Some things could change a little, depending on final vote counts here and across the country, but here are a few thoughts on the elections, in no particular order -
- Big, anonymous, money, rooted in the infamous Citizens United decision, played a huge part in 2012's elections. It didn't buy the presidential race, but that took hundreds of millions of dollars in small donor contributions and one hell of a ground game to fend off. Down-ballot races and referenda weren't so fortunate - here in AZ, at least two ballot questions, 121 and 204, had a ton of "dark" money expended against them. Perhaps not coincidentally, both were defeated.
- On a related note, Karl Rove and the other Republican/corporate "kingmakers" spent hundreds of millions of dollars on advertising for their candidate and against Barack Obama in swing states, only to see Obama win all but one. Wonder if anyone will do a study on what kind of economic impact that spending may have had? Wouldn't it just be a pisser if turns out all their spending helped the economies in those states enough to actually help the President win? Note: "pisser" is New England-speak for "ironic". Trust me on this. :)
- I hope the Republicans aren't reading this, but they deserve our thanks for the Democrats actually gaining seats in the Senate, when pretty much everybody expected them lose seats. The Republicans keep nominating uncompetitive candidates in competitive races (O'Donnell in DE and Angle in NV in 2010; Mourdock in IN and Akin in MO in 2012).
- There will be a record 20 women in the US Senate starting in January. The floor debates on the Republicans' anti-choice, anti-contraception, and anti-equal pay proposals should be interesting. To say the least.
- While the pundits have been going on (and on, and on) about how this election signals a demographic shift, one that spells long-term trouble for the Republicans and their anti-ethnic and racial minority agenda. However, the re-election of Barack Obama signals that one truism about presidential politics hasn't changed:
The candidate that voters would prefer to sit down and have a beer with (i.e. - the most relatable, or more personable, candidate) tends to have a leg up in the presidential contest.
With Barack Obama, you have a man who could sit down and talk sports over a pitcher of beer, or even talk about how to brew a good beer.
With Mitt Romney, you have a man who could sit down in a luxury sky box and talk about how to buy a sports team or brewery. But not about what goes into the makeup of a good team or beer.
It's been true since Reagan v. Carter in 1980 -
Reagan was more personable than Carter in 1980 and Mondale in 1984.
Bush was more personable than Dukakis in 1988...OK, not really, but Bush won because of people voting for a third Reagan term, and Reagan was more personable than Dukakis.
Clinton was more personable than Bush in 1992 and Dole in 1996.
Baby Bush was more personable than Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004...and cheated better in both years, too.
Obama was more personable than McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012.
Not saying that the "more personable" one in each race was a better human being, just better at connecting with people.
- Speaking of Mitt Romney, in the aftermath of the election, a number of Democrats and supporters were making "nice" talk about Romney, how he is a "good and honorable American", blah, blah, blah. There is even talk of giving/creating a cabinet position for him ("Secretary of Business", anyone? ).
Not buying it.
He has built his life - financially, socially, intellectually, and emotionally - on a dislike and even a contempt for the vast majority of society. He got what was coming to him.
He deserves nothing more than the rest of society returning the dislike and contempt.
- The race for 2016 has already started, as Public Policy Polling has already run a poll in Iowa on potential 2016 Democratic candidates. At this point, such polls are less about preference than name recognition, so it was to be expected to see Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden come out on top of this poll.
- Speaking of Hillary Clinton and 2016, some people (and I don't mean Clinton people) have been talking like she has already wrapped up the nomination and that the primary season will be a mere formality.
There was talk like that in 2007 too.
Friday, November 09, 2012
AZ's uncounted ballots update
There isn't much to update. The AZ SOS' press release on the progress toward counting the remaining provisional and early ballots reflects only the work in Maricopa County, but since Maricopa County has more uncounted ballots than the rest of the state combined, it works.
Yesterday, there were 359K uncounted ballots in Maricopa County - 344K early and 115K provisional.
Those numbers have been reduced to 237,359 and 115K, respectively.
There are a few races where the uncounted ballots could impact the outcomes, once all of the ballots are counted.
Statewide races -
R Jeff Flake still has a sizeable lead over D Rich Carmona in the race for US Senate, but the lead is down to less than 75K votes. Given that most of the provisional ballots seem to be from Latino and Democratic-heavy areas, there is still a spark of hope here.
Congressional races -
In CD2, D Ron Barber is slightly ahead (586 votes) of R Martha McSally. This one is going back and forth and it may be well into next week before the victor is determined.
In CD1, D Ann Kirkpatrick's lead over R Jonathan Paton stands at 6264 votes. She is likely to hold on here.
In CD9, D Kyrsten Sinema has opened up a lead of 4068 votes over R Vernon Parker. I don't think this race is called yet, but the margin and trend both favor Sinema.
State legislative race -
In LD28, D Eric Meyer has a 683-vote lead over R Amanda Reeve for the 2nd House seat in that district. The trend favors Meyer, but this one is a long way from over.
Maricopa County races -
In the Sheriff's race, R Joe Arpaio has an 85670-vote lead over D Paul Penzone. Even if the uncounted ballots skew heavily toward Penzone (which I kind of expect), Arpaio's bacon will almost certainly be saved byspoiler "independent" Mike Stauffer, who received nearly 45K votes.
In the race for CAWCD (Central Arizona Water Conservation District, aka the board of directors of the Central Arizona Project), Heather Macre is 94 votes behind Jean McGrath for fifth place in a race where the top five vote-getters win seats on the board. If Macre pulls ahead in the final count, Arizonans will win twice - Macre is a hard-working subject matter expert who would be a supreme asset on the board; McGrath is most assuredly *not*; her loss would be a case of "addition by subtraction".
In the race for Justice of the Peace in the Arrowhead Justice Precinct, we are still awaiting results, but that isn't due to the uncounted provisional/early ballots issue - that was a race where all of the candidates were write-in candidates, and those take a while to count.
The latest reports have the Maricopa County Recorder's office working through the weekend and the holiday on Monday, so the outcomes of the various close races, especially here in Maricopa County, should be clearer on Tuesday.
Yesterday, there were 359K uncounted ballots in Maricopa County - 344K early and 115K provisional.
Those numbers have been reduced to 237,359 and 115K, respectively.
There are a few races where the uncounted ballots could impact the outcomes, once all of the ballots are counted.
Statewide races -
R Jeff Flake still has a sizeable lead over D Rich Carmona in the race for US Senate, but the lead is down to less than 75K votes. Given that most of the provisional ballots seem to be from Latino and Democratic-heavy areas, there is still a spark of hope here.
Congressional races -
In CD2, D Ron Barber is slightly ahead (586 votes) of R Martha McSally. This one is going back and forth and it may be well into next week before the victor is determined.
In CD1, D Ann Kirkpatrick's lead over R Jonathan Paton stands at 6264 votes. She is likely to hold on here.
In CD9, D Kyrsten Sinema has opened up a lead of 4068 votes over R Vernon Parker. I don't think this race is called yet, but the margin and trend both favor Sinema.
State legislative race -
In LD28, D Eric Meyer has a 683-vote lead over R Amanda Reeve for the 2nd House seat in that district. The trend favors Meyer, but this one is a long way from over.
Maricopa County races -
In the Sheriff's race, R Joe Arpaio has an 85670-vote lead over D Paul Penzone. Even if the uncounted ballots skew heavily toward Penzone (which I kind of expect), Arpaio's bacon will almost certainly be saved by
In the race for CAWCD (Central Arizona Water Conservation District, aka the board of directors of the Central Arizona Project), Heather Macre is 94 votes behind Jean McGrath for fifth place in a race where the top five vote-getters win seats on the board. If Macre pulls ahead in the final count, Arizonans will win twice - Macre is a hard-working subject matter expert who would be a supreme asset on the board; McGrath is most assuredly *not*; her loss would be a case of "addition by subtraction".
In the race for Justice of the Peace in the Arrowhead Justice Precinct, we are still awaiting results, but that isn't due to the uncounted provisional/early ballots issue - that was a race where all of the candidates were write-in candidates, and those take a while to count.
The latest reports have the Maricopa County Recorder's office working through the weekend and the holiday on Monday, so the outcomes of the various close races, especially here in Maricopa County, should be clearer on Tuesday.
Thursday, November 08, 2012
Uncounted ballots and Election 2012: Arizona looking to out-Florida Florida
Arizona is back in the national news, and not in a good way.
Reports of voter suppression in Latino- and Democratic-heavy districts (using any excuse to funnel voters toward provisional ballots, with the resultant standing in longer lines on Election Day and a lower likelihood that the vote will count after Election Day) and an official total of more than 631K uncounted ballots remaining have AZ receiving the sort of media attention normally reserved for Florida and its "hanging chads".
The US Senate and Corporation Commission races look to be over, but they are close enough to switch (currently showing as R victories).
In addition to the statewide races, there are enough outstanding ballots in Maricopa County to affect the sheriff's race here.
The press release from the AZ SOS -
A state canvass to certify official election results for federal, statewide and legislative races is scheduled for Dec. 3.
Voters who cast a “conditional provisional” ballot (individuals had insufficient identification when they went to vote at a polling place) have five business days, or until the end of Wednesday, Nov. 14, to return to their county elections office with proper ID.
***Yesterday we erroneously stated the deadline for voters who cast a provisional conditional ballot to provide ID was Nov. 13. The date is actually November 14, due to Veterans Day.***
Individual county breakouts are attached.
Reports of voter suppression in Latino- and Democratic-heavy districts (using any excuse to funnel voters toward provisional ballots, with the resultant standing in longer lines on Election Day and a lower likelihood that the vote will count after Election Day) and an official total of more than 631K uncounted ballots remaining have AZ receiving the sort of media attention normally reserved for Florida and its "hanging chads".
The US Senate and Corporation Commission races look to be over, but they are close enough to switch (currently showing as R victories).
In addition to the statewide races, there are enough outstanding ballots in Maricopa County to affect the sheriff's race here.
The press release from the AZ SOS -
Ballot Processing – County Update – Thursday, Nov. 8 Edition
PHOENIX - Secretary Bennett has announced that as of Thursday afternoon, there are an estimated 631,274 early and provisional ballots statewide that are yet to be processed and counted.A state canvass to certify official election results for federal, statewide and legislative races is scheduled for Dec. 3.
Voters who cast a “conditional provisional” ballot (individuals had insufficient identification when they went to vote at a polling place) have five business days, or until the end of Wednesday, Nov. 14, to return to their county elections office with proper ID.
***Yesterday we erroneously stated the deadline for voters who cast a provisional conditional ballot to provide ID was Nov. 13. The date is actually November 14, due to Veterans Day.***
Individual county breakouts are attached.
| County | Uncounted early ballots | Provisional ballots yet to be verified |
| Apache | 845 | 1,612 |
| Cochise | 12,504 | 1,828 |
| Coconino | 5,700 | 5,300 |
| Gila | 2,134 | 1,285 |
| Graham | 0 | 462 |
| Greenlee | 0 | 2 |
| La Paz | 395 | 415 |
| Maricopa | 344,000 | 115,000 |
| Mohave | 2,680 | 4,228 |
| Navajo | 3,301 | 2,285 |
| Pima | 54,541 | 26,194 |
| Pinal | 20,000 | 7,437 |
| Santa Cruz | 839 | 909 |
| Yavapai | 4,700 | 3,000 |
| Yuma | 7,439 | 2,239 |
| Ballots to be counted totals | 459,078 | 172,196 |
| GRAND TOTAL | 631,274 | |
2013-2014 Democratic legislative leadership selected
In preparation for the upcoming 51st session of the Arizona State Legislature, the newly-elected and re-elected members of the Democratic caucuses gathered to choose the leaders of their caucuses.
In the Senate, Sen. Leah Landrum Taylor of Phoenix was selected as the Democratic leader and Sen. Linda Lopez of Tucson was selected as the assistant leader. The caucus chose Senator-elect (current state representative) Anna Tovar (Tolleson) as the Senate Democratic whip.
Landrum Taylor was the assistant leader during the 50th session of the lege.
“We are energized and ready to work on the priorities important to Arizonans – encouraging job growth, improving our underfunded schools, helping our veterans and returning the $50 million mortgage settlement to help struggling homeowners,” said Sen. Landrum Taylor. “By listening to the people of Arizona and working collaboratively with the majority we will find solutions that move Arizona forward.”
In the House, Rep. Chad Campbell of Phoenix was reelected as Democratic leader and Rep. Ruben Gallego of Phoenix became assistant leader. The caucus chose Rep. Bruce Wheeler (Tucson) as the House Democratic whip.
“There is a lot of work to be done this session,” Campbell said. “Arizonans can expect House Democrats to continue to push for more jobs, better educational opportunities and increased government accountability.”
In the Senate, Sen. Leah Landrum Taylor of Phoenix was selected as the Democratic leader and Sen. Linda Lopez of Tucson was selected as the assistant leader. The caucus chose Senator-elect (current state representative) Anna Tovar (Tolleson) as the Senate Democratic whip.
Landrum Taylor was the assistant leader during the 50th session of the lege.
“We are energized and ready to work on the priorities important to Arizonans – encouraging job growth, improving our underfunded schools, helping our veterans and returning the $50 million mortgage settlement to help struggling homeowners,” said Sen. Landrum Taylor. “By listening to the people of Arizona and working collaboratively with the majority we will find solutions that move Arizona forward.”
In the House, Rep. Chad Campbell of Phoenix was reelected as Democratic leader and Rep. Ruben Gallego of Phoenix became assistant leader. The caucus chose Rep. Bruce Wheeler (Tucson) as the House Democratic whip.
“There is a lot of work to be done this session,” Campbell said. “Arizonans can expect House Democrats to continue to push for more jobs, better educational opportunities and increased government accountability.”
Wednesday, November 07, 2012
Elections have consequences, part one: Steve Pierce out as senate president
The Arizona Capitol Times is reporting (subscription required) that Andy Biggs (R-Gilbert) has defeated Steve Pierce (R-Prescott) for the presidency of the Arizona Senate.
This wasn't a total surprise as GOP's bat-shit crazy wing (which these days is ascendant in their party) signaled its displeasure with Pierce when the Pinal and Maricopa county GOP executive boards passed resolutions urging the ouster of Pierce for not being sufficiently worshipful of said wing of the GOP.
They also urged the ouster of House Speaker Andy Tobin (R-Paulden), but he stood off the challenge.
While this almost certainly means that Senate will remain radical (in spite of the Ds breaking of the R supermajority of the last session), there is a silver lining here for Democrats and Independents: the continued lunacy of the lege should give them a unifying issue in the 2014 elections.
Speculation (on my part, anyway :) ) is that this is just the first salvo in a GOP civil war between disgraced former senate president Russell Pearce and his acolytes on one side and the shrinking not-bat-shit-crazy/Chamber of Commerce wings of the AZGOP on the other.
The AZGOP will hold its biannual reorganization meeting in January (probably in a church); bring your popcorn, and your body armor. It's going to be entertaining, but they will leave blood on the floor.
This wasn't a total surprise as GOP's bat-shit crazy wing (which these days is ascendant in their party) signaled its displeasure with Pierce when the Pinal and Maricopa county GOP executive boards passed resolutions urging the ouster of Pierce for not being sufficiently worshipful of said wing of the GOP.
They also urged the ouster of House Speaker Andy Tobin (R-Paulden), but he stood off the challenge.
While this almost certainly means that Senate will remain radical (in spite of the Ds breaking of the R supermajority of the last session), there is a silver lining here for Democrats and Independents: the continued lunacy of the lege should give them a unifying issue in the 2014 elections.
Speculation (on my part, anyway :) ) is that this is just the first salvo in a GOP civil war between disgraced former senate president Russell Pearce and his acolytes on one side and the shrinking not-bat-shit-crazy/Chamber of Commerce wings of the AZGOP on the other.
The AZGOP will hold its biannual reorganization meeting in January (probably in a church); bring your popcorn, and your body armor. It's going to be entertaining, but they will leave blood on the floor.
Locally, a mixed bag for Democrats and Independents
Note: all Maricopa County results below should be considered in the light of the fact that somewhere near 400K ballots remain to be counted, with approximately half being mail-in ballots that were dropped off at polling places and provisional ballots that were filled out on Tuesday.
And based on reports of voter suppression/general incompetence on the part of Maricopa County Elections (it's one of the two; I'll wait for an honest investigation to determine which it was) in Democratic and/or Latino-heavy precincts, those provisional ballots could affect a few races.
Maricopa County results page here.
AZ SOS results page here.
- Republican Joe Arpaio is 88K votes ahead of Democratic challenger Paul Penzone in his quest for another term in charge of the Maricopa CountySlot Machine Sheriff's Office. It looks over, but the late count could make this one interesting. Arpaio spent roughly 10X more than Penzone on this race.
- Bill Montgomery won election to a "full term" as Maricopa County Attorney, defeating Libertarian challenger Michael Kielsky 74% to 26%. Kielsky may have been completely swamped, but he still outperformed my expectation that he would garner ~25% of the vote.
"Full term" is in quotes because Montgomery looks to be setting up a run at AZ Attorney General in 2014. If he does go for it, he'll have to resign from office due to AZ's "resign to run" law. The incumbent AG, Republican Tom Horne, has issues with campaign finance violations, hiring his girlfriend to a taxpayer-funded job, and leaving the scene of an accident. If he runs for a second term, he'll be vulnerable in both the primary and the general elections.
- Republican Jerry Weiers won a term as mayor of Glendale over Democrat Manny Cruz, leading by 4K votes. While Weiers was and is expected to win, the 4K difference is close enough to make the late count interesting.
- Democrat Terry Goddard, former AZ AG and nominee for Governor, won a seat on the governing board of the Central Arizona Project. Democrat Heather Macre is in sixth in the race to fill five seats, approximately 3700 votes out of 5th place. Besides Goddard, the other apparent winners are Lisa Atkins, Pam Pickard, Guy Carpenter, and Jean McGrath. Atkins, Pickard, and Carpenter are Republicans, but they made various pre-election lists of "less bad" or "Republican but qualified" candidates; McGrath is so tea party that she doesn't *drink* the tea, she mainlines it.
- One piece of good news on the school board front: Mesa wingnut Jerry Walker lost his bid for a seat on the Mesa Unified board. I got to see him in action when he was running wild on the governing board of the Maricopa County Community College District. His loss is a gain for Mesa and its schools, teachers, and students.
- In the US Senate race, Democrat Rich Carmona is behind Republican Jeff Flake by approximately 83K votes. As with the Maricopa County sheriff race above, this one looks over, but the late count could cause some heart palpitations in R land.
- In CD1, Democrat Ann Kirkpatrick is leading Republican Jonathan Paton by 6500 votes. Given that in the days leading up to Election Day, it looked as if Paton was pulling ahead, this will be a bit of an upset if it holds up.
- In CD2, Republican Martha McSally looks to have a major upset in the making over Democratic incumbent Ron Barber, leading by ~1300 votes. Stay tuned on this one.
- In CD9, Democrat Kyrsten Sinema is holding a slim 2100 vote lead over Vernon Parker. This one should hold up, but this is another one to keep an eye on as the late count comes in.
- As for the Arizona Corporation Commission, the Republicans will likely completely control it. The Democrats, Marcia Busching, Sandra Kennedy, and Paul Newman, are well behind the Republicans, Susan Bitter Smith, Bob Burns, and Bob Stump, in the race.
- The AZ Senate looks as if it will turn out to have 13 Ds and 17 Rs.
Biggest (and most pleasant) surprise: In LD26 (Central and North Tempe, West Mesa), it looks as if Democrat Ed Ableser will defeat Republican Jerry Lewis. While I supported Ableser, I thought that Lewis would have enough lingering goodwill from his defeat of Russell Pearce in Pearce's 2011 recall election to win in the D-leaning district. This is one time I happy with being wrong.
Best news: Republican bully Frank Antenori is GONE, and it wasn't even that close. Democrat Dave Bradley is leading the LD10 race by more than 5K votes.
Worst news: Democratic state representative Tom Chabin lost his bid for the LD6 state senate seat to Republican state representative Chester Crandell. LD6 is a Republican-heavy district, but it was hoped that Chabin's experience and name recognition would propel him past the finish line first. It didn't.
- The AZ House will probably have 23 or 24 Ds and 37 or 36 Rs.
Right now, the race for one of the LD28 seats is too close to call. Incumbent R Kate Brophy McGee will win one of the seats, while incumbents Eric Meyer (D) and Amanda Reeve (R) are fighting it out for the second seat, with Meyer current leading by 175 votes. This one will take a while to sort out.
A race that could switch is in the Tucson-area LD9, where Democrat Mohur Sarah Sidwa is trailing Republican Ethan Orr by ~2600 votes for the second House seat in the district. Democrat Victoria Steele looks to have won the other seat. Still, in a district race, a 2600-vote margin will be tough to overcome in the late count.
- On the ballot propositions:
In great, but not terribly surprising news, Proposition 120 went down to defeat by more than 2-1 margin. If passed, it would have declared Arizona has supreme jurisdiction over all air, water, and land in the state. Basically, it was a measure to exempt the state from all federal laws and regulations.
While I voted against it, and remain opposed to it, toward the end of the cycle I was kind of hoping it would pass.
Because federal judges, like everyone else, need comic relief occasionally. :)
In good, but with bad overtones, news, Proposition 121 (the "jungle", or "top two" primary question) failed by a similar margin of more than 2-1. This is good, because it was a short-sighted and poorly-written measure, but there was a lot of "dark" money spent by the Republicans who opposed the measure. If this is seen more as a victory for big money than for a defeat for bad policy, it will be back.
In just plain bad news, Proposition 204 was soundly defeated, not by the margin of the above questions, but still by a lot. 204 would have extended the 1% increase in the state sales taxes that was passed a couple of years ago and dedicated the money to funding education in Arizona.
- In Pinal County, embattled Republican Sheriff Paul Babeu easily won re-election. Earlier this year, a scandal where Babeu was alleged to have threatened to use his influence to have an ex-boyfriend deported broke and forced him from a race for Congress. He chose to run for re-election for sheriff instead. He emerged from a crowded Republican primary field and won the general election by 16K votes, or 20 percentage points.
- In Navajo County, Sylvia "6000 Years" Allen, a soon-to-be former state senator, looks to be cruising to victory in the race for the District 3 seat on the Navajo County Board of Supervisors.
And based on reports of voter suppression/general incompetence on the part of Maricopa County Elections (it's one of the two; I'll wait for an honest investigation to determine which it was) in Democratic and/or Latino-heavy precincts, those provisional ballots could affect a few races.
Maricopa County results page here.
AZ SOS results page here.
- Republican Joe Arpaio is 88K votes ahead of Democratic challenger Paul Penzone in his quest for another term in charge of the Maricopa County
- Bill Montgomery won election to a "full term" as Maricopa County Attorney, defeating Libertarian challenger Michael Kielsky 74% to 26%. Kielsky may have been completely swamped, but he still outperformed my expectation that he would garner ~25% of the vote.
"Full term" is in quotes because Montgomery looks to be setting up a run at AZ Attorney General in 2014. If he does go for it, he'll have to resign from office due to AZ's "resign to run" law. The incumbent AG, Republican Tom Horne, has issues with campaign finance violations, hiring his girlfriend to a taxpayer-funded job, and leaving the scene of an accident. If he runs for a second term, he'll be vulnerable in both the primary and the general elections.
- Republican Jerry Weiers won a term as mayor of Glendale over Democrat Manny Cruz, leading by 4K votes. While Weiers was and is expected to win, the 4K difference is close enough to make the late count interesting.
- Democrat Terry Goddard, former AZ AG and nominee for Governor, won a seat on the governing board of the Central Arizona Project. Democrat Heather Macre is in sixth in the race to fill five seats, approximately 3700 votes out of 5th place. Besides Goddard, the other apparent winners are Lisa Atkins, Pam Pickard, Guy Carpenter, and Jean McGrath. Atkins, Pickard, and Carpenter are Republicans, but they made various pre-election lists of "less bad" or "Republican but qualified" candidates; McGrath is so tea party that she doesn't *drink* the tea, she mainlines it.
- One piece of good news on the school board front: Mesa wingnut Jerry Walker lost his bid for a seat on the Mesa Unified board. I got to see him in action when he was running wild on the governing board of the Maricopa County Community College District. His loss is a gain for Mesa and its schools, teachers, and students.
- In the US Senate race, Democrat Rich Carmona is behind Republican Jeff Flake by approximately 83K votes. As with the Maricopa County sheriff race above, this one looks over, but the late count could cause some heart palpitations in R land.
- In CD1, Democrat Ann Kirkpatrick is leading Republican Jonathan Paton by 6500 votes. Given that in the days leading up to Election Day, it looked as if Paton was pulling ahead, this will be a bit of an upset if it holds up.
- In CD2, Republican Martha McSally looks to have a major upset in the making over Democratic incumbent Ron Barber, leading by ~1300 votes. Stay tuned on this one.
- In CD9, Democrat Kyrsten Sinema is holding a slim 2100 vote lead over Vernon Parker. This one should hold up, but this is another one to keep an eye on as the late count comes in.
- As for the Arizona Corporation Commission, the Republicans will likely completely control it. The Democrats, Marcia Busching, Sandra Kennedy, and Paul Newman, are well behind the Republicans, Susan Bitter Smith, Bob Burns, and Bob Stump, in the race.
- The AZ Senate looks as if it will turn out to have 13 Ds and 17 Rs.
Biggest (and most pleasant) surprise: In LD26 (Central and North Tempe, West Mesa), it looks as if Democrat Ed Ableser will defeat Republican Jerry Lewis. While I supported Ableser, I thought that Lewis would have enough lingering goodwill from his defeat of Russell Pearce in Pearce's 2011 recall election to win in the D-leaning district. This is one time I happy with being wrong.
Best news: Republican bully Frank Antenori is GONE, and it wasn't even that close. Democrat Dave Bradley is leading the LD10 race by more than 5K votes.
Worst news: Democratic state representative Tom Chabin lost his bid for the LD6 state senate seat to Republican state representative Chester Crandell. LD6 is a Republican-heavy district, but it was hoped that Chabin's experience and name recognition would propel him past the finish line first. It didn't.
- The AZ House will probably have 23 or 24 Ds and 37 or 36 Rs.
Right now, the race for one of the LD28 seats is too close to call. Incumbent R Kate Brophy McGee will win one of the seats, while incumbents Eric Meyer (D) and Amanda Reeve (R) are fighting it out for the second seat, with Meyer current leading by 175 votes. This one will take a while to sort out.
A race that could switch is in the Tucson-area LD9, where Democrat Mohur Sarah Sidwa is trailing Republican Ethan Orr by ~2600 votes for the second House seat in the district. Democrat Victoria Steele looks to have won the other seat. Still, in a district race, a 2600-vote margin will be tough to overcome in the late count.
- On the ballot propositions:
In great, but not terribly surprising news, Proposition 120 went down to defeat by more than 2-1 margin. If passed, it would have declared Arizona has supreme jurisdiction over all air, water, and land in the state. Basically, it was a measure to exempt the state from all federal laws and regulations.
While I voted against it, and remain opposed to it, toward the end of the cycle I was kind of hoping it would pass.
Because federal judges, like everyone else, need comic relief occasionally. :)
In good, but with bad overtones, news, Proposition 121 (the "jungle", or "top two" primary question) failed by a similar margin of more than 2-1. This is good, because it was a short-sighted and poorly-written measure, but there was a lot of "dark" money spent by the Republicans who opposed the measure. If this is seen more as a victory for big money than for a defeat for bad policy, it will be back.
In just plain bad news, Proposition 204 was soundly defeated, not by the margin of the above questions, but still by a lot. 204 would have extended the 1% increase in the state sales taxes that was passed a couple of years ago and dedicated the money to funding education in Arizona.
- In Pinal County, embattled Republican Sheriff Paul Babeu easily won re-election. Earlier this year, a scandal where Babeu was alleged to have threatened to use his influence to have an ex-boyfriend deported broke and forced him from a race for Congress. He chose to run for re-election for sheriff instead. He emerged from a crowded Republican primary field and won the general election by 16K votes, or 20 percentage points.
- In Navajo County, Sylvia "6000 Years" Allen, a soon-to-be former state senator, looks to be cruising to victory in the race for the District 3 seat on the Navajo County Board of Supervisors.
Nationally, a good night for Democrats
It wasn't a clean sweep nationally, but the Democrats did about as well as could be hoped for during Election 2012. Along with Barack Obama's re-election, the Democrats actually *gained* seats in the US Senate (something that no one expected). Some non-AZ results that may be of general interest (all vote totals are unofficial and subject to change as provisional and absentee ballots are counted; generally, the sources for those numbers are the secretaries of state in the respective states):
A - The Libertarian in the Indiana Senate race received 98K votes, while Donnelly looks like he will win by ~20K. Cue up video of Republican heads exploding.
B - I can't find the numbers right now, but every source that I *can* find has Brown as the victor.
C - Again, I can't find specific numbers right now, but all sources indicate a solid win for Murphy.
E - No numbers yet, but a victory for Warren, ousting Brown after he spent two years filling the Senate seat once held by Ted Kennedy.
F - This one is included here because Cruz is a wingnut. However, his victory is not a surprise.
G - Paul Ryan's Congressional re-election race. Not a surprise (he outspent his challenger by a margin of 9 or 10 to 1), but I was hopeful.
H - Progressive icon Dave Obey used to hold this seat, and I (and many others) hoped that the Ds would retake this seat. They didn't.
J - Wingnut Republican Allen West is behind in his re-election race, but it's *Florida*. Final results may not be in for a while. After the lawyers get involved.
K - Wingnut Republican Michelle Bachmann is ahead in her re-election race. :((
| Senate | Candidate | Candidate | ||
| Indiana-A | Donnelly D - 819450 | Mourdock R- 797811 | ||
| Wisconsin | Baldwin D - 1299246 | Thompson R -1197062 | ||
| Ohio | Brown D - B | Mandel R | ||
| Pennsylvania | Casey D - 2900728 | Smith R - 2417779 | ||
| Virginia | Kaine D - 1874745 | Allen R - 1705164 | ||
| Connecticut | Murphy D - C | McMahon R | ||
| Mass. | Warren D - E | Brown R | ||
| Missouri | McCaskill D | - 1484683 | Akin R - 1063698 | |
| Texas - F | Sadler D - 2017224 | Cruz R - 2949053 | ||
| Congress | ||||
| WI 7 - H | Kreitlow D - 155068 | Duffy R - 200033 | ||
| WI 1 - G | Derban D - 157721 | Ryan R - 199715 | ||
| FL 18 - J | Murphy D - 160328 | West R - 157872 | ||
| MN 6 - K | Graves D - 175924 | Bachmann R - 180131 |
A - The Libertarian in the Indiana Senate race received 98K votes, while Donnelly looks like he will win by ~20K. Cue up video of Republican heads exploding.
B - I can't find the numbers right now, but every source that I *can* find has Brown as the victor.
C - Again, I can't find specific numbers right now, but all sources indicate a solid win for Murphy.
E - No numbers yet, but a victory for Warren, ousting Brown after he spent two years filling the Senate seat once held by Ted Kennedy.
F - This one is included here because Cruz is a wingnut. However, his victory is not a surprise.
G - Paul Ryan's Congressional re-election race. Not a surprise (he outspent his challenger by a margin of 9 or 10 to 1), but I was hopeful.
H - Progressive icon Dave Obey used to hold this seat, and I (and many others) hoped that the Ds would retake this seat. They didn't.
J - Wingnut Republican Allen West is behind in his re-election race, but it's *Florida*. Final results may not be in for a while. After the lawyers get involved.
K - Wingnut Republican Michelle Bachmann is ahead in her re-election race. :((
Tuesday, November 06, 2012
Live blogging the results
...Apologies to readers. Due to a technical issue, I was unable to access the internet while at the Democratic Party gathering in downtown Phoenix. Will post pics in a later post...
6:27 - Reports still rolling of VERY long lines in Tempe, Mesa, and South Phoenix in heavily D or Latino areas. The problem seems to be the provisional ballot scam/shortage that many polling places are experiencing here in Maricopa County. Also, there is a report of an Assistant US Attorney/DOJ contingent flying to Yuma to look into issues there.
6:19 - Updating the most watched contest of the night: Ball State is leading Toledo in the first quarter of their game, 7 - 0.
6:15 - GA called for Romney. Again, no surprises yet. Florida looks like it will be interesting. "Interesting" is a euphemism for "f*cked up".
6:02 - CNN calls CT, DE, MA, DC, IL, MD, ME (3 of 4 electoral votes; 1 is still too close to call) and RI for Obama; OK for Romney. Also call FL-Sen for incumbent Bill Nelson (D) over Connie Mack (IV or V, can't remember right now).
5:41 - CNN calls SC for Romney; Obama ahead by 63K votes in FL.
5:32 - CNN shows Donnelly leading Mourdock (the "rape babies are God's gift" guy) by 2%/~6500 votes.
5:25 - More reports of elevated totals of provisional ballots, especially in Latino-heavy areas.
5:24 - CNN calls IN for Romney. Not a surprise - a very red state.
5:12 p.m. - They aren't calling FL yet (not by a long shot), but early results (4% of precincts reporting) show Obama up 55% - 45%. For IN-Sen, the current results show Mourdock (R) ahead of Donnelly (D) by 1000 votes...
5:00 p.m. - First results from VA (via CNN) - CNN calls VT for Obama and KY for Romney.
4:48 p.m. - No results yet, but...
While there haven't been reports yet of any significant voter suppression activities in Maricopa County (stressing the "yet"), there have been reports of general incompetence/poor preparation on the part of poll workers manning some polling places, particularly in South Phoenix and SW Maricopa County.
Apparently, in the event of the slightest bit of confusion, poll workers in those areas default to "oh, just fill out a provisional ballot".
Even if those are counted, it takes much longer to count those than normal day-of and early ballots.
6:27 - Reports still rolling of VERY long lines in Tempe, Mesa, and South Phoenix in heavily D or Latino areas. The problem seems to be the provisional ballot scam/shortage that many polling places are experiencing here in Maricopa County. Also, there is a report of an Assistant US Attorney/DOJ contingent flying to Yuma to look into issues there.
6:19 - Updating the most watched contest of the night: Ball State is leading Toledo in the first quarter of their game, 7 - 0.
6:15 - GA called for Romney. Again, no surprises yet. Florida looks like it will be interesting. "Interesting" is a euphemism for "f*cked up".
6:02 - CNN calls CT, DE, MA, DC, IL, MD, ME (3 of 4 electoral votes; 1 is still too close to call) and RI for Obama; OK for Romney. Also call FL-Sen for incumbent Bill Nelson (D) over Connie Mack (IV or V, can't remember right now).
5:41 - CNN calls SC for Romney; Obama ahead by 63K votes in FL.
5:32 - CNN shows Donnelly leading Mourdock (the "rape babies are God's gift" guy) by 2%/~6500 votes.
5:25 - More reports of elevated totals of provisional ballots, especially in Latino-heavy areas.
5:24 - CNN calls IN for Romney. Not a surprise - a very red state.
5:12 p.m. - They aren't calling FL yet (not by a long shot), but early results (4% of precincts reporting) show Obama up 55% - 45%. For IN-Sen, the current results show Mourdock (R) ahead of Donnelly (D) by 1000 votes...
5:00 p.m. - First results from VA (via CNN) - CNN calls VT for Obama and KY for Romney.
4:48 p.m. - No results yet, but...
While there haven't been reports yet of any significant voter suppression activities in Maricopa County (stressing the "yet"), there have been reports of general incompetence/poor preparation on the part of poll workers manning some polling places, particularly in South Phoenix and SW Maricopa County.
Apparently, in the event of the slightest bit of confusion, poll workers in those areas default to "oh, just fill out a provisional ballot".
Even if those are counted, it takes much longer to count those than normal day-of and early ballots.
Live blogging Election Night
Tonight, I'll be live blogging from the Arizona Democratic Party HQ and the gathering in downtown Phoenix as election returns come in from across the country. Here are a few of the races that I'll be watching until Arizona results start coming in; if there are any races that people think should be added to the list, leave a note in a comment -
| Senate | Candidate | Candidate | ||
| Indiana | Donnelly D | Mourdock R | ||
| Wisconsin | Baldwin D | Thompson R | ||
| Ohio | Brown D | Mandel R | ||
| Pennsylvania | Casey D | Smith R | ||
| Virginia | Kaine D | Allen R | ||
| Connecticut | Murphy D | McMahon R | ||
| Mass. | Warren D | Brown R | ||
| Missouri | McCaskill D | Akin R | ||
| Texas | Sadler D | Cruz R | ||
| Congress | ||||
| WI 7 | Kreitlow D | Duffy R | ||
| WI 2 | Derban D | Ryan R | ||
| FL 18 | Murphy D | West R | ||
| MN 6 | Graves D | Bachmann R |
Monday, November 05, 2012
Voting "against" a candidate: a guide
OK, the last post was all about the reasons to vote "for" particular candidates. Anybody who has read this blog before this knows that I'm better at snark than anything else (and with Tedski suspending/retiring his blog, I may be the snarkiest writer in the AZ blogosphere), and I couldn't let this, the last full day of the election season, pass without a little snark.
Here's a little -
- Mitt Romney for President - Where to start? The entirely wrong attitude toward being president (rule vs. server)? The open contempt for a huge chunk of the country? The never-ending changes in the positions that he espouses?
To be fair to Romney, I don't this that he has changed his positions so much as changed what he tells his audience of the day, hour, or minute.
Unfortunately for Romney, most voters want candidates and electeds with spines. Changes to positions are acceptable when the changes are to honestly-held positions and are based on facts. Such changes are a sign of an intellectually mature person.
There is no evidence that Romney is such a person.
- Jeff Flake for U.S. Senate - He has turned not doing his job of representing Arizona into a proudly-held "principled position". He opposes pretty much every policy that is supportive of society and favors every policy that enhances corporate profits, even if that policy harms Arizonans.
Plus, a political campaign is nothing more than an extended job interview, with us as the prospective employer.
Should we hire someone who is brazen enough to lie and cheat during the interview process, and expect him to turn around and turn into an honorable man after getting the job, one with an almost ironclad six year contract?
- Vernon Parker for Congress (CD9) - Tea Party. 'Nuff said...
- Augustine Bartning (Senate) and Brian Kaufman (House) from LD24 - Not much snark here. I met them at the LD24 Clean Elections debate in September, and they seemed to be decent enough sorts for Republicans, if more than a little naive. Kaufman stated that one of the reasons that people should vote for him is so that the people of LD24 will have a voice in the crafting of the state's budget (presuming that the Rs retain control of the AZ House, which seems to be a safe presumption).
Problem: If he were to somehow win a seat, he'd be a *freshman* representative. Simply put, the R leadership in the lege wouldn't let him in the same room as the budget, much less give him a seat at the table. Being an R means that he would get to see the budget a few hours before the Democrats in the legislature, but that's it.
- Joltin' Joe Arpaio for yet another term as Maricopa County Sheriff - Even if you can ignore the two decades of scandals and abuse of the authority of his office, and the rampant bigotry, and the misuse of public funds, and the raging media whore-ism, and the sacrifice of sex crimes victims on the altar of his jihad against the county's judiciary and against anybody with skin that's darker than a golfer's tan, nobody can ignore the body count.
The deaths of dozens of people in his jails, people who were in custody, unarmed, and in some cases, ill, is completely unacceptable in a civil society.
We will find out tomorrow if Maricopa County is part of "civil society".
- Bob Stump, Susan Bitter Smith and Bob Burns for the Arizona Corporation Commission - They are ALEC/corporate shills one and all who consider public service (and the public itself?) contemptible but are quite comfortable with shamelessly doing the bidding of their corporate and industry masters. They claim to have a "plan" for producing sustainable energy in Arizona, which seems to most consist of superimposing pics of themselves over some solar panels, and for pushing for a trash-burning power plant (one that happens to be fronted by the brother of one of their former legislative colleagues, Bob Blendu).
As for solar, their plan seems to primarily consist of them blowing sunshine up the asses of the voters. Until the polls close on Tuesday night.
Here's a little -
- Mitt Romney for President - Where to start? The entirely wrong attitude toward being president (rule vs. server)? The open contempt for a huge chunk of the country? The never-ending changes in the positions that he espouses?
To be fair to Romney, I don't this that he has changed his positions so much as changed what he tells his audience of the day, hour, or minute.
Unfortunately for Romney, most voters want candidates and electeds with spines. Changes to positions are acceptable when the changes are to honestly-held positions and are based on facts. Such changes are a sign of an intellectually mature person.
There is no evidence that Romney is such a person.
- Jeff Flake for U.S. Senate - He has turned not doing his job of representing Arizona into a proudly-held "principled position". He opposes pretty much every policy that is supportive of society and favors every policy that enhances corporate profits, even if that policy harms Arizonans.
Plus, a political campaign is nothing more than an extended job interview, with us as the prospective employer.
Should we hire someone who is brazen enough to lie and cheat during the interview process, and expect him to turn around and turn into an honorable man after getting the job, one with an almost ironclad six year contract?
- Vernon Parker for Congress (CD9) - Tea Party. 'Nuff said...
- Augustine Bartning (Senate) and Brian Kaufman (House) from LD24 - Not much snark here. I met them at the LD24 Clean Elections debate in September, and they seemed to be decent enough sorts for Republicans, if more than a little naive. Kaufman stated that one of the reasons that people should vote for him is so that the people of LD24 will have a voice in the crafting of the state's budget (presuming that the Rs retain control of the AZ House, which seems to be a safe presumption).
Problem: If he were to somehow win a seat, he'd be a *freshman* representative. Simply put, the R leadership in the lege wouldn't let him in the same room as the budget, much less give him a seat at the table. Being an R means that he would get to see the budget a few hours before the Democrats in the legislature, but that's it.
- Joltin' Joe Arpaio for yet another term as Maricopa County Sheriff - Even if you can ignore the two decades of scandals and abuse of the authority of his office, and the rampant bigotry, and the misuse of public funds, and the raging media whore-ism, and the sacrifice of sex crimes victims on the altar of his jihad against the county's judiciary and against anybody with skin that's darker than a golfer's tan, nobody can ignore the body count.
The deaths of dozens of people in his jails, people who were in custody, unarmed, and in some cases, ill, is completely unacceptable in a civil society.
We will find out tomorrow if Maricopa County is part of "civil society".
- Bob Stump, Susan Bitter Smith and Bob Burns for the Arizona Corporation Commission - They are ALEC/corporate shills one and all who consider public service (and the public itself?) contemptible but are quite comfortable with shamelessly doing the bidding of their corporate and industry masters. They claim to have a "plan" for producing sustainable energy in Arizona, which seems to most consist of superimposing pics of themselves over some solar panels, and for pushing for a trash-burning power plant (one that happens to be fronted by the brother of one of their former legislative colleagues, Bob Blendu).
As for solar, their plan seems to primarily consist of them blowing sunshine up the asses of the voters. Until the polls close on Tuesday night.
Sunday, November 04, 2012
Voting *for* a candidate: a guide
During an election cycle, particularly a long one like a presidential cycle, it's easy to lose sight of why we support this candidate or that candidate, losing ourselves in being against the "other".
The reasons why we support candidate "A" become subsumed by the fact that candidate "B" is an arrogant, avaricious plutocrat or the reasons that we support candidate "X" are drowned in the glare of candidate "Y's" bigotry, corruption, etc.
As easy as voting"against" can be, voting "for" is far more satisfying. I've been voting for a while now. Not gonna say how long, but the first presidential ticket that received my vote was Mondale/Ferraro. You do the math. :)
While most of my votes have been "for" a candidate, too many have been for the "less bad" candidate. The most satisfying votes that I've ever cast were for Harry Mitchell. While he is nowhere near liberal enough to suit me politically, he based his positions, and his votes in office, on what he thought was in the best interests of his constituents.
Voting for him in 2010 when David Schweikert took advantage of the Republican wave that year to oust an icon was no less satisfying than voting for him in 2006 when Mitchell first won a seat in Congress.
Having said all of that, here's my "positive" take on my votes this year, why I voted "for" particular candidate. There were lots of "for" candidates this year -
- Barack Obama for President - I enthusiastically voted for him in 2008, and proudly did so again this year.
In the face of intractable opposition (to the point that Republicans in Congress voted against bills that they had sponsored themselves if Obama supported them), he led the start of real healthcare reform, started winding down the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, fought for tax cuts for the working and middle classes, saved the American auto industry, and oversaw the end for Osama Bin Laden.
To be sure, there were a few missteps, but even most of those just showed that the man is simply human (stay off the pitcher's mound, Mr. President :) ).
My biggest complaint with him is that he hasn't be liberal enough in his governance.
However, that dovetails with the biggest reason to vote to give him a second term - he has governed. Not ruled, not dictated, not anything but do his job.
He has worked *for* his constituents, all of them, not just those who agree with him or give him campaign contributions.
You may not agree with everything he's done in office; I like and support him, and even *I* don't agree with everything that the Obama administration has done.
However, he has done what he has done out of concern for the best interests of his constituents, which should be the motivation behind the positions and actions of *all* elected officials.
As such, he has more than earned a second term in the oval office.
I promise that the rest of these will be much shorter. :)
- Dr. Rich Carmona for U.S. Senate - This may be his first foray into electoral politics, but it's not his first foray into public service. Not hardly.
In his storied career, he has been an Army medic (in Vietnam), a SWAT team leader, and Surgeon General of the United States. His life story is the archetypal American success story - born to immigrant parents, worked to obtain an education, lifted himself out of poverty, and has spent his adult life in public service of one sort or another.
In short, he's the sort of person who *should* be in office because he has been where most of us have been.
- Kyrsten Sinema for U.S. Congress (CD9) - *Not* her first foray into electoral politics, but it's hardly her first foray into public service. Like Carmona above, she bootstrapped her way out of poverty with education and hard work, and like Carmona, she has dedicated her life to serving the public. In her case, she has been a social worker, attorney, and educator.
And like Carmona, she is the kind of person who should be in office representing us because she has been and is us.
- Katie Hobbs (Senate) and Lela Alston and Chad Campbell (House) for the Arizona legislature from LD24 - They are each experienced, dedicated, intelligent, hard-working, and caring public servants and have earned another term in office.
Bonus legislative race: Ed Ableser (Senate) and Juan Mendez and Andrew Sherwood (House) for the Arizona legislature from LD26 - While they were not on my ballot (I live in LD24), all three are friends of mine and people who I respect. They are active members of the community and have and will work for the betterment of the community.
- Paul Penzone for Maricopa County Sheriff - Penzone is a career cop who has based his career on *involving* the entire community, not demonizing* part of it for personal and political gain. When he is elected, he'll bring a level of professionalism and integrity to the MCSO that hasn't been seen there in decades.
- Marcia Busching, Sandra Kennedy, and Paul Newman for the Arizona Corporation Commission - While the members of this trio bring a variety of experiences and backgrounds to the table, but they share a focus on ensuring Arizona's energy future.
.jpg)
Are all of the above candidates Democrats? Yup.
But before the above is dismissed as "partisan hackery", one should ask if all of the above candidates are the "best" candidates.
The answer to that question is a resounding "Yes".
Their primary concern has been (in the case of previous or current officeholders) or will be (in the case of future officeholders) the best interests of the people that they represent.
I don't expect to agree with them on every single issue, but I do expect that every person who "represents" me to hold positions, craft policies, and cast votes based on the best interests of their constituents.
And before anyone begins thinking that I've gone soft, an "against" post will follow this one. :)
The reasons why we support candidate "A" become subsumed by the fact that candidate "B" is an arrogant, avaricious plutocrat or the reasons that we support candidate "X" are drowned in the glare of candidate "Y's" bigotry, corruption, etc.
As easy as voting"against" can be, voting "for" is far more satisfying. I've been voting for a while now. Not gonna say how long, but the first presidential ticket that received my vote was Mondale/Ferraro. You do the math. :)
While most of my votes have been "for" a candidate, too many have been for the "less bad" candidate. The most satisfying votes that I've ever cast were for Harry Mitchell. While he is nowhere near liberal enough to suit me politically, he based his positions, and his votes in office, on what he thought was in the best interests of his constituents.
Voting for him in 2010 when David Schweikert took advantage of the Republican wave that year to oust an icon was no less satisfying than voting for him in 2006 when Mitchell first won a seat in Congress.
Having said all of that, here's my "positive" take on my votes this year, why I voted "for" particular candidate. There were lots of "for" candidates this year -
- Barack Obama for President - I enthusiastically voted for him in 2008, and proudly did so again this year.
In the face of intractable opposition (to the point that Republicans in Congress voted against bills that they had sponsored themselves if Obama supported them), he led the start of real healthcare reform, started winding down the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, fought for tax cuts for the working and middle classes, saved the American auto industry, and oversaw the end for Osama Bin Laden.
To be sure, there were a few missteps, but even most of those just showed that the man is simply human (stay off the pitcher's mound, Mr. President :) ).
My biggest complaint with him is that he hasn't be liberal enough in his governance.
However, that dovetails with the biggest reason to vote to give him a second term - he has governed. Not ruled, not dictated, not anything but do his job.
He has worked *for* his constituents, all of them, not just those who agree with him or give him campaign contributions.
You may not agree with everything he's done in office; I like and support him, and even *I* don't agree with everything that the Obama administration has done.
However, he has done what he has done out of concern for the best interests of his constituents, which should be the motivation behind the positions and actions of *all* elected officials.
As such, he has more than earned a second term in the oval office.
 |
| Picture courtesy CNN |
I promise that the rest of these will be much shorter. :)
- Dr. Rich Carmona for U.S. Senate - This may be his first foray into electoral politics, but it's not his first foray into public service. Not hardly.
In his storied career, he has been an Army medic (in Vietnam), a SWAT team leader, and Surgeon General of the United States. His life story is the archetypal American success story - born to immigrant parents, worked to obtain an education, lifted himself out of poverty, and has spent his adult life in public service of one sort or another.
In short, he's the sort of person who *should* be in office because he has been where most of us have been.
.jpg) |
| Carmona talking to a supporter in Tempe, September 15 |
- Kyrsten Sinema for U.S. Congress (CD9) - *Not* her first foray into electoral politics, but it's hardly her first foray into public service. Like Carmona above, she bootstrapped her way out of poverty with education and hard work, and like Carmona, she has dedicated her life to serving the public. In her case, she has been a social worker, attorney, and educator.
And like Carmona, she is the kind of person who should be in office representing us because she has been and is us.
 |
| Sinema at a candidate forum in July in Tempe |
- Katie Hobbs (Senate) and Lela Alston and Chad Campbell (House) for the Arizona legislature from LD24 - They are each experienced, dedicated, intelligent, hard-working, and caring public servants and have earned another term in office.
 |
| (L-R) Hobbs, Alston, and Campbell at the LD24 Clean Elections forum in Phoenix, September 25th |
Bonus legislative race: Ed Ableser (Senate) and Juan Mendez and Andrew Sherwood (House) for the Arizona legislature from LD26 - While they were not on my ballot (I live in LD24), all three are friends of mine and people who I respect. They are active members of the community and have and will work for the betterment of the community.
 |
| (Standing L-R) Mendez, Sherwood, and Ableser at the LD26 Chili Cook-Off, April 28 |
- Paul Penzone for Maricopa County Sheriff - Penzone is a career cop who has based his career on *involving* the entire community, not demonizing* part of it for personal and political gain. When he is elected, he'll bring a level of professionalism and integrity to the MCSO that hasn't been seen there in decades.
 |
| Penzone in Tempe, April 28 (same event as in the above pic, only a couple of hours earlier) |
- Marcia Busching, Sandra Kennedy, and Paul Newman for the Arizona Corporation Commission - While the members of this trio bring a variety of experiences and backgrounds to the table, but they share a focus on ensuring Arizona's energy future.
.jpg)
Are all of the above candidates Democrats? Yup.
But before the above is dismissed as "partisan hackery", one should ask if all of the above candidates are the "best" candidates.
The answer to that question is a resounding "Yes".
Their primary concern has been (in the case of previous or current officeholders) or will be (in the case of future officeholders) the best interests of the people that they represent.
I don't expect to agree with them on every single issue, but I do expect that every person who "represents" me to hold positions, craft policies, and cast votes based on the best interests of their constituents.
And before anyone begins thinking that I've gone soft, an "against" post will follow this one. :)
Friday, November 02, 2012
The number to call in the event of voter suppression tactics at polling places: 800-253-3931
Recently (say, the last month or so), there has been a pic circulating around Facebook urging anybody who is the victim of or witnesses to illegal voter suppression efforts to call the FBI at a special number. The number that has been going around is 202-514-1888.
Great idea, except....
...that particular number is the TDD (Telecommunications Device for the Deaf) number for the FBI's press office in DC -
Probably not the most effective number for filing reports, unless you are deaf and have access to TDD equipment.
As I don't know the genesis of the Facebook campaign, I cannot state unequivocally that there is ill intent behind the apparent error; in fact, I'm leaning toward thinking this is an honest mistake - the FBI *did* issue a press release on just this topic, and like the rest of its press releases, the header contains the TDD number.
The press release (emphasis mine) -
From the above-specified website, the contact numbers for the US Attorney/DOJ offices here in AZ:
Phoenix - (602) 514-7500
Tucson - (520) 620-7300
Flagstaff - (928) 556-0833
Yuma - (928) 314-6410
From the FBI's website, the number for the Phoenix office is 623-466-1999.
Great idea, except....
...that particular number is the TDD (Telecommunications Device for the Deaf) number for the FBI's press office in DC -
As I don't know the genesis of the Facebook campaign, I cannot state unequivocally that there is ill intent behind the apparent error; in fact, I'm leaning toward thinking this is an honest mistake - the FBI *did* issue a press release on just this topic, and like the rest of its press releases, the header contains the TDD number.
The press release (emphasis mine) -
Protecting the Right to Vote and Prosecuting Ballot Fraud
| U.S. Department of Justice October 16, 2012 |
WASHINGTON—In anticipation of the upcoming election, the Justice Department
today provided information about its efforts, through the Civil Rights and
Criminal Divisions, to ensure that all qualified voters have the opportunity to
cast their ballots and have their votes counted free of discrimination,
intimidation, or fraud in the election process.
Civil Rights Division
The Civil Rights Division is responsible for ensuring compliance with the
civil provisions of federal laws that protect the right to vote,and with federal
criminal laws prohibiting discriminatory interference with that right.
The Civil Rights Division’s Voting Section enforces civil provisions of
federal laws that protect the right to vote including: the Voting Rights Act;
the National Voter Registration Act; the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens
Absentee Voting Act; and the Help America Vote Act. Among other things, these
laws prohibit discrimination based on race or membership in a minority language
group; prohibit intimidation of voters; provide that voters who need assistance
in voting because of disability or illiteracy can obtain assistance from a
person of their choice; require minority language election materials and
assistance in certain jurisdictions; provide for accessible election machines
for voters with disabilities; require provisional ballots for voters who assert
they are eligible but whose names do not appear on poll books; provide for
absentee ballots for service members, their family members, and U.S. citizens
living abroad; require states to ensure that citizens can register at drivers’
license offices, public assistance offices, other state agencies, and through
the mail; and include requirements regarding maintaining voter registration
lists.
The Civil Rights Division’s Criminal Section enforces federal criminal
statutes that prohibit voter intimidation and suppression based on race, color,
national origin, or religion.
As it has in the past, on Election Day, November 6, 2012, the Civil Rights
Division will implement a comprehensive program to help ensure ballot access
that will include the following:
- Shortly before the election, the Civil Rights Division will announce which jurisdictions will have federal personnel as election monitors and observers at polling places.
- Civil Rights Division attorneys in both the Voting and Criminal Sections in Washington, D.C., will be ready to receive election-related complaints of potential violations relating to any of the statutes the Civil Rights Division enforces. Attorneys in the division will take appropriate action and will consult and coordinate with local U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and with other entities within the Department of Justice concerning these complaints before, during, and after Election Day, as appropriate.
Civil Rights Division staff will be available by phone to receive complaints
related to ballot access (1-800-253-3931 toll-free or 202-307-2767) or by TTY
(1-877-267-8971). In addition, individuals may also report complaints, problems,
or concerns related to voting by fax to 202-307-3961, by e-mail to
voting.section@usdoj.gov, and, closer to Election Day, by complaint forms that
may be submitted through a link on the department’s website at
www.justice.gov/crt/about/vot/.
Complaints related to violence or threats of violence at a polling place
should, in the first instance, always be reported to local police authorities by
calling 911.
Criminal Division and the Department’s 94 U.S. Attorneys’
Offices
The Department’s Criminal Division oversees the enforcement of federal laws
that criminalize certain election fraud and vindicate the integrity of the
federal election process.
The Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section and the Department’s 94 U.S.
Attorneys’ Offices are responsible for enforcing the federal criminal laws that
prohibit various forms of election fraud, such as vote buying, multiple voting,
submission of fraudulent ballots or registrations, destruction of ballots or
registrations, alteration of votes, and malfeasance by election officials. The
Criminal Division is also responsible for enforcing federal criminal law
prohibiting voter intimidation that does not involve a basis in race, color,
national origin, or religion (as noted above, voter intimidation that has a
basis in race, color, national origin, or religion is addressed by the Civil
Rights Division).
The department encourages each U.S. Attorney’s Office to communicate with
state election officials before the federal general elections regarding the
handling of election-related matters in their respective districts. In addition,
the department provides annual training for the Assistant U.S. Attorneys who
serve as district election officers (DEOs) in their respective districts. DEOs
are responsible for overseeing potential election-crime matters in their
districts and for coordinating with the department’s election-crime experts in
Washington, D.C.
On November 6, 2012, the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices will work with specially
trained Federal Bureau of Investigation personnel in each district to ensure
that complaints from the public involving possible voter fraud are handled
appropriately. Specifically:
- Federal prosecutors at the Public Integrity Section, the DEOs in U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, FBI officials at Headquarters in Washington, D.C., and FBI special agents serving as Election Crime Coordinators in the FBI’s 56 field offices will be on duty while polls are open to receive complaints from the public.
- Election fraud or intimidation complaints should first be directed to the local U.S. Attorney’s Office or the local FBI office. A list of U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and their telephone numbers can be found at www.justice.gov/usao/offices/index.html, and a list of FBI offices and accompanying telephone numbers can be found at the “Contact Us” button at http://www.fbi.gov. Again, however, complaints related to violence or threats of violence at a polling place should, in the first instance, be reported to local police authorities by calling 911.
- Election fraud or intimidation complaints may also be directed to the Public Integrity Section (202-514-1412). Public Integrity Section prosecutors are available to consult and coordinate with the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and FBI regarding the handling of election-crime allegations.
Both protecting the right to vote and combating election fraud are essential
to maintaining the confidence of all Americans in our democratic system of
government. We encourage anyone who has information suggesting voting
discrimination or ballot fraud to contact the appropriate authorities.
From the above-specified website, the contact numbers for the US Attorney/DOJ offices here in AZ:
Phoenix - (602) 514-7500
Tucson - (520) 620-7300
Flagstaff - (928) 556-0833
Yuma - (928) 314-6410
From the FBI's website, the number for the Phoenix office is 623-466-1999.
Arizona Republicans counting their chickens before their eggs are hatched
...actually, they're counting them even before they know who will be controlling part of the roost.
Normally, when Arizona's Republicans engage in one of their many intramural ideological knife fights, I smirk a little and then move on to another topic. Simply put, they have too many of these to bother writing about more than the lamest or most extreme.
The most recent example meets both criteria: it's both ideologically extreme and just plain lame.
Recently, the executive committees of the Republican parties in both Pinal and Maricopa counties approved resolutions urging the Republican members of the incoming legislature to depose their current leadership in the lege, House Speaker Andy Tobin and Senate President Steve Pierce.
Their alleged "crime"?
Not being supportive enough of the bat-shit crazy clique of the GOP caucus.
The wingers are demanding the ouster of Tobin and Pierce in favor of Steve Smith and Andy Biggs, respectively.
Tobin and Pierce are very conservative and are not above partisan gamesmanship, using their positions to undermine or block proposals from Democratic members.
However, neither is stupid nor is either one nuts. While a significant number of tea party/ALEC-driven measures did pass through the lege during the most recent session, Tobin and Pierce blocked a few of the worst measures.
However, the biggest complaint is about money. Pierce and Tobin have a committee that has been spending money in support of Republican legislative candidates, and the wingers are whining that they haven't seen enough of that largesse. One of the biggest complainers is Sen. Frank Antenori (R-Bully), who has found that the voters of his newly-drawn district are less tolerant of his bluster than his old district - reports of recent polling in the district have him down more than five percentage points to Democrat David Bradley.
Antenori has become frantic, leaving messages with Steve Pierce, demanding that the committee spend money on his race. The answer from Pierce (actually, from the attorney representing the PAC) was an unequivocal "No".
There were two reasons for this answer.
One, the PAC is an independent expenditure fund and is barred by law from coordinating activity with candidate campaigns (OK, you can stop laughing now); in the event that any expenditures took place, the phone calls would become evidence of coordination. That's the official reason.
The unofficial reason is two, Frank Antenori is an unmitigated ass and more to the point of this post, an adversary of Pierce. If Antenori is reelected, he is going to support someone else for the Senate presidency, no matter how much outside money is thrown into his race.
It should come as no surprise that the wingers involved in this attempted putsch are all allies and/or acolytes of former (and now twice-defeated) Senate president and nativist icon Russell Pearce. He may be gone, but his presence is still felt at the Capitol.
I don't know how this is going to work out (if I had to speculate, I'd guess that Pierce and Tobin are secure in their positions, though both will be wielding simple, not super, majorities in the next session of the legislature), but expect this rift to percolate through at least the state Republican reorganization in January - Pearce and his cronies will attempt to solidify their control of the state GOP while Pearce plots his return to office.
Oh, and the "lame" part of all this: all of this posturing is taking place scant days before the election, one in which there is a real chance that the Democrats will make at least part of this irrelevant - there is a possiblity that the AZ Senate will end up tied 15 -15 or even with a Democratic majority. Expectations are that that won't happen, but 13 D seats seems likely and 14 is well within the realm of possibility. 15 or 16 seats is possible, but it would take too many things going unexpectedly well for either to be practically feasible (though it would be nice, like "early Christmas present" nice :) ).
Stay tuned...
Normally, when Arizona's Republicans engage in one of their many intramural ideological knife fights, I smirk a little and then move on to another topic. Simply put, they have too many of these to bother writing about more than the lamest or most extreme.
The most recent example meets both criteria: it's both ideologically extreme and just plain lame.
Recently, the executive committees of the Republican parties in both Pinal and Maricopa counties approved resolutions urging the Republican members of the incoming legislature to depose their current leadership in the lege, House Speaker Andy Tobin and Senate President Steve Pierce.
Their alleged "crime"?
Not being supportive enough of the bat-shit crazy clique of the GOP caucus.
The wingers are demanding the ouster of Tobin and Pierce in favor of Steve Smith and Andy Biggs, respectively.
Tobin and Pierce are very conservative and are not above partisan gamesmanship, using their positions to undermine or block proposals from Democratic members.
However, neither is stupid nor is either one nuts. While a significant number of tea party/ALEC-driven measures did pass through the lege during the most recent session, Tobin and Pierce blocked a few of the worst measures.
However, the biggest complaint is about money. Pierce and Tobin have a committee that has been spending money in support of Republican legislative candidates, and the wingers are whining that they haven't seen enough of that largesse. One of the biggest complainers is Sen. Frank Antenori (R-Bully), who has found that the voters of his newly-drawn district are less tolerant of his bluster than his old district - reports of recent polling in the district have him down more than five percentage points to Democrat David Bradley.
Antenori has become frantic, leaving messages with Steve Pierce, demanding that the committee spend money on his race. The answer from Pierce (actually, from the attorney representing the PAC) was an unequivocal "No".
There were two reasons for this answer.
One, the PAC is an independent expenditure fund and is barred by law from coordinating activity with candidate campaigns (OK, you can stop laughing now); in the event that any expenditures took place, the phone calls would become evidence of coordination. That's the official reason.
The unofficial reason is two, Frank Antenori is an unmitigated ass and more to the point of this post, an adversary of Pierce. If Antenori is reelected, he is going to support someone else for the Senate presidency, no matter how much outside money is thrown into his race.
It should come as no surprise that the wingers involved in this attempted putsch are all allies and/or acolytes of former (and now twice-defeated) Senate president and nativist icon Russell Pearce. He may be gone, but his presence is still felt at the Capitol.
I don't know how this is going to work out (if I had to speculate, I'd guess that Pierce and Tobin are secure in their positions, though both will be wielding simple, not super, majorities in the next session of the legislature), but expect this rift to percolate through at least the state Republican reorganization in January - Pearce and his cronies will attempt to solidify their control of the state GOP while Pearce plots his return to office.
Oh, and the "lame" part of all this: all of this posturing is taking place scant days before the election, one in which there is a real chance that the Democrats will make at least part of this irrelevant - there is a possiblity that the AZ Senate will end up tied 15 -15 or even with a Democratic majority. Expectations are that that won't happen, but 13 D seats seems likely and 14 is well within the realm of possibility. 15 or 16 seats is possible, but it would take too many things going unexpectedly well for either to be practically feasible (though it would be nice, like "early Christmas present" nice :) ).
Stay tuned...
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
Good governance is good politics
I may never say anything positive about him again, but Republican Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey has earned some serious respect from across the political spectrum because of the way that he has set aside partisan politics in the face of the devastation wrought upon his state by Hurricane Sandy this week.
He has earned it.
He's dropped partisan gamesmanship in favor of working with President Obama and the federal government to address the needs of storm-ravaged New Jersey residents.
He and Obama certainly don't have much in common, but they do have this: when their constituents needed them this week to step up and be *leaders*, not just politicians, they dropped any election-year partisan posturing and went to work.
That's the sort of personal dedication and professional integrity that I respect in, and expect from, *all* elected officials, not just the ones with whom I happen to agree.
Today, Chris Christie has my respect, and will for as long as he places the long-term interests of his constituents before short-term partisan gain.
I don't expect to ever agree with him on the sort of political issues that tend to divide Democrats and Republicans, but that doesn't mean I can't or won't give credit where it is due.
Quick and cheap political analysis (and worth every penny you're paying for it :) ):
I can't even pretend to have a clue as to what impact Hurricane Sandy will have on this year's elections, but Christie has given himself a leg up in the 2016 general election (if Obama wins next week) or in 2020 (if Romney wins next week). The general election electorate loves someone they see as placing "doing the job" ahead of "flaunting the job title".
However, the same thing that gives Christie a general election boost is the sort of thing that will undermine his chances in the R primary.
He has earned it.
He's dropped partisan gamesmanship in favor of working with President Obama and the federal government to address the needs of storm-ravaged New Jersey residents.
 |
| Obama and Christie speaking to storm victims. Pic courtesy MSNBC. |
He and Obama certainly don't have much in common, but they do have this: when their constituents needed them this week to step up and be *leaders*, not just politicians, they dropped any election-year partisan posturing and went to work.
That's the sort of personal dedication and professional integrity that I respect in, and expect from, *all* elected officials, not just the ones with whom I happen to agree.
Today, Chris Christie has my respect, and will for as long as he places the long-term interests of his constituents before short-term partisan gain.
I don't expect to ever agree with him on the sort of political issues that tend to divide Democrats and Republicans, but that doesn't mean I can't or won't give credit where it is due.
Quick and cheap political analysis (and worth every penny you're paying for it :) ):
I can't even pretend to have a clue as to what impact Hurricane Sandy will have on this year's elections, but Christie has given himself a leg up in the 2016 general election (if Obama wins next week) or in 2020 (if Romney wins next week). The general election electorate loves someone they see as placing "doing the job" ahead of "flaunting the job title".
However, the same thing that gives Christie a general election boost is the sort of thing that will undermine his chances in the R primary.
Q & A with Marcia Busching, candidate for the Arizona Corporation Commission
Marcia Busching, a candidate for the Arizona Corporation Commission took time out of her busy schedule to answer a few questions. Here they are -
I have dedicated myself to improving the lives of others through community activities, legal representation, education, and mentoring. I grew up in the Midwest, the eldest of three siblings, and now have my own law firm that specializes in mediations and arbitrations. Previously I have had experience in the banking, construction, and real estate industries. I also have had public service experience as a Citizens Clean Election Commissioner and member of the Arizona Liquor Control Board. I am also a proud wife and mother of three, Pete, Toffler, and Carrie.
When did you first become interested in politics, and why?
Why run for the Corporation Commission, and what in your background will you bring to the table that the other commissioners (whoever they might be) don't have?
As a former bank examiner, attorney, business owner, and mediator I believe I will be a vital asset to the commission. I feel that I have a harmonious mixture of business and public service experience that some of my opponents lack, and that will be handy during long hours of careful deliberation.
What do you hope to accomplish there?
Are there any "nuts and bolts" issues (transparency, etc.) with the ACC that you would seek to address as a commissioner?
I believe that it is altogether too difficult for ordinary citizens to see how the Commissioners have voted on a certain topic. It is absurd that, while we live in an age of information, ordinary citizens must work so hard to uncover the basic facts about where the Commissioners stand on key subjects such as utilities regulation and plant proposals. If the Corporation Commission is to be accountable for its actions, then Arizonans must be able to easily find out what those actions are.
The utilities side of the ACC's activities receives most of the attention from the public and the media. Most people aren't aware of the ACC's securities regulation activities. What's your take on that aspect of the ACC's work?
If the proposed trash-burning power generating plant becomes reality, what will you tell people who live in the area of the plant?
I think it would be a tragedy if the trash-burning facility becomes a reality. Not only is it expensive to build, but the pollution it would generate would not be healthy for our West Valley residents.
The ACC is charged with crafting energy policy for AZ. Are there any policies that you support that are "people-friendly", "business-friendly" and "forward thinking"?
I support rooftop solar for residences and the implementation of solar power by small businesses, community facilities, and schools. My opponents on the other hand, may impose a surcharge to small businesses who wish to utilize solar technology. I also wish to see the business formation process become streamlined, easier to use, and helpful.
Part of a commissioner's duties may involve lobbying the Arizona Legislature, both supporting and opposing proposals. What in your experience will you draw upon to help you when dealing with the often intransigent and usually hostile legislative branch?
I am hopeful that the legislative branch will be more moderate after the election. We all need to work together to make Arizona an attractive place to live and work. I will use my mediation skills to work with the legislators to implement wise policies for the benefit of all of us.
Why should Arizona's voters choose you for the Corporation Commission?
I truly am passionate about the role that the ACC plays in Arizona’s future. I have experience in both the business and political worlds that will be invaluable to the Corporation Commission. For over thirty years I have considered Arizona my home, and I feel that I can serve the best interests of all of us, our businesses and the environment as a Commissioner on the ACC.
 |
| Busching at an event in Tempe in September |
 |
| From her campaign website: Busching with solar panels |
Tell us a little
about yourself:
I have dedicated myself to improving the lives of others through community activities, legal representation, education, and mentoring. I grew up in the Midwest, the eldest of three siblings, and now have my own law firm that specializes in mediations and arbitrations. Previously I have had experience in the banking, construction, and real estate industries. I also have had public service experience as a Citizens Clean Election Commissioner and member of the Arizona Liquor Control Board. I am also a proud wife and mother of three, Pete, Toffler, and Carrie.
When did you first become interested in politics, and why?
Having served on the
Clean Elections Commission there were times that I felt Arizonans
didn’t have enough of a choice when completing their ballots.
Sometimes there just weren’t enough people interested in a
particular position. As I watched and worked on various campaigns, I
realized that it was important to set up and take a turn at public
service.
Why run for the Corporation Commission, and what in your background will you bring to the table that the other commissioners (whoever they might be) don't have?
As a former bank examiner, attorney, business owner, and mediator I believe I will be a vital asset to the commission. I feel that I have a harmonious mixture of business and public service experience that some of my opponents lack, and that will be handy during long hours of careful deliberation.
What do you hope to accomplish there?
I want to serve and
consider the best interests of everyone. It is important to hear all
aspects of a matter before coming to a conclusion, and to have
decisions be transparent. I want to be a watchdog for Arizonans, not
a utility lapdog.
Are there any "nuts and bolts" issues (transparency, etc.) with the ACC that you would seek to address as a commissioner?
I believe that it is altogether too difficult for ordinary citizens to see how the Commissioners have voted on a certain topic. It is absurd that, while we live in an age of information, ordinary citizens must work so hard to uncover the basic facts about where the Commissioners stand on key subjects such as utilities regulation and plant proposals. If the Corporation Commission is to be accountable for its actions, then Arizonans must be able to easily find out what those actions are.
The utilities side of the ACC's activities receives most of the attention from the public and the media. Most people aren't aware of the ACC's securities regulation activities. What's your take on that aspect of the ACC's work?
The
Corporation Commission helps Arizona residents recover for fraudulent
activity against them. We need to make sure the vulnerable have an
avenue of relief.
If the proposed trash-burning power generating plant becomes reality, what will you tell people who live in the area of the plant?
I think it would be a tragedy if the trash-burning facility becomes a reality. Not only is it expensive to build, but the pollution it would generate would not be healthy for our West Valley residents.
The ACC is charged with crafting energy policy for AZ. Are there any policies that you support that are "people-friendly", "business-friendly" and "forward thinking"?
I support rooftop solar for residences and the implementation of solar power by small businesses, community facilities, and schools. My opponents on the other hand, may impose a surcharge to small businesses who wish to utilize solar technology. I also wish to see the business formation process become streamlined, easier to use, and helpful.
Part of a commissioner's duties may involve lobbying the Arizona Legislature, both supporting and opposing proposals. What in your experience will you draw upon to help you when dealing with the often intransigent and usually hostile legislative branch?
I am hopeful that the legislative branch will be more moderate after the election. We all need to work together to make Arizona an attractive place to live and work. I will use my mediation skills to work with the legislators to implement wise policies for the benefit of all of us.
Why should Arizona's voters choose you for the Corporation Commission?
I truly am passionate about the role that the ACC plays in Arizona’s future. I have experience in both the business and political worlds that will be invaluable to the Corporation Commission. For over thirty years I have considered Arizona my home, and I feel that I can serve the best interests of all of us, our businesses and the environment as a Commissioner on the ACC.
Thanks go out to Marcia and her busy staff for working with me on this. I know how busy candidates and their campaign staffs are
this close to the election and am appreciative of the effort of their part to make this happen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)