AZ Supreme Court says "Merry Christmas" to R legislators, "Gimme" to lobbyists...

...and "Up Yours" to the people of Arizona...

From the Arizona Republic, written by Mary Jo Pitzl -

Higher campaign-contribution limits — up to $4,000 per candidate in a statewide race — are in force for the 2014 elections, in the wake of a state Supreme Court ruling handed up late Tuesday.

The five-member court sided with state legislative leaders, who argued a bill that raises the limits and applies them to both the primary- and general-election cycles does not violate the state Constitution. They argued the higher limits are a free-speech right and would help fend off independent-expenditure committees from distorting candidates’ messages.

I'm not sure where Pitzl got the "$4,000" figure.  The original bill set the limits at $5K - $2500 per election, with the primary and general elections considered  to separate elections for campaign finance purposes - but there was also an argument that while the increased limits could not be stopped, they could be reduced by 20% under the law enacted by the voters that created the Citizens Clean Elections Commission.  $4000 is 20% less than the new law's "$5,000".

Still, whether the new limit is $4K or $5K per contributor, it's way too high for the vast majority of Arizonans.  Under the new limits, only corporations, the very wealthy, and those who do their bidding will be able to afford giving serious financial support to candidates.

My prediction on the first indictment related to the new limits and influence peddling:  Six months after an honest prosecutor takes office at the Arizona Capitol or in Maricopa County.

And this could be the lege's new official song...except that the title includes the word "please", which is not in the lege's vernacular.

Normally, I don't have a huge problem with the decisions of the Arizona Supreme Court.  I may disagree with some of them, but in AZ, the Judicial Branch is the only one of the three main branches of government that is worthy of respect.  While they haven't yet published their opinion on this, explaining the reasoning behind this, this is one that will be examined very closely by people who don't normally focus on the details of such things.

A longer story from AP, via ABC15.com, is here.

The original bill, HB2593, is here.

RBB: AZ clemency board director resigns due to misconduct

* RBB = Republicans Behaving Badly 

From the Arizona Republic, written by Craig Harris -

Jesse Hernandez, the ex-chairman and executive director of the state Board of Executive Clemency, suddenly quit last week after an investigation found nine cases of inappropriate behavior, including giving an unqualified female employee he was dating a promotion and $21,340 pay raise, records obtained Wednesday by The Arizona Republic show.

The Republic acquired heavily redacted documents through the Arizona Public Records Law after Gov. Jan Brewer’s Office refused to explain Monday why her appointment abruptly quit Aug. 16.

Brewer appointed Hernandez, a Republican political operative, to the post last year despite having no experience in corrections or criminal justice, according to his resume.

Harris used the phrase "Republican political operative" to describe Hernandez. 

Harris has a gift for understatement.

From Hernandez' LinkedIn profile -

 

In addition to the stuff listed above, Hernandez was chair of a pro-Russell Pearce political committee during the Pearce recall in 2011 -

 

 And he was a candidate for state senate in 2006 -

A campaign co-chair for Maricopa County Attnorney Bill Montgomery.  From the AZ lege's bio page for Hernandez' appointment -

Maybe Harris should have spelled "operative" with a capital "O"...


Anyway, it could have been worse - Hernandez could have given his girlfriend an entire *job* for which she wasn't qualified, not just a pay raise.

Ya know, kind of like Tom Horne, Arizona's Attorney General.

Lester Pearce censured by the Arizona Supreme Court

Lester Pearce, brother of former state legislator Russell Pearce and a former Justice of the Peace in Maricopa County, was censured by the Arizona Supreme Court because of misconduct in office.

The charges against Pearce stemmed from his active involvement in his brother's (ultimately unsuccessful) campaign to fight being recalled from the state senate.

Judges of all sorts, even JPs, are barred from engaging in partisan political activity or campaigned for a candidate other than themselves.

After fighting the charges for months, Pearce stopped contesting the charges to allow the matter to come to a close (he never admitted his guilt).  Based on media reports, in addition to the censure, Pearce will have to pay a small fine/reimbursement for the costs of the investigation (~$1500).

And the money may be the most painful part of this for Pearce. 

The censure itself is little more than the AZ Supreme Court wagging a scolding finger at Pearce (no, not *that* finger :) ).  As he is 67 and his most recent campaign, a run for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, ended with a loss in the Republican primary, it seems likely that he won't be running for public office again. 

Perhaps he will be active in the rumored "Pearce putsch" at the AZGOP's reorganizational meeting in January.  If that is successful, he might be able to give elected office another shot, but if his party signals that it is embracing the Pearce clan's extremeist positions less enthusiastically (i.e. - doesn't support the wingnuts in their intended complete takeover of the AZGOP), he'd have trouble getting through any primary, not just the most recent one.

Maricopa County Recorder's Office engaging in voter suppression activity?

From ABC15.com, written by Tim Vetscher (emphasis mine) -

The Maricopa County Elections Department mistakenly listed the wrong date of the upcoming general election on an official government document.

The error appears on a document containing a voter ID card.

In addition to the ID card, the piece of paper it comes in lists other information such as important election dates.

In the corner of the document, it says November 6th in English but in Spanish it reads 8 de Noviembre, the 8th of November.

 

Election day is November 6th, not November 8th.

Folks, there is a reason that Arizona has been, is, and will remain, a "preclearance" state under the Voting Rights Act.

OK, there are *many* reasons, and this is only the latest and most blatant.

Folks2, it's official - we've reached the "cheat like hell" portion of the Republicans' plan to win the elections this year.

Political news briefs of the (mostly) legal variety

Some of this has been covered elsewhere, but merits inclusion here because of timeliness and topicality -

- LD17 State Representative Ben Arredondo pled guilty in federal court on Friday on some felony mail fraud charges related to a sporting events tickets bribery scam and a "scholarship fund" that was used to pay education expenses for some relatives of his.  According to news reports, his sentencing will take place in January.  A copy of the plea agreement is here, courtesy AZCentral.com.

With the felony conviction, Arredondo becomes ineligible to serve in the legislature.  When the seat officially becomes vacant, the Democratic Party precinct committeemen (PCs) of the current LD17 will meet to nominate three candidates to fill the seat for the remainder of Arredondo's term.  The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors will then interview and select one of the candidates for the appointment.

- John Mills, a former staffer at the Arizona House of Representatives, is the subject of a federal indictment on wire fraud charges, relating to his alleged use of campaign funds for personal purposes.

...While the two, Arredondo and Mills, have been convicted and/or accused of some serious crimes, the crimes are still relatively small time. 

The "buzz" in Arizona's political circles is that this is just the beginning and that more investigations, indictments, and convictions of "large fry" are in the federal pipeline.

- Arizona has had governors indicted* (and convicted) while in office, a state treasurer resign in disgrace (before he could be indicted), and a state mine inspector who was indicted on fraud and theft charges. 

And just in the last couple of decades.

However, to the best of my knowledge, we've haven't had an Attorney General who was the subject of a corruption investigation.

Enter Tom Horne.

He's now facing civil charges (which could result in fines, as opposed to the prison time that criminal charges could bring) stemming from some alleged campaign finance violations. A close aide of his, Kathleen Winn, headed up an independent expenditure committee during the 2010 election cycle. That independent committee spent more than half a million dollars opposing candidates.

Or should I say, "candidate".

The only candidate that the committee expended funds opposing was Felecia Rotellini, Horne's opponent in the race for Attorney General that year.

There was evidence (aside from the obvious - a Horne associate running an "independent" committee that focused solely on attacking a Horne adversary) that there was operational and fundraising coordination between Horne, hence the charges.

Fun fact: All of the independent expeditures were funnelled through Lincoln Strategy Group, which is run by infamous GOP operative Nathan Sproul. Who's having problems of his own these days.

Even before this, Horne had ethical issues - like a receiving a lifetime ban from the Securities and Exchange Commission for things like fraud and deceiving clients, like concealing a bankruptcy on a financial disclosure form, like hiring women who are close, personal friends to taxpayer-funded jobs for which they may be slightly less than qualified for (that's kind of a convoluted way of saying that he allegedly has used taxpayer money to support his girlfriends).

And to top it all off, during the FBI investigation that led to the current legal difficulties? Horne was driving a car that collided with another car, and after doing so, drove off. He committed a hit-and-run.

In full view of two FBI agents who were following him as part of the investigation.

And where did the accident occur?

At the address of his (alleged) girlfriend.

Ooopsie.

*Actually, multitasker that he was, Ev Mecham was indicted, impeached, and the subject of a recall election, all at the same time. However, including all of that would have made the sentence waaaaay too long. :)

- Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever was legally intoxicated, speeding, and not wearing a seat belt at the time of his fatal car crash.  All of which goes to illustrate that no one is immune to the laws of biochemistry or physics, not even those who enforce the laws of man.  If you are going to consume alcohol (or any other intoxicant), don't drive; when you drive, drive in a manner that is safe for the conditions (Dever was driving at more than 60 mph on a gravel road designed, and designated, for a lower speed); and when you get into a motor vehicle, wear your damn seat belt.

Having said all that, we should not lose sight of the fact that this is a huge tragedy for Dever's family and friends, and my deepest condolences go out to them.

- Apparently, one of the candidates for the Arrowhead Justice of the Peace office, Melanie DeForest, has withdrawn from the race.  According to a source, a press release was sent out late this week announcing the withdrawal, however, I haven't seen the press release nor did DeForest return a call seeking confirmation.  However, I trust my source on this.

DeForest is the "incumbent" in the race in that she currently holds the office.  She was appointed to the office when her predecessor Philip Woolbright was removed from office over ethics violations.

Woolbright was removed from office too late for a normal election process (collect nomination signatures, turn them in and be placed the primary ballot, win the primary, and go on to the general election), so the race is a "write-in" only one on the November ballot.  There are nine declared write-in candidates, but DeForest was considered to be the favorite, both because she was already in the office and because she has the support of the Arrowhead Justice Precinct/NW Valley "establishment", such as it is - the treasurer of her campaign committee is Miles Keegan, the constable of the Hassayampa Justice Precinct, and her non-"Melanie DeForest" campaign contributors, per her most recent campaign finance filings, are John Keegan, a former JP in the Arrowhead precinct, and Chris and Martha Mueller.  Mr. Miller is "Judge" Mueller, the Hassayampa JP, and Martha is his homemaker wife.

Note:  Woolbright is scheduled for a bench trial on Thursday on a charge stemming from the incidents that were part of the ethics violations (Maricopa County Superior Court case number CR2012005432).  However, that may change if either side in the case moves for a continuance.

The Arizona Republic has a story on DeForest's withdrawal from the race.  Apparently she "enhanced" her resume, claiming certain educational and employment achievements that cannot be documented.

- Speaking of Maricopa County Superior Court cases, Jon Levenson, the former constable in the Kyrene Justice Precinct agreed to a plea deal in his insurance fraud/conspiracy case (CR2011-007713).  He plead guilty to one charge, Conspiracy to Commit Arson of an Occupied Structure (his own house), while two other charges were dropped.  He was sentenced to serve four months in Maricopa County Jail, but based on my reading of the plea agreement, the jail sentence is suspended and he will serve two years' probation instead.  I've reached out to someone who knows more about this stuff than I do (you know, a lawyer-type person :) ).  I'll update if appropriate.

Update on 10/7 - turns out that I did, in fact, misread the linked plea agreement.  The normal sentence for a Class Two felony is much harsher than four months in county lockup; the four months in county is *part* of the suspended sentence, along with the two years' probation.  Apologies to readers for my misreading of the plea agreement.  End update...

John Mills, former House staffer, indicted by the feds

From the Arizona Republic, written by Mary Jo Pitzl -

 

A federal grand jury has indicted a former state House staffer on 15 counts of wire fraud, that allege he used a campaign account for his own personal expenses, then returned the money before the election.

 

The indictment alleges John Rowland Mills used the campaign donations to help pay various mortgages, invest in Google stock, invest in  a biodiesel business venture and feed his retirement investment accounts, as well as his wife's.

 

{snip}

 

Although the indictment does not name the candidate whose campaign funds Mills used, Rep. Jim Weiers, R-Phoenix, told The Republic it was his account. At the time of the alleged fraud, Weiers was speaker of the Arizona House and was able to amass hefty contributions for his 2008 re-election bid.

 

Weiers called the indictment "silly" because he does not feel he was victimized by Mills' actions. He said the indictment appears to be an attempt by the FBI to justify the time and effort federal investigators put into the investigation.

The allegation that Mills may be a little dirty isn't surprising to anyone who dealt with him during the redistricting process last year (he served as House Speaker Andy Tobin's hatchet man) - when I asked a few of my friends and acquaintances about him, the nicest thing that was said was "Karma's a bitch".

Mills was actually fired from the lege once before, for blurring some lines during the 2001-2002 redisricting process, but was rehired by Jim Weiers when Weiers became House speaker during the middle of the last decade.

However, Weiers' attempt to pooh-pooh the current allegation is a little surprising, and may be a little counter-productive.

Spouting a version of "move along, nothing to see here" in a blatant attempt to make this go away quietly only serves to signal to observers (like a certain cynic with a blog ;) ) that there *is* something to see.

And now, we're going to look for it.

Lester Pearce the subject of an ethics investigation

Lester Pearce, a former Justice of the Peace in North Mesa and current candidate for the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, is best-known as the older brother of ethically-challenged nativist blatherer Russell Pearce.

Like his brother, he tends to hold some rather extreme political views.

Like his brother, he is quite willing to use his position of public trust to promulgate those views.

Now, like his brother, he is facing an ethics investigation.

Perhaps it's only fitting that (alleged) ethical transgressions are related to his brother.

During his brother's recall election last fall, Lester Pearce allegedly campaigned for Russell Pearce, including helping to put a sham Latina candidate on the ballot in order to split the anti-Pearce vote, and publicly endorsed his brother.

Things that judges are specifically barred from doing (actually, the whole sham candidate thing goes beyond a violation of standards of judicial conduct; that sort of behavior is frowned upon for all of us).

From Canon 4 of the Arizona Code of Judicial Conduct -

RULE 4.1. Political and Campaign Activities of Judges and Judicial Candidates in General

(A) A judge or a judicial candidate shall not do any of the following:

{snip}

(2) make speeches on behalf of a political organization or another candidate for public office;

(3) publicly endorse or oppose another candidate for any public office;

{snip}

(5) actively take part in any political campaign other than his or her own campaign for election, reelection or retention in office;

Stephen Lemons of the Phoenix New Times has an article here regarding Lester's apparent violations of all of the above.

Now, the Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct is investigating a complaint against Pearce.  They won't post the complaint on their website until the matter is resolved.

The ethics investigation may not be the worst thing facing Lester and the Pearce clan -

I wonder if the ethics investigation will be a topic of conversation at the Pearce family fundraiser scheduled for Saturday, July 21 in Fountain Hills?

It will be that, or talk about how desperately poor the Pearces have been at fundraising this year.

During the five months between January 1 and May 31, Russell raised ~$2800 in his race for the LD25 Senate seat.

During the same period, big brother Lester raised $100,223.87.

Sounds good, even great...until you notice that $100,000 came from a loan from the candidate himself.  Meaning he actually raised $223.87.

Many words will probably be written about the fundraiser, both before and after the event (it's possible my post-event write-up will include the words "klavern meeting".  Just sayin' :) ).

I'm just guessing here, but the Pearces won't care what anyone writes about the event so long as one of the words used after the event is "lucrative".

Privatizing public safety: not a safe idea

...and not a particularly ethical or bright one, either...

One of the great watchwords of Republican rhetoric is "privatize!".

As in "we should privatize all government functions because private business can do anything better than the government can!"

They say it frequently and loudly but it seems more like the one thing that private business does best is accrue wealth unto those at the top of the business org chart.  Something that isn't necessarily unethical; in fact, it's what business is all about.

However, that isn't what society is all about, not if it wants to be a healthy society.

The one consistent characteristic of "privatization" efforts is that they turn into mechanisms to funnel money intended to serve the public good away from public purposes and into private pockets (ask state legislator Steve Yarbrough).

It may be legal, mostly because the people writing the laws are the ones benefitting from the misuse of public funds (think: the Mob writing racketeering laws), but it isn't ethical.

And when they start privatizing public safety functions?

The scheme stops being "merely" unethical and starts being hazardous to life and liberty.

Two stories that broke this week highlight this fact -

- In this story, Ethan Bronner of the New York Times chronicled the devastating impact on real people of privatizing probation and jail services.  People who have committed minor infractions end up in jail because they are unable to pay exorbitant fees imposed on them by private probation companies.  Once they are in jail, more fees are imposed on them by the private businesses overseeing that part of the cycle.

Fees that they are still unable to pay, a situation that fuels another go-round in the cycle of debt in which restrictions on freedom are nothing but a revenue generator for private companies.

In other words, in many areas of the country, the public safety system, specifically the local jail/probation apparatus, has been co-opted into enhancing private profit instead of enhancing public safety.

- As bad as the above is, it pales in comparison to an incident in Florida, where a lifeguard was fired from his job for going to rescue a distressed swimmer in an area of a beach that was outside "the section of the beach his company is paid to patrol".

The company deemed the lifeguard's actions inappropriate because its policy, based on "liability concerns" is that only people who are swimming in areas that the company profits from are worthy of rescue (no, they didn't use those specific words, but they might just as well have), and terminated his employment.

The company has since offered the lifeguard, Tomas Lopez, his job back; he has declined the offer.

Lest you think that the people running the company came to their senses and that was behind the turnaround, it should be known that they were eviscerated in the court of public opinion and the offer was less an exercise in "common sense" and more an exercise in "damage control."


The incident serves as a prime example of the darkest side of "privatization."  A company ostensibly hired to protect public safety was willing to let someone die in order to protect their profits.

No matter the nature of the privatized function, the highest priority of a private company is to protect and serve its own profits, not to protect and serve the public.

On Tuesday, I posted a transcript of the Declaration of Independence.

My, how times have changed.

236 years ago, America's leaders pledged their own "lives...fortunes, and...sacred honor " in support of an independent America.

Today, too many of America's leaders have no "honor" and it's our lives and fortunes on the line...to support the bottom lines of their friends.

Enough.

Whenever a politician starts advocating for the privatization of some public function (i.e. - Russell Pearce pushing for the privatization of most MVD functions or  Steve Yarbrough pushing for ever more privatization of public education, in a way that is set up to make him ever more wealthy), audit him (or her; men don't have a monopoly on corruption).  And if the official, the official's family, or the official's friends benefit from the proposed move in even the tiniest way, the official goes to prison. 

And not a private Holiday Inn camouflaged as a prison.

Arizona politics is like New England weather - don't blink or you might miss something

Damn.  Miss a few days due to technical difficulties, and all kinds of crazy-@$$ $#!t goes down in Arizona's political realm...OK, so it wasn't all that crazy, by AZ standards anyway.  I just wanted to use the phrase.  :)


Oh, and the "technical difficulties" weren't all bad - I finally finished the Gabby Giffords book (finally!), read Cannery Row by John Steinbeck (pretty good.  That Steinbeck guy has some potential. :) ), watched the final season of the Battlestar Galactica reboot on DVD (good, but a little too mystical for this fan of hard SF), and re-read Pearls Sells Out, a Pearls Before Swine treasury (not quite as literary as Steinbeck, but more likely to induce audible laughter.  :) )

...On Thursday, Russell Pearce, Arizona's leading nativist demogogue, experienced a PR and fundraising nightmare.

First, a Pearce campaign fundraising event was booted from one Mexican restaurant, Macayo's, after the corporate office found out that there were going to be protests of the event and that efforts were underway to organize a boycott of the chain by Latino customers.

Second, the Pearce campaign tried to move the event to another Mexican restaurant, Oaxaca Restaurante y Cantina, which also put the kibosh on the event, for much the same reasons.

Third, when the Pearce campaign tried to move his event to the library of a public high school with a heavily Latino student population, they (and he) were rebuffed by the school district .because of the short notice.

...On Friday, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio showed both his solidarity with his fellow traveler on the nativist railroad AND his peevish self-righteous outrage at President Obama's new DREAM-like policy on immigration by arresting a six-year old girl.  Wonder how that helps his self-publicized rep as "America's Toughest Sheriff"?

...Speaking of the new policy, Arizona Congressmen David Schweikert and Ben Quayle, Republicans both and facing each other in the August primary in CD6, responded to the new policy by trying to out-redneck each other with duelling bills to overturn the policy.

...News broke that a grand jury is looking into alleged campaign finance violations committed by Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne.  I don't expect it to go far though. 

The FBI is handling the investigation, but the Maricopa County Attorney's Office is shepherding the grand jury itself.


...Candidate challenges have been dropped or adjudicated or candidates have withdrawn.  The list from the AZ Secretary of State is here.  Highlights:

- Jonathan Paton had to drop his challenge to the candidacy of one of his opponents in the CD1 Republican primary.  He had filed suit, to great fanfare, challenging the signatures of Gaither Martin.  It must have been embarrassing to Paton to have to back off, so the Arizona Democratic Party did its part to help Paton move past the pain of his humiliation over the failed challenge by launching a website to help publicize Paton's past.  Awfully considerate of them, doncha' think? :)

- Jean Cheuvront-McDermott was removed from the Democratic primary ballot in LD24 because "Cheuvront-McDermott" isn't the name she has been using, just "McDermott."  She's the mother of former state senator Ken Cheuvront, who is running for a return to the senate.  Rumor has it that because the current electeds in LD24 wouldn't step aside for him, Ken got his mom to run as payback.  That plan seems to have gone by the wayside.


...Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett, not coincidentally Arizona co-chair for Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, is continuing to ramp up his 2014 campaign for governor.  First, he threatened to keep President Obama off of the November ballot unless the state of Hawaii provided a copy of Obama's birth certificate that met Bennett's standards.  He backed off of that after bringing a load of national ridicule down upon Arizona.

Now he has taken the next step to sew up the wingnut vote in the R primary.  Now he is saying that the President was actually born in Hawaii, but lied and said he was born in Kenya to help him get into college.


...And finally, in response to a poll that shows Democrat Richard Carmona within 2 points of him in the race for US Senate, Republican Jeff Flake went to Facebook to brag about his "real world" experience as a lobbyist for foreign corporations and the Goldwater Institute.

Flake is almost as out of touch with the "real world" as Mitt Romney.  Probably not a coincidence there.

AZ's electeds holding their collective breath

The USDOJ filed a motion in their case against Rep. Ben Arredondo, one Arredondo agreed with, to keep records of the investigation secret in order to protect some ongoing investigations.

From the Arizona Capitol Times, written by Gary Grado -

...A motion filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court by DOJ attorney Monique Abrishami asks Judge Fredrick Martone to issue a protective order for “all discovery materials provided in this matter.”

“If this information were to be disclosed, such disclosure might impede those investigations which are ongoing and/or impair the privacy rights of third parties whose conduct is or was at one time under investigation,” Abrishami wrote.

The motion sort of confirms what I've heard - that the feds aren't done with AZ's electeds, not by a long shot.  One person I spoke with, a Capitol insider, thought more indictments were possible, and if they happen, they may reach beyond the legislative level of government.

Given that Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is under investigation, Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne is under investigation, and a number of legislators and lobbyists were named in the report on the Fiesta Bowl scandal (while they almost certainly won't be indicted for any activities documented in the report, the behavior documented therein is the kind that continues until the voters or the courts put a stop to it), those expectations shouldn't be surprising.

And those are just the investigations/allegations that have gained public notice.

The saying "where there's smoke, there's fire" takes on a special meaning in Arizona, especially in the summer.  Most summers, that saying just warns people to be on the lookout for forest fires.

This summer, however, it serves as a warning to keep an eye out on people and situations who have some metaphorical smoke swirling around them.

Will the next USDOJ moves be in the area of the mess in Quartzsite?  Will they step into Colorado City and do the things that need to be done but that are blocked by some suspiciously intransigent Arizona legislators?  Will they finally catch up to a certain somebody who is known for skating on the fine line between behavior that is unethical but legal and behavior that is simply unethical?

My guess is that a number of AZ's electeds, from town/city councils on up, are praying that the bright spotlight of a federal investigation isn't turned their way.  For possible clues as to who might be next on the feds' hit parade, watch the turning in of nominating petitions next week for any "big names" (i.e. - somebody like Russell Pearce, who has had smoke swirling around him for years) who surprise by *not* submitting petitions.

Arizona Republic coverage is here.  It isn't good as Grado's as it is mostly a rehash of the indictment with little insight into the current motion before the court, but there is no telling when the Cap Times will put their story behind a subscriber firewall.

Ken Bennett sews up wingnut vote in 2014 R primary by jumping on the birther bandwagon

From AZCentral.com, written by Yvonne Wingett Sanchez -

Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett has asked government officials in Hawaii to verify that Barack Obama was born in the island state for the president's name to appear on the Nov. 6 ballot.

Bennett, who is exploring a 2014 gubernatorial run, told The Republic on Friday that he made the request on behalf of a constituent who was unable to make the request himself. Bennett said Hawaii statute provides for out-of-state government officials to request such information, but prohibits residents from obtaining it.

Bennett, who is Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's Arizona campaign co-chairman, asked that Hawaii officials provide "verification" of Obama's birth in lieu of a certified copy of the president's birth certificate.

Bennett is "exploring" a run for governor in 2014 (Jan Brewer will be termed out as governor and Bennett will be termed out as SOS).

Looks like he has learned the lesson from Brewer's 2010  campaign.  Bennett may not have an "SB1070" up his sleeve to use to clear the GOP field for him, but a little birther-motivated election rigging should go a long way toward accomplishing that goal.

Yes, it's election-rigging.  What else can it be called when one candidate's campaign co-chair abuses his position of public trust to try to knock his candidate's opponent off of the ballot?

If this doesn't work well enough, maybe Bennett can see a UFO or become a 9-11 "truther".  That should get him the votes of former governor Fife Symington and former state senate Karen Johnson.

For the record:

State Representative Ben Arredondo indicted in FBI sting

On Wednesday, a federal indictment of State Representative Ben Arredondo was released. 

It alleges that Arredondo accepted slightly less than $6300 in tickets to sporting events and charity events in exchange for influence used on behalf of the givers of the largesse, FBI agents working undercover as representatives of a fake company seeking to do business in Tempe.

The matter is still unfolding, and more news will break before it is over.

Arredondo will have his day in court, and as someone who knows and likes him, I hope he is innocent and fends this off.  However, if he's guilty, he should face the appropriate penalty.

Senate Minority Leader David Schapira, from Tempe, like Arredondo, has called for Arredondo's resignation, while House Minority Leader Chad Campbell of Phoenix expressed both shock at the charges and that Arredondo should be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.

Having said all that, I've got a few thoughts on this:

- While if the allegations in the indictment are proven true it will be more than a little disappointing, it won't be all that surprising.  Arredondo was one of a number of elected officials named in the report from the Fiesta Bowl organization concerning its scandal.  The elected officials received trips and tickets to college football games prior to voting on matters that affected the Fiesta Bowl.

- Speaking of the Fiesta Bowl scandal, most or all of the electeds named in that report are probably finding that their digestive systems have turned into masonry production systems (aka "they're $hitting bricks") right about now.  Wednesday's indictment may not be related to the Fiesta Bowl scandal, but the behavior cited in it is very similar.  Just a guess here, but many of them

- The next elected on the feds' menu may not even be a state legislator.  They're still going "round 'n round" with Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, an investigation of Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne relating to some interesting campaign finance activity, and Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu is the subject of an investigation into allegations that he had some PCSO employees do campaign work, for his now-abandoned run for Congress, while they were on the job.

- Assuming that there is merit to the feds' allegations, the question will become "who's next, and for what?"  After the Fiesta Bowl scandal broke, a number of bills were introduced by the Democrats in the legislature to tighten the ethics rules on gifts, etc. from people with an interest in matters before the lege.

Turns out some of the other legislators *really* like their freebies - the Republicans killed each and every attempt to clean up the legislature.

In other words, it's not "if" but "when" there will be a next time.

Bad Day In Arizona...

...Four people, including a 2 year-old toddler, were killed by infamous Arizona neo-Nazi/white supremacist JT Ready.

From the Arizona Republic, written by Jim Walsh and Lindsey Collom -

A border militia leader on Wednesday shot and killed four people at a Gilbert home, including a toddler, before committing suicide, sources said.

Sources identified the shooter as Jason "J.T." Ready, a reputed neo-Nazi who made headlines when he launched a militia movement to patrol the Arizona desert to hunt for illegal immigrants and drug smugglers.

At least one person survived the shooting, and was being treated at Maricopa Medical Center.

Authorities have not identified the other victims, but reached by phone Wednesday afternoon, Hugo Maderos said the victims were his ex-wife, Lisa; their daughter, Amber; Amber's boyfriend, whose name The Republic is withholding until his next of kin could be notified, and Amber's 18-month-old baby, Lilly.

First and foremost, my deepest condolences and prayers go out to the family and friends of Ready's victims.

While today's events aren't really surprising to anyone who has followed Ready's activities over the years (one of my FB friends referred to him as a "ticking time bomb"), they are no less horrifying for the lack of surprise.

...Other events today would normally fall into the category of "horrific", but compared to Ready's mass murder...

Note: In addition to condolences and prayers, my apologies go out to the friends and family of Ready's victims.  I planned to write about the following items before the news of Ready's mass murder broke.  In no way do I intend to state or imply that the following items are as horrible as the killings in Gilbert.

- In an effort led by his allies in the legislature, Russell Pearce, former senate president and a friend and ally of Ready) is in line to receive more than $260K of taxpayer money to reimburse him for expenses related to the successful recall of him in November.  A conference committee made of two Democrats and four Pearce supporters amended SB1449 to include a path to payment for Pearce.

Three are in this picture, from election night in November as the Pearce camp realized that the voters of LD18 hadn't fallen for the usual smoke and BS-storm -

Pearce is at the mic, Rep. Eddie Farnsworth is to his right (left in the pic as we are looking at it), Sen. Steve Smith is directly behind Pearce, Rep. Steve Montenegro is to Pearce's left (right, when viewing the pic).  Also on the committee, but not in the pic: Sen. Andy Biggs.  I'm not sure, but I think he was there that night, but just isn't in this particular pic.  In this pic, however, are Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio (pic right, gazing at Pearce), Rep. Carl Seel (behind Arpaio), and Rep. John Kavanagh (barely inside the pic on the right, sort of behind Arpaio).


So far, Steve Pierce and Andy Tobin, the current Senate President and House Speaker, respectively, haven't said much about the scheme to give Russell Pearce a s---load of taxpayer money, but since they select the members of the conference committees, my guess is that they are completely on board.


- The House gave final approval to HB2503, a measure that exempts companies from punitive damages relating to defective or inadequate products or services if those products or services meet government regulatory standards.

Left unsaid in the bill:  The fact that industry lobbyists already write most regulations, watering them down to the point of being ineffective or even counter-productive.

- The Senate passed HB2571, Governor Brewer's plan to turn the state's merit employment system into a political patronage/spoils system designed to enrich her and her associates/handlers.  It returns to the House for a rubber-stamp vote on a minor amendment passed by the Senate.

- Republican legislators are working to join lawsuits seeking to overturn the recently-precleared legislative district maps, saying that the maps don't do enough to protect minority voting power.

This in spite of the fact that minority legislators are saying "the maps are fine, and since when do you folks look out for minorities, other than looking to demonize them for fun, profit, and votes whenever you can?" (OK, they didn't use those specific words, but it's a good summary.  :) )

...All in all, a bad day made tragic by events in Gilbert, which are still unfolding at this hour.  Federal agencies are on the scene handling a hazmat situation.  Apparently, Ready had a stockpile of chemicals and munitions at the house.

Ready (left) and Pearce, in happier days

Ready getting, well, *ready* for one of his immigrant hunts "patrols"

Ready in all of his glory











The above three pics courtesy the Phoenix New Times; the press conference pic courtesy a FB friend.

Sign the petition urging the USDOJ to bring Arpaio to trial

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has run roughshod over standards of professionalism, fiscal good practices, and civil rights for nearly 20 years.

The US Department of Justice is finally taking a long look at him and his activities, but they have been slow to actually bring Arpaio to court.

Steve Muratore of The Arizona Eagletarian has started a petition to urge the DOJ to bring Arpaio to trial. 

You can sign it at Change.org here.

If you can, share the petition with your friends via Facebook, Twitter, and other social media.

Later...

Thomas disbarred, Patterson resigns: A busy couple of days in AZ politics...

Tuesday and Wednesday were rather eventful days in Arizona politics.

...The most significant, at least locally, event was the disbarment of former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and one of his former deputies, Lisa Aubuchon.  Another former Thomas deputy, Rachel Alexander, had her license to practice law suspended.

They faced an investigation into some of the activities Thomas engaged in, with the assistance of Aubuchon and Alexander, during his term as the Maricopa County Attorney.

To say the least, that investigation didn't go well for the trio.

While the legal community rarely hands out punishments to its own that are stronger than a couple of lashes with a wet noodle, when attorneys step far enough out of line...

Can you say "ton of bricks"?

Anyway, my favorite passage from the ruling (hat tip to a friend for noticing it) -

At some point in his career, a leak formed in the dike of Andrew Thomas’s ethical restraint. In short time, it rapidly grew...[w]ithin a few short years the hole had become a radical moral dislocation.

Thomas has called a press conference for Wednesday morning; expect him to continue playing the "victim" card.

Note:  This was written before the press conference.  He held the presser, and compared himself to Ghandi, Dr. Martin Luther King and Alexander Solzhenitsyn.

Seriously.

As someone who has been disbarred (assuming the penalty is upheld on the inevitable appeal), he will be eligible to apply for reinstatement after five years.  Expect the video of this presser to be played at any hearing on that particular subject.

The Arizona Republic has coverage here.

...The Daniel Patterson mess is dragging on, but in a new direction. 

The House Ethics Committee met on Tuesday and accepted Patterson's response to the report on the investigation into his activities (domestic violence, misconduct in office, general creepiness, etc.).  However, nothing was done at the time, and it was looking like he would be a member of the lege for another week.

The the committee met again on Wednesday, and voted to recommend to the full House that it expel Patterson from the lege.

Patterson turned around and showed them - he resigned.  Finally.

There may be a lawsuit yet stemming from this - while making his exit from the lege, Patterson said that the lege was "hostile work environment".  

Which may be Patterson's way of laying some legal groundwork.

I hope he goes for it - if he sues, as the plaintiff he would have to testify under oath, and more importantly, be cross-examined under oath, about the events that transpired leading up to today's events.

Patterson changed his voter registration from Democratic to independent over a week ago, and by doing so, he may have seriously gummed up the process for replacing him. 

ARS 41-1202 states that when a vacancy occurs in the lege, the seat must be filled by a member of the same party as the person who vacated the seat.

The statute says nothing about what to do when a legislator is elected under a party banner, changes his registration in office, and then leaves office, nor can I find anything relevant in other parts of the ARS.

I made a few calls to folks who know a lot more about this stuff than I do, and the universal response was "Dunno.  Trying to figure it out too."  (OK, they used more words, and bigger ones, but this was the upshot of their answers :) .)

It's unusual for an officeholder to leave office before completing his/her term in office (it does happen, but the vast majority complete their terms); a very rare occurrence for an officeholder to change his/her partisan while in office.

The combination of the two conditions in the person of one (now former) legislator? 

Not just unusual or rare; nobody can recall it happening in Arizona before this.

Should create a bit of conundrum for the Pima County Board of Supervisors, who are tasked with filling the spot.

Still, it's a question of interest mostly to political geeks (like me) - no matter who is appointed to fill the vacancy left by Patterson, the lege will adjourn within a few weeks, and the appointee won't make a difference in the partisan balance in the House.  The Republicans will still have a 2/3 majority for the remainder of the session.

According to a story in the Arizona Capitol Times, Patterson re-registered as a Democrat before resigning, but the paperwork hasn't reached the SOS' office yet, so it isn't confirmed.

If he did re-register, things will be far more simple; if he didn't, things will be far more interesting.

...Sylvia Allen (R-Snowflake) announced that she won't run for another term in the Senate, choosing to trade the state capitol in Phoenix for a possible job in the Navajo County seat in Holbrook.

She cited "family" concerns in her announcement, but the fact is that her new district is far more competitive than her current one, and there is already a formidable Democrat in the race, State Rep. Tom Chabin.

In short, a return to the lege was a long way from being a sure thing, so a run for the Navajo County BOS isn't a surprise.

...Ed Ableser (D-Tempe) announced that he will seek the Senate seat in the new LD26.  The move sets up a likely general election contest against Jerry Lewis (R-Mesa), who gained his office in November's recall of Russell Pearce.

Mark your calendars: Attack on civil servants up for committee consideration on Thursday, February 16

Strap in folks, the ride is only going to get bumpier from here...

On Thursday, the House Committee on Employment and Regulatory Affairs is holding a a special meeting at 2 p.m.  There is one item on the agenda -

HB2571   public employees; unlawful acts; termination   

Doesn't sound too bad, until you see the subject of the strike-everything amendment that is being proposed for the bill -

S/E: state personnel system

The text of the striker isn't available on line as yet, but Steve at Arizona Eagletarian has the scoop on the details of Governor Jan Brewer's scheme to turn the Arizona state government personnel system into a political patronage system where the spoils go to the governor and her allies.  His post includes a memo giving an overview of her plan.

If you are a state employee, know a state employee, or just simply believe that state government exists to serve the needs of the people of Arizona, not the whims (and wallets) of certain elected officials, contact the members of the committee - Reps. Eddie Farnsworth, Sally Ann Gonzalez, John Kavanagh, Justin Olson, Lynne Pancrazi, Daniel Patterson, Kimberly Yee, John Fillmore, and Bob Robson (emails and phone numbers available here) and plan to be there on Thursday to show your support for the state's workers, and the integrity of the state's employment system.

More details as they become available...

Russell Pearce, martyr? Not so much...

...though to listen to the whining among the Republicans, you'd think they were Al-Quaeda and Pearce was a suicide bomber...

As soon as it became clear that Russell Pearce had lost his November recall, the whispers started.  And when it became clear that Pearce didn't just lose but was thoroughly thumped, the whispers became shouts (whiny, wheedling shouts, but shouts nonetheless).

Tuesday, the Republican blog/press release site Sonoran Alliance posted a long and rather revisionist paean to Pearce that effectively sums up what most of the Rs have been saying.

Their main spin has been to claim that Pearce was the subject of a recall because of his anti-immigrant policies, positions and speeches and particularly because of his SB1070.

Now, I cannot deny the fact that Pearce's bigotry makes him much easier to dislike.  However, if the recall effort was based on that, why has only one other supporter of SB1070 faced a recall effort?  And that effort actually pre-dated SB1070 and was pushed by Republicans who fell the legislator in question (Sen. Rich Crandall, R-Mesa) isn't conservative enough.


Another R talking point is to claim that the recall process was abused and was never intended to an unpopular legislator.

Ummm...the recall law was followed to the letter, and it's been used once in a century.

Pearce wasn't just unpopular.  He misused and abused his office.

...He ordered the arrest of people who criticized him when those critics peacefully entered the Senate building for a scheduled appointment...

...He proclaimed that legislators could ignore the laws barring possession of weapons in public buildings...

...When the other legislators caught up in the Fiesta Bowl gift scandal shut up and paid up, Pearce refused to repay the Fiesta Bowl and still denies wrongdoing...

...When his friend and close political ally Sen. Scott Bundgaard was involved in a "domestic violence incident" (i.e. - he assaulted his girlfriend by the side of a Phoenix freeway), Pearce declared that Bundgaard was the victim...

It should be pointed out here that the GOP's whiners and spinners are expressing criticism only of the fact that Pearce was held accountable for his bad conduct in office, but have said nothing about the conduct itself.

Apparently, they believe if someone is stridently nativist, they should be forgiven "minor" foibles like corruption in office, abuse of power, and si\nple unbridled arrogance (not a crime in itself, but the attitude that he and the rest of his caucus were and are above the laws that govern the rest of society was the root of his downfall).

Bottom line:  the recall was legal, proper, and most importantly, deserved.

Short Attention Span Musing...

...Jan Brewer may yet be inducted into the Arizona Governor's Hall of Fame.  Unfortunately for her, it's looking more and more likely it will be in the Mecham/Symington wing.

From the Phoenix New Times, written by James King -

Federal authorities spent more than a year investigating Governor Jan Brewer's role in collecting Social Security benefits intended for her mentally ill son, Ronald, who currently is in a state hospital after being found not guilty by reason of insanity in 1990 on kidnapping and sexual assault charges.

The federal government, according to the Arizona Republic, which broke the story, was trying to determine whether $75,000 in benefits were improperly paid to the governor on behalf of her son.

Yes, Brewer is the same governor who earlier this year cut healthcare benefits for an estimated 135,000 poor Arizonans.

As of right now, the feds have chosen not to file charges.  However, given this, her close ties to industry lobbyists (i.e. longtime advisor/friend Chuck Coughlin, et. al.) and her predilection for pronouncing that she is above the laws and constitution of Arizona (i.e. the her effort to hijack the independent redistricting process), nobody will be shocked if she finds herself indicted before the end of her term.

...Do Brewer et. al.'s lawyers get paid extra every time they receive a slap-down from a judge?

I as that question because the best explanation for the continuing efforts to use the legal system to overthrow the AIRC is bill padding.  On the heels of a separate decision by the AZ Supreme Court overturning the Rs' removal of the AIRC's independent chair, a judge at the Maricopa County Superior Court derailed another of the R efforts to take over the redistricting process when he ruled against their move to say that the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) violated the Open Meeting laws. 

...The constant stream of losses isn't dissuading the Rs from continuing their attacks on the independence of the commission.  The Arizona Capitol Times has a story about a number of changes the Rs in the legislature want to foist off on the commission and the process.  However, they all seem to be ignoring one basic fact - the voters wanted an independent redistricting commission, so we set one up.  If we wanted to set up an elected officials job security commission, we'd have done that, instead.

...Yeah, education is her number one priority, but doesn't say if *supporting* it or *eviscerating* it is what she most wants to do.

From the Yuma Sun, written by Chris McDaniel -

“We have to get our population educated,” said Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer during a ribbon-cutting ceremony Tuesday at the University of Phoenix Yuma Learning Center.

The ceremony marked the grand reopening of the Student Resource Center. It was recently upgraded to include 23 high-speed computers, two interview rooms, a faculty room, and printing and copy services.

{snip}

Education is my No. 1 priority."

To be fair to Brewer, I think that Brewer's actual target is *public* education.  As documented by the article ("University of Phoenix Yuma Learning Center"), she's been pretty consistent in her support of "for-profit" education companies (private and charter K-12, and private post-secondary), while cutting hundreds of million of dollars from public education.

...Joe Arpaio spent Saturday going after people with brown skin.  Perhaps he'd have left them alone if they were dressed up as rapists and child molesters...

...From the "deja vu" department:  State Rep. Jack Harper (R-Surprise!) has reintroduced one of his regular bills, a proposal to repeal the restriction on former legislators that makes them wait a year after leaving the legislature before they can return to lobby the legislature.  This time around it is HB 2022.

Look for the measure to NOT pass, for at least two reasons:

1.  It's an election year, and even AZ's Republicans don't want to be seen as that blatantly self-serving, especially because...

2.  Most former legislators find ways around that particular restriction anyway, often by simply not registering as lobbyists.

Later...

The 2012 session of the Arizona Legislature hasn't started yet, but it's easy to see it's going to be a long one

In approximately a month and a half, the 2012 session of the Arizona Legislature will start, and while there will be some major differences from the 2011 session (new Speaker of the House, new President of the Senate, no Russell Pearce!!), some things don't change.

Usually, sitting legislators start "pre-filing" bills starting around two months before the start of a session, and this year is no different.

Sometimes, as with Sen. David Schapira's SB1001 last year (restoring transplant coverage to AHCCCS), the early measures are meant to make a statement about where the priorities of the lege should be, knowing full well that the bill(s) won't pass (and Schapira's SB1001 was never even heard in committee, much less given a floor vote).

Other times, the bills are introduced to give the sponsors an early start on lobbying their colleagues for passage.

The first couple of bills introduced this year, including a proposed amendment to the Arizona Constitution, have to do with creating a mechanism for exchanging state trust lands for the purpose of protecting military reservations from encroachment by developments (this summary may be a little oversimplified, but these bills aren't the focus of the post.  If you're interested, the bill is here, the proposed amendment is here).

The amendment is necessary because under the Arizona Constitution, those trust lands can only be sold or transferred for the benefit of the state's education system.

The lege has been trying to crack that restriction for years.  They tried a similar scheme in 2010, only to see the measure go down to defeat, at least in part because a majority of Arizona's voters don't trust the legislature or its intentions.

In addition to those, at around the same time, Rep. Jack Harper (R-Surprise!) filed a different amendment proposal, this one to overturn the prohibitions in the AZ Constitution on damage awards in lawsuits.  They've tried this one before, but limiting or eliminating punitive damage awards is a pet project of corporate lobbyists and their "friends"/tools in Congress and state legislatures across the country.

After that, there were a few innocuous "technical corrections" bills introduced by Rep. Judy "Birther" Burges.  Officially, technical corrections bills are supposed to contain minor, non-controversial fixes to things like typos, misspellings, and bad grammar/legalese to laws, and generally speaking, the bills do just that.  However, they rarely pass the lege as technical corrections bills.  Mostly, they exist to serve as "vehicle" bills that can be changed late in the legislative session by "strike everything" amendments, aka "strikers.". 

Strikers frequently turn previously innocuous bills (like technical corrections bills) into utter bile.  Of course some bills, like 2010's infamous SB1070, are amended only in specific language, not actual intent.  For example, SB1070 started off life as an ugly anti-immigrant bill and was amended into an ugly anti-immigrant bill.

All this background brings us to Rep. John Fillmore (R-Apache Junction).  While until now he has been an almost-unknown backbencher, it looks like he wants to make a splash during this coming election year.

Among others, he has proposed bills that...

...would halve the maximurm income level to qualify for coverage under the Arizona Long Term Care System (ALTCS).  ALTCS provides coverage to low-income senior citizens or disabled  who need long-term medical care (i.e. - nursing home, assisted living, or ongoing home health aides)

...would arbitrarily impose a limit on the amount of "respite care" that someone covered by ALTCS could receive in a calendar year at 360 hours.  Respite care is perhaps best characterized as a relief pitcher for long-term caregivers. 

...would grant a teacher the right to kick any student out of class for any reason, and that action would not be reviewable by or appealable to anybody.  Fillmore's proposal is written so broadly that a teacher (say, a follower of Russell Pearce's) could order a student out of class because the student's skin is, shall we say, too tan, and there would be no recourse (though a federal court would probably step in eventually).

...would give school principals the authority to fire any teacher in their schools for any reason, subject to the review and approval of the district's school superintendent.  The measure also includes a clause that bars school district governing boards from entering into collective bargaining agreements that inhibit the ability to exercise that authority, including the establishment of a "due process" process for the teachers.  No AZ Republican wants to appear to be "pro-teacher"...  The measure also takes control of textbook selection from the hands of the governing boards of individual school district and bestows it on the school superintendent of the county in which the school district is located.

...would bar courts from paying for, under any circumstances, court-ordered anger management and domestic violence counseling for defendants.

...would establish a minimum cost to the beneficiaries of state employee health insurance plans of 18 percent of the overall cost.  Currently, there is no minimum or maximum limit in statute.  While this measure would establish a minimum limit, it would not establish a maximum cost to the beneficiaries.

...and in his piece de resistance, Fillmore has proposed an amendment to the AZ Constitution regarding punitive damage awards, like Harper's proposal above.  However, this one has an "Isn't that crazy, quirky, loony Arizona just so precious?" sort of way -

His proposal doesn't eliminate punitive damage awards,  Instead, it would mandate the confiscation of such awards by the state and puts the monies into a fund that would be dedicated to funding K-12 education in Arizona.

If passed, not only would this measure effectively reduce the number of lawsuits with punitive damage awards (if the victims of injuries cannot benefit from such lawsuits, why would they file them?), it would also serve as a smokescreen to cover moves to reduce education funding in AZ (eventually, the lege would base the budget for education on projections of the amount of money available in the fund established in this proposal, and when those funds decreased, they would use it as an excuse to further cut education).

This measure, as with Harper's, could very well be a welcoming gift for next week's conference of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), an organization crafted to facilitate corporate influence over state level legislation.  The conference will be held in a Scottsdale resort.

ALEC has long pushed for corporation-protecting limits on lawsuits in general and punitive damage awards in particular (examples here, here and here, courtesy ALECExposed.org).

Fillmore and Harper are among the many members of the R caucus in the AZ lege who are also members of ALEC. but in Arizona, that association isn't limited to the legislature.  Check out this notice from the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) -

Notice of a Joint Appearance of a Quorum of Commissioners


(Not an Official Meeting of the Arizona Corporation Commission)

November 30 - December 2, 2011

Location:
The Westin Kierland Resort & Spa
6902 East Greenway Parkway
Scottsdale, Arizona 85254

This notice is provided as a courtesy to the public that three or more Commissioners may be present at the above location to attend the American Legislative Exchange Council, States and Nation Policy Summit.  The Commissioners attending this meeting will not vote on any issue.

Please note:  The ACC is supposed to *regulate* corporations, not *party* with them.  Of course, current ACC member Brenda Burns is a former president of ALEC, so she (and the other Rs on the ACC) may not make that distinction.

I'd love to be able to tell you that the above measures are likely to be the worst offered up by Republican AZ legislators during the coming session, but it seems likely that they are going to for the "full nutty" this session.  They realize that one of two possibilities exist.

Either a majority of voters will NOT hold them responsible for their shameless disregard for the will of the voter (attacks on the independence of the voter-established independent redistricting process, their brazen contempt for the rule of law (assaulting a woman by the side of a Phoenix freeway, pointing a gun at a reporter in the Senate building), or their sacrifice of the interests of their "official" constituents (no jobs, gutting education) on the altar of corporate profits (corporate tax cuts paid for by gutting education and rest of the social infrastructure in AZ), or this year will be their last best chance to wreak unchecked havoc upon the state, for at least a couple of election cycles.

Brief update on redistricting mess...

Steve at the Arizona Eagletarian has a far more comprehensive rundown here, but I like brevity, so here is mine...

Regarding the court filings seeking to stay and overturn the removal of Colleen Mathis, the independent chair of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) by Governor Jan Brewer and the Republicans caucus in the state senate, the pertinent dates/deadlines (from an email press release) -

Monday, 11/7 at 5 pm – Responses due for Motion to Stay Removal and Motion to Intervene

Tuesday, 11/8 at Noon – Reply to responses for Motion to Stay Removal and Motion to Intervene

Tuesday, 11/8 in the afternoon – Court will consider Motion to Stay Removal (no hearing) and a decision expected in Motion to Stay Removal.

Friday, 11/11 at 5 pm – Responses to petition for special action and any amicus briefs due

Monday, 11/14 at 5 pm – Reply to responses to petition for special action and amicus briefs

Thursday, 11/17 at 2 pm – Potential Oral Arguments on merits of petition for special action (25 mins per side.)

So to sum up, the state supreme court will (probably) decide tomorrow to grant or deny a stay of the removal, and will (probably) decide by the end of next week whether or not to overturn the removal in its entirety.

- Steve at the Arizona Eagletarian has linked to a couple of the court filings uploaded as Google docs, but let me summarize:  Lisa Hauser, writing for the governor: "We can do what we want, when we want, to who we want, and our victims (the AIRC and the voters) can't say squat about it."

The response from Mathis and Linda McNulty and Jose Herrera, the Democratic members of the AIRC: "Wanna bet?"

- The Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments has reopened applications for the position of independent chair of the AIRC.  The deadline for submitting applications is next Tuesday, November 15, at 5 p.m.

General info for applicants is here.

The application is here (note to applicants: while one of the Republican members of the AIRC lied on his application concerning tax liens, among other things, you shouldn't expect to get away with it if you do.  Of course, even if you don't lie, the Rs will say you did...unless you're actually an R plant.  Then they'll get on their knees in the middle of Washington Street and kiss your butt, even if you've committed violent crimes.  See Bundgaard, Scott.).
Stay tuned...