Short Attention Span Musing

Responding to some criticism that my posts have been boring recently (lacking in 'wiseass' content), so how 'bout this????


...From the "they probably expect us to ignore the irony" department -

A U.S. attorney has issued a report decrying the conditions in a jail, citing beatings of prisoners by staff, poor medical, and dangerous building conditions as among the reasons that he found that "the jail had systematically violated the constitutional rights of inmates." (NY Times)

Where is this den of brazen brutality located?

Abu Ghraib? Nope, not even the right hemisphere.

Guantanamo? Much closer, but not close enough.

No, the jail that the feds find so objectionable is the Cook County Jail.


In Illinois.


Apparently, the "do as we say, not as we do" gang is still running the show...


...From the "It must be an even numbered year" department,,,,

On Tuesday, both the House and the Senate voted to override Bush's veto of H.R. 6331, The Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008. All four of Arizona's Democratic congressmen voted to override the veto, which wasn't a surprise. However, they were joined by a Republican, and it wasn't Rick Renzi, who occasionally (*very* occasionally :) ) crosses party lines on a specific vote.

Nope, it was John Shadegg (CD3).

The same John Shadegg who scored a 100 in the American Conservative Union's rankings and tied for the most conservative in the House in the National Journal's rankings.

One might think that this vote illustrates Shadegg's (new-found) concern for plight of those of his constituents who rely on Medicare, whether as patients or physicians (and we should expect a press release or 5 trumpeting his "heartfelt" concern). However, there is one point that every one of his constituents should remember - on June 24, he voted against the original bill.

And not only did he vote against the bill on its first trip though the House, he tried to prevent even its mere consideration by twice voting to adjourn the House during debate on H.R. 6331. (here and here)

In other words, Tuesday's vote was just for show, not substance - he's only concerned with his own plight.

Possible unemployment after November.

Yep, Shadegg is definitely hearing Bob Lord's footsteps...

Note: The Senate also voted to override the President's veto of H.R. 6331, by a vote of 70 - 26. Arizona's senatorial delegation voted as is their pattern - Kyl voted against Medicare, and McCain skipped the vote.


...and from the "See! I occasionally pick on Democrats, too!" department -

From the AZ Republic -

Could Sky Harbor soon become home to an army of one-armed bandits?

It might, if Mayor Phil Gordon has his way. Gordon wants to explore the possibility of partnering with a Native American tribe to bring slot machines to the airport.

Good freakin' God! Don't we drop enough money on air trips already?? What's next? Bingo tournaments on the Red Line (the bus route through the airport? Video poker machines on Supershuttle vans??

Later!

FEC Reports are in....

Others have covered this area already, but have tended to focus on their own CDs; the basic raw numbers from all CDs with active committees are included in this post.


Key - candidate - net contributions, individual contributions, PAC contributions, net expenditures, cash on hand. (Net contributions may not match the total of individual and PAC contributions due to refunds, candidate contributions to their own campaigns, or other reasons. Generally, any such variance isn't significant.

CD1 -

Ann Kirkpatrick (D), challenger - $328053.05, $218453.05, $109600.00, $125340.27, $668177.46

Howard Shanker (D), challenger - $33274.60, $33274.60, $0, $46603.04, $20972.36

Mary Kim Titla (D), challenger - $54104.75, $52466.36, $1638.39, $45039.94, $57385.88

Sydney Hay (R), challenger - $95033.73, $76518.73, $18515.00, $59959.65, $257408.09

Preston Korn (R), challenger - $2885.00, $2885.00, $0, $7362.48, $9173.96


CD2 -

John Thrasher (D), challenger - $8295.00, $7895.00, $0, $6599.59, $14207.90

Trent Franks (R), incumbent - $88386.00, $53261.00, $35625.00, $44885.27, $129774.83


CD3 -

Bob Lord (D), challenger - $233202.50, $161794.90, $73507.60, $158933.66, $706523.25

John Shadegg (R), incumbent - $536024.78, $421210.36, $140014.42, $121592.91, $1354246.30

The Shadegg campaign is gloating about their fundraising success during the April - June reporting period, but there's more than a little element of "whistling past the graveyard" in their press releases - Bob Lord is easily the strongest challenger, Dem or Rep, in the state and he's mounting a challenge to Shadegg that is far tougher than any challenge he's faced since entering Congress.

Note: The grand opening of the Lord campaign headquarters is this Saturday, July 19, at 4736 N. 44th St., Phoenix (just south of Camelback) from 11 a.m. - 1 p.m.


CD4 -

Ed Pastor (D), incumbent - $229493.13, $117377.88, $113515.25, $69158.20, $1428843.55


CD5 -

Harry Mitchell (D), incumbent - $335002.66, $224962.13, $113175.00, $85554.75, $1372464.22

David Schweikert (R), challenger - $162749.05, $162749.05, $0, $155851.16, $520990.10

Jim Ogsbury (R), challenger - $49783.24, $46783.24, $3000.00, $79435.55, $323442.10

Laura Knaperek (R), challenger - $34249.00, $37549.00, $0, $23200.05, $105520.79

Mark Anderson (R), challenger - $29278.14, $29278.14, $0, $25618.73, $68791.33

Susan Bitter Smith (R), challenger - $150379.51, $110603.51, $7000.00, $52363.67, $247945.89

The Republican challengers to Harry Mitchell have made some major bets on their abilities to emerge victoriously from the primary and then move on to defeat Mitchell - they've accumulated over $700K in loans and debts - Ogsbury and Schweikert at $250K each, Bitter Smith at more than $156K, and Knaperek has $50K in campaign debt. The only CD5 Rep who lists no campaign loans or obligations is Mark Anderson. In most cases, the loans/debt constitute a significant percentage (half or more) of the candidates' cash on hand totals.

Expect the following headline in mid-November - "Join the LD8 and LD17 Republicans for a joint campaign-debt retirement bake sale and car wash."

OK, OK, probably not... :))

Candie Dates (love that name!) at Sonoran Alliance has a post with some good graphs showing the CD5 challengers' financial positions.


CD6 -

Chris Gramazio (D), challenger - $3137.15, $3075.00, $0, 2539.24, $597.91

Jeff Flake (R), incumbent - $200035.00, $194835.00, $8800.00, $74097.13, $1091474.52


CD7 -

Raul Grijalva (D), incumbent - $125,398.00, $64,398.00, $61,000.00, $89,625.11, $171,043.21.


CD8 -

Gabrielle Giffords (D), incumbent - $562167.97, $381748.16, $181753.35, $156814.05, $2077845.80

Tim Bee (R), challenger - $390406.65, $307856.32, $79950.00, $229078.66, $687703.62


No reports that I could find from challengers Rebecca Schneider (D - CD6), Lee Gentry (R - CD5), Don Karg (R - CD4), or Joe Sweeney and Gene Chewning (Rs - CD7).

Withdrawn candidates - Annie Loyd (I - CD3).

Later!

FEC reports starting to trickle in

There's only two days until the deadline (July 15), but during an election year, most campaigns wait until the last possible minute to reveal how they're doing financially. It's a tactical thing - they're trying to deny any advantage to their opponents.

So far, only a few candidates have submitted their reports. I'll update with a more complete post later this week.

Because the candidate report pickings are slim, I'll include some info from other committees.

From July reports, unless otherwise noted:

Arizona Libertarian Party - Received $35.00, spent $1.62, cash on hand $5067.56

Arizona Republican Party (June report) - Received $98148.51, spent $96082.28, cash on hand $112626.81. Pretty good month there.

Arizona State Democratic Central Executive Committee (June report) - Received $207242.03, spent $109015.08. cash on hand $117746.50. Hmmmm....better than 'pretty good' month there. Much better. :)


Arizona Cotton Growers Association - Received $550.00, spent $2960.53, cash on hand $5246.92. Interesting contributions by the ACGA - $500 each to John Shadegg, Ed Pastor, and Susan Bitter Smith (all running for Congress); $390 to Kevin Gibbons, running for LD18 state senate.

CVS/Caremark Corporation Employees PAC (June report) - Received $19365.00, spent $82000.00, cash on hand $-16983.00. This particular PAC made this list because it has a Scottsdale mailing address. And it spent over $35K in May alone on contributions to races for the Texas legislature. Be interesting to see what they are trying to buy next session.

AgPAC of the Arizona Farm Bureau Federation - Received $10229.26, spent $1007.00, cash on hand $9222.26. Interesting contributions by AgPAC - $500 to John Shadegg, $250 each to Kevin Gibbons (LD18) and Steve Pierce (LD1), Republican candidates for state senate.


Bob Lord, CD3 challenger (Democrat) - No report yet, but his campaign is claiming a very successful quarter. It wouldn't be surprising if the claim is true - John Shadegg has been out shaking every money tree that he can find; there's probably a reason that he's running scared..


Trent Franks, CD2 incumbent (Republican) - Received $57377.44 ($32084.37 from PACs), spent $32800.56, cash on hand $147351.71.

Rick Renzi, CD1 incumbent, not running for reelection (Republican) - Received nada, spent $141.44, cash on hand $3825.02. Campaign committee debt of $456089.91 (candidate loads to his own election committee and legal fees.)

I just like putting up the Renzi numbers. :))


More later this week!

John Shadegg - Newest Punter For The Cardinals??

Maybe he thinks that by not voting *against* a bill that would help American consumers facing skyrocketing gas prices, the consumers (and voters) of his district won't notice that he didn't vote *for* it, and them, either.

On Thursday, the House had nine roll call votes -

Roll Call #462, 11:52 a.m. EDT, Ordering the previous question (aka - ending debate) on H. Res. 1304, allowing for consideration of H.R. 6052 (a bill encouraging Americans to conserve energy by using public transportation). The motion passed 228 - 198, Shadegg voting nay (to continue deliberations).

Roll Call #463, 12:02 p.m., On passage of H. Res. 1304. Resolution passed 230 - 196, Shadegg voting nay (against allowing consideration of H.R. 6052).

Roll Call #464, 12:09 p.m., On passage of H. Res. 1291; passed 421 - 0, Shadegg voting yea.

Roll Call #465, 4:45 p.m., On approval of an amendment of H.R. 6052; passed 421 - 0, Shadegg voing yea.

Roll Call #466, 5:21 p.m. On a motion to recommit (aka - kill) H.R. 6052; failed 199 - 211, Shadegg voting yea.

Roll Call #467, 5:28 p.m., On Passage of H.R. 6052; passed 322 - 98, Shadegg voting nay (apparently he doesn't want people to use public transportation, perhaps because it might cut into the profit margins of Big Oil and the auto industry.)

Roll Call #468, 5:36 p.m.. On passage of H.R. 6377, the Energy Markets Emergency Act of 2008; passed 402 - 19, Shadegg voting yea. This bill would "direct the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to utilize all its authority, including its emergency powers, to curb immediately the role of excessive speculation in any contract market within the jurisdiction and control of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, on or through which energy futures or swaps are traded, and to eliminate excessive speculation, price distortion, sudden or unreasonable fluctuations or unwarranted changes in prices, or other unlawful activity that is causing major market disturbances that prevent the market from accurately reflecting the forces of supply and demand for energy commodities."

Roll Call #469, 5:44 p.m., On passage of H.R. 6251, the Responsible Federal Oil and Gas Lease Act; failed 223 - 195 (2/3 required), Shadegg not voting. This bill would have compelled oil companies that leased public lands to drill for oil to actually drill and produce oil from that leased land, or be barred from acquiring more leases.

Roll Call #470, 5:51 p.m., On passage of H. Res. 1098, Supporting the goals and ideals of the Year of the American Veteran; passed 409 - 0, Shadegg voting yea.

So let's see...during an agonizingly long voting day of almost 6 hours (yes, that "agonizingly" is dripping with sarcasm), Shadegg makes every vote but for the one on the only bill under consideration that day that had some teeth in it, one that could have made a difference to the American people.

Coincidence? Probably not. Consider this -

One one hand, Shadegg is beholden to Big Oil, having received hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions from petroleum and other energy interests over the years.

On the other hand, he's been getting some serious heat for being out of touch with his constituents and their concerns and needs.

Hmmm......so, what to do, what to do??? If he votes for the measure, he alienates some of his biggest campaign contributors (and possible future employers); if he votes against it, he further alienates the average resident of his district (increasing the likelihood that he will need a "future employer" after November's election).

Damned if you do, damned if you don't....

What's a weary, ready-to-retire-but-they-won't-let-him=go pol to do?

What else? Call upon all of his experience and guile and do something that no one will expect.

The legislative equivalent of football's quick kick - simply skip the tough vote.


And for this he gets paid almost $170K per year???


Anyway, perhaps somebody should let Shadegg know - it was a nice try, but he didn't fool anyone.

BTW - I'm not exactly the first one to notice Shadegg's little attempt at a slide-step. From a Bob Lord for Congress press release -

"While we are paying $4.14 per gallon for gas here in Phoenix, John Shadegg intentionally skipped a vote that would force oil companies to drill for oil on the land they already lease," said Andrew Eldredge-Martin, Lord's campaign manager. "The Bush-Shadegg philosophy on energy gives the oil companies all our public lands, lets the companies sit inactive on the land, leaves consumers to fend for themselves, and allows Shadegg to keep taking big checks from the oil, gas and energy industry. This philosophy is bankrupt, just like we will all be soon if we don't take action on gas prices."

Expect a counter-release from the Shadegg campaign admonishing the Lord campaign for not saying "thank you" for the early Christmas gift. :)

Oh, and if Shadegg takes the title of this post to heart - Cards training camp starts July 25th.

Skipping out on that means that you get cut from the team. Keep this up, and Shadegg will be cut from the Congressional teams.

Later!

Shadegg: Voting For Ideology and Big Business Before Constituents. Again.

On Tuesday, the House passed H.R. 6331, the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008 by a vote of 355 - 59. All 59 opposing votes were from Republicans.

Among other things, the Act would stop a reduction in Medicare reimbursements to doctors, lowers payments to Medicare Advantage Plans (private Medicare plans), and require that any health care providers who are delinquent in their federal income taxes have the back taxes deducted from their Medicare reimbursement payments. (KGMB-TV in Hawaii)

Unsurprisingly, John Shadegg (CD3) was one of those opposed to the bill.

At first blush, his opposition to what is essentially a "cleanup" bill seems counterintuitive - the bill sounds good (improving Medicare? That's something everyone wants, isn't it?) and Shadegg is in the toughest election fight since he entered Congress (thank you Bob Lord!) - he needs all the "good" votes that he can get. In addition, the bill is relatively inexpensive (reducing federal expenditures by $100 million over the next 5 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.)

So why did Shadegg oppose efforts to improve Medicare for patients and health care providers?

He just doesn't *like* Medicare or any program that allows elderly or poor patients to bypass profiteering corporate gatekeepers to health care.

He shows this by combining efforts to make Medicare unworkable (like with this vote) and sponsoring bills like H.R. 4460, a bill to push private insurers' plans by allowing them to bypass state regulations and consumer safeguards.

Lastly, he has a supreme [lack of] understanding of and empathy for the uninsured folks in the country and his district.

According to The Yellowsheet Reports, a newsletter published by the Arizona Capitol Times, on Monday, he spoke at a cocktail party for The Center for Medicine in the Public Interest (CMPI). (Yellowsheet is subscription-only, so no link, but here is Kos' take on the same topic, with a quote.)

CMPI is something of a misnomer - the "public" interest isn't really their interest - it's actually just a Big Pharma and Big Health Care industry front group. (Source Watch)

The organization opposes any government involvement in health care, including enacting and enforcing such trivial things as safety regulations for pharmaceuticals.

Anyway, during the party, Shadegg dropped this gem (courtesy the Yellowsheet Report via Kos) -

Shadegg said, that contrary to what many believe, no one in this country goes without health care. "We're covering them in the emergency rooms and paying a very, very high price to have them walk into the emergency room with a cold or flu."

Apparently, Shadegg doesn't understand the difference between "health" care and "acute" care. Furthermore, he doesn't understand the impact that forgoing an actual long-term health care regimen can have on quality of life, especially in growing children and the elderly.

Somebody needs to sit Congressman Shadegg and tell him to keep his mouth closed until they can figure out if Congress' taxpayer-funded health insurance covers foot-ectomies (removal of the foot from the mouth).

Later!

How do you split 30 pieces of silver 105 ways?

On Friday, the House passed an update of FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act by a vote of 293 -129. The bill includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that aided the Bush Administration in their efforts to spy on Americans.

In addition to the immunity provision (Title II of the bill) it allows the government to "initiate a wiretap without court permission if "important intelligence" would otherwise be lost." (AP)

AZ delegation votes: Renzi, Shadegg, Franks, Mitchell, Giffords, Flake - yea; Pastor, Grijalva - nay.

I suppose I could expound at length on why this was a horrible move, but it's late, I'm tired, and work starts early tomorrow, so let me sum up -

To Congressman Harry Mitchell, Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, and the 103 other Democrats who joined the entire Republican caucus (excepting Rep. Tim Johnson of Illinois, who, for some unknown reason, voted against the measure) in supporting the bill that George Bush wanted:

1. One of the rationalizations given to support this bill was that it was "necessary" in order to ensure the safety of Americans. The only problem with that story is that it is put forth by the President and his lackeys, who, as evidenced by the testimony on Friday by former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, lie the way that normal people breathe, and have been doing so for nearly eight years.

2. Some of you might say that it was necessary to compromise to get the FISA update passed. Perhaps it was, but when the President gets everything that he wanted, it isn't "compromise," it's "surrender."

3. Each and every one of you should remember that you were elected to work for your constituents' best interests, not the President's. In no way does retroactive immunity for telecoms or decreased judicial oversight of Administration activities benefit your constituents.

'Nuff said.

For those who wonder why the Republicans seem to be getting a free pass on this one, they're just receiving the benefit of *really* low expectations here - expecting them to start showing concern for their constituents or respect for the Bill of Rights at this point would be the height of foolishness and an utter waste of time.


Daniel Patterson at Daniel's News & Views offers his far more succinct take on the situation here.

ACLU press release here.

Good night.

Short Attention Span Musing -candidates edition (Redux)

I know that I just did one of these, but the campaigns have provided a wealth of material to work with in the last few days that another one is warranted...

...Maybe she should look a little closer to home for the source of the trouble...

From PolitickerAZ:

Bitter Smith accuses Mitchell campaign of push polling

AZ-5 Republican primary candidate and Arizona cable industry lobbyist Susan Bitter Smith is charging that the campaign of U.S. Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-Tempe) has been "push polling" in the 5th Congressional District - a charge the Mitchell campaign denies.

"Reports have surfaced that the Mitchell campaign has initiated a push pull [sic] in the District specifically targeting Susan," read a press release put out by the Bitter Smith campaign.

Her campaign has been asked by PolitickerAZ to produce a recipient of one of these calls, but they have not done so as yet. Assuming that this alleged push poll is real, one should remember that Ms. Bitter Smith is in a six-way primary fight.

That's six people with more incentive than Harry Mitchell to do this (yes, that includes the inimitable Ms. Bitter Smith herself).

Self-promotion time - less than a week ago, I predicted that this race (CD5 Rep primary) would get dirty.

I'd gloat more, but even I have to admit making that prediction was as difficult, and risky, as predicting a sunny day in Arizona.


...Guess Shadegg hasn't figured out that elections can only be lost in D.C., not won there.

Veterans in his district (and all over the country!) are receiving inadequate medical care, a chunk of his district is scared of the water coming out of their taps, and skyrocketing energy costs are destroying the budgets of working- and middle-class families all over the country, so how does he respond to the needs of his constituents?

By introducing H.R. 6274, a bill to provide legal cover for the Bush Administration and its kangaroo courts (aka military tribunals) and its permanent detention without trial or even evidence in the face of last week's Supreme Court decision granting habeas corpus rights to detainees at Guantanamo.

Shadegg press release here.

Just speculating here, but I have to wonder if he is starting to write off the November election and is planning/hoping/praying for a job in a McCain administration.


...Maybe the McCainiacs should see if the rights to "Running On Empty" are available...

From MSNBC.com:

REP. TO MCCAIN: STOP USING MY SONG!

New Hampshire picked up McCain in the 2000 Republican primary and stayed true to him in 2008. It was fitting, then, that McCain concluded a Nashua event yesterday with the 1976 Orleans' hit celebration of monogamy, "Still the One."

It was 'fitting' until the song's co-writer, and current progressive Democratic Congressman from New York, John Hall, spoke up, objecting to its use.

You know, while the songwriter of "Running On Empty", Jackson Browne, is known for being fairly liberal himself, he might approve the use of his song by the McCain campaign.

It's totally appropriate - they've got nothing left in the tank.

Later!

Republicans try to hold unemployment benefits hostage...

...hostage to increased oil company profits...

In one of the Republicans' most shameless displays of contempt for the average American in recent memory (well, in nearly two years, anyway), House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) actually argued on the House floor that opening up ANWR to oil drilling is more important than helping unemployed Americans. (I'll update with a quote after the Congressional Record of today's debate is posted tomorrow.)

Edit on 9/13 to add the aforementioned quote...

Boehner, from page H5356 of the Congressional Record -

Why aren't they thinking about the hardworking men and women in America, who go to work every day, they pay taxes, they do tough jobs, they have to give part of their money to us so that we can spend it on behalf of the American people to provide services? We should always remember that it's the hardworking people in America that provide the taxpayer funds that we spend. And our job is to spend those funds in a responsible way, and this is not, in my view, a responsible bill.

{snip}

I think the American people want us to achieve energy independence, and the only way we're going to get there is to do what I call, "all of the above.'' We need to conserve more in America. We need biofuels; we need alternative fuels; we need to get serious about nuclear energy; and we need to produce more oil and gas here in the United States instead of depending on some 70 percent of it coming from foreign sources.

Helping unemployed Americans is "irresponsible" while guaranteeing drilling into (and destroying!) ANWR isn't?

Oh, and how does more oil drilling fit into a discussion of unemployment benefits?

End edit...

Boehner's press release on the legislation is here; his press release on oil drilling (as well as blaming Nancy Pelosi for rising prices at the pump) is here.

The bill under consideration, H.R. 5749, the Emergency Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2008, would extend unemployment benefits by 13 weeks. The bill was heard on Wednesday under suspension of the rules, but failed to garner the 2/3 majority needed for passage. It was brought back today under a rule that would allow it to pass with a simple majority.

Additionally, one of the Reps' biggest objections to the bill is that its benefits are not limited to states with the highest levels of unemployment. The example they cited most frequently was Oklahoma, whose rate stands at 3.2%.

Guess they think that someone who is unemployed in OK is less out of a job than someone who is unemployed in Michigan (6.9%).

Boehner and the Reps frequently cited their desire to help workers in Michigan while decrying the "election year politics" that they said are behind the measure.

Wonder who's playing "election year politics" here - in the race for the presidency, Michigan is considered a battleground state with 17 electoral votes, Oklahoma is safe Republican and only has 7 electoral votes.

In the end, H.R. 5749 passed 274 - 137, with the votes of the Arizona delegation breaking along party lines - Democrats Mitchell, Giffords, Grijalva, and Pastor in favor, Republicans Shadegg, Franks, and Renzi opposed, and Flake absent (bereavement).

Note: The Arizona breakdown for yesterday's vote on the bill was the same - Democrats in favor of extending unemployment benefits, Reps opposed, Flake absent.

Regarding local "election year" political considerations, I can understand why Rick Renzi didn't vote for the bill. He's not running again, so he has no real motive to work for his constituents. I can even understand why Trent Franks didn't vote for it - while he is facing a challenge from respected teacher John Thrasher, he still looks fairly safe in his district, which has a Rep registration advantage of over 60,000.

But why is John Shadegg voting against a bill that even his fellow Republicans think won't get passed in the Senate, much less signed into law by the President? I realize that his ideology is very to him, but a vote for this bill would have given Shadegg a little protections from criticisms that he doesn't care for (or work for) working families, including active and veteran military families, that have been disproportionately impacted by the downturn in the economy.

Of course, with Shadegg safe in his corporate-funded D.C. sinecure, he has no personal economic worries anyway (an illustration of his carefree attitude is available for download; it's an interview for last year's Conservative Leadership Conference (tip o' the hat to The Irregular Times for heads-up on the interview).

As it is, he's given Democratic challenger Bob Lord another opening.

From an email press release -

"After months of hundreds of thousands of job losses for American workers, it’s unfathomable why my opponent would vote against such important relief legislation for Arizona’s middle class families in such a difficult time for our nation,” Lord said.

Bob Lord is a *lot* more tactful than I am - Shadegg is taking his working- and middle-class constituents and throwing them under the proverbial bus.

CNN coverage of the unemployment legislation and vote here.

Other House campaign news -

...Humorous site of the day - AZ5 Primary Watch. This isn't a satire site, though it's so over the top that it sometimes reads like one. Instead, it's an attack "blog" anonymously authored by Laura Knaperek, one of her family members, or one of her supporters.

How do I know it's a Knaperek blog? Well, the only Rep candidates in CD5 that it *hasn't* attacked are Mark Anderson and Laura Knaperek.

I've met them both, and this doesn't really seem like his style.

On the other hand, I've heard her speak in person regarding liberals using the same terminology and rhetorical style that this blog uses toward liberals.

My early prediction: The CD5 Republican primary will be the dirtiest race in the state this year.

Unless Knaperek wins the primary, in which case the CD5 general election will win that dubious award.

Later!

"That's not too important"

Edit on 6/13 to correct an error regarding financial reporting dates...

John McCain, in an unusually honest moment, admitted that he believes that it's "not too important" when or if the our troops are brought home from Iraq.

In an interview on Wednesday's Today Show on NBC, host Matt Lauer asked McCain if he knew when the troops would come home.

His response?

No, but that's not too important. What's important is the casualties in Iraq.

He went on to rationalize his statement by conflating his intent to permanently deploy American troops in Iraq with the permanent presence of troops in South Korea, Japan, and Germany, and the relatively low levels of casualties in those places (relative to the meatgrinder in Iraq, anyway).

What he conveniently forgot to mention is that in those countries U.S. troops have served as a stabilizing influence in countries that have either attacked us in the past (Japan, Germany) and are now allies, or have been threatened or attacked by others and needed a continuing protective presence (South Korea, Germany again).

He also conveniently forgot to mention that Iraq never attacked the U.S., or that the biggest outside threat to Iraq is, well, *us.*

To use a sports metaphor, McCain served up a batting practice fastball to the Democrats today, one that Democrats ranging from Sens. Harry Reid, John Kerry and Joe Biden in D.C. and all the way to wiseass bloggers from McCain's home state are taking turns hitting out of the park.

As an aside, this past weekend, two of the big guns for the AZ Republicans, McCain and Jon Kyl (R-Big Pharma), held a fundraiser for embattled CD3 Congressman John Shadegg (coverage here), rumored to be a successful one. We should find out in a month or so - the next FEC report is due in by July 15.

Wonder how many of the donors that McCain roped in for his friend Shadegg have ties to defense contractors, Big Oil, or others who are profiting from the Iraq Forever War?

I suppose we'll just have to wait until July. Of course, if that number is accurate, Shadegg and company will start crowing, and soon - they need good news to rally the faithful around Shadegg in the face of the ever-stronger challenge from Democratic candidate Bob Lord.

Baltimore Sun coverage here.

Daily Voice coverage here.

Later!

Shadegg and Conservatives going to Vegas -

Take a group of artificially-tanned, permed, blow-dried, holier-than-thou stuffed-shirt types, blind them with glitz and neon lights, stir in showgirls, strippers and prostitutes, sprinkle in an extra special seasoning of female impersonators, marinate with mass quantities of alcohol and bake it all in the late summer Vegas sun.

Then step back and watch the election year wackiness ensue.

It's called "The Conservative Leadership Conference 2008." The conference is taking place from September 18 - 21, with mugshots posted online from September 22 thru Election Day.


Wonder how pissed they're going to be when they figure out the catchphrase "What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas" doesn't apply to YouTube? :))

Of course, with the way things are going in his race against Bob Lord, this trip may be the highlight of the year for Shadegg....

Later!

Politics 101: A Tale of Two Incumbents

...On one hand, we have freshman Democrat Harry Mitchell. He's defending his seat a district where he faces a crowded field of Republican challengers hoping to take advantage of a daunting Republican registration advantage in the district.


Instead of running scared (which has never been Mitchell's style in nearly four decades of public service anyway), he has simply been doing his job, working for the people of his district.


- He's been working tirelessly since he took office in January 2007 to support the Fifth District's (and America's!) veterans with H.R. 5740, the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008, prodding the Veterans' Administration over its almost-criminally lax efforts to meet the medical, psychological, and social needs of injured veterans (here, here, and here), meeting with his Veterans Advisory Council here in the district, or myriad other efforts on behalf of vets.

Here his efforts have been less focused on ideology than on people.


- Since late last year, Mitchell and his staff have been working to address the failures at a water treatment facility that resulted in many of his constituents being exposed to TCE-contaminated drinking water. Again, his instincts are to help his constituents.


- More recently (Wednesday, as a matter of fact), he's working to help Corona del Sol High School by bringing national attention to the plight of students, faculty, and staff. They've been dealing with air-quality related medical ailments as a result of the poor air inside the aging school.


AZ Rep coverage of his floor speech here; the actual floor statement starts on this page of the Congressional Record, and goes on to the next.

Yet again, he focuses on working for his constituents.


In short, the longtime teacher, Tempe city council member and mayor understands Politics 101, best summed up by the title of Tip O'Neill's book, "All Politics Is Local."




...On the other hand, we have 7-term incumbent Republican incumbent John Shadegg. He's defending his seat against a relative political newcomer in Bob Lord (he's not new to public service, but is new to elected office). He's in a district that has an even wider Republican registration advantage than CD5 and he's an experienced campaigner.


This should be a cakewalk for him, right?


It probably would be, except that he is failing Politics 101, and failing miserably.

- He fights against efforts to help America's (and the Third District's) veterans, whether in empty gestures of support, or in a pattern of outright opposition, usually rationalized with in the name of his "small or no government" ideology.

- When many of his constituents in Paradise Valley were dealing water taps that delivered poison instead of water, he ignored it in favor of campaigning for fellow Republican John McCain in South Carolina.

He couldn't even be bothered to send an intern to NIBW meetings or have a low-level staffer write a press release expressing his concern over the issue.

- He even opposed the Act (H.R. 3021) that Harry Mitchell spoke in support of on Wednesday, voting against modernizing public schools and educational facilities.

Even the invitations to his re-election fundraisers don't bother to tout the work that Shadegg has done for his constituents, because there isn't any such work to tout.

The invite for this Saturday's fundraiser with Sens. McCain and Kyl touts Shadegg's record as "one of the most principled and steady conservative leaders" in Congress.

In something of an ironic twist, Saturday's fundraiser is at a home in Paradise Valley. Wonder if the house is in the service area of Arizona American Water, operator of the treatment facility that caused all the furor in November and January?

Mitchell's record is one of concern for and advocacy on behalf of his constituents; Shadegg's record is that of someone who places the interests of his party and his large campaign contributors above the interests of his constituents.


Is it any wonder that Harry Mitchell is ahead of the leading Republican contenders in this April poll of head-to-head matchups, and that John Shadegg's support is in decline and free fall in this current poll?

Part of Shadegg's problem may be his experience, or lack of it - unlike Mitchell who had a long resume of public service prior to entering Congress, Shadegg's pre-Congress resume is primarily that of a professional Republican, not a professional public servant. The closest he came was as a special assistant attorney general during the 1980s under Republican AG Bob Corbin.

Not exactly a job that motivates the jobholder to worry about the concerns of the people he meets during the course of his duties. :))

Anyway, about the only good news from the poll for Shadegg was the fact that he is outpolling the President - Bush has a 30% favorable rating, and Shadegg has 31% support for his reelection.

On second thought, maybe that isn't such good news... :)

Note: If you are interested in seeing the actual invitation to Shadegg's fundraiser, leave a comment with your email addy; I'll be happy to forward it.

Later!

Could Renzi take down both McCain and Kyl with him?

From The Hill -

Federal agents interviewed staffers for likely Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) as part of their corruption case against Rep. Rick Renzi (R-Ariz.).
U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona Diane J. Humetewa and fellow prosecutors disclosed the interviews with aides for McCain and fellow Arizona Republican Sen. Jon Kyl in a written response to Renzi’s attorneys, who asked for the contents of the interview to help prepare for Renzi’s upcoming trial, which is scheduled for October.

OK, so given that Renzi's trial isn't starting until October, any "taking down" probably won't happen until after the fall elections, if at all. However, it *is* fun to watch how the Renzi scandal just keeps expanding to include some of the most senior members of the GOP members of the AZ delegation to D.C.

With this report, the public count is at four out of the six GOPers - Renzi himself (of course), Kyl, McCain (of course, McCain has land deal and lobbyist issues of his own to deal with), and John Shadegg (those darn wiretaps!)

Wonder if he is going to go for a clean sweep and drag down Trent Franks and Jeff Flake too?

We can only hope...

Stay tuned on this one...

John Shadegg - Protector of Big Oil

As efforts to find renewable sources of energy multiply, both nationally and here in Arizona, Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ3) is hard at work, protecting the interests of Big Oil, his Big Donors.

While claiming to support renewable energy and the extension of a tax credit for homeowners and businesses that utilize solar power, he voted against passage of a bill that will extend that tax credit beyond the end of the year.

His objection? The bill would follow House pay-go rules and pay for the solar energy tax credit by closing some tax credits reserved for the oil industry.

The same oil industry that reports setting a new record for profits seemingly every day.

From AZcentral.com -

Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., a champion of solar efforts, said previous legislation would have paid for the renewable-energy tax credits by repealing credits given to the oil and gas industry. She said she hopes this latest bill, which would close tax loopholes for hedge-fund managers, overseas corporations and others, will be more "palatable."

Fellow Arizona Congressman John Shadegg, a Republican, isn't so sure it will be.

Shadegg said he supports solar energy and the tax-credit extension, but he voted against the latest House bill.

"Each time the issue of solar has come up before Congress, it has included tax increases, and none of them has moved in the Senate," Shadegg said. "If we (Republicans) get to vote for these issues, and they're not burdened by tax increases, we will approve it."

Instead, Shadegg has signed on as a cosponsor of H.R. 5984, a bill that would extend the solar energy tax credit, but instead of finding a way to pay for that extension, it would just increase the federal budget deficit.

Shadegg likes to tout his 'budget hawk' credentials (like this page from his campaign website that includes a WSJ article about his formation of 'Reagan 21'), but that hawkishness flies away when faced with defending his deep-pockets donors from the petroleum industry ($440K and counting).

Compare Shadegg's stance to that of his opponent, Bob Lord (from a press release) -

"Arizona can become the Middle East of solar energy if Congress makes energy independence a top priority," Lord said. "Solar power means investment, growth, and jobs in Arizona – it is an investment in our future.”

So, after Lord retires Shadegg this November, is anyone interested in starting a pool on which oil company or industry group hires Shadegg as a lobbyist?

For entertainment purposes only, of course. :)

Later!

Whew - got scared there for a minute

Here I was, all prepared to write a post criticizing the Democrats in Congress for passing H.R. 6074, the Gas Price Relief for Consumers Act of 2008. The bill passed by a 324 - 84 margin (Giffords, Mitchell, Pastor, Grijalva - yea; Franks, Flake, Renzi, Shadegg - nay).

The reason for my intended criticism was not based on the language in the bill, but on some of the press coverage, which calls the bill a move to allow the U.S. to sue OPEC over high gas prices.

AP coverage here; TimesOnline coverage here; AFR coverage here.

The coverage gives the impression that in an era of record-breaking oil prices, and equally record-breaking oil company profits, that Congress has determined that the best solution is to take foreign nations to court.

Assuming that those nations would even bother to face the U.S. in court, given the low regard for international law that is typically exhibited by the U.S. government.

The U.S. government only participates in that process when it suits them - why should any other country behave any differently when it is the U.S. initiating the proceedings?

Based on the MSM coverage, I thought that the bill was pointless and insipid, and reeked of a little election year pandering, and that's always worthy of criticism.

I was sitting at my keyboard, profoundly disappointed in my fellow Democrats, and when the White House threatened a veto of the legislation, I was worried that my agreement with that position might indicate that I'd hit my head, come down with some sort of mental illness, or just plain had my soul sucked out of me.

Then I read the actual language of the bill, and was greatly relieved to find the real teeth of the measure.

SEC. 201. ESTABLISHMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PETROLEUM INDUSTRY ANTITRUST TASK FORCE.

The section goes on to delineate some of the areas of interest of the Task Force, including looking for price gouging, market manipulation, anti-competitive behavior, collusive behavior and more.

And it isn't restricted to international cartels and the like. Specifically included are petroleum refiners and wholesalers of gasoline and petroleum products.

In short, the oil companies themselves are in the crosshairs of this bill.

Which thoroughly explains why the White House and the four Republican members of Arizona's delegation so thoroughly oppose the bill.

The "I'm not totally naive" caveats -

It *is* an election year, and I'm fully aware that many of the Democratic supporters of this bill did so to take advantage of the anti-OPEC nature (aka - the "anti-foreigner" nature) of the bill. It's always easier to blame an amorphous "them" for our problems than to tell voters that they might bear some of the responsibility for the creation of and the ultimate solution for the current mess.

In addition, I'm fully aware of the fact that many of the Republicans who supported the bill did so with the full knowledge that it will never become law, either because of a veto they won't vote to override, or because it will die in the Senate.

While this move has some merit (holding Big Oil's feet to the fire is always a good thing), how about an effort to not just wean the U.S. off of *foreign* oil (which is just Republican-speak for "let's destroy ANWR"), but to wean us off of petroleum in general.

Supporting efforts to create something other than the internal combustion engine to power our transportation infrastructure would be a good start, no matter how much Big Oil and Big Auto scream about it.

House Republicans abdicate their professional responsibilities

Earlier today, the U.S. House of Representatives failed to pass part of H.R. 2642, the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act, 2008. The part that they failed to pass was the part provided supplemental funding for Bush's occupation of Iraq.

I call today's move a "failure" not because I support continuing to pay for Bush's war, but because the bill wasn't defeated (though much of the MSM coverage will paint it as such), but because the Republicans basically didn't show up.

The final vote - 141 in favor, 149 opposed, 132 present.

All 132 members of the House refusing to take a stand on one of the biggest issues facing our nation today by voting present were Republicans.

As evidenced by the split in the Democratic caucus (85 yeas, 147 nays), this is an issue that deeply divides the country; the Republicans' refusal to take a stand, any stand (even one I disagree with!) nearly constitutes en masse job abandonment.

And 'job abandonment' is grounds for termination of employment.

See you in November.

By the way - the part of the measure that they failed to take a stand on is the part of the bill that would have ensured that there is money to continue paying the troops after June 15.

Can't wait to see how they spin that into "support for the troops."

Other details of today's votes -

The vote split among the Democratic members of Arizona's Congressional delegation reflected the split among the whole caucus - Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ8) and Harry Mitchell (D-AZ5) voted yea; Ed Pastor (D-AZ4) and Raul Grijalva (D-AZ7) voted nay,

Among the Republicans from Arizona, only Rick Renzi (R-AZ1) took a stand, voting yea. John Shadegg (R-AZ3), Trent Franks (R-AZ2), and Jeff Flake (R-AZ6) all sat on their hands.

A second part of the bill that establishes a timeline for withdrawal passed 227 - 196, with Arizona's delegation splitting along party line - Democrats in favor, Republicans opposed.

The third and final section of the bill, containing some domestic spending such as the new G.I. Bill and unemployment relief, passed 256 - 166, with Democrats Grijalva, Giffords, Mitchell and Pastor, and Republican Renzi supporting, and Republicans Flake, Franks, and Shadegg opposing.

Note: there is an expectation that the Senate will restore the funding portion of the bill and return it to the House for another vote.

Note2: Bush has threatened to veto any supplemental bill that includes any restrictions or timelines (he's not too fond of education benefits for veterans, either.)


The Hill's coverage here.

AP coverage here.

Later!

Small (Shady) World Time - Shadegg, McCain, Myanmar, and TCE

By now, most people have heard how Douglas Goodyear, the man that John McCain and his campaign picked to coordinate his coronation at this fall's Republican convention, had to step aside after word got out of his lobbying ties to Myanmar's repressive regime.

From Newsweek -

...[I]nvestigative ace Michael Isikoff reported that the man chosen by John McCain's presidential campaign to run this summer's GOP convention--Arizonan Doug Goodyear--was causing some headaches within the ranks. The problem? Goodyear is CEO of DCI Group, a consulting firm that earned $3 million last year lobbying for ExxonMobil, General Motors and other clients...DCI was paid $348,000 in 2002 to represent Burma's military junta, leading "a PR campaign to burnish the junta's image, drafting releases praising Burma's efforts to curb the drug trade and denouncing 'falsehoods' by the Bush administration that the regime engaged in rape and other abuses."

Mr. Goodyear doesn't just have shady ties to John McCain and Myanmar's brutal government. In addition to the thousands of dollars that he has given to McCain's various campaigns, he's supported the candidacies of a virtual post office wall-ful of some of the most ethically-challenged (and in many cases, criminally-challenged) politicos to ever run for a term, whether in office or in prison.

The 'who's who' list includes luminaries like indicted Texas Congressman Tom Delay, facing jail over his money laundering indictment, AZ State Treasurer Dean Martin, renowned for his creative use of campaign funds, Congressman Jerry Lewis, who, like McCain, has his own shady lobbyist problems, indicted Arizona Congressman Rick Renzi (R-Mantech), who, like McCain, has his own shady land deal problems, and McCain BFF and CD3 Congressman John Shadegg, who like Delay, has money laundering problems of his own.

What I found interesting, in a "gee, isn't it a small world" sort of way, is that Goodyear's DCI Group is a paid lobbyist for Iowa American Water, a subsidiary of American Water, which also owns Arizona American Water, the company that at least twice in last 7 months has pumped TCE-contaminated water into the homes of some of Shadegg's constituents in Paradise Valley, threatening the health of those constituents and their families.

A threat that Shadegg conspicuously ignored, in favor of campaigning for his BFF, John McCain.

Maybe somebody should tell Shadegg that while giving a free pass to the clients of major campaign contributors isn't necessarily indictable, it's still not a good idea to do so during an election year.

Particularly when facing a strong challenger.


Financial notes -

Goodyear gave $256 to Martin for his state senate run in 2000; $500 to Renzi in 2003; $2000 to Delay in 2004; $3500 to Lewis, via DCI's PAC, in 2006 and 2007; and $6600 to Shadegg, both personally and via DCI's PAC, in 2006 and 2007. Info courtesy the campaign finance websites of the FEC and the Arizona Secretary of State.

Note: This may be the first blog post ever to have a Dean Martin/Jerry Lewis reference that neither harkens back to the great comedy team nor is trying to force a lame Martin/Lewis joke on readers.

I'm rather proud of my self-restraint.

Enjoy the moment, but don't get used to it. :))

John Shadegg, Master Of The Empty Gesture

Apparently, John Shadegg realizes that after not supporting Harry Mitchell's modern G.I. Bill (288 cosponsors and counting, but no Shadegg), he has some bridges to repair with the veterans in his district.

Too bad for him (and for his veteran constituents) that his attempt to do that was all sizzle and no steak.


Thanks to PolitickerAZ for the heads-up on this one...

On Thursday, the House passed H.R. 5818, the Neighborhood Stabilization Act. The bill would establish a program to purchase foreclosed properties and sell them to low- and middle-class buyers at a reduced cost. Since the bill would help Americans, President Bush has threatened to veto it.

Before final passage of the bill, the Republicans, in the person of our own John Shadegg (R-AZ3), made one of their standard motions to recommit (aka - 'kill') the bill.

From the Politicker AZ piece -

Rep. John Shadegg (R-3), however, offered a motion to recommit that would have barred drug dealers, sex offenders and those who've committed mortgage fraud. Instead, said Shadegg, priority should be given to disabled veterans.

"...the least we can do is give those who have served our nation the highest priority in receiving housing assistance," said Shadegg on the floor of the House.

Sounds good, right? Where's the 'empty gesture' here?

From CQ.com (note: Politicker AZ used the same quote; I just went to their source) -

But House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., said the motion to recommit could stall the bill. He noted that an amendment from Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, R-Mich., adopted Wednesday by voice vote, added priority treatment for veterans and members of the armed forces.

My curiousity was piqued - *surely* a long-time Congressman such as Shadegg wouldn't have missed something like that, particularly when the amendment was offered by a fellow Republican, such as Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI11). Surely Rep. Frank was putting a partisan spin on the facts, right??

From the House webpage chronicling its floor activities on Wednesday, May 7 -

10:39 P.M. -

On agreeing to the McCotter amendment Agreed to by voice vote.

10:27 P.M. -

DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 1174, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with ten minutes of debate on the McCotter amendment.

Amendment offered by Mr. McCotter.

An amendment numbered 6 printed in House Report 110-621 to direct States using federal loans and grants for housing rehabilitation to give priority to veterans, members of the Armed Forces on active duty, members of the National Guard or Armed Forces reserves, school teachers, and emergency responders when reselling the rehabilitated property.

Note: The entire McCotter amendment, courtesy the House Rules Committee, here.

In any event, Shadegg's motion to recommit failed by a 210 - 216 vote (from AZ - Renzi, Flake, Shadegg, Franks, Giffords, and Mitchell, aye; Pastor and Grijalva, nay) while the underlying bill passed 239 - 188 (Giffords, Mitchell, Pastor, Grijalva - aye; Flake, Franks, Shadegg, Renzi - nay).

Shadegg seems to be conceding the whole supporting veterans issue to his opponent for the CD3 seat, Bob Lord -

- Lord's campaign website has a page dedicated to supporting actual troops and veterans and guiding his supporters to organizations that directly and specifically assist active-duty troops, veterans, and their families.

- Shadegg's campaign website has a page supporting General Petraeus.


Anybody have questions about which of the two actually cares more about the people actually serving our country?

Later!

Harry Mitchell's Veterans Bill Creating Some Strangeness In D.C. And Arizona

Congressman Harry Mitchell's H.R. 5740, the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008, while garnering widespread support among his colleagues (250 cosponsors and counting), but it's creating an interesting dichotomy among the Republican members of AZ's Congressional delegation.

[Note: Congressman Mitchell's blog entry about the bill, in The Hill, is here.]

On the one hand, we have John Shadegg (R-AZ3). He is refusing to support the bill, not because he thinks it is a bad bill, but because he hasn't been asked to support it.

On the other hand, Jeff Flake (R-AZ6), who, like Mikey of Life Cereal fame, 'hates everything' related to government spending, may sign on in support of the bill (which, by the way, would be this year's "Phoenix freezes over" moment if that comes to pass :) ).

So, let me get this straight - John Shadegg, the hand-shaking, baby-kissing, industry PAC money-taking, savvy politician (his retire/unretire two-step earlier this year notwithstanding) is telling the 56,000 veterans in his district to get stuffed, while Jeff Flake, the putative anti-government crusader, who is almost physically incapable of supporting anything that has even a hint of a whiff of help for the average American, veteran or otherwise, is considering throwing his support behind Mitchell's bill?

Shadegg shouldn't be surprised when his challenger, Bob Lord, says "thank you" to him.

That's because he understands that many (most??) of CD3's veterans will also have a couple of words to say to Shadegg when Election Day rolls around, and while the second word will be "you" also, the first one won't be "thank."

Nope, not even close.

BTW - am I the only one who thinks that "I can't support it because I haven't been asked to" is the epitome of pissy?

BTW2 - During his 2006 campaign against JD Hayworth, more than once I used a 'workhorse vs. showhorse' analogy when comparing Mitchell to Hayworth. Bills like H.R. 5740 show why this is still accurate - the bill isn't showy, it's just solidly professional and effective legislation and governance.

Compare those qualities to most of the Republicans in Congress or running to replace Democrats there.

'Nuff said.


Bob Lord's campaign website here.

Lord press release on the topic, courtesy PolitickerAZ, here; more Lord press releases on this subject here and here.

Richard Grayson's chronicle of Jeff Flake's extremist ideology and ineffective representation of his district here (Grayson is mounting a campaign for the CD6 seat.)

Short Attention Span Musing - Congressional Edition

...In the "big" news this week, Arizona Corporation Commissioner Kris Mayes announced that she would not run for the Republican nomination in CD1 (PolitickerAZ).

This may actually help not the other Republicans running, but instead it may aid the Democrats' chances of taking Renzi's seat. While Mayes may be too moderate and too conscientious a public servant to suit the power structure of the Arizona Republican Party, it's precisely those qualities that would have made her a formidable candidate in a general election.

As for the other major Rep candidates, Sydney "my soul is owned by the mining industry" Hay (already in the race) and Ken "broomstick" Bennett (rumored to be entering the race)?? Not so much.

Follow the links - each one has major weaknesses as a candidate, weaknesses that the eventual Democratic nominee will be certain to bring to the attention of CD1's voters.


...Over in CD5, while the Republican challengers to Harry Mitchell were making nice with each other, in an "aww shucks, isn't that cute" sort of way (and taking shots at Democrats in general and Mitchell in particular) on Monday, Mitchell was sponsoring a 21st century version of the GI Bill (H.R. 5740).

No AZ Republicans in Congress signed on as cosponsors of the bill to support post-9/11 veterans.
No Republican challenger in CD5 has issued a statement that they support H.R. 5740 either, and a quick perusal of their campaign websites finds far more support for the war in Iraq than for the servicemen and women fighting and dying in the war.


...In CD3, Republican John Shadegg had a mixed week -

First, he found out that the U.S. Chamber of Congress loves him (no word though on what Paradise Valley thinks of him or if he understands that PV is part of his district, and the US CofC isn't) and he loved them right back - attacking Congressional Democrats for delaying a vote on the Colombia Free Trade deal.

Later in the week, however, his constituents found out that alleged "taxpayer watchdog" Shadegg (as well as CD6's Jeff Flake) has no problem with taking international trips at taxpayer expense.

Then there was the whole "Shadegg was recorded by the FBI on a Renzi wiretap" news, too. :)

Oh, and challenger Bob Lord raised more than $220K during the first quarter and has more than $630K on hand.

All in all, *not* a good week for Congressman Shadegg.


...Of course, while Shadegg's week fell into the "not good" category, the week of Tim Bee, Republican challenger to Gabrielle Giffords in CD8 had an "absolutely lousy" week.

Tedski at Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion broke the story of a taxpayer-funded campaign...errr...'thank-you' ad for Bee. In his update on the original post, Tedski found that the source of the funding for the TV spot was a bunch of school districts and that the ad aired not in his legislative district, but in CD8. Hmmm...

Now that the DCCC has filed a complaint over the spot, Bee may learn the hard way that he's trying to step up to the big leagues.

Part of that lesson will be understanding that the FEC is going to hammer him for stuff that AZ's Secretary of State Jan Brewer would turn a blind eye to (at least for fellow Republicans, anyway.)


Later!

Harry Mitchell's speech on reauthorization of the U.S.Fire Administration

The 2nd of tonight's copy and paste posts features Congressman Harry Mitchell's speech in support of his bill to reauthorize the U.S. Fire Administration, given on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday, April 3, 2008.

From the page H1979 of Congressional Record -

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 4847, the U.S. Fire Administration Reauthorization Act of 2008, a bill I introduced with the original cosponsor, my good friend from Georgia, Dr. Gingrey. Firefighters are often the first to arrive at an emergency scene and the last to leave. Whether it is putting out a house fire or a wild fire, or responding to a terrorist attack or car accident, we depend on firefighters every day. But firefighters also depend on us; they depend on the public and their elected officials to make sure that they have the resources, the equipment, and the training they need to do their job. Without those tools, we put them and all of us at risk.

The U.S. Fire Administration is an invaluable resource for our Nation's firefighters and the communities they protect. Through training, data collection, fire education for the public, and support for fire-related research and development, the USFA provides critical tools and leadership to the Fire Service.

Fire is one of nature's most destructive forces. In 1973, when USFA was created, over 6,000 Americans died each year in fires and another 100,000 were injured. Through the leadership of USFA and others, the number of people killed by fires each year is now between 3,000 and 3,500, with approximately 16,000 people who were injured. We can all be proud of the significant reduction. However, 3,000 Americans a year is still too many, especially when so many of these deaths and injuries are from our most vulnerable populations, children and the elderly.

In addition, the Nation still suffers over $11 billion per year in direct losses due to fire, and the trend for this number is going up, not down. With statistics like these, it is clear that fire continues to be a major problem for the U.S. H.R. 4847 reauthorizes this important agency for 4 years at funding levels that will enable USFA to carry out fully its mission.

At a hearing with the Technology and Innovation Subcommittee held last fall, we heard the priorities of the Nation's fire service communities for USFA. This bill directly reflects their priorities.

This bill authorizes the USFA to focus on the pressing challenges of fighting fires in the wildland-urban interface, and fires involving hazardous materials, as well as advanced topics of emergency medical services.

Back home in Arizona, one of the toughest challenges our firefighters face is wildfires in the wildland-urban interface. This is an important year for wildfires. We have had a pretty wet winter which means a great deal of shrubs and bushes have grown at lower elevations. When the summer months heat up and the vegetation dries out, those shrubs and bushes will turn into tinder that can start a fast-moving wildfire in urban areas. Those fires threaten homes and lives. Fighting wildfires in urban areas requires special training, and I am proud that this legislation enhances fire administration training for wildland-urban interface fires.

Firefighters today are called upon to respond to an ever-broader range of emergencies. This authorization bill gives USFA the authority to make sure its training program keeps pace with the increasing challenges to the fire service.

The bill also addresses an important priority of the fire service in USFA, and that is to update the National Fire Incident Reporting System, or NFIRS. This system provides important data on fire events to policymakers at all levels of government. The current system is slow to report the data to the National Fire Data Center, and does not capture data on every fire, thus limiting its value to users. H.R. 4847 would direct USFA to update NFIRS to a real-time reporting, web-based system.

The bill also directs the U.S. Fire Administrator to continue USFA's leadership in firefighter health and safety. Every year over 100 firefighters die in the line of duty. H.R. 4847 directs USFA to educate local fire departments about national voluntary consensus standards for firefighter health and safety, and to encourage local departments to adopt these standards. This provision will help reduce the tragic loss of life the fire service suffers each year in line-of-duty deaths by promoting good practices in a variety of fire emergencies.

I also understand there have been some concerns that this provision would affect the jurisdiction of NIOSH, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health. I would like to reassure my colleagues that it is not my intent for this bill to have any effect on NIOSH or any other agency of the Department of Health and Human Services.

H.R. 4847 is the product of bipartisan collaboration, and is supported by major fire service organizations, including the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the International Association of Firefighters, the National Volunteer Fire Council, National Fire Protection Association, and the Congressional Fire Services Institute.

The resources and leadership of the USFA are an essential part of the ability of the fire service to protect our cities, towns and communities. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

No partisan showboating or gamesmanship here, just solid and practical work on a mundane but vital issue, on behalf of his constituents and the country.

Apparently, freshman Congressman Harry Mitchell could teach something to veterans like John "Only has a cold shoulder for his constituents in Paradise Valley when that have poison coming out of their taps" Shadegg..

Later!