Due to time constraints Ryan, the creator of the Progressive Wave network of bloggers, is taking down the site. Over the next few days, I'll be working and transferring posts from the AZ5 blog to a new one that I have created to chronicle the votes, statements, and activities of Harry Mitchell.
Think "AZ Congress Watch" but focused on CD5.
Have a great weekend!
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Quick events post...NJDC and "Congress On Your Corner"
...Tonight (Thursday, May 10), the Phoenix/Scottsdale Chapter of the NJDC will be holding its organizational meeting at the Jewish Community Center at 12701 North Scottsdale Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85254 (corner of Scottsdale and Sweetwater).
Time: 6:30 p.m.
Contact: Jerry Gettinger at njdcphx@cox.net or 480-510-1320.
...On Saturday, Congressman Harry Mitchell will be hosting his 6th "Congress On Your Corner." This week's event will be held at the Mustang Library, 10101 N 90th St. in Scottsdale.
Time: 10:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m.
Time: 6:30 p.m.
Contact: Jerry Gettinger at njdcphx@cox.net or 480-510-1320.
...On Saturday, Congressman Harry Mitchell will be hosting his 6th "Congress On Your Corner." This week's event will be held at the Mustang Library, 10101 N 90th St. in Scottsdale.
Time: 10:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m.
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
Pelosi threatens to *sue* the President?
The Hill has an article about how House Speaker Nancy Pelosi advised a group of bloggers that if necessary, the Congress could sue the President for issuing a 'signing statement' to a bill (aka - the next Iraq supplemental) that would purport to exempt him from following all or part of the bill (aka - withdrawal timetable).
Ummm....*sue*?!?
Try "impeach," Madam Speaker.
From Merriam-Webster Online (emphasis mine)-
Yeah, "impeach" is definitely the word.
Later!
Ummm....*sue*?!?
Try "impeach," Madam Speaker.
From Merriam-Webster Online (emphasis mine)-
Main Entry: im·peach
Pronunciation: im-'pEch
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Middle English empechen, from Anglo-French empecher, enpechier to ensnare, impede, prosecute, from Late Latin impedicare to fetter, from Latin in- + pedica fetter, from ped-, pes foot
1 a : to bring an accusation against b : to charge with a crime or misdemeanor; specifically : to charge (a public official) before a competent tribunal with misconduct in office c : to remove from office especially for misconduct.
Yeah, "impeach" is definitely the word.
Later!
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Stupid professor tricks...
...followed by "even stupider college administrator tricks"...
I'm sure by now that many of you have read the AZ Rep article detailing the situation of a Glendale Community College mathematics professor whose job is in jeopardy because of a history of sending personal emails on the college's system, in violation of the College's email policy.
A little harsh perhaps, but not really newsworthy, until you read the part about the emails in question containing links to white supremacist sites and anti-Mexican screeds.
Now, it's a possible First Amendment issue.
An overview, from the article -
The professor, Walter Kehowski, sounds likes a bigoted schmuck; hell, he's probably offended at being described with a word derived from Yiddish slang.
So what?
Unless his social attitudes affect how he treats students, and such bias can be documented, or his emails were targeted to harass specific coworkers, the content of his emails should have absolutely no impact on his employment.
Freedom of speech is an ideal that doesn't only apply to pleasant or agreeable speech, especially in an academic environment. There are enough efforts by Republicans to restrict what can be said in a classroom to fight off without having to battle academics who are trying to do the same thing.
If he does get fired (it won't be decided until next month), the lawsuits will be as spectacular as they are inevitable. After years of posturing, maneuvering and appeals, the College will lose the lawsuits. Unless, of course, they can show that they've disciplined everyone who has sent a personal email on their system.
Best guess - they haven't; no organization ever does.
If every employee who ever sent a personal email on an employer's system were fired, the U.S. unemployment rate would be somewhere over 95%.
At worst, the college adminstration should revoke his college email account or restrict it so that it can only receive messages, not send or forward them.
Eli Blake at Deep Thought has an insightful take on this issue; he's actually a professor and brings an insider's perspective to the 'academic freedom' implications. Check it out.
Later!
I'm sure by now that many of you have read the AZ Rep article detailing the situation of a Glendale Community College mathematics professor whose job is in jeopardy because of a history of sending personal emails on the college's system, in violation of the College's email policy.
A little harsh perhaps, but not really newsworthy, until you read the part about the emails in question containing links to white supremacist sites and anti-Mexican screeds.
Now, it's a possible First Amendment issue.
An overview, from the article -
A Maricopa Community Colleges professor could be fired after he sent an e-mail to district employees that contained a link to Pat Buchanan's Web site and a transcript of a George Washington Thanksgiving proclamation.
{snip}
In 2003, he e-mailed employees several Internet links that contained statements about Hispanics. Titles on the Web sites included, "Mexicans Think U.S. Belongs to Them!" and "Mexican Double Standard."
The professor, Walter Kehowski, sounds likes a bigoted schmuck; hell, he's probably offended at being described with a word derived from Yiddish slang.
So what?
Unless his social attitudes affect how he treats students, and such bias can be documented, or his emails were targeted to harass specific coworkers, the content of his emails should have absolutely no impact on his employment.
Freedom of speech is an ideal that doesn't only apply to pleasant or agreeable speech, especially in an academic environment. There are enough efforts by Republicans to restrict what can be said in a classroom to fight off without having to battle academics who are trying to do the same thing.
If he does get fired (it won't be decided until next month), the lawsuits will be as spectacular as they are inevitable. After years of posturing, maneuvering and appeals, the College will lose the lawsuits. Unless, of course, they can show that they've disciplined everyone who has sent a personal email on their system.
Best guess - they haven't; no organization ever does.
If every employee who ever sent a personal email on an employer's system were fired, the U.S. unemployment rate would be somewhere over 95%.
At worst, the college adminstration should revoke his college email account or restrict it so that it can only receive messages, not send or forward them.
Eli Blake at Deep Thought has an insightful take on this issue; he's actually a professor and brings an insider's perspective to the 'academic freedom' implications. Check it out.
Later!
Time to quit letting the Republican chickenhawks frame the debate
on the war in Iraq.
A post on this issue has been percolating around the ol' synapses for a while, but today, jobsanger in Texas had an excellent post on the trend of Democrats "wussing out" on forcing Bush to end the war. It helped crystallize my thoughts on the topic.
For months now, many 'big-name' Democrats have given the Republicans in general, and Bush in particular, something of a 'free pass' on Iraq -
The consistently blame the Iraqis for the mess, and place the onus for withdrawal on the Iraqi government. They have to meet 'benchmarks' before our troops can leave.
This is completely wrong and utterly shameless.
Let's be clear here - this mess is *completely* our fault.
We started the war on a false pretense (OK - let's call it what it was - an out-and-out lie), we totally screwed up the 'peace', and we won't leave, even when it's obvious that the only purpose American troops have there is to serve as targets of opportunity.
Well, there is another purpose - protect the interests of corporations that are making billion$ off of no-bid contracts to "rebuild" Iraq or are trying to reap profits from Iraq's natural resources.
Now, much of that deception and corruption occured on the watch of a Republican-controlled Congress; but now that the Democrats hold a majority of seats in Congress (and many of the winning candidates in last year's elections campaigned on getting out of Iraq), things must have changed, right?
Ehhhh, not so much.
With a few notable exceptions, prominent Democrats have bought into the mindset that the Iraqis created this mess; acceptance of responsibility for the war and criticism of Bush is muted.
Barack Obama -
Nancy Pelosi talks of holding "the Iraqi government accountable to meet the President’s benchmarks for progress."
Even our own Harry Mitchell states that "it is essential that Congress and the Administration work together to establish benchmarks in the areas of security, reconstruction and governance..."
Many others are just as wishy-washy; I just picked a few of the bigger names.
Enough.
"Benchmarks" is a euphemism for "let's not admit our responsibility and learn from our mistakes." Nothing more than that.
More Democrats should join the likes of Bill Richardson, Dennis Kucinich, and John Edwards in publicly urging a complete withdrawal from Iraq.
To that end, I urge everyone to contact their Congresscritters to support passage of a new Iraq funding bill with a timeline for withdrawal.
Cut the pork out (except for $ to bolster VA medical facilities and services) to address one of his official reasons for vetoing the original bill, but LEAVE THE TIMELINE IN.
If Bush wants to play partisan politics with such a bill and to veto it, so be it. Let him take the heat on that 2nd veto.
And if he does veto it, give him yet another bill, just with a tighter deadline.
If he keeps vetoing, keep passing a bill that funds the war, with a deadline for withdrawal; with each succeeding veto, tighten the deadline. Start throwing in other restrictions, too, like ending the ability of the Department of Defense to award 'no-bid' contracts.
Eventually, he'll start paying attention when he realizes that the Democrats aren't going to appease him.
To those of you who object to my saying that this mess is "our" responsibility - whether or not we agreed with the war or with our Congresscritters' votes for/against it, it was undertaken in our name (superficially, anyway.) The mess *is* ours.
Welcome to democracy.
Later!
A post on this issue has been percolating around the ol' synapses for a while, but today, jobsanger in Texas had an excellent post on the trend of Democrats "wussing out" on forcing Bush to end the war. It helped crystallize my thoughts on the topic.
For months now, many 'big-name' Democrats have given the Republicans in general, and Bush in particular, something of a 'free pass' on Iraq -
The consistently blame the Iraqis for the mess, and place the onus for withdrawal on the Iraqi government. They have to meet 'benchmarks' before our troops can leave.
This is completely wrong and utterly shameless.
Let's be clear here - this mess is *completely* our fault.
We started the war on a false pretense (OK - let's call it what it was - an out-and-out lie), we totally screwed up the 'peace', and we won't leave, even when it's obvious that the only purpose American troops have there is to serve as targets of opportunity.
Well, there is another purpose - protect the interests of corporations that are making billion$ off of no-bid contracts to "rebuild" Iraq or are trying to reap profits from Iraq's natural resources.
Now, much of that deception and corruption occured on the watch of a Republican-controlled Congress; but now that the Democrats hold a majority of seats in Congress (and many of the winning candidates in last year's elections campaigned on getting out of Iraq), things must have changed, right?
Ehhhh, not so much.
With a few notable exceptions, prominent Democrats have bought into the mindset that the Iraqis created this mess; acceptance of responsibility for the war and criticism of Bush is muted.
Barack Obama -
Senator Obama introduced legislation in January 2007 to offer a responsible alternative to President Bush's failed escalation policy. The legislation commences redeployment of U.S. forces no later than May 1, 2007 with the goal of removing all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008 -- a date consistent with the bipartisan Iraq Study Group's expectations. The plan allows for a limited number of U.S. troops to remain in Iraq as basic force protection, to engage in counter-terrorism and to continue the training of Iraqi security forces. If the Iraqis are successful in meeting the 13 benchmarks for progress laid out by the Bush Administration, this plan also allows for the temporary suspension of the redeployment, provided Congress agrees that the benchmarks have been met.
Nancy Pelosi talks of holding "the Iraqi government accountable to meet the President’s benchmarks for progress."
Even our own Harry Mitchell states that "it is essential that Congress and the Administration work together to establish benchmarks in the areas of security, reconstruction and governance..."
Many others are just as wishy-washy; I just picked a few of the bigger names.
Enough.
"Benchmarks" is a euphemism for "let's not admit our responsibility and learn from our mistakes." Nothing more than that.
More Democrats should join the likes of Bill Richardson, Dennis Kucinich, and John Edwards in publicly urging a complete withdrawal from Iraq.
To that end, I urge everyone to contact their Congresscritters to support passage of a new Iraq funding bill with a timeline for withdrawal.
Cut the pork out (except for $ to bolster VA medical facilities and services) to address one of his official reasons for vetoing the original bill, but LEAVE THE TIMELINE IN.
If Bush wants to play partisan politics with such a bill and to veto it, so be it. Let him take the heat on that 2nd veto.
And if he does veto it, give him yet another bill, just with a tighter deadline.
If he keeps vetoing, keep passing a bill that funds the war, with a deadline for withdrawal; with each succeeding veto, tighten the deadline. Start throwing in other restrictions, too, like ending the ability of the Department of Defense to award 'no-bid' contracts.
Eventually, he'll start paying attention when he realizes that the Democrats aren't going to appease him.
To those of you who object to my saying that this mess is "our" responsibility - whether or not we agreed with the war or with our Congresscritters' votes for/against it, it was undertaken in our name (superficially, anyway.) The mess *is* ours.
Welcome to democracy.
Later!
Monday, May 07, 2007
Hell hasn't frozen over, but...
...the devil is putting on a jacket tonight. :)
In a truly bipartisan show of support for America's beleaguered pharmaceutical companies (only $40 billion in profits for the first 6 months of 2006! The shame of it! Whatever can be done about this corporate poverty?!? source: House Oversight and Government Reform), today the Senate gutted S1082, the Prescription Drug User Fee Amendments of 2007 Act.
The voted added an amendment to the bill, sponsored by Sen. Ted Kennedy, that while still putatively allowing Americans to buy their prescription medicines abroad, requires that the U.S. government certify the drugs' safety before they can be allowed into the U.S.
The government (aka - Bush Administration) has already said that they cannot make such certifications.
The vote on the amendment was 49 in favor, 40 against, 11 not voting.
15 Democrats, including the writer of the original bill, Sen. Kennedy, voted for the amendment. Kennedy stated that he voted for the amendment to help ensure that the bill isn't vetoed.
10 Republicans voted against the amendment.
You know that things are screwy when Ted Kennedy and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) are together on one side of an issue (aye) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Trent Lott (R-MS) are together on the other side of the same issue (nay).
And in an unsurprising development, our own John McCain was one of the 11 who missed the vote. To be fair though, four other presidential candidates also missed the vote (Biden, Brownback, Dodd and Obama).
"Follow the money" is a phrase, that I'm sad to say, should be applied to Democrats, too.
MSM coverage -
AP here.
GlobeandMail.com here.
Later!
In a truly bipartisan show of support for America's beleaguered pharmaceutical companies (only $40 billion in profits for the first 6 months of 2006! The shame of it! Whatever can be done about this corporate poverty?!? source: House Oversight and Government Reform), today the Senate gutted S1082, the Prescription Drug User Fee Amendments of 2007 Act.
The voted added an amendment to the bill, sponsored by Sen. Ted Kennedy, that while still putatively allowing Americans to buy their prescription medicines abroad, requires that the U.S. government certify the drugs' safety before they can be allowed into the U.S.
The government (aka - Bush Administration) has already said that they cannot make such certifications.
The vote on the amendment was 49 in favor, 40 against, 11 not voting.
15 Democrats, including the writer of the original bill, Sen. Kennedy, voted for the amendment. Kennedy stated that he voted for the amendment to help ensure that the bill isn't vetoed.
10 Republicans voted against the amendment.
You know that things are screwy when Ted Kennedy and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) are together on one side of an issue (aye) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Trent Lott (R-MS) are together on the other side of the same issue (nay).
And in an unsurprising development, our own John McCain was one of the 11 who missed the vote. To be fair though, four other presidential candidates also missed the vote (Biden, Brownback, Dodd and Obama).
"Follow the money" is a phrase, that I'm sad to say, should be applied to Democrats, too.
MSM coverage -
AP here.
GlobeandMail.com here.
Later!
Short attention span musing...
Delayed a few days due to work and studying for finals...
...Even though George Bush is finally facing criticism even from some Republicans for many things (deficits, failure in Iraq, etc.), he has been following one Republican tenet to a 'T' -
Run government like a business.
Unfortunately for Americans in general, and veterans in particular, the business example is Enron.
From AP, via The Houston Chronicle -
Our own Harry Mitchell (D-AZ5) has pledged to hold hearings investigating the practice. From the same AP article -
It should be noted that the practice of giving big bonuses to execs and high-level managers while shafting field-level personnel and customers isn't limited to Enron; for example, check out the business practices of any major airline that's gone through bankruptcy. Most have demanded paycuts for their line workers while giving managers huge bonuses for cutting costs.
Of course, given the President's history, it was either going to be the bonuses for cutting the quality of care for veterans, or insider trading to benefit a chosen few. The fact that he's in running an unethical government, not an unethical business, limited his options.
...In a development that surprised few, the Yuma County DA was going to offer state rep Trish Groe (R-Lake Havasu) a plea to a non-felony charge relating to her DUI in March.
In a further development that surprised even fewer, the plea deal fell apart once it came to light.
The case, originally transferred to Yuma County from La Paz County to avoid a potential conflict of interest (Groe is a state rep for La Paz), is now being sent back to La Paz, where the DA there has said that he will have outside counsel handle the case.
Groe shouldn't face harsher penalties for her alleged crime because she is a legislator; however, she should face the same penalties as a normal citizen in the same situation.
Maybe this case will persuade the legislature to include treatment options in the state's DUI laws.
Ok. Probably not this bunch. :)
They'll probably think that hanging one of their own out to dry will provide political cover for even more draconian laws.
...In slightly related news, the talentless but wealthy Paris Hilton was sentenced to 45 days in jail for driving on a suspended license while on probation for another traffic violation, alcohol-related reckless driving.
In typical celebrity fashion, she has called the sentence "cruel" and blamed her publicist for her troubles, firing him as a result.
A few points here -
1. She makes Trish Groe look sympathetic - at least Rep. Groe has admitted that she has a problem; whether or not she does anything about it is another question, but at least she has taken the first step toward dealing with her problem.
2. Hilton's wealthy; she can afford to hire a chauffeur while her licence is suspended. No sympathy for her there, either.
3. WHY ON GOD'S GREEN EARTH DID I GET EMAIL ALERTS FROM CNN ABOUT *THIS* OF ALL THINGS?!?!? It's freakin' celebrity gossip and nothing more. If Bush gets sentenced to jail, let me know; if the celeb-of-the-moment gets a hangnail
I DON'T CARE!!
Ahhhh...venting. Always good for the soul. :))
Have a great week!
Later!
...Even though George Bush is finally facing criticism even from some Republicans for many things (deficits, failure in Iraq, etc.), he has been following one Republican tenet to a 'T' -
Run government like a business.
Unfortunately for Americans in general, and veterans in particular, the business example is Enron.
From AP, via The Houston Chronicle -
Congressional leaders on Thursday demanded that the Veterans Affairs secretary explain hefty bonuses for senior department officials involved in crafting a budget that came up $1 billion short and jeopardized veterans' health care.
Our own Harry Mitchell (D-AZ5) has pledged to hold hearings investigating the practice. From the same AP article -
"These reports point to an apparent gross injustice at the VA that we have a responsibility to investigate," said Mitchell, D-Ariz. "No government official should ever be rewarded for misleading taxpayers, and the VA should not be handing out the most lucrative bonuses in government as veterans are waiting months and months to see a doctor."
It should be noted that the practice of giving big bonuses to execs and high-level managers while shafting field-level personnel and customers isn't limited to Enron; for example, check out the business practices of any major airline that's gone through bankruptcy. Most have demanded paycuts for their line workers while giving managers huge bonuses for cutting costs.
Of course, given the President's history, it was either going to be the bonuses for cutting the quality of care for veterans, or insider trading to benefit a chosen few. The fact that he's in running an unethical government, not an unethical business, limited his options.
...In a development that surprised few, the Yuma County DA was going to offer state rep Trish Groe (R-Lake Havasu) a plea to a non-felony charge relating to her DUI in March.
In a further development that surprised even fewer, the plea deal fell apart once it came to light.
The case, originally transferred to Yuma County from La Paz County to avoid a potential conflict of interest (Groe is a state rep for La Paz), is now being sent back to La Paz, where the DA there has said that he will have outside counsel handle the case.
Groe shouldn't face harsher penalties for her alleged crime because she is a legislator; however, she should face the same penalties as a normal citizen in the same situation.
Maybe this case will persuade the legislature to include treatment options in the state's DUI laws.
Ok. Probably not this bunch. :)
They'll probably think that hanging one of their own out to dry will provide political cover for even more draconian laws.
...In slightly related news, the talentless but wealthy Paris Hilton was sentenced to 45 days in jail for driving on a suspended license while on probation for another traffic violation, alcohol-related reckless driving.
In typical celebrity fashion, she has called the sentence "cruel" and blamed her publicist for her troubles, firing him as a result.
A few points here -
1. She makes Trish Groe look sympathetic - at least Rep. Groe has admitted that she has a problem; whether or not she does anything about it is another question, but at least she has taken the first step toward dealing with her problem.
2. Hilton's wealthy; she can afford to hire a chauffeur while her licence is suspended. No sympathy for her there, either.
3. WHY ON GOD'S GREEN EARTH DID I GET EMAIL ALERTS FROM CNN ABOUT *THIS* OF ALL THINGS?!?!? It's freakin' celebrity gossip and nothing more. If Bush gets sentenced to jail, let me know; if the celeb-of-the-moment gets a hangnail
I DON'T CARE!!
Ahhhh...venting. Always good for the soul. :))
Have a great week!
Later!
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
Since the campaign season started early, so has the endorsement season...
The hardest working, wisest, smartest and the best-looking members of AZ's legislative and Congressional membership have proven their superior political acumen once again with their incredibly prescient endorsements of New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson for the Democratic nomination for President.
[OK, I think that covers my 'butt-kissing' quota for the week, lol.]
From the Business Journal of Phoenix -
In other AZ-related presidential campaign news, John Edwards will be in Tucson on Thursday (probably 'later today' as you read this) for a Community Meeting.
Location - Plumbers and Pipefitters Hall, 2475 Water St. (Off Tucson Blvd. and Grant Road)
Time - 4:30 pm
Expect Tedski to have the scoop on any endorsements.
Later!
[OK, I think that covers my 'butt-kissing' quota for the week, lol.]
From the Business Journal of Phoenix -
Phoenix Congressman Ed Pastor and a number of Arizona Democratic state lawmakers are backing New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson's 2008 presidential bid.
{snip}
State Reps. Kyrsten Sinema, Steve Gallardo, Theresa Ulmer and David Lujan and state Sen. Meg Burton-Cahill are also backing Richardson's White House run.
In other AZ-related presidential campaign news, John Edwards will be in Tucson on Thursday (probably 'later today' as you read this) for a Community Meeting.
Location - Plumbers and Pipefitters Hall, 2475 Water St. (Off Tucson Blvd. and Grant Road)
Time - 4:30 pm
Expect Tedski to have the scoop on any endorsements.
Later!
Upcoming LD17 events...
Now for a couple of LD17 events...
Wednesday, May 9 - Democratic Happy Hour at Joe's Crab Shack at 1504 E. Southern in Tempe. Starts at 6:30 p.m. Contact info: email Corey Woods at coreywoods7[at]yahoo.com.
Saturday, May 12 - Voter Registration Walk in the morning; Democrats in the Park with LD18, LD20, and LD21 in the afternoon. Meet at Daley Park at 10:00 a.m. for the voter reg walk; 1:00 p.m. for the potluck picnic. Contact info: Voter Reg Walk - email D17 chair Doug Mings at dougmings[at]gmail.com; Picnic - email Corey Woods at the above addy.
Thursday, May 17 - Free screening of the award-winning documentary about illegal immigration, Crossing Arizona. Q&A afterwards with Mike Wilson from the movie. 6:30 p.m., Escalante Community Center, 2150 East Orange Street Tempe, AZ 85281. Contact info: email David Malsch at hupinertia[at]cox.com.
Thursday, May 24 - The LD17 Issues Committee is sponsoring a Health Care Forum at the Granite Reef Senior Center, 1700 N. Granite Reef, Scottsdale. From 6:30 p.m. - 7:00 p,m., a number of healthcare organizations will be hosting informational tables; from 7 to 8:30 p.m., House Minority Leader Representative Phil Lopes will be moderating a discussion that includes representatives from the Children's Action Alliance, Arizona Rural Health Association, United Food and Commercial Workers Local 99, and the AARP.
The public not only welcome to attend, it's strongly encouraged to show up and learn about the "forces affecting health in our community."
In case you were wondering why a Tucson legislator would moderate a Tempe/Scottsdale event, try this quote from his legislative bio:
Directions to the Granite Reef Senior Center - Loop 101 to McDowell, exit westbound on McDowell to Granite Reef. Turn north on Granite Reef for approximately 300 feet; parking is on the west side of the street.
Later!
Wednesday, May 9 - Democratic Happy Hour at Joe's Crab Shack at 1504 E. Southern in Tempe. Starts at 6:30 p.m. Contact info: email Corey Woods at coreywoods7[at]yahoo.com.
Saturday, May 12 - Voter Registration Walk in the morning; Democrats in the Park with LD18, LD20, and LD21 in the afternoon. Meet at Daley Park at 10:00 a.m. for the voter reg walk; 1:00 p.m. for the potluck picnic. Contact info: Voter Reg Walk - email D17 chair Doug Mings at dougmings[at]gmail.com; Picnic - email Corey Woods at the above addy.
Thursday, May 17 - Free screening of the award-winning documentary about illegal immigration, Crossing Arizona. Q&A afterwards with Mike Wilson from the movie. 6:30 p.m., Escalante Community Center, 2150 East Orange Street Tempe, AZ 85281. Contact info: email David Malsch at hupinertia[at]cox.com.
Thursday, May 24 - The LD17 Issues Committee is sponsoring a Health Care Forum at the Granite Reef Senior Center, 1700 N. Granite Reef, Scottsdale. From 6:30 p.m. - 7:00 p,m., a number of healthcare organizations will be hosting informational tables; from 7 to 8:30 p.m., House Minority Leader Representative Phil Lopes will be moderating a discussion that includes representatives from the Children's Action Alliance, Arizona Rural Health Association, United Food and Commercial Workers Local 99, and the AARP.
The public not only welcome to attend, it's strongly encouraged to show up and learn about the "forces affecting health in our community."
In case you were wondering why a Tucson legislator would moderate a Tempe/Scottsdale event, try this quote from his legislative bio:
Phil was the Executive Director of the Health Systems Agency of Southeastern Arizona from 1981-1987, and prior to that held senior administrative positions with the Arizona Health Foundation, which provided health care to low income families and individuals, and with Visiting Nurse Association Home Health Services.
Directions to the Granite Reef Senior Center - Loop 101 to McDowell, exit westbound on McDowell to Granite Reef. Turn north on Granite Reef for approximately 300 feet; parking is on the west side of the street.
Later!
Local NJDC chapter meeting next week
Next Thursday night, May 10th, the Phoenix/Scottsdale chapter of the National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC) will hold its first meeting at the Jewish Community Center at 12701 North Scottsdale Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85254 (corner of Scottsdale and Sweetwater).
The meeting will begin at 6:30 p.m.
This first meeting will be an organizational meeting, to select officers and to begin discussion of a strategy for the upcoming election cycle. With all of the offices on the ballot next year, local level through national, an early start is key.
If you are interested in information on joining or just helping out, contact Jerry Gettinger at njdcphx@cox.net or 480-510-1320.
Later!
The meeting will begin at 6:30 p.m.
This first meeting will be an organizational meeting, to select officers and to begin discussion of a strategy for the upcoming election cycle. With all of the offices on the ballot next year, local level through national, an early start is key.
If you are interested in information on joining or just helping out, contact Jerry Gettinger at njdcphx@cox.net or 480-510-1320.
Later!
Take action to fight the House budget proposal...
Tedski at Rum, Romanism and Rebellion has been doing a great job at covering the defection of Democratic Reps. Pete Rios, Linda Lopez, and Olivia Cajero Bedford over the state budget proposed by Speaker Jim Weiers and the House Republican leadership.
I could talk about the events of the last couple of days, but I'd just be repeating stuff he has already documented.
Plus he has better sources than I do. Most of what I know about this I learned from him; anything that I did learn from my own sources, he's already posted. [Freakin' brothers in the lege...curse grumble swear... :) ]
In order of publishing, his posts on the topic can be found here, here, here, here, and here. Expect more. :)
What I can and will do is to urge everyone to contact their representatives in the AZ legislature (both House and Senate) to urge them to fight against the House budget; it funds a big tax break for corporations on the backs of the state's children and poor.
Member roster f0r the House of Representatives is here; the Senate's roster page is here. The pages contain phone and email contact info for the members. Click on a member's name to go to his/her official page to obtain snail mail address info.
I've been assured by people that know that the House budget doesn't stand much of a chance; even if it gets through the House, it has to get past the Senate AND the Governor's veto pen.
The first (passage by the House) is likely, but not a slam dunk - Weiers ignored a lot of Republican moderates when he ginned up his budget; his own caucus may yet kill his own budget.
The second, passage by the Senate, is extremely unlikely - the Senate has put in a LOT of bipartisan work already on a 'compromise' budget. They aren't going to throw that away on one of Weiers' whims.
The third, avoiding the Governor's veto pen, is also unlikely - it's *her* office that the Senate has been working with on their budget.
However, for all that, people still need to contact their reps and senators; make sure that they know this budget is bad and, more importantly, that their constituents are watching.
Closely.
The Arizona Education Association sent out an action alert urging people to contact both their own legislators and Reps. Rios, Lopez, and Cajero-Bedford (to ask them to reconsider their positions).
Those three are singled out not only for the defection to Weiers' camp, but because they were endorsed by the AEA during the last election.
The AEA had a number of talking points in their action alert, points to bolster efforts to defeat the House budget. These included the tax giveaways to corporations ($48 million on top of $591 million because of last year's budget deal), the negligible additional assistance for public schools ($20 million sounds ok, until you realize that it comes to less than $20/student), the large increase in funding for charter schools ($10 million, $107/student), and the backroom deals to create the public's budget (see above linked posts about Democratic defections.)
When contacting legislators, whether your own or Lopez, Rios, and Cajero Bedford, be direct, concise and above all, BE CIVIL. The threesome may have exercised some profoundly bad judgement, but they're still civil servants worthy of courtesy.
But when you do contact them, in addition to the above points, ask them this:
"It's bad enough to sell your souls to Jim Weiers, but couldn't you at least make *him* pay the price? The money for your pet projects/line items all came out of things that Weiers hates anyway, like school buildings and facilities, state employees' pockets, and AHCCCS. He doesn't care if those areas get screwed; in fact you did him a favor.
Now he gets to blame Democrats for the short funding in those areas.
Bottom line - you didn't sell your souls so much as give them away."
"How does it feel to burn your bridges with your colleagues, your party, and your constituents, for less than nothing.?"
Now, according to one of the Tedski's posts, Rep. Cajero-Bedford has backed off from her support of Weiers' budget, but she still deserves to hear from folks, in case she is considering backsliding.
Later!
I could talk about the events of the last couple of days, but I'd just be repeating stuff he has already documented.
Plus he has better sources than I do. Most of what I know about this I learned from him; anything that I did learn from my own sources, he's already posted. [Freakin' brothers in the lege...curse grumble swear... :) ]
In order of publishing, his posts on the topic can be found here, here, here, here, and here. Expect more. :)
What I can and will do is to urge everyone to contact their representatives in the AZ legislature (both House and Senate) to urge them to fight against the House budget; it funds a big tax break for corporations on the backs of the state's children and poor.
Member roster f0r the House of Representatives is here; the Senate's roster page is here. The pages contain phone and email contact info for the members. Click on a member's name to go to his/her official page to obtain snail mail address info.
I've been assured by people that know that the House budget doesn't stand much of a chance; even if it gets through the House, it has to get past the Senate AND the Governor's veto pen.
The first (passage by the House) is likely, but not a slam dunk - Weiers ignored a lot of Republican moderates when he ginned up his budget; his own caucus may yet kill his own budget.
The second, passage by the Senate, is extremely unlikely - the Senate has put in a LOT of bipartisan work already on a 'compromise' budget. They aren't going to throw that away on one of Weiers' whims.
The third, avoiding the Governor's veto pen, is also unlikely - it's *her* office that the Senate has been working with on their budget.
However, for all that, people still need to contact their reps and senators; make sure that they know this budget is bad and, more importantly, that their constituents are watching.
Closely.
The Arizona Education Association sent out an action alert urging people to contact both their own legislators and Reps. Rios, Lopez, and Cajero-Bedford (to ask them to reconsider their positions).
Those three are singled out not only for the defection to Weiers' camp, but because they were endorsed by the AEA during the last election.
The AEA had a number of talking points in their action alert, points to bolster efforts to defeat the House budget. These included the tax giveaways to corporations ($48 million on top of $591 million because of last year's budget deal), the negligible additional assistance for public schools ($20 million sounds ok, until you realize that it comes to less than $20/student), the large increase in funding for charter schools ($10 million, $107/student), and the backroom deals to create the public's budget (see above linked posts about Democratic defections.)
When contacting legislators, whether your own or Lopez, Rios, and Cajero Bedford, be direct, concise and above all, BE CIVIL. The threesome may have exercised some profoundly bad judgement, but they're still civil servants worthy of courtesy.
But when you do contact them, in addition to the above points, ask them this:
"It's bad enough to sell your souls to Jim Weiers, but couldn't you at least make *him* pay the price? The money for your pet projects/line items all came out of things that Weiers hates anyway, like school buildings and facilities, state employees' pockets, and AHCCCS. He doesn't care if those areas get screwed; in fact you did him a favor.
Now he gets to blame Democrats for the short funding in those areas.
Bottom line - you didn't sell your souls so much as give them away."
"How does it feel to burn your bridges with your colleagues, your party, and your constituents, for less than nothing.?"
Now, according to one of the Tedski's posts, Rep. Cajero-Bedford has backed off from her support of Weiers' budget, but she still deserves to hear from folks, in case she is considering backsliding.
Later!
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
A little perspective on Bush's veto
Then, May 1, 2003 - The administration declares victory in Iraq.
George W. Bush, courtesy a White House press release (emphasis mine):
Now, May 1, 2007 - Bush vetoes a bill that while funding continued operations in Iraq, would have set a timeline for withdrawal.
George W. Bush, courtesy a White House press release (emphasis mine):
Let's sum up, with visual cues -
Then:
Now:
Yeah, they really teed this one up for me (and every other blogger in America) by timing the veto for the fourth anniversary of the "Mission Accomplished" pronouncement.
The important question:
How many more have to die for Bush's lies?
George W. Bush, courtesy a White House press release (emphasis mine):
Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.
Now, May 1, 2007 - Bush vetoes a bill that while funding continued operations in Iraq, would have set a timeline for withdrawal.
George W. Bush, courtesy a White House press release (emphasis mine):
...the bill would impose impossible conditions on our commanders in combat.
...That means American commanders in the middle of a combat zone would have to take fighting directions from politicians 6,000 miles away in Washington, D.C.
...We need to give our troops all the equipment and the training and protection
they need to prevail.
Let's sum up, with visual cues -
Then:
Now:
Yeah, they really teed this one up for me (and every other blogger in America) by timing the veto for the fourth anniversary of the "Mission Accomplished" pronouncement.
The important question:
How many more have to die for Bush's lies?
Monday, April 30, 2007
Things that make you "hmmmm...."
Embattled Congressman Rick Renzi (R-Mantech) has changed lawyers in his dustup with the feds...
From the Phoenix Business Journal -
Renzi hired Woods last year when the investigation first came to light. (R-Cubed)
This change doesn't mean that Renzi believes that he doesn't need representation; powerhouse Arizona lawyer Woods has been replaced with the nearly 700 lawyers(nationwide) of powerhouse DC law firm Nixon Peabody LLP.
Interesting tidbit from the webpage of their DC office (emphasis mine)-
Well, he'll save money on his lawyers' travel expenses, anyway.
From the Phoenix Business Journal -
Former Arizona attorney general Grant Woods no longer is representing Republican Congressman Rick Renzi in a federal investigation that is looking into the latter's involvement in a real estate deal involving swapping federal lands with parcel owned by a former business partner.
Renzi hired Woods last year when the investigation first came to light. (R-Cubed)
This change doesn't mean that Renzi believes that he doesn't need representation; powerhouse Arizona lawyer Woods has been replaced with the nearly 700 lawyers(nationwide) of powerhouse DC law firm Nixon Peabody LLP.
Interesting tidbit from the webpage of their DC office (emphasis mine)-
The firm’s Washington D.C. office is staffed by approximately 100 attorneys. It is conveniently located just off Pennsylvania Avenue, midway between the Capitol and the White House, and directly across from the headquarters of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Well, he'll save money on his lawyers' travel expenses, anyway.
LD17 Legislators in the news
Rep. Ed Ableser -
...Ableser sharply criticized the payday loan industry during the House's consideration of SB1446.
From the AZ Daily Star -
...The federal No Child Left Behind act received some attention from him during the House's consideration of SB1300.
Also from the AZ Daily Star -
...After the prison riot in Indiana last week, private prisons were also in his cross-hairs.
From KTAR.com -
...David received a 'bravo!' from the ASU State Press for his DUI bill amendment that would require a breathalyzer ignition lock for those convicted of DUI.
From the State Press -
...Schapira was quoted in an article about how lobbyists for the liquor and restaurant industries are marshalling their forces in the fight against his amendment.
From the AZ Daily Star -
...David's fashion sensibilities were uncovered by Daniel Scarpinato, the Daily Star's intrepid political reporter, in his "Political Notebook" column -
...In other, non-MSM, news, Rep. Schapira announced his new website, DavidSchapira.com. It's a great source for information pertaining to the lege and his activities there, as well as for contacting him to get involved.
Note: after some in-depth investigation (OK, it was a Google search :) ), I found Ed Ableser's site, too.
Sen. Meg Burton-Cahill -
...She was vocal in her support for HB2443, a proposal to "require owners of offroad vehicles to pay a new fee for the privilege of operating them anywhere on public lands or roads."
From the EV Tribune (also the source of the above quote) -
From the Yuma Sun article written by the same author, Howard Fischer -
Note: the bill failed in the Senate, with 14 voting in favor and 13 against, but under Senate rules, 16 votes are needed to pass legislation.
Note: Since they seem to be getting their personal websites up and running, this will probably be the last "LD17 Legislators in the News" compilation post. These will become unnecessarily duplicative.
Plus, this session of the lege is nearing its end. :)
Later!
...Ableser sharply criticized the payday loan industry during the House's consideration of SB1446.
From the AZ Daily Star -
"They should be kicked out," said Rep. Ed Ableser, D-Tempe. "Any sort of practice which preys and reaps profit off the unfortunate circumstance of an individual that really has no other place to turn is immoral at best."
...The federal No Child Left Behind act received some attention from him during the House's consideration of SB1300.
Also from the AZ Daily Star -
While not everyone shares [State Senator Karen] Johnson's view, Democrats launched their own attacks on No Child Left Behind as the bill came up for a House vote.
In a long-shot amendment of his own, Rep. Ed Ableser, a Tempe Democrat, proposed divorcing the entire state from the federal mandates and giving up the $600 million.
Ableser called the law the "worst thing to happen to public education in decades," and proposed making up the money with state funds.
While the amendment won some Democratic support, Republicans said the move would be too costly.
...After the prison riot in Indiana last week, private prisons were also in his cross-hairs.
From KTAR.com -
Tuesday's riot by Arizona inmates at an Indiana private prison prompts a caution from Democrat Ed Ableser.Rep. David Schapira -
"We need to be very careful about a private industry that actually makes money off of the amount of criminals we produce in this society," he said.
...David received a 'bravo!' from the ASU State Press for his DUI bill amendment that would require a breathalyzer ignition lock for those convicted of DUI.
From the State Press -
BRAVO to Rep. David Schapira and his amendment to a DUI bill working its way through the State Legislature. With the representative's changes, the bill would require anybody convicted of a DUI to get a breathalyzer ignition installed on their vehicle. Finally, a punishment that fits the crime. We understand, sometimes it's easy to get into a car after only a couple drinks, but bottom line is, you shouldn't. This way, if you do it once, you definitely won't be able to do it again.
...Schapira was quoted in an article about how lobbyists for the liquor and restaurant industries are marshalling their forces in the fight against his amendment.
From the AZ Daily Star -
Schapira, the bill's sponsor, also rejected the idea of drunk driving being
a mistake.
"They're making a mistake that in many cases results in the death of someone," he said.
One point of contention is that the devices ensure more than legal sobriety: Schapira said the Motor Vehicle Division has these set so a car or truck will not start if the driver's blood-alcohol content is 0.04 or higher, half the 0.08 DUI threshold. But Schapira said he doesn't see that as a problem.
"I don't think it's asking too much to say that someone who has been driving drunk should not have a BAC of (more than) 0.03 for a year after their conviction," Schapira said.
...David's fashion sensibilities were uncovered by Daniel Scarpinato, the Daily Star's intrepid political reporter, in his "Political Notebook" column -
And speaking of [State Rep. Steve] Farley, it looks like he's part of a group of male lawmakers who share fashion tips at the state Capitol.
During a recent meeting, Farley was looking colorful in a red shirt and tie, when Tempe Democrat David Schapira (at 26 during the November election, he's the youngest member of the Legislature) got on him for wearing horizontal stripes against vertical ones — a fashion no-no, according to Schapira.
"He's getting much better," Schapira said of Farley.
...In other, non-MSM, news, Rep. Schapira announced his new website, DavidSchapira.com. It's a great source for information pertaining to the lege and his activities there, as well as for contacting him to get involved.
Note: after some in-depth investigation (OK, it was a Google search :) ), I found Ed Ableser's site, too.
Sen. Meg Burton-Cahill -
...She was vocal in her support for HB2443, a proposal to "require owners of offroad vehicles to pay a new fee for the privilege of operating them anywhere on public lands or roads."
From the EV Tribune (also the source of the above quote) -
But Sen. Meg Burton Cahill, D-Tempe, who bought an ATV for her son, said not everyone believes in no responsibility to help pay for state programs that maintain trails and police the rural areas to ensure riders don’t destroy habitat.
From the Yuma Sun article written by the same author, Howard Fischer -
Sen. Meg Burton Cahill, D-Tempe, said charging off-road vehicle users makes sense.
"I guess the alternative is we could adequately fund our parks,'' she said. "And then all of us could be paying for these trails.''
Note: the bill failed in the Senate, with 14 voting in favor and 13 against, but under Senate rules, 16 votes are needed to pass legislation.
Note: Since they seem to be getting their personal websites up and running, this will probably be the last "LD17 Legislators in the News" compilation post. These will become unnecessarily duplicative.
Plus, this session of the lege is nearing its end. :)
Later!
Saturday, April 28, 2007
Some things don't change...
I have said and written many things about the Republicans in general and the Bushies in particular, mostly negative, but I have to give them this much credit -
They're consistent.
...Rationalize torture? Get promoted to U.S. Attorney General or get oodles of administration support in your reelection campaign. (Gonzales, Kyl)
...Indicted for money laundering and illegal use of corporate funds? Take a corporate jet to your booking and treat America to an insipid grin in your booking photo. Oh, and shamelessly make noises about a comeback in electoral politics. (Delay)
...Under investigation for misusing your position to benefit your family, your friends, and yourself? Ignore the fact that everyone doing the investigating is a Republican appointee and denounce the investigation as a partisan attack and deny everything. (Doolittle, Renzi)
By these examples and myriad others, a strong case can be built to support the proposition that the Republican Party cherishes bad acts and bad actors, with one exception.
Caught having sex with someone you're not married to? Quit or they'll try to remove you from office. (Tobias, Clinton)
And for that, they'll claim the 'moral' high ground.
I'm not advocating or condoning the hiring of prostitutes, but let's face facts - the guy who did so may be the least bad Bushie out there, yet he's the one resigning in disgrace.
They may be thoroughgoing hypocrites, but they are totally consistent about it.
They're ALWAYS hypocrites.
They're consistent.
...Rationalize torture? Get promoted to U.S. Attorney General or get oodles of administration support in your reelection campaign. (Gonzales, Kyl)
...Indicted for money laundering and illegal use of corporate funds? Take a corporate jet to your booking and treat America to an insipid grin in your booking photo. Oh, and shamelessly make noises about a comeback in electoral politics. (Delay)
...Under investigation for misusing your position to benefit your family, your friends, and yourself? Ignore the fact that everyone doing the investigating is a Republican appointee and denounce the investigation as a partisan attack and deny everything. (Doolittle, Renzi)
By these examples and myriad others, a strong case can be built to support the proposition that the Republican Party cherishes bad acts and bad actors, with one exception.
Caught having sex with someone you're not married to? Quit or they'll try to remove you from office. (Tobias, Clinton)
And for that, they'll claim the 'moral' high ground.
I'm not advocating or condoning the hiring of prostitutes, but let's face facts - the guy who did so may be the least bad Bushie out there, yet he's the one resigning in disgrace.
They may be thoroughgoing hypocrites, but they are totally consistent about it.
They're ALWAYS hypocrites.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)