...Last week, embattled Senate president Russell Pearce (R-National Alliance) appointed freshman Sen. Don "Tequila" Shooter as chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee. The position opened up because Sen. Andy Biggs, now the former chair, ascended to the position of Senate majority leader when now-former majority leader Sen. Scott Bundgaard was ousted from his job as a result of a "domestic violence incident" by the side of a Phoenix freeway (OK, he attacked his girlfriend. No need to be tactful).
Some were surprised by the elevation of a freshman member to the head of the most powerful committee in the Senate.
Most observers, including me, expected the post to go to one of the more experienced R members of the committee, which include Sens. Sylvia Allen, Rich Crandall, Ron Gould, and Al Melvin.
Evan Wyloge of the Arizona Capitol Times speculates that Shooter got the promotion because in some unnamed way, Shooter is in a position to help Pearce with his looming recall election.
Personally, I think he simply passed his audition in June by proving he was one of Pearce's "good ol' boys."
...Mitt "just folks" Romney has followed up his recent declaration that "corporations are people" with plans to expand his home...a spare house, a $12 million, 3000 square foot beach home in La Jolla, California.
Just a guess here, but he probably isn't going to run on a "populist" platform.
...Finally, something that really *did* escape my notice last week, the Arizona Republic's Political Insider noticed that Arizona's top law enforcement official has a very interesting friend on Facebook -
Noted Arizona neo-Nazi (and Russell Pearce buddy) J.T. Ready.
I freely admit that I didn't have a high opinion of Horne to begin with, but he actually found a way to lower my opinion of him.
Thanks, Tom. Now I have to figure out what's lower than "pond scum".
Monday, August 22, 2011
Sunday, August 21, 2011
GOP: Tax hikes on the wealthy and corporations: Bad; tax hikes on the poor and middle class: Good
From AP, via MSNBC.com, written by Charles Babington -
BTW - I am not necessarily opposed to letting the temporary payroll tax cut expire (as much as it would hurt), but it has to be paired with making the tax burden more fairly distributed by also allowing the Bush-era tax cuts, mostly focused on the wealthy and corporations, expire.
However, look for the GOPers to push for higher taxes on the poor and the middle class while at the same time insisting on lower taxes on the wealthy.
They'll call it their "jobs creation" initiative or some such line of BS.
And unfortunately, look for the Obama administration to surrender to the R extremists yet again.
News flash: Congressional Republicans want to raise your taxes.
Impossible, right? GOP lawmakers are so virulently anti-tax, surely they will fight to prevent a payroll tax increase on virtually every wage-earner starting Jan. 1, right?
Apparently not.comm
Many of the same Republicans who fought hammer-and-tong to keep the George W. Bush-era income tax cuts from expiring on schedule are now saying a different "temporary" tax cut should end as planned. By their own definition, that amounts to a tax increase.They're not even bothering to pretend that they are working for the interests of the average American, are they?
BTW - I am not necessarily opposed to letting the temporary payroll tax cut expire (as much as it would hurt), but it has to be paired with making the tax burden more fairly distributed by also allowing the Bush-era tax cuts, mostly focused on the wealthy and corporations, expire.
However, look for the GOPers to push for higher taxes on the poor and the middle class while at the same time insisting on lower taxes on the wealthy.
They'll call it their "jobs creation" initiative or some such line of BS.
And unfortunately, look for the Obama administration to surrender to the R extremists yet again.
Saturday, August 20, 2011
Brewer touts federal grant...
...and does it without acknowledging the feds or even the fact that it fills in a gaping hole in the budget priorities of her and the legislature...
Earlier this week, Governor Jan Brewer issued a press release touting the receipt of an $11,894,000 grant from the federal Centers for Disease Control, (CDC) money intended to buttress Arizona's ability to respond to a public health emergency.
In her press release, she glossed over the fact that the CDC is a federal agency...OK, she totally ignored that fact...and is now officially called the "Centers for Disease Control and Prevention."
But this post isn't meant to point out the deceptive, petty, and yes, lazy aspects of her press release.
Nope, it's meant to point out a sad fact.
The nearly $12 million that the feds just sent AZ to help it respond to and communicate about public health emergencies outstrips the money that Arizona spends on (from SB1612, this year's General Appropriations, aka "budget", bill) -
- the entire appropriation for the Department of Emergency and Military Affairs ($5.169,300)
- the appropriation for the AZ Department of Administration's appropriation for public safety communications ($542,000)
- the Department of Health Services appropriation for poison control centers ($990,000)
- the Department of Economic Security's appropriation for "community and emergency services" ($3,724,000)
- even the entire allowed "Governor's emergency funds" authorization in ARS 35-192, which is capped at $4,000,000 (not an appropriation. If she deems it to be necessary, she can expend up to that amount of unrestricted general fund monies per fiscal year. For example, she just authorized the expenditure of $50K to aid Tombstone as a result of some flooding issues there.)
There aren't any budget line items specifically for public health emergencies or communications related to the same.
I'm sure that any Brewer administration or legislative insiders who read this will protest that money currently designated for other uses could be reappropriated in the event of an emergency, but the fact remains that they refuse to adequately prepare for emergencies.
My question is: What does it say about the priorities of Arizona's electeds when the feds put more money toward addressing public health emergencies than the people who are supposed to be dedicated to Arizona do?
Earlier this week, Governor Jan Brewer issued a press release touting the receipt of an $11,894,000 grant from the federal Centers for Disease Control, (CDC) money intended to buttress Arizona's ability to respond to a public health emergency.
In her press release, she glossed over the fact that the CDC is a federal agency...OK, she totally ignored that fact...and is now officially called the "Centers for Disease Control and Prevention."
But this post isn't meant to point out the deceptive, petty, and yes, lazy aspects of her press release.
Nope, it's meant to point out a sad fact.
The nearly $12 million that the feds just sent AZ to help it respond to and communicate about public health emergencies outstrips the money that Arizona spends on (from SB1612, this year's General Appropriations, aka "budget", bill) -
- the entire appropriation for the Department of Emergency and Military Affairs ($5.169,300)
- the appropriation for the AZ Department of Administration's appropriation for public safety communications ($542,000)
- the Department of Health Services appropriation for poison control centers ($990,000)
- the Department of Economic Security's appropriation for "community and emergency services" ($3,724,000)
- even the entire allowed "Governor's emergency funds" authorization in ARS 35-192, which is capped at $4,000,000 (not an appropriation. If she deems it to be necessary, she can expend up to that amount of unrestricted general fund monies per fiscal year. For example, she just authorized the expenditure of $50K to aid Tombstone as a result of some flooding issues there.)
There aren't any budget line items specifically for public health emergencies or communications related to the same.
I'm sure that any Brewer administration or legislative insiders who read this will protest that money currently designated for other uses could be reappropriated in the event of an emergency, but the fact remains that they refuse to adequately prepare for emergencies.
My question is: What does it say about the priorities of Arizona's electeds when the feds put more money toward addressing public health emergencies than the people who are supposed to be dedicated to Arizona do?
Note to MSM outlets: When you have employees write about a subject, fact check them before publishing
On August 18, the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) selected a set of grid maps that will serve as the basis of the final maps of the new Congressional and legislative districts in Arizona.
Most news articles on the topic, even the one that I'm about to criticize, made it clear that the grid maps are only a starting point and that the final maps will look very different.
However, some writers, especially those for smaller outlets with less experienced reporters, tried to flesh out their pieces with other background facts.
Facts that they got woefully wrong.
Part of the problem may be due to writers writing about topics with which they aren't overly familar (at small outlets, most of the reporters are generalists). Another part of the problem may be the fault of editors demanding filler (journalistic analysis of the grid maps as if they are the final maps is a complete waste of time) and being willing to sacrifice accuracy for word count.
From the White Mountain Independent, written by David Roberts...who's an editor at WMI...oopsie... (emphasis mine) -
While there are strong practical reasons for a representative (or candidate) to live in the district he/she represents (not least because the other candidates would point out his/her "carpetbagger" status at every turn), there are no legal requirements for that.
From Article One, Section Two of the US Constitution, courtesy Cornell University (emphasis mine) -
In other words, a person only has to live somewhere in Arizona to represent a Congressional district here, but not necessarily in that district.
In the past, this has led to people like Mary Kim Titla and Sydney Hay running for the current CD1. While both have ties to communities in the district, at the time of their candidacies, both were basically Maricopa County residents.
And don't even get me started on the subject of disgraced former Congressman Rick Renzi (R-VA AZCD1). He may have owned a house in AZ, but it wasn't his home, given the fact that his family never moved here from Virginia.
The residency requirements for state legislators is also somewhat flexible.
From Article Four, Part Two, Section Two of the Arizona Constitution (emphasis mine) -
It won't happen (thank God!), but the requirement dates from AZ's early days, when legislators were actually elected from counties, and it hasn't been changed, even after decades of growth and change here.
BTW - legislators may not talk about it, but they know about it - it's on page 9 (page 15 of the .pdf) of the Legislative Manual published by the lege's Legislative Council.
Mr. Roberts did an OK job with his reporting on the grid maps themselves (it was a waste of time, but that may not be entirely his fault), but he failed horribly with his analysis of who could respresent his area (Show Low/Navajo County, I think). It wouldn't have taken a lot of editing to make the piece more accurate. All he had to do was note that Gosar and Kirkpatrick don't reside in the potential district he was discussing, instead of saying that they absolutely couldn't represent it.
Perhaps some of the smaller MSM outlets should consider sticking to the facts in their areas of expertise (like the happenings in their local areas) and leaving analysis of broader topics to folks with more knowledge of those particular topics.
Most news articles on the topic, even the one that I'm about to criticize, made it clear that the grid maps are only a starting point and that the final maps will look very different.
However, some writers, especially those for smaller outlets with less experienced reporters, tried to flesh out their pieces with other background facts.
Facts that they got woefully wrong.
Part of the problem may be due to writers writing about topics with which they aren't overly familar (at small outlets, most of the reporters are generalists). Another part of the problem may be the fault of editors demanding filler (journalistic analysis of the grid maps as if they are the final maps is a complete waste of time) and being willing to sacrifice accuracy for word count.
From the White Mountain Independent, written by David Roberts...who's an editor at WMI...oopsie... (emphasis mine) -
...In the second proposal, this area would be in CD-5 which would start with all of Navajo and Apache Counties in the north, and take in parts of Greenlee, Graham, Gila and Maricopa.Mr. Roberts makes it sound as if a congressional representative must live in the district they represent.
That map would eliminate either Democrat Anne Kirkpatrick or Republican Paul Gosar from representation here, and would probably put this area in Rep. David Schweikert's current Fountain Hills district. Representatives from Schweikert's office were quick to point out that these preliminary maps are required but probably bear no resemblance to final output...
While there are strong practical reasons for a representative (or candidate) to live in the district he/she represents (not least because the other candidates would point out his/her "carpetbagger" status at every turn), there are no legal requirements for that.
From Article One, Section Two of the US Constitution, courtesy Cornell University (emphasis mine) -
No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the age of twenty five years, and been seven years a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state in which he shall be chosen.
In other words, a person only has to live somewhere in Arizona to represent a Congressional district here, but not necessarily in that district.
In the past, this has led to people like Mary Kim Titla and Sydney Hay running for the current CD1. While both have ties to communities in the district, at the time of their candidacies, both were basically Maricopa County residents.
And don't even get me started on the subject of disgraced former Congressman Rick Renzi (R-
The residency requirements for state legislators is also somewhat flexible.
From Article Four, Part Two, Section Two of the Arizona Constitution (emphasis mine) -
No person shall be a member of the Legislature unless he shall be a citizen of the United States at the time of his election, nor unless he shall be at least twenty-five years of age, and shall have been a resident of Arizona at least three years and of the county from which he is elected at least one year before his election.The same practical reasons for a candidate living in a Congressional district also apply to a candidate in a legislative race, but under the AZ Constitution, he/she only has to live in the same county as the district. In theory, Jack Harper (R-Surprise!) could run for a seat in Tempe - both cities are in Maricopa County.
It won't happen (thank God!), but the requirement dates from AZ's early days, when legislators were actually elected from counties, and it hasn't been changed, even after decades of growth and change here.
BTW - legislators may not talk about it, but they know about it - it's on page 9 (page 15 of the .pdf) of the Legislative Manual published by the lege's Legislative Council.
Mr. Roberts did an OK job with his reporting on the grid maps themselves (it was a waste of time, but that may not be entirely his fault), but he failed horribly with his analysis of who could respresent his area (Show Low/Navajo County, I think). It wouldn't have taken a lot of editing to make the piece more accurate. All he had to do was note that Gosar and Kirkpatrick don't reside in the potential district he was discussing, instead of saying that they absolutely couldn't represent it.
Perhaps some of the smaller MSM outlets should consider sticking to the facts in their areas of expertise (like the happenings in their local areas) and leaving analysis of broader topics to folks with more knowledge of those particular topics.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
2012 Campaign Committee update
Some of this has been covered elsewhere (or here earlier), but some of it is new, so here goes -
- Republican state senator Frank Antentori (LD30) has filed paperwork to form a committee to "explore" a run for Congress next year. By making it an exploratory committee, he avoids running afoul of Arizona's resign-to-run law. Look for him to make it "official" after the first of the year. The filing was with the IRS, not the FEC, and I'm not sure how that affects the reporting requirements for it. As of this writing, there isn't any current Antenori paperwork on the FEC's website.
- Democrat Mark Holub Stonebraker of Sierra Vista has formed an exploratory committee for a run at a House seat in LD25. After redistricting, that district designation will probably change.
- Open committees for LD18 Senate, up for a recall election in November (partisan affiliation included for reference only - this election is non-partisan) -
- - Russell Pearce (R) - of course - he's the one being recalled
- - Robert Herandez McDonald (D) - however, in a phone conversation, he stated that he is NOT running in the recall election
- - Olivia Cortes (R) - something of a "stealth" candidate
- - Michael Kielsky (L) - something of a perennial candidate. He's always running for something, though as a Libertarian, he never needs more than a couple of dozen sigs to get on a ballot. It will be impressive if he gets the 600+ sigs needed for this race.
- - Tommy Cattey (I) - he's already dropped out of the race and endorsed...
- - Jerry Lewis (R), a well-respected Mormon leader who filed his nominating petitions today.
Others involved in this recall election:
- The Maricopa GOP, which has formed an independent expenditure committee to support Pearce
- Tom Tancredo's Team America PAC (not affiliated with the movie - while the movie is over-the-top satire, Tancredo and his cohorts are just over the top), which has formed a committee to support Pearce
- Matt Tolman, a Pearce ally and former chair of the LD18 Rs has formed a "citizens' " committee to support Pearce
There are/will be others. In addition, there are a number of Arizona-registered corporate PACs and other committees that will be able to funnel money into LD18 in support of Pearce. I couldn't find any committees opposed to Pearce, other than the candidate committees.
In the only significant Maricopa County news, one Richard Hensley (R) of Peoria has formed a committee to run for Maricopa County Supervisor. He doesn't list a district, but based on his address, it seems he is gearing up to run against Max Wilson, the Republican incumbent in SD4.
In Scottsdale and Tempe, no candidate committees have formed recently.
Later...
- Republican state senator Frank Antentori (LD30) has filed paperwork to form a committee to "explore" a run for Congress next year. By making it an exploratory committee, he avoids running afoul of Arizona's resign-to-run law. Look for him to make it "official" after the first of the year. The filing was with the IRS, not the FEC, and I'm not sure how that affects the reporting requirements for it. As of this writing, there isn't any current Antenori paperwork on the FEC's website.
- Democrat Mark Holub Stonebraker of Sierra Vista has formed an exploratory committee for a run at a House seat in LD25. After redistricting, that district designation will probably change.
- Open committees for LD18 Senate, up for a recall election in November (partisan affiliation included for reference only - this election is non-partisan) -
- - Russell Pearce (R) - of course - he's the one being recalled
- - Robert Herandez McDonald (D) - however, in a phone conversation, he stated that he is NOT running in the recall election
- - Olivia Cortes (R) - something of a "stealth" candidate
- - Michael Kielsky (L) - something of a perennial candidate. He's always running for something, though as a Libertarian, he never needs more than a couple of dozen sigs to get on a ballot. It will be impressive if he gets the 600+ sigs needed for this race.
- - Tommy Cattey (I) - he's already dropped out of the race and endorsed...
- - Jerry Lewis (R), a well-respected Mormon leader who filed his nominating petitions today.
Others involved in this recall election:
- The Maricopa GOP, which has formed an independent expenditure committee to support Pearce
- Tom Tancredo's Team America PAC (not affiliated with the movie - while the movie is over-the-top satire, Tancredo and his cohorts are just over the top), which has formed a committee to support Pearce
- Matt Tolman, a Pearce ally and former chair of the LD18 Rs has formed a "citizens' " committee to support Pearce
There are/will be others. In addition, there are a number of Arizona-registered corporate PACs and other committees that will be able to funnel money into LD18 in support of Pearce. I couldn't find any committees opposed to Pearce, other than the candidate committees.
In the only significant Maricopa County news, one Richard Hensley (R) of Peoria has formed a committee to run for Maricopa County Supervisor. He doesn't list a district, but based on his address, it seems he is gearing up to run against Max Wilson, the Republican incumbent in SD4.
In Scottsdale and Tempe, no candidate committees have formed recently.
Later...
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Ben Quayle wants extra $$$ for talking to the people he works for
Apparently, $174,000 per year, plus benefits and perks, isn't enough to convince Ben Quayle (R-CD3) that he should have to talk his constituents, aka - "his employers."
From Politico, written by Reid Epstein (emphasis mine) -
Of course, perhaps the fact that Schweikert's October event is having breakfast with the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the US Chamber of Commerce won't exactly help to dispel the idea that he and his associates don't hold the interests of their constituents in high regard.
One final observation: Most people who work for a living have people who they answer to, whether those people are called customers or employers or whatever.
I wonder what would happen to Quayle et. al. if they took their open contempt for the people who pay their salaries to private sector jobs?
From Politico, written by Reid Epstein (emphasis mine) -
It will cost $15 to ask Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) a question in person during the August congressional recess.
The House Budget Committee chairman isn’t holding any face-to-face open-to-the-public town hall meetings during the recess, but like several of his colleagues he will speak only for residents willing to open their wallets.Like his colleague "Foreclosure Dave" Schweikert (R-CD5), Quayle is mimizing contact with the people of his districts, but at least Schweikert was smart enough to schedule his "pay to play" events out of state (CA) or in October, perhaps giving people time to forget how Quayle, Schweikert, and the rest of the Rs are *deep* in the pockets of Big Business.
Ryan, who took substantial criticism from his southeast Wisconsin constituents in April after he introduced the Republicans’ budget proposal, isn’t the only member of congress whose August recess town hall-style meetings are strictly pay-per-view.
Rep. Ben Quayle (R-Ariz.) is scheduled to appear Aug. 23 at a luncheon gathering of the Arizona Republican Lawyers Association. For $35, attendees can question Quayle and enjoy a catered lunch at the Phoenix office of the Snell & Wilmer law firm.
Of course, perhaps the fact that Schweikert's October event is having breakfast with the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the US Chamber of Commerce won't exactly help to dispel the idea that he and his associates don't hold the interests of their constituents in high regard.
One final observation: Most people who work for a living have people who they answer to, whether those people are called customers or employers or whatever.
I wonder what would happen to Quayle et. al. if they took their open contempt for the people who pay their salaries to private sector jobs?
Monday, August 15, 2011
In case you forgot about it, county redistricting is proceeding apace
Not really an "analysis" post; more of an "information" post...
Lost in the ginned-up hubbub surrounding the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) has been the fact that while the AIRC is drawing new Congressional and legislative district maps, most of the counties in Arizona are similarly drawing new districts for county-level offices like county supervisor.
Maricopa County (my home) has a redistricting page here, courtesy the Maricopa County Recorder's website. A ,pdf of a powerpoint presentation on the county redistricting process is here.
The deadline for submitting suggested maps has passed (June 1) but people have until October 1 to submit comments on five citizen-submitted plans (here, here, here, here, and here) and one county-crafted plan.
Call me a cynic, but something tells me that the county-crafted plan is most likely to be implemented - not that the supes will really find any of the citizen-submitted plans truly objectionable - all result in one overwhelmingly Democratic district so Mary Rose Wilcox can keep her job and four Republican-heavy districts for the four Republicans on the MCBOS. :)
Given that the supes are in charge of their own redistricting, the proposed new districts look a *lot* like the current districts. The only people who might find themselves in new supervisorial districts are those who live on the border of their current districts.
People like me.
Currently, I live in the tiny corner of Scottsdale that is in SD1, the embattled Fulton Brock's district. Under the county-crafted proposal (and three of the citizen-submitted proposals), my area of Scottsdale would be transferred to SD2, Don Stapley's district. Not a big difference in practical terms, but there is a bit of logic to the move - most of Scottsdale is already in SD2.
There are also a number of neighborhoods in south Scottsdale that are currently in SD3 (Andy Kunasek) that would also be moved into SD2 under the county-crafted plan.
Take a look at the plans, and if you wish to comment, there are two email links on the main page.
Lost in the ginned-up hubbub surrounding the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) has been the fact that while the AIRC is drawing new Congressional and legislative district maps, most of the counties in Arizona are similarly drawing new districts for county-level offices like county supervisor.
Maricopa County (my home) has a redistricting page here, courtesy the Maricopa County Recorder's website. A ,pdf of a powerpoint presentation on the county redistricting process is here.
The deadline for submitting suggested maps has passed (June 1) but people have until October 1 to submit comments on five citizen-submitted plans (here, here, here, here, and here) and one county-crafted plan.
Call me a cynic, but something tells me that the county-crafted plan is most likely to be implemented - not that the supes will really find any of the citizen-submitted plans truly objectionable - all result in one overwhelmingly Democratic district so Mary Rose Wilcox can keep her job and four Republican-heavy districts for the four Republicans on the MCBOS. :)
Given that the supes are in charge of their own redistricting, the proposed new districts look a *lot* like the current districts. The only people who might find themselves in new supervisorial districts are those who live on the border of their current districts.
People like me.
Currently, I live in the tiny corner of Scottsdale that is in SD1, the embattled Fulton Brock's district. Under the county-crafted proposal (and three of the citizen-submitted proposals), my area of Scottsdale would be transferred to SD2, Don Stapley's district. Not a big difference in practical terms, but there is a bit of logic to the move - most of Scottsdale is already in SD2.
There are also a number of neighborhoods in south Scottsdale that are currently in SD3 (Andy Kunasek) that would also be moved into SD2 under the county-crafted plan.
Take a look at the plans, and if you wish to comment, there are two email links on the main page.
Sunday, August 14, 2011
GOPer Presidential field - Perry in, Pawlenty out, Bachmann getting headlines
While most of us tried to enjoy the weekend, most of America's political reporters (few are actual journalists) were focused on a Republican "straw poll" in Ames, Iowa.
While hardly serving as a predictor of which candidate is going to win the R nomination or even the Iowa caucuses early next year (you know, the vote that actually counts for something officially), it does serve as an early test of who has the best organization in Iowa, an early primary state.
The Ames straw poll has lost some of its luster in recent years - 2008 GOP nominee John McCain skipped this event in 2007, and the 2007 winner and the front runner in national polls this year, Mitt Romney, skipped it this year.
- In case you have been living under a rock - or were at least smarter than me and didn't turn on a cable news show this weekend - MN Congresswoman Michele Bachmann eked out a victory over TX Congressman (and perennial candidate) Ron Paul. Former MN Governor Tim Pawlenty came in a distant third.
Quick analysis: While most winners of the straw poll do NOT go on to win the GOP nomination, winning is still better than losing. Bachmann is still viewed by most (including many Rs) as a "fringe" candidate. However, she's still got some upside; Paul has probably reached the top end of his candidacy. He may stay in the top tier for a while, but he's probably going to fade.
- Pawlenty expended a lot of time and effort in Iowa. His disappointing showing of a rather distant third led him to drop out of the race this morning. While he may have been one of the GOP's better options for the general election, he didn't generate much buzz among GOP primary voters, and you need to win the primary before getting to the general.
Quick analysis: Add his name to the list of potential GOP VP candidates. If GOP voters pick an "extreme" or "tea party" candidate like Bachmann, look for their ticket to be balanced by someone more mainstream like Pawlenty or AZ's soon-to-be retired Sen. Jon Kyl. If someone more "mainstream" like Romney gets the nod, they'll go with someone who appeals to the hardcore base, like a Bachmann or former PA Senator Rick Santorum (warning: link probably not safe for work).
- TX Governor Rick "Governor Goodhair" Perry made official what everyone already knew by announcing his candidacy yesterday in South Carolina, before trekking to New Hampshire. He had announced in May that he wasn't going to be a candidate for President, but flip-flopped (perhaps after realizing that the rest of the R field has some serious weaknesses).
Quick analysis: It's easy to dismiss Perry as just another "all hat, no cattle" Texas pol, but that happened in 1999/2000 with another governor from Texas, and we all know how that turned out.
Later...
While hardly serving as a predictor of which candidate is going to win the R nomination or even the Iowa caucuses early next year (you know, the vote that actually counts for something officially), it does serve as an early test of who has the best organization in Iowa, an early primary state.
The Ames straw poll has lost some of its luster in recent years - 2008 GOP nominee John McCain skipped this event in 2007, and the 2007 winner and the front runner in national polls this year, Mitt Romney, skipped it this year.
- In case you have been living under a rock - or were at least smarter than me and didn't turn on a cable news show this weekend - MN Congresswoman Michele Bachmann eked out a victory over TX Congressman (and perennial candidate) Ron Paul. Former MN Governor Tim Pawlenty came in a distant third.
Quick analysis: While most winners of the straw poll do NOT go on to win the GOP nomination, winning is still better than losing. Bachmann is still viewed by most (including many Rs) as a "fringe" candidate. However, she's still got some upside; Paul has probably reached the top end of his candidacy. He may stay in the top tier for a while, but he's probably going to fade.
- Pawlenty expended a lot of time and effort in Iowa. His disappointing showing of a rather distant third led him to drop out of the race this morning. While he may have been one of the GOP's better options for the general election, he didn't generate much buzz among GOP primary voters, and you need to win the primary before getting to the general.
Quick analysis: Add his name to the list of potential GOP VP candidates. If GOP voters pick an "extreme" or "tea party" candidate like Bachmann, look for their ticket to be balanced by someone more mainstream like Pawlenty or AZ's soon-to-be retired Sen. Jon Kyl. If someone more "mainstream" like Romney gets the nod, they'll go with someone who appeals to the hardcore base, like a Bachmann or former PA Senator Rick Santorum (warning: link probably not safe for work).
- TX Governor Rick "Governor Goodhair" Perry made official what everyone already knew by announcing his candidacy yesterday in South Carolina, before trekking to New Hampshire. He had announced in May that he wasn't going to be a candidate for President, but flip-flopped (perhaps after realizing that the rest of the R field has some serious weaknesses).
Quick analysis: It's easy to dismiss Perry as just another "all hat, no cattle" Texas pol, but that happened in 1999/2000 with another governor from Texas, and we all know how that turned out.
Later...
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Busy week coming up for Redistricting Commission
After the end of the first round of public hearings on redistricting, the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC), the five members of the Commission had a week off.
...OK, it was actually a week off from public meetings throughout the state. Lots of work was still going on.
However, they are going to make up for the week "off" by holding two (perhaps three) public meetings this week.
Monday, they are scheduled to hold a meeting in Casa Grande. The scheduled topic is to obtain, consider, and possibly take action on legal advice pertaining to Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne's "investigation" into the AIRC.
Wednesday, a meeting will be held in the Phoenix City Council chambers. This one is a more general meeting and includes an address from retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
Finally, Steve at Arizona Egaltarian is reporting that a meeting is planned for Thursday in Casa Grande, where they will be officially unveiling and selecting grid maps. These are maps of legislative and Congressional districts that are based only on the criteria of equal population and compactness. The final maps will be very different after adjusting them for other criteria such as adherence to the Voting Rights Act and competitiveness.
To add a little perspective on this, consider the Congressional district grid map created during the 2000 redistricting cycle -
...and compare it to the final map of Congressional districts -
The 2000 legislative maps are similarly different (yes, I just wrote that sentence! :) ).
In other words, if you are in a grid map district that looks great to you, don't gloat, and if you are in one that looks horrible, don't panic.
Things will change greatly over the next couple of months.
When the schedule for the next round of hearings, aka "the second leg of the AIRC's traveling road show," is posted, I'll post it here.
Until then, and even after, keep up with the redistricting process at Arizona Egaltarian.
...OK, it was actually a week off from public meetings throughout the state. Lots of work was still going on.
However, they are going to make up for the week "off" by holding two (perhaps three) public meetings this week.
Monday, they are scheduled to hold a meeting in Casa Grande. The scheduled topic is to obtain, consider, and possibly take action on legal advice pertaining to Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne's "investigation" into the AIRC.
Wednesday, a meeting will be held in the Phoenix City Council chambers. This one is a more general meeting and includes an address from retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
Finally, Steve at Arizona Egaltarian is reporting that a meeting is planned for Thursday in Casa Grande, where they will be officially unveiling and selecting grid maps. These are maps of legislative and Congressional districts that are based only on the criteria of equal population and compactness. The final maps will be very different after adjusting them for other criteria such as adherence to the Voting Rights Act and competitiveness.
To add a little perspective on this, consider the Congressional district grid map created during the 2000 redistricting cycle -
...and compare it to the final map of Congressional districts -
The 2000 legislative maps are similarly different (yes, I just wrote that sentence! :) ).
In other words, if you are in a grid map district that looks great to you, don't gloat, and if you are in one that looks horrible, don't panic.
Things will change greatly over the next couple of months.
When the schedule for the next round of hearings, aka "the second leg of the AIRC's traveling road show," is posted, I'll post it here.
Until then, and even after, keep up with the redistricting process at Arizona Egaltarian.
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Foreclosure Dave-speak 101: First lesson - what he says, what he means
Wednesday, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, Department of the Treasury, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development issued a joint press release requesting suggestions on how to best dispose of the large number (~250K) of foreclosed single-family homes that are currently owned by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Housing Administration.
Based on the press release, while the preference is for them to be owned by families, they are leaning toward turning a significant portion of the portfolio of foreclosed properties into rentals.
Naturally, the Congressman from Arizona's 5th District, "Foreclosure Dave" Schweikert is all over this.
He issued a press release, and as a public service, I will translatewhat he wrote into what he actually means -
Based on the press release, while the preference is for them to be owned by families, they are leaning toward turning a significant portion of the portfolio of foreclosed properties into rentals.
Naturally, the Congressman from Arizona's 5th District, "Foreclosure Dave" Schweikert is all over this.
He issued a press release, and as a public service, I will translate
“Since arriving in Congress one of my top priorities has been finding ways toLater...re-starthelp me and my business partners squeeze even more blood out of the stone that is the U.S. housing market. One of the biggest impediments to ahousing recoveryeven more profits for me and my wealthy friends at Swartz and Brough is that the U.S. government, through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is holding more than 250,000 Real Estate Owned (REO) single family residences across the country. The continuedinabilityfailure to move these homesback into the marketplaceinto our possession has created significant uncertainty forthe marketour balance sheet, which has received little indication about when, how, and if these homes will everbe soldgiven to us.
“Today, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), which oversees Fannie and Freddie, issued a Request for Information (RFI) to solicit ideas about how todispose of thesetransfer the REO properties to me and my friends.
“Moving these properties off the government’s books andback into the market-placeonto mine is an important step in creatingvelocity in the housing marketa stable source of profit for me and mine by removing uncertainty about the fate of these homes. Ifpriced at an appropriate discountsubsidized for well-connected profiteers, these homes will be a unique opportunity for first time home buyers toenter the market at competitive pricesto transfer most of their life savings to me and mine.
“Arizona is home to many real estateentrepreneursprofiteers and I welcome thoughts and feedback on ways to move these homes toreduce taxpayer riskme and mine and ensure this program is implemented properly, you know, with taxpayer subsidies for wealthy people.
“As part of the Republicanjobspersonal wealth acquisition at taxpayer expense agenda, this one technical correction that I am happy to be involved with and many Arizonans will beencouraged to seetold that they can kiss my butt if they don't like it.”
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
The Arizona Family Project: A study in irony and self-dealing
The Arizona Family Project, a low-profile conservative/anti-choice organization started by Republican consultant Constantin Querard in 2003, apparently for the purpose of saying nice things about the candidates who hired him, has given out annual Friend of the Family Awards to the legislators it feels are the most pro-family (hint: Democrats need not sit around, waiting for the phone call notifying them of the award. It just ain't coming.)
At first, I was going to write about how it would have been easier to list the legislative Republicans who didn't win the award - only eight out of 61 were snubbed.
Then I noticed two of the names on the list of "winners."
One was Sen. Scott Bundgaard (R-LD4).
The same Scott Bundgaard who used legislative immunity in late February to avoid arrest for assaulting his girlfriend by the side of a freeway in Phoenix.
Ummmm, I have to ask - since when is domestic violence a conservative family value, officially anyway?
The other interesting name?
Rep. Jeff Dial (R-LD20).
Why would anyone find the fact that Dial's name is on the list sent out by The Arizona Family Project to be interesting? After all, he maintained a fairly low profile during what was his freshman year in the lege (something that most freshmen are wont to do), so what's the big deal?
Well, according to records found on the website of the Arizona Secretary of State, Constantin Querard is no longer the chairman of The Arizona Family Project.
Dial is, and has been since 2005.
Well, I guess Dial giving an award to Dial helps his organization in at least one way - it saves on postage.
And based on the organization's IRS form 990 filed last October, they need to pinch every penny.
They have a financial profile that may actually be lower than the group's all-but-nonexistent public profile - they reported $115 in net assets at the end of their last fiscal year.
At first, I was going to write about how it would have been easier to list the legislative Republicans who didn't win the award - only eight out of 61 were snubbed.
Then I noticed two of the names on the list of "winners."
One was Sen. Scott Bundgaard (R-LD4).
The same Scott Bundgaard who used legislative immunity in late February to avoid arrest for assaulting his girlfriend by the side of a freeway in Phoenix.
Ummmm, I have to ask - since when is domestic violence a conservative family value, officially anyway?
The other interesting name?
Rep. Jeff Dial (R-LD20).
Why would anyone find the fact that Dial's name is on the list sent out by The Arizona Family Project to be interesting? After all, he maintained a fairly low profile during what was his freshman year in the lege (something that most freshmen are wont to do), so what's the big deal?
Well, according to records found on the website of the Arizona Secretary of State, Constantin Querard is no longer the chairman of The Arizona Family Project.
Dial is, and has been since 2005.
Well, I guess Dial giving an award to Dial helps his organization in at least one way - it saves on postage.
And based on the organization's IRS form 990 filed last October, they need to pinch every penny.
They have a financial profile that may actually be lower than the group's all-but-nonexistent public profile - they reported $115 in net assets at the end of their last fiscal year.
Tuesday, August 09, 2011
Scraping the bottom of the barrel: AZGOP trying to dupe minorities into supporting continued GOP legislative supermajority
By now, most observers in Arizona is familiar with the tactics of the Arizona Republican Party to undermine the independence of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC).
They've cast aspersions upon the integrity of the Independent chair of the AIRC as well as one of the Democratic members.
They've tried to intimidate the AIRC by flooding the meetings of the Commission with tea party types who heckle and jeer the Commission and any members of the public who testify in favor of competitive districts.
They've gotten their Attorney General, Tom Horne, to begin an investigation into the AIRC. (Of course, he probably wants to be careful - if it appears that he is misusing his office for partisan purposes, it would just invite direct federal intervention. And not just into the redistricting process.)
While those efforts are ongoing, they haven't swayed the AIRC from performing its duties.
Which has led to the next step in the Republicans' campaign to maintain their stranglehold on Arizona's state government, and Arizona's future - pretending to be concerned about the rights of racial and ethnic minorities.
To that end, they've put together a "super" political action committee, or Super PAC, called "Fair Trust." At least, I think it's a PAC; they're being rather secretive about the whole thing. Except when they're flaunting their secretiveness. Which seems counterintuitive - a "secret" group boasting that it's a secret - but it's what they're doing. Not sure why...who am I kidding? They know full well if they get caught doing anything illegal, they've got only Tom Horne to worry about.
And that is no worry for Arizona Republicans who are contemplating doing something that may be legally murky.
However, I digress...
Fair Trust has been writing letters and sending representatives to hearing of the AIRC to testify in favor of concentrating minority voters into just a few districts, maximizing the likelihood of minority candidates winning in those districts. What they leave unsaid (in the letters and during the hearings, anyway) is that this also minimizes the likelihood that the voices of those candidates will be heard in the legislature if they win election to office. Those representatives include attorney David Cantelme, who has worked for the Republicans in the legislature in the past (and he wasn't exactly working to protect minority rights).
Steve at Arizona Eagletarian has been doing stellar work covering the redistricting process and has more complete coverage of Fair Trust here.
This tendency manifested itself quite clearly in the most recent session of the legislature.
While more than 48% of the members (14 out of 29 total) of the Democratic caucus of the legislature are members of racial or ethnic minorities, only 3% (two out of 61 total) of the Republican caucus are members of racial or ethnic minorities.
As Democrats make up less than 1/3 of the legislature, that means that minorities make up 17.8% of the legislature, in a state where more than 40% of the residents belong to one or another minority group.
That has led to a legislature where Democrats and minorities aren't just outvoted on most issues, they are completely ignored - one of the things that most shocked the freshman Ds in this year's legislature is the habit of their Republican colleagues of pretending that the Ds don't exist, often refusing even to say "hi" in the halls of the Capitol.
One of the Republicans who has benefited most from the diminution of minority voters in his district, Rep. Jack Harper (R-LD4), has been putting in his two cents worth, via his Twitter account. He's put out gems like (all copied and pasted; any spelling errors are his) -
- Harper is so nutty that his fellow Republicans put together a website called "Crazy Jack Harper."
- He has voted for every anti-immigrant, anti-minority, anti-everything but rich, white, and Republican bill that has come before the Arizona legislature for most of the last decade, first as a member of the senate and now as a member of the house of representatives.
- He has sponsored or co-sponsored most of the same.
- One of his pet projects has been the creation of a state-sanctioned anti-immigrant vigilante force. He's pushed this or variants of it for years in various forms - bills, resolutions, strike-everything amendments, whatever he thought might slip through. This past session, a mild version, SB1495, passed into law, setting up a framework for future mischief.
In short, he has never cared about the Voting Rights Act or protecting the interests of minorities, and has given no indication that he has "seen the light," repented, and become a good guy.
He has given every indication, however, that he believes that minority elected officials and candidates are dumber than he is.
As in "dumb enough to believe the BS that he is spewing."
They've cast aspersions upon the integrity of the Independent chair of the AIRC as well as one of the Democratic members.
They've tried to intimidate the AIRC by flooding the meetings of the Commission with tea party types who heckle and jeer the Commission and any members of the public who testify in favor of competitive districts.
They've gotten their Attorney General, Tom Horne, to begin an investigation into the AIRC. (Of course, he probably wants to be careful - if it appears that he is misusing his office for partisan purposes, it would just invite direct federal intervention. And not just into the redistricting process.)
While those efforts are ongoing, they haven't swayed the AIRC from performing its duties.
Which has led to the next step in the Republicans' campaign to maintain their stranglehold on Arizona's state government, and Arizona's future - pretending to be concerned about the rights of racial and ethnic minorities.
To that end, they've put together a "super" political action committee, or Super PAC, called "Fair Trust." At least, I think it's a PAC; they're being rather secretive about the whole thing. Except when they're flaunting their secretiveness. Which seems counterintuitive - a "secret" group boasting that it's a secret - but it's what they're doing. Not sure why...who am I kidding? They know full well if they get caught doing anything illegal, they've got only Tom Horne to worry about.
And that is no worry for Arizona Republicans who are contemplating doing something that may be legally murky.
However, I digress...
Fair Trust has been writing letters and sending representatives to hearing of the AIRC to testify in favor of concentrating minority voters into just a few districts, maximizing the likelihood of minority candidates winning in those districts. What they leave unsaid (in the letters and during the hearings, anyway) is that this also minimizes the likelihood that the voices of those candidates will be heard in the legislature if they win election to office. Those representatives include attorney David Cantelme, who has worked for the Republicans in the legislature in the past (and he wasn't exactly working to protect minority rights).
Steve at Arizona Eagletarian has been doing stellar work covering the redistricting process and has more complete coverage of Fair Trust here.
This tendency manifested itself quite clearly in the most recent session of the legislature.
While more than 48% of the members (14 out of 29 total) of the Democratic caucus of the legislature are members of racial or ethnic minorities, only 3% (two out of 61 total) of the Republican caucus are members of racial or ethnic minorities.
As Democrats make up less than 1/3 of the legislature, that means that minorities make up 17.8% of the legislature, in a state where more than 40% of the residents belong to one or another minority group.
That has led to a legislature where Democrats and minorities aren't just outvoted on most issues, they are completely ignored - one of the things that most shocked the freshman Ds in this year's legislature is the habit of their Republican colleagues of pretending that the Ds don't exist, often refusing even to say "hi" in the halls of the Capitol.
One of the Republicans who has benefited most from the diminution of minority voters in his district, Rep. Jack Harper (R-LD4), has been putting in his two cents worth, via his Twitter account. He's put out gems like (all copied and pasted; any spelling errors are his) -
HarperForAZ JackWHarperand
At Az Ind Redistricting Commission meetings, caucasion DEM's argue for competitive districts over ensuring minority wins. #VRA
4 Aug
HarperForAZ JackWHarperand
Sen. Gallardo supports Voting Rights Act that enables wins by minorities. I do to, so distrist stay lop-sided. #AIRC
3 Aug
HarperForAZ JackWHarperJust a quick refresher, for those of you who may have dozed for the last four years or so -
As IRC is poised to dilute power of minorities in the Leg, ringer consultant brings caucasion employees to presentation.
8 Jul
- Harper is so nutty that his fellow Republicans put together a website called "Crazy Jack Harper."
- He has voted for every anti-immigrant, anti-minority, anti-everything but rich, white, and Republican bill that has come before the Arizona legislature for most of the last decade, first as a member of the senate and now as a member of the house of representatives.
- He has sponsored or co-sponsored most of the same.
- One of his pet projects has been the creation of a state-sanctioned anti-immigrant vigilante force. He's pushed this or variants of it for years in various forms - bills, resolutions, strike-everything amendments, whatever he thought might slip through. This past session, a mild version, SB1495, passed into law, setting up a framework for future mischief.
In short, he has never cared about the Voting Rights Act or protecting the interests of minorities, and has given no indication that he has "seen the light," repented, and become a good guy.
He has given every indication, however, that he believes that minority elected officials and candidates are dumber than he is.
As in "dumb enough to believe the BS that he is spewing."
Saturday, August 06, 2011
Foreclosure Dave feeling the pressure over his hypocrisy?
David Schweikert, CD5's representative in Congress, has made a fortune off of the misery of Arizonans who have seen their homes foreclosed.
Since he's been in office, he's come in for some withering criticism from some quarters (including this one) for working to take advantage of Arizonans suffering the effects of the economic cratering here, rather than working to improve economic conditions here and across the country.
Now, reports have come to me that at least one of his staffers is telling people who bring this up that Schweikert has sold his real estate business.
That sounds all well and good, except for one thing -
I can't find any evidence that he has done so.
According to the available public records...
...his company Sheridan Equities, an LLC formed in 2006, still shows him as the sole manager and lists his Fountain Hills address as its business address
...another company, Sheridan Equities Holdings, an LLC formed in 2009, also still shows him as the sole manager with the Fountain Hills address as its business address
...yet another company, MASFund AZ, an LP formed in 2010 in Texas, with Swartz and Brough (a Texas company and his partners in the home grab and flip scheme) and Sheridan Equities as partners, still shows Sheridan as one of the partners (Arizona SOS registration on the LP here and ACC info on its related LLC here; TX info on the LLC here.
...according to the Maricopa County Recorder's office, Sheridan Equities is still acquiring property. Most recently, in February a transfer from Swartz and Brough to Sheridan was recorded. MASFund AZ has been much more active, acquiring or disposing of at least six properties since the beginning of the year.
All of the property dispositions look to be sales to individual owners, not transfers that exhibit a pattern of transfers to a new business owner. In addition, the Maricopa County Assessor still shows the owner address for the properties owned by Sheridan as Schweikert's.
In short, I can't state definitively that Schweikert has not sold his real estate business, but if he has, it seems that he hasn't told anyone except for his staff about it.
If he really *has* sold his real estate business, he might want to think about correcting that oversight.
Notes:
"LLC" is an abbreviation for "Limited Liability Corporation"; the IRS definition is here.
"LP" is an abbreviation for "Limited Partnership": a definition, courtesy the State of California, is here.
Since he's been in office, he's come in for some withering criticism from some quarters (including this one) for working to take advantage of Arizonans suffering the effects of the economic cratering here, rather than working to improve economic conditions here and across the country.
Now, reports have come to me that at least one of his staffers is telling people who bring this up that Schweikert has sold his real estate business.
That sounds all well and good, except for one thing -
I can't find any evidence that he has done so.
According to the available public records...
...his company Sheridan Equities, an LLC formed in 2006, still shows him as the sole manager and lists his Fountain Hills address as its business address
...another company, Sheridan Equities Holdings, an LLC formed in 2009, also still shows him as the sole manager with the Fountain Hills address as its business address
...yet another company, MASFund AZ, an LP formed in 2010 in Texas, with Swartz and Brough (a Texas company and his partners in the home grab and flip scheme) and Sheridan Equities as partners, still shows Sheridan as one of the partners (Arizona SOS registration on the LP here and ACC info on its related LLC here; TX info on the LLC here.
...according to the Maricopa County Recorder's office, Sheridan Equities is still acquiring property. Most recently, in February a transfer from Swartz and Brough to Sheridan was recorded. MASFund AZ has been much more active, acquiring or disposing of at least six properties since the beginning of the year.
All of the property dispositions look to be sales to individual owners, not transfers that exhibit a pattern of transfers to a new business owner. In addition, the Maricopa County Assessor still shows the owner address for the properties owned by Sheridan as Schweikert's.
In short, I can't state definitively that Schweikert has not sold his real estate business, but if he has, it seems that he hasn't told anyone except for his staff about it.
If he really *has* sold his real estate business, he might want to think about correcting that oversight.
Notes:
"LLC" is an abbreviation for "Limited Liability Corporation"; the IRS definition is here.
"LP" is an abbreviation for "Limited Partnership": a definition, courtesy the State of California, is here.
Friday's IRC meeting...
As with the first one I covered, this is mostly pics, with just a little bit of news. Steve at Arizona Eagletarian will do a full write up later today or tomorrow on his site.
The Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) held a three-hour hearing Friday evening in the main branch of the Phoenix public library on Central Ave. Turnout was solid - not SRO, but definitely well over 100 people attended the hearing. 49 spoke, and more would have, but they left before being called.
While the crowd was mostly well-behaved during the meeting, there were some mild fireworks. Some of the tea party types objected to people taking pictures and recording a public meeting held in a public building. Curiously, most of them spent the meeting taking pictures and video of people.
One right-winger became upset and very angry when a couple of the speakers pointed out that she was one of the worst (and most hypocritical) "offenders" - she was both videorecording the speakers and taking still photographs of the crowd for the purposes of intimidating people into silence.
Some pics -
The LD17 contingent...
AIRC Executive Director Ray Bladine (standing) and AIRC members Scott Freeman (seated, left) and Jose Herrera (seated, right)
Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox, speaking in favor of creating a Congressional districtthat she can win easily if Ed Pastor doesn't run for re-election that protects her "community of interest"
David Lucier of Tempe, speaking in support of more competitive districts
Jim Williams, of I'm not sure where, self-identified tea party type, criticizing the AIRC
Longtime Phoenix activist and icon, Phyllis Rowe. She brought up the irony of standing up and speaking in a library building named after long-time legislator Burton Barr, and that the push to name the building after Republican Barr was led by a Democratic adversary/friend of his from his time in the lege. She lamented the loss of civility and collegiality in the legislature, and its replacement with the basest, ugliest, partisanship.
Michelle Melchiorre gave the most moving testimony of the evening, talking about her medical history and good fortune to have health insurance to help her through her time of need while this legislature has denied AHCCCS care to thousands of poor Arizonans during theirs. The Commission often talks about the "Cs" - Compact, Contiguous, Communities of interest, Competitive. She suggested that they (and we) add another C - Compassion.
The Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) held a three-hour hearing Friday evening in the main branch of the Phoenix public library on Central Ave. Turnout was solid - not SRO, but definitely well over 100 people attended the hearing. 49 spoke, and more would have, but they left before being called.
While the crowd was mostly well-behaved during the meeting, there were some mild fireworks. Some of the tea party types objected to people taking pictures and recording a public meeting held in a public building. Curiously, most of them spent the meeting taking pictures and video of people.
One right-winger became upset and very angry when a couple of the speakers pointed out that she was one of the worst (and most hypocritical) "offenders" - she was both videorecording the speakers and taking still photographs of the crowd for the purposes of intimidating people into silence.
Some pics -
The LD17 contingent...
AIRC Executive Director Ray Bladine (standing) and AIRC members Scott Freeman (seated, left) and Jose Herrera (seated, right)
Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox, speaking in favor of creating a Congressional district
David Lucier of Tempe, speaking in support of more competitive districts
Jim Williams, of I'm not sure where, self-identified tea party type, criticizing the AIRC
Longtime Phoenix activist and icon, Phyllis Rowe. She brought up the irony of standing up and speaking in a library building named after long-time legislator Burton Barr, and that the push to name the building after Republican Barr was led by a Democratic adversary/friend of his from his time in the lege. She lamented the loss of civility and collegiality in the legislature, and its replacement with the basest, ugliest, partisanship.
Michelle Melchiorre gave the most moving testimony of the evening, talking about her medical history and good fortune to have health insurance to help her through her time of need while this legislature has denied AHCCCS care to thousands of poor Arizonans during theirs. The Commission often talks about the "Cs" - Compact, Contiguous, Communities of interest, Competitive. She suggested that they (and we) add another C - Compassion.
Wednesday, August 03, 2011
Do split ends qualify as a "recurring injury"?
When Rick Perry replaced George W. Bush as the governor of Texas, the late, great, Molly Ivins nicknamed him "Governor Goodhair." His hair is a little grayer now, but he seems to be just as focused on "not a hair out of place" as ever.
pic courtesy Bagofnothing.com
From the Texas Tribune (h/t to Teagan Goddard's Political Wire for noticing this) -
Still, this was too good to pass up, especially given that he will soon be slogging his way across Iowa, South Carolina, New Hampshire and the other early primary states. In those places, he'll be trying to reach Republican primary voters.
These are the same folks who believe that all government spending is bad, and will tell you that rather loudly and definitively, before they drive on public roads to deposit their Social Security checks into their FDIC-insured accounts in banks staffed by people educated in public schools, all the while protected by public employees called police officers and fire fighters.
In short, many of them won't understand the nuanced differences between "embryonic" and "adult." More importantly, they won't want to understand the difference.
pic courtesy Bagofnothing.com
From the Texas Tribune (h/t to Teagan Goddard's Political Wire for noticing this) -
When Gov. Rick Perry emerged from back surgery on July 1, he tweeted that his “little procedure” — a spinal fusion and nerve decompression designed to treat a recurring injury — had gone “as advertised.”
The possible presidential contender didn’t reveal that he’d undergone an experimental injection of his own stem cells, a therapy that isn’t FDA approved, has mixed evidence of success and can cost upwards of tens of thousands of dollars.To be fair to soon-to-be-official presidential candidate Perry, while this seems a little bizarre, it isn't hypocritical - while he is rabidly opposed to embryonic stem cell research, he has long supported adult stem cell research.
Still, this was too good to pass up, especially given that he will soon be slogging his way across Iowa, South Carolina, New Hampshire and the other early primary states. In those places, he'll be trying to reach Republican primary voters.
These are the same folks who believe that all government spending is bad, and will tell you that rather loudly and definitively, before they drive on public roads to deposit their Social Security checks into their FDIC-insured accounts in banks staffed by people educated in public schools, all the while protected by public employees called police officers and fire fighters.
In short, many of them won't understand the nuanced differences between "embryonic" and "adult." More importantly, they won't want to understand the difference.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)