Part 2 in a series of guest posts from contributor Jerry Gettinger...
Education budgets are easiest to reduce. It is only the courageous and forward-looking governments that will use schooling to turn around this situation and offer their constituents a new path to success. If this is not done soon, there will develop a permanent unemployable class that will foster social upheaval. There is not much time left to induce positive change. It still can be done, but only with a government that sees education as a desirous utility, much like a $300 million football stadium.
Unfortunately, in some communities, education is a burdensome necessity or a social institution useful as an ideological tool that inculcates our children in religiously acceptable behavior. What is needed and needed immediately is a national goal that remakes the U.S. into a High Tech country with communities teaching the most sophisticated protocols to give students the intellectual means of, not just competing, but surpassing the rest of the world in innovation and production.
If there is one then there are hundreds, if not thousands of Stephen Jobs in our country. Those students will only evolve into highly productive individuals in a school system that encourages individual thought and critical thinking. Ours does not, and in fact, discourages such thought.
Teachers and parents feel threatened and intimidated by schools that allow students to consider all perspectives and question each one. This effort can become a part of the need to become energy independent. That coupled with changing the U.S. into a "green" nation can justify the metamorphosis. However, do not make the mistake of approaching the problem as needing justification. Educating our young to achieve the same goals in our country that were achieved during the last century is a necessity.
The love-hate relationship we have with our public schools must be turned into an attitude that values an education. Schools must receive whatever is needed to become an institution that encourages independent thinking. I suggest that the reader study the case of Intel and what saved the company from becoming a 2nd rate manufacturer of computer chips The Company had developed the computer chip to the point where when it ran faster it would over-heat and literally catch fire. The research facility in Israel came up with the idea of using a dual system instead trying to add speed with one.
It solved the problem. The suggestion came from a research assistant. The fact that the assistant promoted the idea and his supervisor was receptive resulted from their service in the Israeli army. As such, a private might be a high up officer at Intel and vice-versa. As a result, everyone had the freedom to try ideas and do critical thinking. An employee would be encouraged to present his idea to his supervisor.
We need that freedom in our schools and companies. The freedom to fail as well as succeed.
Saturday, November 19, 2011
Friday, November 18, 2011
Guest post: Wall Street
This is part 1 of a three part piece from occasional guest writer (and good friend) Jerry Gettinger. The next two parts of the series will go up this weekend...
I recently attended a rally a group named "Occupy Wall Street" sponsored. For the most part, the gathering was calm and peaceful. It was an experience totally unlike the scene I remember in the late 60's and 70's when it was a pitched battle between the participants and the police. Every speaker spoke of Wall Street as uncaring and corrupt. Speaker after speaker forcefully called for executives and hedge fund managers to give up their earnings in higher taxes. There were also accusations that our elected officials were bought with "Wall Street Money."
The subject of the gathering raised questions about why attitudes have changed from young people seeing Wall Street as a career goal to it being a source of anger and frustration. Having worked on Wall Street, I can view both periods in such a way as to render what I consider a unique perspective.
There is no doubt that Wall Street is not the same as when I worked there.
As a matter of fact, if one goes back to the late 1800's, one will discover that the product of Wall Street firms today bears no resemblance to the past. Like many of our institutions, Wall Street is broken. When I was in sales, I went home in the evenings with some pride and a sense of accomplishment. Those feelings came from knowing that my efforts served a purpose. That was that I sold bonds (or stock) for a company so the company had money to expand, which led to hiring additional workers who bought goods that resulted in profits used by owners to buy bonds etc. The product of Wall Street was not money; Wall Street functioned as a conduit that funneled value into production of goods and services. Not so in this age. The only thing Wall Street produces is money... to make money. That is where Wall Street is broken. Money in itself does not serve any purpose. In a capitalistic economy, money must be used to help business, not generate more money. Even the Robber Barons of the 1800's recognized the fact that unless their money was put to good use, it served no purpose. Even though the J.P. Morgans, Carnegie and Rockefeller amassed great wealth (even compared to today's wealthy), they invested their wealth in areas that benefited their country. Railroads, Oil and Steel Mills provided the products that fed growth and allowed a middle class to enjoy a lifestyle second to none.
Sadly, today's economic atmosphere is chasing the middle class into oblivion. The major source of wealth, their house, has become a burden rather that a unique investment. The ability to succeed through one's job and/or education has become unattainable to all but the very wealthy or talented. Pensions and self-contributed saving accounts are structured in favor of the rich. The worst part is that there is nothing in the foreseeable future that provides hope. While it is true that manufacturing jobs have all but disapered, careers in the IT industry offer both advancement and premium incomes. However, the mood and myopic view of governments in distressed areas add to the despondent feeling of futility.
I recently attended a rally a group named "Occupy Wall Street" sponsored. For the most part, the gathering was calm and peaceful. It was an experience totally unlike the scene I remember in the late 60's and 70's when it was a pitched battle between the participants and the police. Every speaker spoke of Wall Street as uncaring and corrupt. Speaker after speaker forcefully called for executives and hedge fund managers to give up their earnings in higher taxes. There were also accusations that our elected officials were bought with "Wall Street Money."
The subject of the gathering raised questions about why attitudes have changed from young people seeing Wall Street as a career goal to it being a source of anger and frustration. Having worked on Wall Street, I can view both periods in such a way as to render what I consider a unique perspective.
There is no doubt that Wall Street is not the same as when I worked there.
As a matter of fact, if one goes back to the late 1800's, one will discover that the product of Wall Street firms today bears no resemblance to the past. Like many of our institutions, Wall Street is broken. When I was in sales, I went home in the evenings with some pride and a sense of accomplishment. Those feelings came from knowing that my efforts served a purpose. That was that I sold bonds (or stock) for a company so the company had money to expand, which led to hiring additional workers who bought goods that resulted in profits used by owners to buy bonds etc. The product of Wall Street was not money; Wall Street functioned as a conduit that funneled value into production of goods and services. Not so in this age. The only thing Wall Street produces is money... to make money. That is where Wall Street is broken. Money in itself does not serve any purpose. In a capitalistic economy, money must be used to help business, not generate more money. Even the Robber Barons of the 1800's recognized the fact that unless their money was put to good use, it served no purpose. Even though the J.P. Morgans, Carnegie and Rockefeller amassed great wealth (even compared to today's wealthy), they invested their wealth in areas that benefited their country. Railroads, Oil and Steel Mills provided the products that fed growth and allowed a middle class to enjoy a lifestyle second to none.
Sadly, today's economic atmosphere is chasing the middle class into oblivion. The major source of wealth, their house, has become a burden rather that a unique investment. The ability to succeed through one's job and/or education has become unattainable to all but the very wealthy or talented. Pensions and self-contributed saving accounts are structured in favor of the rich. The worst part is that there is nothing in the foreseeable future that provides hope. While it is true that manufacturing jobs have all but disapered, careers in the IT industry offer both advancement and premium incomes. However, the mood and myopic view of governments in distressed areas add to the despondent feeling of futility.
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Schapira announcement on 2012 plans coming Monday
From a press release -
The Arizona Capitol Times is speculating that Schapira will announce that he is forming an exploratory committee to look at a run for Congress next year (subscription required).
I can't say for certain what his plans are, but if Schapira does go for a seat in Congress, he will have my support...unless Harry Mitchell changes his mind about a run next year. :)
However, I don't think Harry is going to run again.
Schapira to Make Monday Announcement on Website
TEMPE, ARIZ. - Arizona State Senate Democratic Leader David Schapira will make an announcement regarding his ongoing work to build a strong future for Arizona and his plans for the 2012 election.
Sen. Schapira will make his announcement in a video that will be available to view beginning at 9 a.m., Monday, November 21, at http://www.davidforaz.com/.
The Arizona Capitol Times is speculating that Schapira will announce that he is forming an exploratory committee to look at a run for Congress next year (subscription required).
I can't say for certain what his plans are, but if Schapira does go for a seat in Congress, he will have my support...unless Harry Mitchell changes his mind about a run next year. :)
However, I don't think Harry is going to run again.
The Mathis ruling...
Essentially, the court said that no matter how much the governor, her handlers, and their mouthpieces insist otherwise, the removal of Colleen Mathis is something that is subject to judicial review. Like almost every act committed by legislative and executive branches of every level of government since Marbury v. Madison.
It also said that no matter how much those same folks insist otherwise, Mathis has done nothing to meet the threshold set in the Arizona Constitution to justify her removal from office.
My way of putting it: Actually being the independent on the *independent* redistricting commission and conducting yourself in an independent manner is NOT grounds for kicking being kicked out of office.
No matter how much Jan and her clan click their heels together while say "we wish we still controlled district lines, we wish we still controlled district lines."
Because the order is short, here it is in its entirety -
Crow For Breakfast
From a Facebook posting from the AIRC -
Arizona Republic coverage here
It also said that no matter how much those same folks insist otherwise, Mathis has done nothing to meet the threshold set in the Arizona Constitution to justify her removal from office.
My way of putting it: Actually being the independent on the *independent* redistricting commission and conducting yourself in an independent manner is NOT grounds for kicking being kicked out of office.
No matter how much Jan and her clan click their heels together while say "we wish we still controlled district lines, we wish we still controlled district lines."
Because the order is short, here it is in its entirety -
Having considered the filings in this matter by the petitioner, the intervenor, the respondents, and the amici curiae, and the arguments of counsel,Might I suggest a title for the sequel to Jan Brewer's book?
1. The Court accepts jurisdiction of the petition for special action, having concluded that it has jurisdiction under Article 6, Section 5(1) of the Arizona Constitution;
2. The Court concludes that the issues presented in this matter are not political questions and are therefore justiciable. See Brewer v. Burns, 222 Ariz. 234, 238-39 ¶¶ 16-22, 213 P.3d671, 675-76 (2009);
3. The Court concludes that the letter of November 1, 2011, from the Acting Governor to the intervenor Colleen Mathis does not demonstrate “substantial neglect of duty, gross misconduct in office, or inability to discharge the duties of office” by the intervenor Mathis, as required under Article 4, Part 2, Section 1(10) of the Arizona Constitution;
Therefore, the Court grants the relief requested by the intervenor Mathis and orders that she be reinstated as chair of the Independent Redistricting Commission.
The Court in due course will issue an opinion more fully detailing its reasoning in this matter.
Crow For Breakfast
From a Facebook posting from the AIRC -
The Arizona Supreme Court has reinstated Colleen Coyle Mathis as chairwoman of Arizona's Independent Redistricting Commission.Arizona Capitol Times coverage here (subscription required)
The justices issued their ruling late this afternoon, a couple hours after hearing oral arguments on the issue.
Once the executive director has contacted the five commissioners and determined how they want to move forward, the staff will make the appropriate arrangements.
Arizona Republic coverage here
Court rules; Mathis back on the AIRC...
The story is still breaking, but the AZ Supreme Court has ruled against Governor Jan Brewer and the Republicans in the state senate and has restored Colleen Mathis to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission.
Details as they become available...
Details as they become available...
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Nineteen Arizonans apply for chair of the Independent Redistricting Commission*
* - Pending the decision of the Arizona Supreme Court in the lawsuit over the removal of the original chair, Independent Colleen Mathis, by the governor and her Republican colleagues in the Arizona Senate.
If the court does the right thing, the applications will be moot. However, this is Arizona. Be hopeful (the AZ judiciary actually has a pretty good reputation), but don't hold your breath.
Nineteen people have applied for the Independent position on the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC). It became (sort of, depending on the AZ Supreme Court's decision this week) vacant when Jan Brewer and the 21 Republicans in the State Senate railroaded Colleen Mathis off of the AIRC in an effort to usurp the authority of the Independent Redistricting Commission.
Pending the court's decision, the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments, which screens applicants, will meet on November 22 (next Tuesday as of this writing) to discuss the applications and decide which applicants should be interviewed at a meeting on November 28. At that meeting, they will decide upon a list of three names to forward to the other four members of the AIRC for their consideration.
The nineteen applicants are:
Alton Briggs of Scottsdale, retired
James Buesing of Peoria, lawyer
Linda Buscemi of Phoenix, psychologist/counselor
James DiRienzo of Prescott, adjunct professor at Embry-Riddle
Michael Doyle of Cave Creek, retired, and a former member of the Sheriff's Posse
John M. Fife III of Tucson, teacher
Paige Heavey of Phoenix, real estate, former member of WISH List, the Republican counterpart to Emily's List
Daniela Larson of Tucson, graduate research assistant
Eden Lewkowitz of Phoenix, instructional assistant
Anthony Merrill of Chandler, lawyer
Dale Mukavetz of Chandler, retired
Milford Rimmer of Scottsdale, self-employed technical sales
David Roberts of Scottsdale (legal address), editor at White Mountain Publishing
Margarita Silva of Laveen, lawyer (note: Ms. Silva was a candidate for this position during the initial start up phase of this year's AIRC)
Don Snider of Phoenix, an executive with a non-profit foundation
Stanley Usinowitz of Lake Havasu City, self employed
Stephen Weston Sr. of Waddell, training consultant
Marshall Whitmire of Camp Verde, self-employed
Gregory Zamora of Tempe, legal assistant
Public comment on the applicants will be accepted, so feel free to examine the applications. I know I will be.
If the court does the right thing, the applications will be moot. However, this is Arizona. Be hopeful (the AZ judiciary actually has a pretty good reputation), but don't hold your breath.
Nineteen people have applied for the Independent position on the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC). It became (sort of, depending on the AZ Supreme Court's decision this week) vacant when Jan Brewer and the 21 Republicans in the State Senate railroaded Colleen Mathis off of the AIRC in an effort to usurp the authority of the Independent Redistricting Commission.
Pending the court's decision, the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments, which screens applicants, will meet on November 22 (next Tuesday as of this writing) to discuss the applications and decide which applicants should be interviewed at a meeting on November 28. At that meeting, they will decide upon a list of three names to forward to the other four members of the AIRC for their consideration.
The nineteen applicants are:
Alton Briggs of Scottsdale, retired
James Buesing of Peoria, lawyer
Linda Buscemi of Phoenix, psychologist/counselor
James DiRienzo of Prescott, adjunct professor at Embry-Riddle
Michael Doyle of Cave Creek, retired, and a former member of the Sheriff's Posse
John M. Fife III of Tucson, teacher
Paige Heavey of Phoenix, real estate, former member of WISH List, the Republican counterpart to Emily's List
Daniela Larson of Tucson, graduate research assistant
Eden Lewkowitz of Phoenix, instructional assistant
Anthony Merrill of Chandler, lawyer
Dale Mukavetz of Chandler, retired
Milford Rimmer of Scottsdale, self-employed technical sales
David Roberts of Scottsdale (legal address), editor at White Mountain Publishing
Margarita Silva of Laveen, lawyer (note: Ms. Silva was a candidate for this position during the initial start up phase of this year's AIRC)
Don Snider of Phoenix, an executive with a non-profit foundation
Stanley Usinowitz of Lake Havasu City, self employed
Stephen Weston Sr. of Waddell, training consultant
Marshall Whitmire of Camp Verde, self-employed
Gregory Zamora of Tempe, legal assistant
Public comment on the applicants will be accepted, so feel free to examine the applications. I know I will be.
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Guns in homes: A triumph of ideology over science
An article on the website of the Arizona Republic today struck a deep note inside of me, not because it was a "once in a lifetime" story or because it was an "only in Arizona" story, but because variations of it are written almost every day all over the country.
From the Arizona Republic -
In mid-click, I realized that was a disgustingly blase attitude towards something that brought harm to a child.
The thing is, it's not just me. Most of us are just as blase when it comes to gun "accidents." We are so used to reading and hearing about them, we just tune them out.
Unfortunately, that "tuning out" is an opening exploited by certain people and groups to enact policies that actually make the situation worse, leading to more incidents to be blase about.
Over the years, there have literally been scores of scientific studies documenting the fact that guns in homes tend to decrease, not increase, the safety of the occupants of such homes. This has led to the practice of many physicians adding firearms safety questions and information to their discussions of risky behavior with their patients and their patients' families.
One such study was released earlier this year. In it, the author, David Hemenway PhD of the Harvard School of Public Health, found that the presence of firearms in the home increased the likelihood of violent death or injury, especially to women, children, and seniors.
Most of the studies have found that, in spite of the claims of the NRA et. al., most firearms in homes are not used for self-defense when they are used.
Pro-gun lobbying organizations like the NRA have spent thousands of hours and millions of dollars attempting to refute the studies or at least undermine the credibility of the scientists involved.
When that has failed (as it usually does), they've resorted to simply trying to silence their critics and advocates for gun safety and knowledge.
In Florida, shortly after the release of the above study (a coincidence, I think), the legislature passed and the governor signed into law HB155, the rather innocuously titled Privacy of Firearms Owners bill (legislative analysis here).
The title of the bill was innocuous, but the text of the bill wasn't - it barred health care providers from asking about or talking to patients and their families about guns.
It was shepherded through the legislative process by the NRA and its proxies, who sent the "big gun" among its lobbyists, Marion Hammer, to personally and directly exercise her influence.
The measure has since been overturned by a federal judge who found, among other things, that the provisions of the measure violated doctors' free speech rights.
Note: After the court's ruling, HB4015 was filed in the Florida House of Representatives. If passed into law, it would repeal the offending language of the earlier measure (bill summary page here). It has been assigned to committee and awaits the start of the 2012 session of the Florida legislature for any action on it (in the news article linked to the word "filed", the sponsor of HB4015 indicates that he does not expect his bill to see any consideration, much less passage).
Expect more moves like this in more legislatures - when the facts (aka - the science) don't support their desired policies, the NRA et. al. pushes for policies that ignore the facts.
Still, it's not a total tragedy - the four year old child in the article cited at the beginning of this post apparently suffered only "non-life-threatening" injuries.
Unlike the victim here, from New Mexico...
Unlike the victim here, from Pennsylvania...
Unlike the victim here, from Virginia...
Unlike the victim here, from Georgia...
Unlike the victim here, from Indiana...
Unlike the victim here, from North Carolina...
Unlike the victim here, from Washington (state)...
Unlike the victim here, from Tennessee...
Unlike the victim here, from Alabama...
Unlike the victim here, from Michigan...
The list is long and will continue to grow longer so long as there are places that base public safety and public health policies on ideology rather than reality.
From the Arizona Republic -
Surprise child injured by gun; possible accident
A 4-year-old boy in Surprise suffered facial injuries while apparently playing with a handgun Saturday morning, police said.My initial response to the article was to glance at the headline, think to myself "ho hum" and start to move on to the next article.
Police responded to a report of an injured child around 11 a.m., said Surprise police spokesman Sgt. Bert Anzini. When officers arrived, they found a 4-year-old boy with injuries to the face.
In mid-click, I realized that was a disgustingly blase attitude towards something that brought harm to a child.
The thing is, it's not just me. Most of us are just as blase when it comes to gun "accidents." We are so used to reading and hearing about them, we just tune them out.
Unfortunately, that "tuning out" is an opening exploited by certain people and groups to enact policies that actually make the situation worse, leading to more incidents to be blase about.
Over the years, there have literally been scores of scientific studies documenting the fact that guns in homes tend to decrease, not increase, the safety of the occupants of such homes. This has led to the practice of many physicians adding firearms safety questions and information to their discussions of risky behavior with their patients and their patients' families.
One such study was released earlier this year. In it, the author, David Hemenway PhD of the Harvard School of Public Health, found that the presence of firearms in the home increased the likelihood of violent death or injury, especially to women, children, and seniors.
Most of the studies have found that, in spite of the claims of the NRA et. al., most firearms in homes are not used for self-defense when they are used.
Pro-gun lobbying organizations like the NRA have spent thousands of hours and millions of dollars attempting to refute the studies or at least undermine the credibility of the scientists involved.
When that has failed (as it usually does), they've resorted to simply trying to silence their critics and advocates for gun safety and knowledge.
In Florida, shortly after the release of the above study (a coincidence, I think), the legislature passed and the governor signed into law HB155, the rather innocuously titled Privacy of Firearms Owners bill (legislative analysis here).
The title of the bill was innocuous, but the text of the bill wasn't - it barred health care providers from asking about or talking to patients and their families about guns.
It was shepherded through the legislative process by the NRA and its proxies, who sent the "big gun" among its lobbyists, Marion Hammer, to personally and directly exercise her influence.
The measure has since been overturned by a federal judge who found, among other things, that the provisions of the measure violated doctors' free speech rights.
Note: After the court's ruling, HB4015 was filed in the Florida House of Representatives. If passed into law, it would repeal the offending language of the earlier measure (bill summary page here). It has been assigned to committee and awaits the start of the 2012 session of the Florida legislature for any action on it (in the news article linked to the word "filed", the sponsor of HB4015 indicates that he does not expect his bill to see any consideration, much less passage).
Expect more moves like this in more legislatures - when the facts (aka - the science) don't support their desired policies, the NRA et. al. pushes for policies that ignore the facts.
Still, it's not a total tragedy - the four year old child in the article cited at the beginning of this post apparently suffered only "non-life-threatening" injuries.
Unlike the victim here, from New Mexico...
Unlike the victim here, from Pennsylvania...
Unlike the victim here, from Virginia...
Unlike the victim here, from Georgia...
Unlike the victim here, from Indiana...
Unlike the victim here, from North Carolina...
Unlike the victim here, from Washington (state)...
Unlike the victim here, from Tennessee...
Unlike the victim here, from Alabama...
Unlike the victim here, from Michigan...
The list is long and will continue to grow longer so long as there are places that base public safety and public health policies on ideology rather than reality.
This post is written as part of the Media Matters Gun Facts fellowship. The purpose of the fellowship is to further Media Matters' mission to comprehensively monitor, analyze, and correct conservative misinformation in the U.S. media. Some of the worst misinformation occurs around the issue of guns, gun violence, and extremism, the fellowship program is designed to fight this misinformation with facts.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
Campaign committees update...
With the end of the 2011 election season, culminating in Tuesday's historic recall of Russell Pearce, the 2012 election cycle is in full swing. While some changes will be made if/when Congressional and legislative district lines are finalized, more folks are jumping into races.
...Spencer Morgan of Gilbert has filed paperwork to run for Congress as a Democrat in CD5 (not sure if that is the current CD5 or the one on the draft maps produced by the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission.) However, given that his listed website, MorganforCongress.org doesn't exist yet so all he has is his Facebook public figure page, he may not be much of a factor next year.
Note: MorganforCongress.org should not be confused with Morgan4Congress.com. That's the website of Vincent Morgan, a Democratic candidate in New York City.
Oh, I should note now that all district designations are presumed to be the current ones, unless other indicated.
...Paul Babeu, the Republican sheriff in Pinal County, is "exploring" a run for Congress. Something that has been reported before, and has been long expected. Of note to some readers is the listed treasurer for the Babeu committee: Chris Derose. He's been in and around the edges of Arizona politics for a while now, including running for a House seat from LD17 in 2006. If he later moves over to an official Babeu campaign, he won't be there as the voice of moderation (not that anybody expects a Babeu campaign to have any).
...Clair Van Steenwyck of Buckeye has formed a committee to run for the Republican nomination for US Senate. He appears to be a tea party type. And I can't say that he is an unserious candidate, but at least Spencer Morgan (above) typed out his paperwork. Van Steenwyck's is hand-written.
...It's rumored that other candidates (some of the rumors are surprising) will be stepping forward in the next few weeks, while other rumored candidates will choose to pass on a run in 2012. More when those rumors solidify into confirmable interest/disinterest...
Legislative news -
...Mary Hamway, a town council member in Paradise Valley, is "exploring" a run for the Republican nomination for an LD11 House seat. However, the "exploratory" designation on her committee appears to be pro-forma only. She announced in May that she was going to make the run.
...Victoria Steele of Tucson has formed a committee to for a run at the Democratic nomination for an AZ House seat in LD26.
...In Maricopa County news -
- Kyle Jones, formerly a member of the Mesa City Council, has filed paperwork for a run at the Republican nomination for North Mesa Justice of the Peace. That office is currently held Lester Pearce, the brother of recently recalled (and now former) state senator Russell Pearce.
Not having followed Mesa politics until the last few months, all I know about Jones is what I read in the linked article, but between Jerry Lewis' victory over Russell this week and the appearance of an apparently well-respected Republican challenger to Lester, it's possible that the Pearce machine in Mesa has seen its best days..
...In Scottsdale news...
- Debra Komarnicki of north Scottsdalei, a sales person/manager of some kind for AT&T, is running for a seat on the city council. She moved here in June.
Of this year.
I don't know her. She may be well-meaning and highly qualified (or not, I really don't know), but Scottsdale is not known for voting for newbies here. Hell, most cities and towns in the country don't do that. Anything could happen, but my guess right now is that she doesn't stand a real chance this time around.
- Joe Meli, also of north Scottsdale, has formed a committee to run for City Council. Know even less about him than Komarnicki, but he looks to have been in Scottsdale longer than a few months.
...In Tempe news -
- GC Saarup has formed a committee for a run at a seat on the City Council. Know even less about him than about Meli, above.
Expect these posts to come with a more regular frequency as the calendar approaches and turns to 2012..
...Spencer Morgan of Gilbert has filed paperwork to run for Congress as a Democrat in CD5 (not sure if that is the current CD5 or the one on the draft maps produced by the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission.) However, given that his listed website, MorganforCongress.org doesn't exist yet so all he has is his Facebook public figure page, he may not be much of a factor next year.
Note: MorganforCongress.org should not be confused with Morgan4Congress.com. That's the website of Vincent Morgan, a Democratic candidate in New York City.
Oh, I should note now that all district designations are presumed to be the current ones, unless other indicated.
...Paul Babeu, the Republican sheriff in Pinal County, is "exploring" a run for Congress. Something that has been reported before, and has been long expected. Of note to some readers is the listed treasurer for the Babeu committee: Chris Derose. He's been in and around the edges of Arizona politics for a while now, including running for a House seat from LD17 in 2006. If he later moves over to an official Babeu campaign, he won't be there as the voice of moderation (not that anybody expects a Babeu campaign to have any).
...Clair Van Steenwyck of Buckeye has formed a committee to run for the Republican nomination for US Senate. He appears to be a tea party type. And I can't say that he is an unserious candidate, but at least Spencer Morgan (above) typed out his paperwork. Van Steenwyck's is hand-written.
...It's rumored that other candidates (some of the rumors are surprising) will be stepping forward in the next few weeks, while other rumored candidates will choose to pass on a run in 2012. More when those rumors solidify into confirmable interest/disinterest...
Legislative news -
...Mary Hamway, a town council member in Paradise Valley, is "exploring" a run for the Republican nomination for an LD11 House seat. However, the "exploratory" designation on her committee appears to be pro-forma only. She announced in May that she was going to make the run.
...Victoria Steele of Tucson has formed a committee to for a run at the Democratic nomination for an AZ House seat in LD26.
...In Maricopa County news -
- Kyle Jones, formerly a member of the Mesa City Council, has filed paperwork for a run at the Republican nomination for North Mesa Justice of the Peace. That office is currently held Lester Pearce, the brother of recently recalled (and now former) state senator Russell Pearce.
Not having followed Mesa politics until the last few months, all I know about Jones is what I read in the linked article, but between Jerry Lewis' victory over Russell this week and the appearance of an apparently well-respected Republican challenger to Lester, it's possible that the Pearce machine in Mesa has seen its best days..
...In Scottsdale news...
- Debra Komarnicki of north Scottsdalei, a sales person/manager of some kind for AT&T, is running for a seat on the city council. She moved here in June.
Of this year.
I don't know her. She may be well-meaning and highly qualified (or not, I really don't know), but Scottsdale is not known for voting for newbies here. Hell, most cities and towns in the country don't do that. Anything could happen, but my guess right now is that she doesn't stand a real chance this time around.
- Joe Meli, also of north Scottsdale, has formed a committee to run for City Council. Know even less about him than Komarnicki, but he looks to have been in Scottsdale longer than a few months.
...In Tempe news -
- GC Saarup has formed a committee for a run at a seat on the City Council. Know even less about him than about Meli, above.
Expect these posts to come with a more regular frequency as the calendar approaches and turns to 2012..
Frank Antenori: Putting the "bully" in "bully pulpit"
State Sen. Frank Antenori (R-Hates Tucson, even though he lives there and represents part of it) has never been known as "one of the good guys" or even as particularly civil, especially toward Democrats and anybody else who dares to disagree with him, has sunk to a new low. He's added himself to the list of people who didn't get the message that LD18 voters sent Tuesday about how fed up the voters are with the arrogance, pettiness and personal agendas that dominate Arizona's politics.
From an editorial in the Sierra Vista Herald (emphasis added) -
With Antenori, like Pearce before him, elected office is all about his own personal agenda, not the needs of his constitutuents.
And the other Republicans in the AZ Senate must agree with that premise - the just elected him to a leadership position.
For the record: Jerry Lewis, the man who soundly defeated Russell Pearce, is as conservative as any other R at the lege. He is just civil about it. And that may be why Antenori and many of his caucus-mates already despise Lewis.
They're afraid he'll make them look bad by comparison.
David Safier at Blog for Arizona offers his take here.
From an editorial in the Sierra Vista Herald (emphasis added) -
Among the first lessons taught to our youngest students is the importance of getting along with others.
We learn at an early age to “play nice,” and to “treat others with respect.”This is the man who bullied the Pima County Supervisors into appointing him to the state senate in 2010 by publicly threatening that he wouldn't do anything to help Pima County if they didn't. At the time, he was already in the state house of representatives, not representing Pima County, even though he was elected to do just that.
Apparently District 30 State Senator Frank Antenori skipped that lesson, or flunked kindergarten.
Shortly after Tuesday’s recall election that saw Senate President Russell Pearce lose his seat to challenger Jerry Lewis, Antenori ripped into the newly-elected fellow GOP member in an Arizona Capital Times interview.
“Cold shoulder? I want him out on the freaking lawn. I don’t even want him to have a desk in the building. He can caucus with the Democrats for all I care,” Antenori is quoted telling the newspaper.
With Antenori, like Pearce before him, elected office is all about his own personal agenda, not the needs of his constitutuents.
And the other Republicans in the AZ Senate must agree with that premise - the just elected him to a leadership position.
For the record: Jerry Lewis, the man who soundly defeated Russell Pearce, is as conservative as any other R at the lege. He is just civil about it. And that may be why Antenori and many of his caucus-mates already despise Lewis.
They're afraid he'll make them look bad by comparison.
David Safier at Blog for Arizona offers his take here.
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Short Attention Span Musing...
...Some people just didn't get the message from Tuesday's recall vote in LD18.
- Recalled state senator Russell Pearce wrote a rather delusional op-ed published by the Arizona Capitol Times. Aside from the expected self-pitying and self-righteous blathering (the recall was all about his anti-immigrant positions and he did nothing wrong. His opponenets made up his misuse and abuse of office and his meanness and arrogance toward the people of his district), he dropped some whoppers that weren't directly related to the recall election. My favorite:
Or both.
- State Senator Sylvia Allen, not recalled but a close friend of Pearce's, issued a press release that blamed everyone but Pearce for the recall. Like Pearce above, she hasn't heard the message, or she has and is lying about it.
Or is she saying that violating free speech protections, ignoring domestic violence laws, and ignoring the ethical standards for elected officials are just "issues" where Pearce (and Allen) simply finds himself in disagreement with civil society?
...In other news, Governor Jan Brewer and her handlers are looking to strike while the iron is hot (read: before the AZ Supreme Court rules on her partisan interference with the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission). Steve at Arizona Eagletarian has posted the text of a letter she sent to the rest of the AIRC.
She's demanding that they scrap the draft maps completely and come up with districts that are more to her (and that of Marilyn Quayle). Without using the specific words, it's evident that she wants the AIRC to protect one "community of interest" above all others -
Arizona's community of Republican elected officials.
Even if the voters don't want incumbents interests served at the expense of Arizona's interests.
...The Republican members of the state senate have selected Senator Steve Pierce to be the president of the state senate. Like his predecessor (Pearce) and his colleague (Allen), he doesn't have a clue about what happened Tuesday.
From the Arizona Republic article linked above -
That's what is *supposed* to happen, and he deserved every bit of it.
...From the "has even less of a clue than Pearce, Pierce, and Allen" department - Sen. Scott "Fists of Fury" Bundgaard has formed a reelection committee for the 2012 cycle. I won't predict that he can't make it through an R primary (made that mistake with Ben Quayle last year. Never again will make the mistake of overestimating the standards of R primary voters. However, his presence on a general election ballot could turn a safe R district into a D upset.
...In a long-rumored development, Richard Carmona, a former US Surgeon General, has entered the race for the Democratic nomination for the US Senate seat currently held by Jon Kyl. He joins Don Bivens, an attorney and former chair of the Arizona Democratic Party, in the race.
Obviously, it is still early, and other candidates may yet enter the race, but I have to say this -
I hope there *is* a primary. As long as it is clean, a primary is a good thing. Especially since neither of the announced candidates has ever run for office before (so far as I can find).
Arizona Democrats have a history of "clearing the field" for well-meaning but inexperienced candidates for high office, only to watch them get buried at the polls. A robust primary will not only remedy the "inexperience" problem, it will generate media and public attention for the Democratic candidates, something that has been sorely lacking during the last few election cycles.
In addition, like their predecessors, both are bound to have highly-paid professional "consultants" on their campaign staffs who will tell each to run as "Republican-lite" candidates.
This highly-unpaid amateur is telling each candidate (and any others who may also jump into the race) -
Run as "sincere" candidates who focus more on the needs and concerns of Arizonans (even if that ticks off a few of the loud and proud screamers in the electorate) than on "triangulating" positions that are calculated to completely alienate the smallest number of voters (but leave a vague bad taste in the mouths of *all* voters).
Pandering to the fringe Rs even though you will never get their votes may not cost you the votes of the Democratic base (it's not like they'll vote for Jeff Flake), but it will cost you something almost as valuable - their energy. A successful candidate doesn't just need votes, but also needs feet on the ground.
What those professional consultants won't tell you, in fact are afraid to tell you because they are worried about their next paying gig, is that most successful campaigns are more about the energy of the volunteers than they are about perfectly crafted and completely meaningless positions on issues.
Remember that.
- Recalled state senator Russell Pearce wrote a rather delusional op-ed published by the Arizona Capitol Times. Aside from the expected self-pitying and self-righteous blathering (the recall was all about his anti-immigrant positions and he did nothing wrong. His opponenets made up his misuse and abuse of office and his meanness and arrogance toward the people of his district), he dropped some whoppers that weren't directly related to the recall election. My favorite:
...we lead the nation in many areas, such as economic recovery, safer neighborhoods, job creation, quality education...Either Pearce is completely clueless about the realities of life in Arizona, or he's trying out for a spot on Faux News.
Or both.
- State Senator Sylvia Allen, not recalled but a close friend of Pearce's, issued a press release that blamed everyone but Pearce for the recall. Like Pearce above, she hasn't heard the message, or she has and is lying about it.
“Recalls have never and were never meant to be used against lawmakers whose sole fault was they disagreed with you on the issues. They’re designed to target people who may have committed crimes or were guilty of gross misconduct in office,” says Senator Sylvia Allen, President Pro Tem of the Senate.So, is Allen saying that things like her friend's ordering the unlawful arrests of people who dissent from his extreme positions, protectiing a domestic abuser like Sen. Scott Bundgaard from answering for his crimes, and accepting "gifts" from the Fiesta Bowl and having the arrogance to say that he didn't have to report them or pay them back (before he quietly did so) aren't gross misconduct?
Or is she saying that violating free speech protections, ignoring domestic violence laws, and ignoring the ethical standards for elected officials are just "issues" where Pearce (and Allen) simply finds himself in disagreement with civil society?
...In other news, Governor Jan Brewer and her handlers are looking to strike while the iron is hot (read: before the AZ Supreme Court rules on her partisan interference with the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission). Steve at Arizona Eagletarian has posted the text of a letter she sent to the rest of the AIRC.
She's demanding that they scrap the draft maps completely and come up with districts that are more to her (and that of Marilyn Quayle). Without using the specific words, it's evident that she wants the AIRC to protect one "community of interest" above all others -
Arizona's community of Republican elected officials.
Even if the voters don't want incumbents interests served at the expense of Arizona's interests.
...The Republican members of the state senate have selected Senator Steve Pierce to be the president of the state senate. Like his predecessor (Pearce) and his colleague (Allen), he doesn't have a clue about what happened Tuesday.
From the Arizona Republic article linked above -
"We're going to continue the good things that Russell started," Pierce said. "He did a wonderful job. He did not deserve what happened to him."Russell Pearce was drunk with power and contemptuous of his constituents and Arizonans as a whole (unless they lined his pockets with "gift" and "campaign contributions"), and he lost an election as a result.
That's what is *supposed* to happen, and he deserved every bit of it.
...From the "has even less of a clue than Pearce, Pierce, and Allen" department - Sen. Scott "Fists of Fury" Bundgaard has formed a reelection committee for the 2012 cycle. I won't predict that he can't make it through an R primary (made that mistake with Ben Quayle last year. Never again will make the mistake of overestimating the standards of R primary voters. However, his presence on a general election ballot could turn a safe R district into a D upset.
...In a long-rumored development, Richard Carmona, a former US Surgeon General, has entered the race for the Democratic nomination for the US Senate seat currently held by Jon Kyl. He joins Don Bivens, an attorney and former chair of the Arizona Democratic Party, in the race.
Obviously, it is still early, and other candidates may yet enter the race, but I have to say this -
I hope there *is* a primary. As long as it is clean, a primary is a good thing. Especially since neither of the announced candidates has ever run for office before (so far as I can find).
Arizona Democrats have a history of "clearing the field" for well-meaning but inexperienced candidates for high office, only to watch them get buried at the polls. A robust primary will not only remedy the "inexperience" problem, it will generate media and public attention for the Democratic candidates, something that has been sorely lacking during the last few election cycles.
In addition, like their predecessors, both are bound to have highly-paid professional "consultants" on their campaign staffs who will tell each to run as "Republican-lite" candidates.
This highly-unpaid amateur is telling each candidate (and any others who may also jump into the race) -
Run as "sincere" candidates who focus more on the needs and concerns of Arizonans (even if that ticks off a few of the loud and proud screamers in the electorate) than on "triangulating" positions that are calculated to completely alienate the smallest number of voters (but leave a vague bad taste in the mouths of *all* voters).
Pandering to the fringe Rs even though you will never get their votes may not cost you the votes of the Democratic base (it's not like they'll vote for Jeff Flake), but it will cost you something almost as valuable - their energy. A successful candidate doesn't just need votes, but also needs feet on the ground.
What those professional consultants won't tell you, in fact are afraid to tell you because they are worried about their next paying gig, is that most successful campaigns are more about the energy of the volunteers than they are about perfectly crafted and completely meaningless positions on issues.
Remember that.
Wednesday, November 09, 2011
Jack Harper wants the taxpayers to give Russell Pearce a quarter-milliion dollar going away gift
I've said it before, and I'll say it again -
State Rep. Jack Harper (R-Surprise!) is God's gift to writers. And I don't mean that in a good way...
The outlook for the post-Pearce era in Arizona politics is slowly coming into focus, and over the near term at least, it looks a lot like it did when Pearce was in the Senate. In other words, the Republicans are looking to siphon a lot of taxpayer money into their pockets, and not to benefit the people of Arizona.
From the East Valley Tribune, written by Howard Fischer of Capitol Media Services -
State Rep. Jack Harper has jumped all over this idea. From his Twitter feed -
Now, while vague, there *is* a section of the Arizona Constitution that seems relevant.
From Article 8, Part 1, Section 6 -
In addition, no one is quite sure who would be reimbursed. Pearce spent what will end up being more than $250K, but it was all other people's money. Harper's push on Pearce's behalf could end up directing taxpayer money into the coffers of Freeport McMoran, Pinnacle West, and other corporations whose PACs funded Pearce's failed campaign.
However, Harper, Pearce, and all concerned seem to be ignoring the other part of this clause in the AZ Constitution, the part about general election law applying to recall elections.
Under Arizona law, if someone spends money on a political activity (such as an election campaign), it has to be reported, in this case both as an expense and a personal contribution.
From Pearce's Pre-Recall Election Report, filed with the AZSOS, covering the period ending October 19, 2011 -
Pearce has documented no direct contributions or loans to his campaign, and none of the "in-kind" expenses totalled above were from Pearce himself.
In other words, either Pearce hasn't directly incurred any personal expenses related to the recall or he has failed to report campaign contributions and expenses.
In other words2, there's nothing to reimburse and there's no record to indicate that there is. And the "magical" appearance of any such records as evidence of reimbursable expenses will also constitute evidence of violations of campaign finance laws.
Probably not something that someone who is likely to run for some office somewhere next year wants hanging over his head...
State Rep. Jack Harper (R-Surprise!) is God's gift to writers. And I don't mean that in a good way...
The outlook for the post-Pearce era in Arizona politics is slowly coming into focus, and over the near term at least, it looks a lot like it did when Pearce was in the Senate. In other words, the Republicans are looking to siphon a lot of taxpayer money into their pockets, and not to benefit the people of Arizona.
From the East Valley Tribune, written by Howard Fischer of Capitol Media Services -
Arizona voters may not be quite done with Russell Pearce.
Questions of Pearce’s political future aside, a little-known provision of the Arizona Constitution requires the Legislature to act to reimburse any recalled public official his or her “reasonable special election campaign expenses."
State Rep. Jack Harper has jumped all over this idea. From his Twitter feed -
Now, while vague, there *is* a section of the Arizona Constitution that seems relevant.
From Article 8, Part 1, Section 6 -
The general election laws shall apply to recall elections in so far as applicable. Laws necessary to facilitate the operation of the provisions of this article shall be enacted, including provision for payment by the public treasury of the reasonable special election campaign expenses of such officer.As the article linked above notes, this has never happened before, so no one, not even Ken Bennett, the Arizona Secretary of State, knows exactly what "reasonable" means in this context.
In addition, no one is quite sure who would be reimbursed. Pearce spent what will end up being more than $250K, but it was all other people's money. Harper's push on Pearce's behalf could end up directing taxpayer money into the coffers of Freeport McMoran, Pinnacle West, and other corporations whose PACs funded Pearce's failed campaign.
However, Harper, Pearce, and all concerned seem to be ignoring the other part of this clause in the AZ Constitution, the part about general election law applying to recall elections.
Under Arizona law, if someone spends money on a political activity (such as an election campaign), it has to be reported, in this case both as an expense and a personal contribution.
From Pearce's Pre-Recall Election Report, filed with the AZSOS, covering the period ending October 19, 2011 -
Pearce has documented no direct contributions or loans to his campaign, and none of the "in-kind" expenses totalled above were from Pearce himself.
In other words, either Pearce hasn't directly incurred any personal expenses related to the recall or he has failed to report campaign contributions and expenses.
In other words2, there's nothing to reimburse and there's no record to indicate that there is. And the "magical" appearance of any such records as evidence of reimbursable expenses will also constitute evidence of violations of campaign finance laws.
Probably not something that someone who is likely to run for some office somewhere next year wants hanging over his head...
Tuesday, November 08, 2011
Historic night in Arizona...
For the first time in Arizona history, a sitting state legislator, the President of the Senate no less, has been removed from office mid-term by the voters.
Congratulations to Randy Parraz and all of the volunteers at Citizens for a Better Arizona for making this possible, and to Jerry Lewis...*Senator* Jerry Lewis...and his team for turning that possibility into a reality.
Congratulations to Randy Parraz and all of the volunteers at Citizens for a Better Arizona for making this possible, and to Jerry Lewis...*Senator* Jerry Lewis...and his team for turning that possibility into a reality.
Elections night open thread
...The Maricopa County Recorder's election results web page can be found here, but don't expect any returns to be posted before 8 p.m.
...Lewis on TV declaring victory in LD18! Whoooo hooooo! Hard to believe, but civility has a chance, even in Arizona...
...Gullett concedes! Stanton wins! Congratulations to the new mayor of Phoenix!
...16 of 16 precincts reporting, Lewis has 10816 votes, Pearce has 9188!
...Fourth posting of LD18 results show Lewis up by more than 1400 votes (14 of 16 precincts reporting)
...Third posting of LD18 results show Lewis up by more than 1300 votes (11 of 16 precincts reporting)
...Second posting of results show that Lewis is maintaining his lead, 10 of 16 precincts counted..
- First returns in LD18 (mostly early ballots) show Jerry Lewis leading incumbent Russell Pearce by more than 1000 votes, 53% to 47%.
- In the City of Phoenix elections, early returns show Greg Stanton up solidly over lobbyist Wes Gullett in the race for mayor, and show Thelda Williams and Daniel Valenzuela ahead of tea party types in their races for city council seats...
...Grain of salt time: exit polling has Lewis ahead. The source is Examiner.com, so make it a BIG grain of salt...
....It looks like Ohio's Issue 2, the Republican move to take away collective bargaining rights from public sector workers is going down in flames...
...Pre-election polling seems to be holding true, as Mississippi's anti-choice/birth control/women in general proposed amendment also seems to be going down to defeat, though not by as wide a margin as Issue 2 in OH...
...Lewis on TV declaring victory in LD18! Whoooo hooooo! Hard to believe, but civility has a chance, even in Arizona...
...Gullett concedes! Stanton wins! Congratulations to the new mayor of Phoenix!
...16 of 16 precincts reporting, Lewis has 10816 votes, Pearce has 9188!
...Fourth posting of LD18 results show Lewis up by more than 1400 votes (14 of 16 precincts reporting)
...Third posting of LD18 results show Lewis up by more than 1300 votes (11 of 16 precincts reporting)
...Second posting of results show that Lewis is maintaining his lead, 10 of 16 precincts counted..
- First returns in LD18 (mostly early ballots) show Jerry Lewis leading incumbent Russell Pearce by more than 1000 votes, 53% to 47%.
- In the City of Phoenix elections, early returns show Greg Stanton up solidly over lobbyist Wes Gullett in the race for mayor, and show Thelda Williams and Daniel Valenzuela ahead of tea party types in their races for city council seats...
...Grain of salt time: exit polling has Lewis ahead. The source is Examiner.com, so make it a BIG grain of salt...
....It looks like Ohio's Issue 2, the Republican move to take away collective bargaining rights from public sector workers is going down in flames...
...Pre-election polling seems to be holding true, as Mississippi's anti-choice/birth control/women in general proposed amendment also seems to be going down to defeat, though not by as wide a margin as Issue 2 in OH...
Monday, November 07, 2011
Brief update on redistricting mess...
Steve at the Arizona Eagletarian has a far more comprehensive rundown here, but I like brevity, so here is mine...
Regarding the court filings seeking to stay and overturn the removal of Colleen Mathis, the independent chair of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) by Governor Jan Brewer and the Republicans caucus in the state senate, the pertinent dates/deadlines (from an email press release) -
- Steve at the Arizona Eagletarian has linked to a couple of the court filings uploaded as Google docs, but let me summarize: Lisa Hauser, writing for the governor: "We can do what we want, when we want, to who we want, and our victims (the AIRC and the voters) can't say squat about it."
The response from Mathis and Linda McNulty and Jose Herrera, the Democratic members of the AIRC: "Wanna bet?"
- The Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments has reopened applications for the position of independent chair of the AIRC. The deadline for submitting applications is next Tuesday, November 15, at 5 p.m.
General info for applicants is here.
The application is here (note to applicants: while one of the Republican members of the AIRC lied on his application concerning tax liens, among other things, you shouldn't expect to get away with it if you do. Of course, even if you don't lie, the Rs will say you did...unless you're actually an R plant. Then they'll get on their knees in the middle of Washington Street and kiss your butt, even if you've committed violent crimes. See Bundgaard, Scott.).
Stay tuned...
Regarding the court filings seeking to stay and overturn the removal of Colleen Mathis, the independent chair of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) by Governor Jan Brewer and the Republicans caucus in the state senate, the pertinent dates/deadlines (from an email press release) -
Monday, 11/7 at 5 pm – Responses due for Motion to Stay Removal and Motion to InterveneSo to sum up, the state supreme court will (probably) decide tomorrow to grant or deny a stay of the removal, and will (probably) decide by the end of next week whether or not to overturn the removal in its entirety.
Tuesday, 11/8 at Noon – Reply to responses for Motion to Stay Removal and Motion to Intervene
Tuesday, 11/8 in the afternoon – Court will consider Motion to Stay Removal (no hearing) and a decision expected in Motion to Stay Removal.
Friday, 11/11 at 5 pm – Responses to petition for special action and any amicus briefs due
Monday, 11/14 at 5 pm – Reply to responses to petition for special action and amicus briefs
Thursday, 11/17 at 2 pm – Potential Oral Arguments on merits of petition for special action (25 mins per side.)
- Steve at the Arizona Eagletarian has linked to a couple of the court filings uploaded as Google docs, but let me summarize: Lisa Hauser, writing for the governor: "We can do what we want, when we want, to who we want, and our victims (the AIRC and the voters) can't say squat about it."
The response from Mathis and Linda McNulty and Jose Herrera, the Democratic members of the AIRC: "Wanna bet?"
- The Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments has reopened applications for the position of independent chair of the AIRC. The deadline for submitting applications is next Tuesday, November 15, at 5 p.m.
General info for applicants is here.
The application is here (note to applicants: while one of the Republican members of the AIRC lied on his application concerning tax liens, among other things, you shouldn't expect to get away with it if you do. Of course, even if you don't lie, the Rs will say you did...unless you're actually an R plant. Then they'll get on their knees in the middle of Washington Street and kiss your butt, even if you've committed violent crimes. See Bundgaard, Scott.).
Stay tuned...
Sunday, November 06, 2011
Pearce camp digging deep into bag of dirty tricks as recall election draws near
On Tuesday, voters in Mesa's LD18 will decide the political fate of State Sen. Russell Pearce, and in the light of recent polls that show him in a dead heat with or even behind his challenger, Jerry Lewis, Pearce and his followers are getting desperate.
After running a sham candidate, Olivia Cortes, in an attempt to siphon votes from Lewis, only to see her withdraw from the race, they are now running a robocall targeted at Latino voters.
Note: The animation is not part of the robocall, just the audio.
The call, with an actor using a Hispanic accent and trying to sound like a Democrat, is trying to suppress the anti-Pearce vote by announcing that Pearce and Lewis are Republicans (true) and that Democrats can effectively protest the lack of a Democratic candidate on the ballot by writing in another name, any other name (not true - under AZ law, such votes are meaningless unless the write-in candidate has previously registered with the AZ Secretary of State).
Stephen Lemons of the Phoenix New Times has complete coverage here.
The political committee behind the robocalls is Safeguard Arizona's Future, SOS info here. It is chaired by Ronald Ludders, a tea party type and an employee of the Arizona Corporation Commission (according to his Facebook page). So far this cycle, they've reported almost no activity and only $327 cash on hand. My guess is that the robocalls cost more than that, so there should be some activity reported in the next filing.
Regardless of how Tuesday's election turns out, expect the dirty tricks to continue next year - Ludders formed a new committee just last week, Arizona Project. Given his tea party and ACC connections, one can guess where he will find money to spend/launder for R candidates.
Because while some pundits have declared that Pearce's political career is on the line Tuesday, I believe that he is arrogant enough that if he loses, he will A) fight to overturn the election results in court, and B) will not take the hint and go away. No matter what, he will be running for some office next year.
Still, better that he does that as a challenger than as an incumbent.
The Lewis campaign and Citizens for a Better Arizona have big GOTV efforts planned; contact either to volunteer to help out.
After running a sham candidate, Olivia Cortes, in an attempt to siphon votes from Lewis, only to see her withdraw from the race, they are now running a robocall targeted at Latino voters.
The call, with an actor using a Hispanic accent and trying to sound like a Democrat, is trying to suppress the anti-Pearce vote by announcing that Pearce and Lewis are Republicans (true) and that Democrats can effectively protest the lack of a Democratic candidate on the ballot by writing in another name, any other name (not true - under AZ law, such votes are meaningless unless the write-in candidate has previously registered with the AZ Secretary of State).
Stephen Lemons of the Phoenix New Times has complete coverage here.
The political committee behind the robocalls is Safeguard Arizona's Future, SOS info here. It is chaired by Ronald Ludders, a tea party type and an employee of the Arizona Corporation Commission (according to his Facebook page). So far this cycle, they've reported almost no activity and only $327 cash on hand. My guess is that the robocalls cost more than that, so there should be some activity reported in the next filing.
Regardless of how Tuesday's election turns out, expect the dirty tricks to continue next year - Ludders formed a new committee just last week, Arizona Project. Given his tea party and ACC connections, one can guess where he will find money to spend/launder for R candidates.
Because while some pundits have declared that Pearce's political career is on the line Tuesday, I believe that he is arrogant enough that if he loses, he will A) fight to overturn the election results in court, and B) will not take the hint and go away. No matter what, he will be running for some office next year.
Still, better that he does that as a challenger than as an incumbent.
The Lewis campaign and Citizens for a Better Arizona have big GOTV efforts planned; contact either to volunteer to help out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)