If Dougie likes someone, it may not be a positive character reference for that someone

From Ben Giles, published by KJZZ -

Ducey praises Sinema's steadfast support of the filibuster

Gov. Doug Ducey had high praise for Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema one day after she sided with Senate Republicans to reject a proposed change to the filibuster.

“I want to give Senator Sinema credit for standing up and protecting a Senate rule that she believes in,” Ducey told reporters on Thursday.

Sinema, voting against the minimum wage, from CNN -

Arizona"s R members of Congress don't really give a damn about Arizona

At least based on their bill proposals, they don't.  They *do* hate immigrants, government/society, choice, Covid mitigation measures, democracy/election, and, of course, Joe Biden.

From my spreadsheet, data source Congress.gov -

While the total number of bills proposed by each member was easy to determine (than you. Congress.gov); categorization less so, since that was all me.

They proposed only six Arizona-specific bills between them (with Paul Gosar leading the way, but he made up for it) they all hate immigrants with 13 bill proposals between them.

However, that number is next to nothing when compared to their anti-government/society proposals, with 44 of those.

Additionally, they each like Covid, or at least have offered proposals against Covid mitigation measures.

Lastly, it's no surprise that Gosar and Biggs, two of Congress' leading collaborators of the January 6th insurrection have offered bills that are anti-elections/democracy.

Even the fifth, unofficial, Republican member of the Arizona delegation to Congress, Kyrsten Sinema, did better than that -

I may not be one of Kyrsten Sinema's biggest fans, but even *I* have never compared her to Ivanka Trump

Cheeto?  Maybe (OK, yup :) ), but Vanky?

Never.  That would be too low.

But it seems that my journalistic standards are higher than those of some folks.

From The Daily Beast, today -

Kyrsten Sinema in All Her Bad Outfits Is the New Ivanka Trump

Have you missed Ivanka Trump’s breathlessly variable White House fashion—her pristine, all-white “I’m rich” outfits or knifelike Louboutin stilettos? Probably not. But say what you will about the whole erosion of democracy under Trump’s presidency, or that pesky insurrection, the first daughter sure wore some outfits during her four years as a “White House adviser”-slash-faded-debutante.

Don’t fret, for a torch has been passed. Ivanka may be holed up in her million-dollar Miami compound, but another high-powered white woman is dressing to enrage: Kyrsten Sinema. Her clothes appear to be an extension of her political persona: she will do things her way, thanks very much, and she does not care if you don’t like it, or don’t understand it—such as her wearing a denim vest to preside over the Senate earlier this week.

The only question left: will Kyrsten Sinema switch parties or does she already have a corporate lobbying gig lined up?

My guess is the lobbying job - even Republicans won't vote for her in a primary no matter how cravenly pro-corporation that she is, and she's easily smart enough to realize that.

My guess is that even if she gets through a Democratic primary in 2024 (and until she actually loses one, I'm going to presume she will), many folks who voted for her in 2018 will simply skip the race.

Pic from CNN, not related to this story but not her finest moment.

From CNN -

Sinema's opposition to raising the corporate tax rate leaves White House scrambling to pay for Biden's agenda

Top Biden administration officials are now weighing a range of different ideas to finance a sweeping economic and climate package as opposition from Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema has thrown initial plans to raise the corporate tax rate into doubt, according to two people familiar with the matter.

The ideas were raised on a Wednesday call between top officials and the two chairs of the congressional tax writing committees -- Senate Finance Chairman Ron Wyden and House Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal, the people said. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Brian Deese, the director of Biden's National Economic Council, were among those who participated in the call from the administration, the people said.

Sinema teaches students about her first love - getting money from rich people

At least she's qualified for this one; it's not as if she could teach courses on public service, or listening to constituents.

Pointed to this by Taegan Goddard's Political Wire.

From The Intercept -

SEN. KYRSTEN SINEMA IS LITERALLY TEACHING A COURSE ON FUNDRAISING

ALL STUDENTS HOPE to learn from the top experts in their field. Graduate students at Arizona State University have an unusual opportunity this fall to do just that, where Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., is teaching a course on getting rich people to give you money.

The course, titled “Developing Grants and Fundraising,” is one of two classes Sinema is teaching this fall at Arizona State University’s School of Social Work. The syllabus, which was obtained by The Intercept, says students will “learn diverse fundraising strategies” for nonprofits as well as “how to cultivate donors,” including “large individual donors,” by leveraging resources like “opportunistic fundraising,” “finding supporters for major fundraising events” — and, well, “asking for money.”

Betcha ASU doesn't have a professional integrity policy for their instructors; just one for their students.

From the syllabus (courtesy The Intercept) -

One question.  Is she a hypocrite for not attending work when students are expected to attend class?

I think she is one, but at least she skipped out on work to raise money from rich folks and/or corporate lobbyists.

Also from the syllabus -

Manchin and Sinema: Describing them as "centrists" is a misnomer.

 A better term for them would be "self-centered obstructionists".

From The Guardian -

Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema: the centrists blocking Biden’s agenda

 

Donald Trump’s favorite insult for political opponents inside his own party is “Rino” – Republican in name only. By such logic, Senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona are the epitome of Dinos, two elected Democrats whose dogged resistance to Joe Biden’s social agenda threatens/threatened to upend his entire presidency.

Their standoff with the party’s progressive wing over the price tag of Biden’s ambitious reform package has become almost more of a hazard to his legacy than anything the Republicans, currently in a narrow minority in both chambers of Congress, can throw at it.

Guessing that one of our senators, Kyrsten Sinema, isn't well read

At least, she hasn't read Dale Carnegie's "How to Win Friends and Influence People".

From CNN -

Sinema says lack of infrastructure vote 'inexcusable' and erodes trust within Democratic party

Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema strongly rebuked the House of Representatives' lack of a vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill in a statement Saturday, calling the delay "inexcusable and deeply disappointing for communities across our country."

Sinema's statement came after a dramatic week in the House when Speaker Nancy Pelosi delayed the vote on the infrastructure bill because progressives threatened to withhold support until details are ironed out for the separate, massive social benefits and climate spending bill. President Joe Biden vowed Friday that Democrats will deliver on their agenda as congressional leaders attempt to resolve intra-party divisions that have put passage of the two bills in jeopardy.

Know what really "erodes trust within Democratic party"?

(Allegedly) Democratic electeds behaving like self-absorbed and anti-society Republicans.

Still, patience with Sinema is wearing thin, and not just mine.

From The Hill -

Arizona Democrats' frustration with Sinema comes to a head

Democratic anger with Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) is beginning to reach a boil in Arizona over her opposition to Democrats’ $3.5 trillion reconciliation package, fueling speculation that a primary challenger could be awaiting her when she runs for a second term in 2024.

A handful of Democratic groups critical of Sinema popped up this week, with some looking to fund a potential primary challenger and at least one looking to specifically recruit Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) to run against her in the Democratic nominating contest. At the same time, the Arizona Democratic Party is threatening to hold a no-confidence vote on Sinema unless she falls in line with the rest of her caucus.

Someone can recruit Ruben Gallego all that they want, but I think that he may be the wrong Gallego to challenge Sinema (assuming she runs for for reelection and doesn't already have a corporate lobbying gig already lined up.)

Of course, if Sinema does actually run for reelection in 2024, she may face a primary challenge, not from a Democrat, but from Doug Ducey.

"Leadership PAC" is another way of saying "questionable use of money"

From Election Law Blog -

“Scores of lawmakers’ leadership PACs spent vast sums on luxurious dining, lodging, and travel, new Issue One and Campaign Legal Center report shows”

From the report:

New research from Issue One and Campaign Legal Center shows that scores of lawmakers are not using the bulk of the money they raise in their leadership PACs to assist other candidates, political groups, or their parties — the intended purpose of leadership PACs when they were approved by the Federal Election Commission more than 40 years ago.

While most members of Congress primarily use their leadership PACs to make political contributions, Issue One and Campaign Legal Center found that the leadership PACs of 120 members of Congress spent less than 50% on politics between January 2019 and December 2020 — roughly one of every five members of Congress….

Note: The report doesn't include Senator Mark Kelly, who, at that point, hadn't been a member of the Senate during most of the covered period of time.

From the report, Arizona's Congressional contingent, listed alphabetically by last name - 

The worst offenders by percent spent on politics - 

Ordered by amount of money spent -

Notice a pattern?

The only time that Senator Kyrsten Sinema is near the bottom of the list is when it's presented alphabetically.

Otherwise, she spent far and away the most money from her leadership PAC and she is tied for lowest percentage spent on politics.

Of course, of the only three Arizona members under 50% there, one was unelected and is no longer a member of Congress (McSally), one is, ahem, "ethically challenged" (Schweikert). and Sinema, who, even when she was in the AZ lege, was notorious for not helping other Democrats.

Refilling the money coffers may be one of the reasons that she's hobnobbing with business groups today.

Federal committee update

From the website of the FEC -

Republican Martin is a 2020 candidate who has signed on for another run at the CD2 seat currently held by the retiring Ann Kirkpatrick.

And my lack of regard for the job Sinema has done as an elected is well known; putting the word "leadership" in anything associated with her is a lie.

Kyrsten Sinema hangs America out to dry

I was pointed to most of this by Taegan Goddard's Political Wire.

Being a Massachusetts guy, I would most liken Kyrsten Sinema to Billy Bulger, another pol who seemed to become a Democrat only because it was the shortest path to power, not because of any affinity for Democratic ideals.

Hey!  This is nice; I could have said she was shamelessly auditioning for the 2024 or 2028 Republican presidential ticket.

From the Arizona Republic -

Sinema doesn't support Democrats' $3.5T bill, clinches bipartisan infrastructure deal

Yvonne Wingett Sanchez

Arizona Republic

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema does not support Democrats' $3.5 trillion budget plan that aims to deliver major components of President Joe Biden’s economic agenda that Democrats hope to pass after moving a separate bipartisan infrastructure deal that Sinema negotiated.

Sinema, D-Ariz., told The Arizona Republic on Wednesday she had reviewed the Senate Budget Committee’s spending framework and has told Senate leadership and Biden that she supports many of its goals, including job growth and American competitiveness. 

Needless to say, some members of the more liberal wing of the Democratic Party expressed their disagreement with her position -

Of course, her positions are situational.  To whit: her current defense of the Republican-friendly filibuster.

From Business Insider -

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema slammed 'false pressure' to reach a filibuster-proof 60 votes in unearthed 2010 video

In comments to supporters 11 years ago, Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, an Arizona Democrat, criticized the "false pressure" to reach a 60-vote supermajority to pass legislation, a 2010 video unearthed by the progressive media organization More Perfect Union showed.  

Sinema, an Arizona state representative at the time, told the audience that she supported Democrats using reconciliation to pass major legislation, including healthcare reform, with just 51 votes. She also criticized Sen. Joe Lieberman, an independent from Connecticut who caucused with the Democratic Party, and Sen. Bill Nelson, a Florida Democrat, for being too moderate. 

Sinema's action made Mitch McConnell happy - 

Making Mitch happy probably is not in the job description of any (allegedly) Democratic senator.

Sinema may have displayed some power today, but she didn't make any friends; we'll see what that means when/if she's up for reelection.

Yes, Kyrsten Sinema is in trouble

From Data For Progress (pointed to this by Taegan Goddard's Political Wire) - 

WHO IS KYRSTEN SINEMA REALLY REPRESENTING?

Halfway through her term as Senator of Arizona, Kyrsten Sinema is finding herself seemingly at odds with the members of her party. Her dedication to preserving the filibuster has stood as a significant obstacle to enacting a number of important bills and to more general Democratic governance despite the party’s trifecta in Washington, DC. Most recently, her unwavering stance on the filibuster enabled Republicans to block the For the People Act, a sweeping voting rights bill that is popular with the Democratic base, leadership, and her constituents back home in Arizona. In a recent poll by Data For Progress, we found strong majority support for this bill and a number of others that are high on the Democrats’ policy agenda. We also found that Arizona voters from across the political spectrum are displeased overall with her performance as Senator. Taken together, this begs the question: if her policy stances are alienating leadership and voters alike, who exactly is Kyrsten Sinema representing in Congress?

Even if she makes it through a primary, in a general election, she'll have problems.

I expect that many of the folks who, like me, held their noses and voted for her in 2018, will skip the race if she's on the general election ballot in 2024.

It also may be why Doug Ducey is letting Mark Brnovich take on Mark Kelly in 2022 for his seat in the US Senate; in 2024, he wants to be the Republican nominee for POTUS, and may settle for being the R nominee for VPOTUS.  Depending on how that works out, he may accept the consolation prize of challenging Sinema for a spot in the US Senate.

The best thing for Sinema may be if the R nominee is someone who is utterly nuts; say a Gosar or Biggs.

On the other hand, they're in safe Congressional districts so they may not run for a Senate seat..

Maybe it's all part of the marketing plan for the new Star Wars movie: AZ Congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema embraces the Dark Side...

...Fellow blogger Bob Lord has written on this very topic here, far more eloquently than I can.  However, I hope can make up in brevity what is lacking in eloquence...

OK, I'm done.  No more "holding my nose" and voting for the "less bad" option in Arizona's 9th Congressional District.

Former progressive icon (and current member of Congress) Kyrsten Sinema announced her complete renunciation of the pretense of working to serve the interests of her constituents (but damn, she's always serving her own interests), or even exhibiting the most basic humanity in her conduct in office, with her vote (along with 47 other Democrats) demonizing Syrian refugees for the terrorist attacks in Paris (and, as of this writing, no Syrians, refugee or otherwise, have been shown to have been part of the attacks).

This is not the first time she has done something like this, and to be blunt, I don't expect it to be the last time.

However, I can state unequivocally that the general election in 2014 will go down in history as the last time that I will ever vote for her.

 The worst case scenario for her here is that she truly believes that demonizing people of a specific ethnic background is good for the US.

The best case scenario for her here is that she truly believe that demonizing people of a specific ethnic background is good for her.

Either way though, it's evil.

And is something that I cannot, and will not, support.

Now, I almost certainly won't vote for the R in whatever race she is in - the next time Arizona Republicans nominate an honorable public servant for any office will be the first time they do so since former state senator Carolyn Allen and former corporation commission member Kris Mayes won their primaries (2008, I think).

However, I can skip any race on the ballot.

And in 2016 (and going forward), that is what will happen in any race where Kyrsten Sinema is a candidate.


Prediction: While it is getting late in the cycle for a Democrat to mount a credible primary challenge to her in 2016, the only way she avoids a Democratic primary in 2018 is to join State Sen. Carlyle Begay tomorrow and just change her partisan affiliation to Republican.

It may be time to resurrect the "Kyrsten Sinema" party...

 ...if only in the interests of "Truth In Advertising"...

Arizona Congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema (D...for now-CD9), early in her political career, was a darling of the liberal set.

Years ago, she was more of a Green than a Democrat because the Democrats in her area were too conservative.

However, even then, her political acts gave insight into her political focus...to anyone who cared to notice.

Her first run for the state legislature in 2002 was as a member of the "Kyrsten Sinema Party".

As that move, electorally speaking, was something other than a complete success, for 2004, she changed her registration to "Democrat" (the former LD15 was a Democratic-leaning district), and she was off to the races.  She won a seat in the Arizona House of Representatives.

In 2012, she left the AZ lege behind (having since moved to the Arizona State Senate) and mounted a successful run for a new Congressional district based in Phoenix.

She entered Congress as a Democrat but almost immediately upon taking office, started acting and voting like a Republican.

For instance, in 2013 she helped shepherd through committee HR992, a bill basically written by financial industry lobbyists to water down the already weak regulation faced by the financial industry (think: enabling the Mob in a rewrite of RICO), later voting for the measure when it reached the floor of the House.

Now it's 2015, and she is still aiding and abetting the House Republicans, this time with their push for an America that's in a state of "Forever War".

From the Arizona Republic, written by Rebekah L. Sanders -

Liberals are fuming over U.S. Rep. Kyrsten Sinema's vote against the Iran deal, and some want her out of office.

MoveOn.org, a grassroots organizing group, told The Arizona Republic it may support a primary challenge to the Arizona Democrat for opposing the international agreement that seeks to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, the latest in a string of votes the lawmaker has cast with the GOP.

After voting against the Iran deal, she voted for lifting sanctions against Iran, a seeming contradiction.

Until you look at the money.

What do financial industry types (and their lobbyists), defense industry types (and their lobbyists), and the business interests (and their lobbyists) who stand to reap profits from opening Iran's markets all have in common?


Deep pockets.


Pockets that have the kind of depth that seem to catch the eye...and soul...of Sinema.


A couple of years ago, when she so eagerly catered to the whims of the financial industry, I wrote a post criticizing the move.

At the time though, I still held out some hope for her.

Now, I just wonder one thing:


When is she going to make it official?  When is she going to go back being the lead (and possibly only) member of the Kyrsten Sinema Party?

Short Attention Span Musing

Edited on 7/27 to correct an error

...Apparently, the leash from the Center for Arizona Theocracy Policy (CATP) stretches all the way from CATP's HQ to the 9th floor (governor's office)...

Last week, a video emerged purporting to show a senior official from Planned Parenthood offering for sale tissue from fetuses that have been aborted (not going to link to it; it's easy to find if you really want to see it).

It was quickly shown to be heavily selectively edited and egregiously taken out of context (the actual conversation was about using legitimately donated tissue for legitimate medical research), but that hasn't stopped hordes of anti-choicers from citing the video when they demonize Planned Parenthood.

Which is something that they do the same way that normal people breathe.

Anyway, Doug Ducey, Governor of Arizona, has jumped on the anti-PP bandwagon with a statement.  From that statement -

Governor Doug Ducey today directed the Arizona Department of Health Services to conduct a thorough review of current law and immediately promulgate emergency rules designed to prohibit the illegal sale of any tissue from an unborn child.

Since Ducey has officially deemed it OK to change public policy based on open lies, maybe it's time to play with the truth a little and see how much he likes it.

Found this picture on Yahoo.com -

Ducey, left, and Cathi Herrod, President of CATP

Now, someone with Photoshop skills could do a better job with this than me, but this may be good enough to make my point -

The crudely-drawn black line going from Herrod's right hand to Ducey's neck represents a leash attached to a collar.

Now, to be clear, while it seems clear that Herrod and her group exert undue influence at the Capitol (9th Floor and elsewhere), to the best of my knowledge, a physical leash is not involved (meaning that the above pic is meant to be taken as a physical representation of a metaphor, not as documentation of an actual leash).

Having said that, I have to ask -

Would he like it if the above picture (or one done more skillfully) were circulated during his next election campaign?

While it is not accurate in a literal sense (like the anti-PP video), it is accurate in a metaphorical sense (unlike the anti-PP video)...


...Am I the only person who thinks that Donald Trump, Republican presidential candidate (and God's gift to comedians and wiseasses everywhere), instead of being the "nightmare" for the GOP that many in the GOP seem to believe, is actually their wettest dream -

- he actually has Democrats defending Sen. John McCain (R-Never Met A War He Didn't Monger) and his military service.

- he is providing cover for the other R candidates, all of whom have gone right on with saying things that should disqualify them from ever holding *any* elected office, much less the presidency.  However, the national media is focused on Trump and his never-ending case of verbal diarrhea.


...News broke this week that Rodney Glassman, the 2010 Democratic nominee for US Senate in AZ, has changed his voter registration from Democrat to Republican.

Most people that I talked to about this A) hadn't heard the news prior to reading about it in the Yellow Sheet Report and B) weren't surprised - he was never much of a Democrat, and unless the AZGOP changes its name to the "Arizona Glassman Party", he's probably not going to be much of a Republican (though he may find some common cause with the Chamber of Commerce wing of the AZGOP).

The story mentioned that he might be exploring a run in LD28 (looking to unseat Democratic State Rep. Eric Meyer).  As of this writing, the website of the AZSOS doesn't show him as establishing a campaign committee (statewide, exploratory, or legislative).

Just to be thorough, I checked the websites of the FEC and Maricopa County; no Glassman activity in either place as yet.

Edit on 7/27:  Rep Meyer is facing term limits in the House and has formed a committee for a Senate run.  He is expected to face the incumbent senator for LD28, Republican Adam Driggs.  As such, if Glassman does indeed go for a House seat, it will be an open seat.  However, unless he is better connected within the LD28GOP and can fend off would-be competitors before nominating signatures are filed, he will face a number of challengers.  

Many of whom may view themselves as having "waited their turn" and will be reluctant to step aside for an upstart.

Having said that, a Glassman primary victory isn't impossible, just difficult to foresee.

Apologies to readers for in my haste to complete this post, I didn't check Meyer's status while searching for any Glassman committees.

End edit...


...Also this past week, the US House of Representatives passed HB3009, punishing "sanctuary cities" (cities that don't notify the feds of the immigration status of people that come into contact with "the system").  The vote fell almost completely along party lines, but six Democrats crossed over to support this nugget of nativist grandstanding.

Including Arizona's own Kyrsten Sinema (CD9).

I don't know if she was always on the nativist train (support: her friendly relationship with the infamous Russell Pearce) or if she is triangulating, trying to gain the support of people who will never vote for her anyway (support: everything she has done since gaining the office), she is looking ever more vulnerable to a primary challenge.

I don't know if one will happen in 2016, but one is coming, and soon.

Short Attention Span Musing

Just a mish-mash of stuff that doesn't really fit into its own post.  For now anyway...

...Republican former legislator Mark Thompson is looking for a return to elected office; he's filed to run for the justice of the peace seat in the University Lakes district (east Tempe).

...Rumors are running rampant that Democratic Congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema is mulling the option of leaving her current CD9 (a competitive district) for a run at the CD7 seat (a safe D district) that will be vacated by the about-to-retire Ed Pastor.  I don't think that it's a good idea, and don't think that ultimately she'll do it, but whatever she does, she needs to make the decision quickly - being a carpetbagger is only slightly worse than looking like a carpetbagger-wannabe.

...Rumors are also swirling that Shana Ellis, member of the Tempe City Council and nominally a Democrat, has hired HighGround Public Affairs as a consultant to her reelection campaign.  This is significant for two reasons:

1.  HighGround is arguably the most influential consulting/lobbying firm in Arizona (for good reason), but it is also unabashedly Republican.  Having said that, consulting firms are modern politics' version of hired guns, and candidates care primarily about winning.  And the city council race is non-partisan.  The rumor is as yet unconfirmed, but the relationship, assuming it exists, should be an amicable one. So long Ellis wins and her checks don't bounce.  Which brings us to...

2.  HighGround ain't cheap.  Either she expects to spend a serious amount of time fundraising, or she already has someone in mind, ready to pick up the tab for HighGround's services.


...Republican former legislator and former candidate for Congress Rusty Bowers has filed for a return to the legislature.  He's seeking one of the Republican nominations for a House seat in LD25.

...Republican state representative John Kavanagh may have learned a lesson the hard way, one that many politicos before him have learned, also the hard way.

Don't tell jokes, especially those that make fun of anybody but the joke teller.

Video of him surfaced, video of his performance at a "roast" of his friend and ally, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

His jokes were putatively about Arpaio, but they all seemed to put down Latinos and other groups that have been targeted by Arpaio (and Kavanagh, and Russell Pearce, and many other current and former members of the anti-breathing while brown caucus of the AZGOP).

The Southern Poverty Law Center has more here.

Dear US House freshmen: Doing bad works for good reasons is still doing bad works.

I don't expect to be in complete agreement on every issue with the elected officials who represent me, even those who I support, but I do expect my elected representatives to perform their duties in a completely ethical manner.

*Especially* those I support.

There were a number of Democrats in this year's freshman class in the US House of Representatives, including Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona's 9th Congressional District.

Those freshman members who were deemed to be most vulnerable in 2014, including Sinema, were given seats on the House Financial Services Committee to give them access to the deep-pocketed lobbyists for the financial services industry.

As such, most of them are doing very well with their campaign fundraising efforts.

Well, DC is a "quid pro quo" kind of place, and it's time for the freshmen to give a little "quo" for all of the "quid" that they've been getting.

From the New York Times, written by Eric Lipton and Ben Protess -

Bank lobbyists are not leaving it to lawmakers to draft legislation that softens financial regulations. Instead, the lobbyists are helping to write it themselves.

One bill that sailed through the House Financial Services Committee this month — over the objections of the Treasury Department — was essentially Citigroup’s, according to e-mails reviewed by The New York Times. The bill would exempt broad swathes of trades from new regulation.

{snip}

...But most of the Democrats on the committee, along with 31 Republicans, came to the industry’s defense, including the seven freshmen Democrats — most of whom have started to receive donations this year from political action committees of Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo and other financial institutions, records show.

Six days after the vote, several freshmen Democrats were in New York to meet with bank executives, a tour organized by Representative Joe Crowley, who helps lead the House Democrats’ fund-raising committee. The trip was planned before the votes, and was not a fund-raiser, but it gave the lawmakers a chance to meet with Wall Street’s elite.

In addition to a tour of Goldman’s Lower Manhattan headquarters, and a meeting with Lloyd C. Blankfein, the bank’s chief executive, the lawmakers went to JPMorgan’s Park Avenue office. There, they chatted with Jamie Dimon, the bank’s chief, about Dodd-Frank and immigration reform.

I understand the desire of elected officials to win re-election and am fully cognizant of the fact that any Republican running against her is likely to be far worse.

Having said that however, each of the seven Democratic freshmen on the committee (and, for that matter, all of the Democratic members of the committee) got where they are in large part because of a massive amount of grassroots support.

Those grassroots supporters didn't stuff thousands of envelopes, make thousands of phone calls and canvass thousands of miles of neighborhoods only to see their candidates turn into ethical reincarnations of JD Hayworth.

Yes, re-electing Congresswoman Sinema and the rest of the freshman Democrats would be a "good" thing, but actively aiding and abetting the banksters in return for generous campaign contributions is most definitely "bad" and just may help the Republicans in the long run.

Most everybody expects Republican electeds to be at least a little dirty, even their supporters - they hold public service and public servants themselves as utterly contemptible, and use that attitude to rationalize contemptible behavior of their own* - but Democrats tend to be seen as the "good guys" (no, not all perfect, and certainly not all "guys").  As such, they are held to a slightly higher standard.  That's why John Ensign (R) got to resign with his pension intact and Rod Blagojevich (D) got to go to prison.

In short, an elected Democrat who is perceived to be as ethical as an elected Republican is well on the way to becoming an unelected Democrat.


For the record, while I absolutely deplore corruption on the part of public officials regardless of partisan affiliation, I think that the most annoying part of this behavior is that it gives credibility to the "they're all dirty" crowd, those whose political thoughts and knowledge can comfortably fit on a bumper sticker.


* - I am not the first to make this observation.  The late, great, Molly Ivins once made almost the same observation about the presidential administration of George H.W. Bush, and things have only become worse since.

Voting *for* a candidate: a guide

During an election cycle, particularly a long one like a presidential cycle, it's easy to lose sight of why we support this candidate or that candidate, losing ourselves in being against the "other".

The reasons why we support candidate "A" become subsumed by the fact that candidate "B" is an arrogant, avaricious plutocrat or the reasons that we support candidate "X" are drowned in the glare of candidate "Y's" bigotry, corruption, etc.

As easy as voting"against" can be, voting "for" is far more satisfying.  I've been voting for a while now.  Not gonna say how long, but the first presidential ticket that received my vote was Mondale/Ferraro.  You do the math. :)

While most of my votes have been "for" a candidate, too many have been for the "less bad" candidate.  The most satisfying votes that I've ever cast were for Harry Mitchell.  While he is nowhere near liberal enough to suit me politically, he based his positions, and his votes in office, on what he thought was in the best interests of his constituents.

Voting for him in 2010 when David Schweikert took advantage of the Republican wave that year to oust an icon was no less satisfying than voting for him in 2006 when Mitchell first won a seat in Congress.

Having said all of that, here's my "positive" take on my votes this year, why I voted "for" particular candidate.  There were lots of  "for" candidates this year -


- Barack Obama for President - I enthusiastically voted for him in 2008, and proudly did so again this year. 

In the face of intractable opposition (to the point that Republicans in Congress voted against bills that they had sponsored themselves if Obama supported them), he led the start of real healthcare reform, started winding down the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, fought for tax cuts for the working and middle classes, saved the American auto industry, and oversaw the end for Osama Bin Laden. 

To be sure, there were a few missteps, but even most of those just showed that the man is simply human (stay off the pitcher's mound, Mr. President :) ).

My biggest complaint with him is that he hasn't be liberal enough in his governance.

However, that dovetails with the biggest reason to vote to give him a second term - he has governed.  Not ruled, not dictated, not anything but do his job.

He has worked *for* his constituents, all of them, not just those who agree with him or give him campaign contributions.

You may not agree with everything he's done in office; I like and support him, and even *I* don't agree with everything that the Obama administration has done. 

However, he has done what he has done out of concern for the best interests of his constituents, which should be the motivation behind the positions and actions of *all* elected officials.

As such, he has more than earned a second term in the oval office.

Picture courtesy CNN

I promise that the rest of these will be much shorter.  :)

- Dr. Rich Carmona for U.S. Senate - This may be his first foray into electoral politics, but it's not his first foray into public service.  Not hardly.

In his storied career, he has been an Army medic (in Vietnam), a SWAT team leader, and Surgeon General of the United States.  His life story is the archetypal American success story - born to immigrant parents, worked to obtain an education, lifted himself out of poverty, and has spent his adult life in public service of one sort or another.

In short, he's the sort of person who *should* be in office because he has been where most of us have been.

Carmona talking to a supporter in Tempe, September 15

- Kyrsten Sinema for U.S. Congress (CD9) - *Not* her first foray into electoral politics, but it's hardly her first foray into public service.  Like Carmona above, she bootstrapped her way out of poverty with education and hard work, and like Carmona, she has dedicated her life to serving the public.  In her case, she has been a social worker, attorney, and educator.

And like Carmona, she is the kind of person who should be in office representing us because she has been and is us.

Sinema at a candidate forum in July in Tempe

- Katie Hobbs (Senate) and Lela Alston and Chad Campbell (House) for the Arizona legislature from LD24 - They are each experienced, dedicated, intelligent, hard-working, and caring public servants and have earned another term in office.

(L-R) Hobbs, Alston, and Campbell at the LD24 Clean Elections forum in Phoenix, September 25th

Bonus legislative race:  Ed Ableser (Senate) and Juan Mendez and Andrew Sherwood (House) for the Arizona legislature from LD26 -  While they were not on my ballot (I live in LD24), all three are friends of mine and people who I respect.  They are active members of the community and have and will work for the betterment of the community.

 

 

(Standing L-R) Mendez, Sherwood, and Ableser at the LD26 Chili Cook-Off, April 28

 

- Paul Penzone for Maricopa County Sheriff - Penzone is a career cop who has based his career on *involving* the entire community, not demonizing* part of it for personal and political gain.  When he is elected, he'll bring a level of professionalism and integrity to the MCSO that hasn't been seen there in decades.

Penzone in Tempe, April 28 (same event as in the above pic, only a couple of hours earlier)

- Marcia Busching, Sandra Kennedy, and Paul Newman for the Arizona Corporation Commission - While the members of this trio bring a variety of experiences and backgrounds to the table, but they share a focus on ensuring Arizona's energy future.

Are all of the above candidates Democrats?  Yup.

But before the above is dismissed as "partisan hackery", one should ask if all of the above candidates are the "best" candidates. 

The answer to that question is a resounding "Yes".

Their primary concern has been (in the case of previous or current officeholders) or will be (in the case of future officeholders) the best interests of the people that they represent.

I don't expect to agree with them on every single issue, but I do expect that every person who "represents" me to hold positions, craft policies, and cast votes based on the best interests of their constituents.

And before anyone begins thinking that I've gone soft, an "against" post will follow this one.  :)

The 2012 primaries: one major disappointment, a minor one, but otherwise, no real surprises

Tuesday's primaries are over, and the post-game analysis is in full swing.  As I wasn't able to live blog the results last night due to being otherwise occupied (at David Schapira's election night gathering in Tempe.  Hard to type when it is too dark to see the keyboard... :) ).

There were a couple of disappointments, but the only surprises Tuesday were in margins of victory (or loss, depending on your perspective), not in end results.

First, the disappointments -

- The biggest disappointment of the evening was, of course, David Schapira's second place finish, behind Kyrsten Sinema, in the Democratic primary in CD9.  He ran a positive and energetic campaign, earned the respect of many people who had never heard of him before this campaign (and reinforced the respect of the many people who *had* heard of him), and has a bright future despite this one loss, the first in his electoral career.

- A minor disappointment, but not a surprise, was the ability of LD23 R state reps John Kavanagh and Michelle Ugenti to fend off the challenge of Jennifer Petersen, a member of the Scottsdale school district governing board.  Petersen has a reputation as a pragmatic public servant, ergo, she had almost no chance of getting through a Republican primary.  Her north Scottsdale district used to send a highly-respected moderate R to the lege in the person of Carolyn Allen.  Now, the most "moderate" is State Sen. Michelle Reagan, and she has gone hard to the right, probably in preparation for an expected Congressional or statewide run.  The winner of the CD9 race in November, regardless of partisan affiliation, should probably start oppo research on her, at just about the time that the polls close.


Now, the (mostly pleasant) surprises -

- In the LD25 Senate R primary, disgraced former state senator Russell Pearce lost big to Mesa businessman Bob Worsley in his bid to return to the senate.  He has now lost a recall election by double digit percentage points, where he argued that if only Republicans could've voted in it (like, say, as in a primary), he would have won.  Well, he got the primary that he wanted, and...he lost by double digit percentage points.

- The other Pearce, Lester, lost his primary race for the 2nd District seat on the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors to businessman Steve Chucri.  It was by an equally resounding margin (double digits, baby!).

- Pearce ally John Fillmore lost his bid for the LD16 state senate R nomination to Pearce foe Rich Crandall.

- In the one victory for the Pearce machine, Sylvia Allen, currently in the state senate, won her primary race for the Republican nomination for the 3rd District seat on the Navajo County Board of Supervisors.  She won with 80% of the vote, but her opponent ran as a $500 Exemption candidate, while she had the thousands of dollars that she transferred from the legislative campaign committee.

- In the R primary for US Senate, it wasn't surprising to see Jeff Flake defeat Wil Cardon, nor even to do so soundly.  However, Flake didn't just win soundly - he absolutely thumped Cardon, gaining more than three times as many votes as Cardon. 

Damn!

- In Pinal County, embattled Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu held off multiple challengers for the R nomination, which in itself isn't much of a surprise - he was expected to win a plurality of the votes because the other candidates would split the anti-Babeu vote.  What is surprising is that Babeu got 61% of the vote.  The other three candidates combined didn't equal his total.

- In the LD24 D primaries, Katie Hobbs (Senate) and Lela Alston and Chad Campbell (House) easily turned aside the challenges from Ken Cheuvront (Senate) and his mom Jean and Tom Nerini (House), respectively.  While Hobbs was clearly the better candidate in her race, Cheuvront had money and name recognition on his side, so Hobbs' margin of victory was a bit of a surprise (>20 percentage points).

- In the CD6 R primary, freshman Congressman David Schweikert defeated fellow freshman Ben Quayle.  As a Democrat, I viewed that race much like I viewed the 2000 World Series between the Yankees and the Mets as a Red Sox fan - I hoped both would lose.  It didn't work out that way, but at least one lost. :)

- In the City of Scottsdale's mayoral race, incumbent Jim Lane received the most votes, which was no surprise.  What was surprising was his margin of victory - he gained a majority of votes cast, easily avoiding a November runoff against one of his challengers - businessman/community activist John Washington or businessman Drew Bernhardt.


Democratic primary results from Maricopa County are here (state and federal) and here (county)..
Republican primary results from Maricopa County are here (state and federal) and here (county).
Other party and non-partisan results from Maricopa County are here.
Results from the AZ Secretary of State are here.

David Schapira - the positive candidate in CD9

Two negatives don't make a positive...but two overwhelmingly negative candidates may help propel the positive candidate in a race to a win.

The CD9 Democratic primary has become very negative.  Not as negative as the Rs in CD6 (Schweikert v. Quayle) where they are gay-baiting, or as the negative as the Rs in CD4 (Gosar v. Gould v. Murphy) where during their debate on KAET's Horizon one was left with the impression that if Gosar and Gould had knives, there would have been blood on the floor.

Still, in CD9, the half-truths and outright lies have been flying about with increasing frequency.

Kyrsten Sinema put out a mailer that attacks both of her opponents, Andrei Cherny and David Schapira, claiming that both Schapira and Cherny support public education-destroying school vouchers.  I can't speak for Cherny (don't know him that well), but in the six years that David Schapira has been representing me in the Arizona Legislature, he has always been a staunch defender of public education.

There is also a PAC/independent expenditure group named "Restoring Arizona's Integrity" that has spent more than $50K attacking Cherny.  That group has ties to the Sinema camp - the organizers of the committee are long-time lobbyists in AZ and the head of the lobbying firm has contributed to Sinema's campaign.

Another group, "Progressive Independent Committee" has begun weighing in with "hit pieces" (aka - negative mailers) against Sinema, against Sinema and Schapira, and robocalls (against Sinema, I think; not sure because I didn't get one of those).  The combo hit piece compared Schapira and Sinema to Republicans Russell Pearce, Jan Brewer and Joe Arpaio. 

Like many Democrats in the district, I have formed opinions of all three Ds in the CD9 race.  While most of us now support one candidate over the other two, that doesn't mean we believe that the other two are stupid and/or evil.  This particular mailer isn't just nasty, it may border on libel (and that's tough to pull off when talking about politicians).

That group is more shadowy.  Its organizer, Matthew D. Langley, is a political operative based in Tennessee.  His firm, MD Langley & Associates, has been administratively dissolved by the Tennessee Secretary of State for failure to file annual reports -

The filing problems continue with Langley, as he has been lax in filing Independent Expenditure reports for the committee, filing only one report (for the initial anti-Sinema mailers) but not doing so for his/the committee's other activity (the mailer that railed against both Sinema and Schapira and the robocalls).

Anyway, this committee seems to be the Cherny committee.  If the targets of its vitriol don't make that clear enough, how about this -

Langley used to work for a firm called Patton Technologies as Director of Compliance, and early in his campaign for Arizona Treasurer, Andrei Cherny hired, you guessed it, Patton Technologies.

Note to Mr. Langley if he bothers to read this: A "Director of Compliance" shouldn't have filing issues on his resume.  Just sayin'...


The negative blasts from from the Cherny and Sinema camps seem to be working against them and boosting Schapira, who has been running an unfailingly positive campaign - a recent poll (published in the Yellow Sheet, so I cannot link to it) shows Schapira with a small lead in the race, and a reception with former Congressman Harry Mitchell on Saturday night was just packed.

Next Wednesday,  the Arizona Democratic Party will hold the 2012 Forward Together unity rally in Phoenix. 

I have no doubt that regardless of the outcome of Tuesday's primary, David Schapira will be there to support all Democratic candidates.  I can't say I believe the same about the others.

And that fact, combined with his relentlessly positive campaign and the fact that he is the candidate most concerned with the people of the Ninth Congressional District, is why David Schapira is the best candidate in the race.