As recently as ten years ago, that editorial would have actually meant something. The downfall of the mainstream media has reached a tipping point and the unhinged rantings of the New York Times are as meaningless as the rantings of Walter Cronkite.
 |
Arizona's own EspressoPundit Ruminations of an over-caffeinated political junkie |
||||
|
January 31, 2006
Here's an interesting Twist Treasurer David
Petersen, a Republican, is scrambling in response to a judge's order late
Friday for the state ‘‘through the appropriate officer'' to start paying
$500,000 daily fines now accumulating because of the failure to meet a
court deadline to improve English Language Learning programs. Golly, do you mean to tell me that there is actually a law that says the the State Treasurer can't write million dollar checks without some type of appropriation? I'm shocked. What were the founders thinking? Didn't they realize that a future governor and a federal judge might really really want the money? Looks like we have a Mexican stand off. Ha, I slay me.
So How Will it End? Only a fool plays this type of brinksmanship without an end game in mind. Contrary to popular assumptions, the Legislators and the Governor are by no means foolish. They may go over the brink, but it won't be for lack of planning. They have different goals, different assumptions, different constituencies and they have been dealt different hands, but they are not fools. One possible solution, of course, is that both sides find a face-saving way out and defuse the situation. Another possible solution is that the Legislature makes it obvious to the judge that Goddard only represents the governor and that they are in lock step with Tim Hogan, and the judge allows the legislature to have representation. This leaves open avenues for appeal or other legal solutions. But what if it plays out to the end? What if the Legislature refuses to pass a fourth bill and the fines mount? Nonessential state services are curtailed. Newt Gengrich and Bill Clinton played that game and shut down the federal government in 1995. The country blamed Newt and it was the beginning of his personal downfall. But how will this play nationally? We know that Napolitano owns the local press. If the standoff continues, the Republicans will look bad locally. But eventually, The Washington Times, Fox news, The Wall Street Journal Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly or Rush Limbaugh is going to realize that the governor who supported giving drivers licenses to illegal aliens is shutting down an entire state so that she and federal judge can work on their pet plan. Someone is going to ask the questions that the local press corps considers tacky...like how many of these kids aren't here legally? and of the ones who were born here, how many of the parents aren't here legally? Maybe they will ask how much federal education money she has available and why she isn't using it. Maybe they will realize that the legislature has passed three bills to address the problem but she has vetoed them without bothering to show them to the judge. Maybe they will notice that she... vetoed SB 1186 which incorporated into statute Prop 200 requirements for proof of citizenship when registering to vote. And she: ...Vetoed SB 1306 Which would have allowed police officers to enforce immigration laws. ...Vetoed SB 1511 which would have banned state agencies and law enforcement from accepting consular ID Cards. ....Vetoed HB 2709 which would have built a prison in Mexico to house undocumented immigrant criminals. ...Vetoed SB 1118 which would have prevented people from casting a provisional ballot if they could not produce ID. Hmm, maybe the national press corps isn't going to be as tame at the local crowd. Weiers and Bennett don't have much to risk if the story goes national. The last time I checked, they didn't have national aspirations.
Here's an interesting letter. Greg, Another example of
AWOL-like behavior (Appropriations Without
January 30, 2006
Appropriate This... Now that the Governor, Attorney General and a federal Judge--the three branches of Government--have managed to appropriate state money for English Language instruction without the participation of the Legislature, don't expect the House and Senate to provide an easy way out. My guess is that the Legislature is going to let the fines accumulate and then gradually eliminate state programs to make up the difference.
AWOL I haven't seen a lot of outrage in our Congressional delegation over the fact that Arizona's Legislative process has been commandeered by a federal judge.
It's going to be a Long Session If you want to get a sense of the animosity between the legislature and the Governor, check out this website. It's possible that I have tin ear on this issue, but it seems like a political mistake to continually veto the corporate tax tuition credit bill. The folks who are going to use private school scholarships are predominantly Hispanic and Catholic. They are a natural Napolitano constituency and they are organized. Folks understand how the tax credits work. Parents and school administrators have been working for nearly a decade to make sure that taxpayers earmark part of their tax payments to private schools. Do you think that there is ANY parent at Salpointe Catholic High School in Tucson or St. Theresa's in Phoenix who doesn't know that she has vetoed this bill after saying she would sign it? If they don't know now, they will by election time. I simply don't understand the political calculus. Her education establishment base isn't going to desert her. She's delivered All Day K, and like Richard Gere in an Officer and a Gentleman, they don't have anyplace else to go. Why not reward both constituencies? Some have suggested that she's going to sign a corporate tuition tax credit bill eventually and take credit for it before the election. I find that doubtful. Republicans try that trick all the time and it never works. Republicans like to zero out the budget for, say, the Commerce Department, knowing that they will end up funding it anyway. They somehow believe that the folks who care about Commerce will be grateful that the funding was restored. What actually happens is that the Governor gets the credit for forcing the miscreant legislators to restore the funding. I see the same thing in reverse here. If she ultimately signs the bill, it will be clear who forced whom. Napolitano may win big in November. But she will have the smallest percentage of the Catholic vote of any Democratic candidate in Arizona history. All that to stop a $5 million program in a $10 billion budget?
So that's what Passed for Intelligent Discourse in 1968 Last week's Republic gave a glowing tribute to the radicals of the 1960s. War is dividing the country. Congress has dubbed it a "quagmire." Protesters have taken to the streets with cries of "bring the boys home." Is this 2006 or 1966? Clever. Jack Williams was the Governor of Arizona during those turbulent years. As a child Williams developed a cancerous tumor in his eye and the eye was removed in an experimental surgery in 1914, when Williams was 5. Williams went on to become a radio personality, mayor of Phoenix and eventually Governor. An old photograph of a protest accompanies the article. The only sign that's prominent in the picture says. Williams is Blind in Both Eyes! Ahh, the good old days of intelligent debate.
Update on My Conversion I've had many comments on my essay about the question that converted me from Pro Choice to Pro Life. One reader recommended this excellent essay. If you enjoyed my comments, you will enjoy these comments as well. I would also like to thank the readers because all of the comments were positive. Those who were tempted to tell me to go jump in a lake showed remarkable restraint.
January 27, 2006 The Unitary Executive Much has been made of fact that Samuel Alito and George Bush believe that the President has some powers independent of Congress. But George Bush still seems to believe that appropriations bills start in the House and they need to be passed by the Senate. Let's see, I think he gets that from...oh yes the "Constitution." Governor Napolitano has a plan for the contempt fines that a federal Judge is imposing on the State. Instead of appealing the judge's decision, she and Attorney General Terry Goddard have convinced the judge to spend the monies on ELL programs. In a victory for Gov. Janet Napolitano, a federal judge ruled Thursday that the state must deposit $500,000-a-day fines for missing an English-learners deadline into a special fund to help those children master English-language skills. Hmm, a federal judge and the Governor are going to use state general fund money to fund ELL programs because they believe that the solution implemented by the Legislature is inadequate, or contains provisions with which they disagree. So much for checks and balances.
We have an Answer On January 6th, I asked the question "Where does Pete Rios live?" Here's the opening sentence. There does not appear to be a structure at the address that Representative Pete Rios lists as his home address in Dudleyville. Representative Rios and I have exchanged numerous emails in an effort to get to the bottom of this mystery. He and I thought you might enjoy reading them.
Here's an interesting Letter about Photo
Radar.
The City of Scottsdale is continuing to spin that a bright white stroboscopic light is safe to flash on a 65 MPH freeway (try looking into the flash of your camera at the next family birthday party and tell me how long it takes to see normally again) and that it is unlikely that the flash will cause a traffic collision. Having filled out quite a few accident report forms in another life as a traffic cop I can tell you that there is no little box to check off on that form that specifically lists that type of view obstruction as a collision cause, therefore nothing is available for researchers to extrapolate that a camera flash caused a crash. Besides, ADOT's traffic collision data usually takes over a year to produce so I am puzzled how Scottsdale will be able to have those answers during the nine month "test" period.
With that said, here is anecdotal evidence that is
as good as anything else:
On the Saturday evening of the weekend that the
cameras became operational my wife and I were South-bound on 101
approaching the last camera before freedom when we saw the flash about
ten or twenty car lengths in front of us. I have a sad habit of
watching for speeders, engrained in my head from years of being a cop
and I absolutely-positively did not see anyone that should have set it
off. My wife gasped, "What the heck was that?" and I have to admit,
even though I knew where they were, it still surprised the heck out of
me. I know that the experts have said that the flash will not cause
crashes but just around the bend we came upon three cars, pulled over to
the side, emergency flashers on, and people standing around.
I'm guessing that it was a crash. I'm guessing
that it happened near the bright white stroboscopic light. I'm pretty
sure it wasn't a birthday party.
Name Withheld
All the News that's Fit to Ignore. The New York Times on Alito.
Judge Samuel Alito Jr., whose entire history
suggests that he holds extreme views about the expansive powers of the
presidency and the limited role of Congress, will almost certainly be
a Supreme Court justice soon. His elevation will come courtesy of a
president whose grandiose vision of his own powers threatens to
undermine the nation's basic philosophy of government — and a Senate
that seems eager to cooperate by rolling over and playing dead.
ASU should change the name of the Cronkite school of Journalism to the Brontosaurus school of Journalism.
January 26, 2006 The Republic Strikes Back I chastised the Republic yesterday for re-writing a quote that implied that the photo radar testing on the loop 101 isn't going well. The quote that appeared in the online edition emphasized that the cameras may be malfunctioning but the quote that appeared in the print edition downplayed that possibility. My point was that the Republic has editorialized against those who are opposed to photo radar being used on freeways, and then appears to have changed the emphasis on the news coverage to justify its stance. After berating Reps. Pearce and Gorman, the Republic has conceded that: Gorman and other critics continue to speculate about whether the traffic cameras will contribute to freeway traffic accidents by forcing people to brake at high speeds, but Scottsdale officials have said they will halt the pilot program in the unlikely event that theory holds true. But, as you can read in yesterday's entry, the Republic is now downplaying the fact that the tests are going badly. Republic Editorial writer Dan Nowicki wrote a piece on AzCentral today that made no effort to rebut my main charge. However, Nowicki believes that I have mischaracterized the extent to which the Republic criticized Reps. Pearce and Gorman. Here's the quote that I took from the editorial. "'It's only the second week in January, and state Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, already has come up with what could be the dumbest legislative idea of the year. He's apparently miffed about Scottsdale's photo traffic-enforcement pilot program, which is starting Jan. 22.'" I concede that I should have put a "..." between "year" and "He's." Here's the entire quote. You tell me if it makes any difference. "It's only the second week in January, and state Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, already has come up with what could be the dumbest legislative idea of the year. "He's working on a bill that would relinquish state control over the Northeast Valley stretch of Loop 101 to Scottsdale -- even, according to the Scottsdale Republic, the segment on the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community. "He's apparently miffed about Scottsdale's photo traffic-enforcement pilot program, which is starting Jan. 22." Does that make the editorial better? That's a distinction without a difference. The point is that the ad hominem attack--dumbest legislative idea--is unprofessional and that changing the quote to deemphasize the problems associated with the testing is at best sloppy and at worst unethical. Nowicki has not addressed either point. One of the frustrations that legislators (and former legislators) have with newspapers is that we believe that the daily coverage is slanted to reinforce the paper's editorial policies. The photo radar article reinforces this belief. Nowicki's response does nothing to alleviate those concerns.
Speaking of Editorial Standards... It amuses me when mainstream media types get all puffed up when they brag about their accuracy--especially whey you catch one of them simply making stuff up. Here's a Quick Hit by the Republic Editorial writer Jeremy Dowell. America's founders were wary of the corrupting influence of power. That's why they built checks and balances into our Constitution. President Bush has said he can disregard those checks. Like the Founding Fathers, modern Americans should be suspicious of anyone who claims absolute power. It tends to corrupt absolutely. I had been following the debates closely, so the Bush quote surprised me. I emailed Mr. Dowell and asked him where he read it. "President Bush has said he can disregard those
checks." Here's his response. I was paraphrasing Bush's remarks. He has
asserted a greatly expanded Mr. Dowell then proceeded to provide his views on President Bush's positions on enemy combatants and the FISA courts. To which, I responded: That was the last I heard from Mr. Dowell.
Now I remember why I like him so Much Bush suggested Ford and GM make "a product that's relevant" instead of contemplating a bailout.
January 25, 2006 Photo Radar Shenanigans Scottsdale is putting photo radar cameras on the loop 101 with the full faith and credit of the Arizona Republic behind them. Some legislators have had the audacity to question the wisdom of placing cameras on freeways. Reps. Pearce and Gorman have pointed out that even drivers who are traveling below the speed limit tend to brake sharply when they see the flash and since no one has tried to place cameras on a busy freeway, transportation planners don't know if the cameras will enhance safety, or actually cause accidents. The Republic has responded with the favorite journalistic technique of...calling the sponsor stupid. It's only the second week in January, and state
Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, already has come up with what could be the
dumbest legislative idea of the year. He's apparently miffed about
Scottsdale's photo traffic-enforcement pilot program, which is starting
Jan. 22. The Republic also assures us that we are in good hands. After all the initial testing should alleviate all of our concerns. Gorman and other critics continue to speculate about whether the traffic cameras will contribute to freeway traffic accidents by forcing people to brake at high speeds, but Scottsdale officials have said they will halt the pilot program in the unlikely event that theory holds true. Scottsdale's trial should answer many of the critics' concerns. At this point, they should give Scottsdale a chance to prove the cameras will help and not hurt the Loop 101 safety record. But what if the Testing goes Badly? Photo enforcement cameras along a stretch of Scottsdale's Loop 101 flashed thousands of drivers Sunday in a trial run of the nation's only digitally patrolled state freeway. Naturally, the Republic pointed out the problems and apologized to Pearce and Gorman. Ha, I slay me. Actually, the Republic engaged in some fancy quote manipulation to discount the fact that the cameras may not operate well under freeway conditions. Here's the online version. Mary O'Connor, Scottsdale's transportation boss, said the cameras on six locations between Scottsdale Road and 90th Street, may have malfuntioned. She said it is more likely that they also caught emergency vehicles legally allowed to exceed the speed limit. That version is a bit raw--"malfunctioned" is spelled incorrectly and O'Connor is the transportation "boss." Those items are fixed in the version that ran in the paper. But there was one more bit of fixing... It seems that the reason for the flashes changed between the online version and the printed version of the story. Here's the version that ran in the paper. Mary O'Connor, Scottsdale's transportation general manager, said some of the 1,000 to 2,000 flashes recorded on a 7.8-mile stretch of the highway on Sunday may have caught emergency vehicles legally exceeding the speed limit. She said it is "less likely to be malfunctions." By removing the word "also" and changing the order, the editor is able to dramatically de-emphasize the possibility of malfunction. After all, they couldn't have been malfunctioning...because that might mean that they guys at the Republic are, like, even stupider than Russell Pearce.
January 24, 2006 The Question that Converted Me. This week marks the 33rd anniversary of Roe Vs. Wade. When I served in the State House of Representatives in the early 1990s I was pro choice. Since the our political views rarely change after college, it is extremely rare for someone who has actually been elected while holding a pro-choice position to convert later. Presumably, that position has been well thought out and even vigorously defended. People occasionally ask me about the question that converted me. (If you don't care then skip down to the entry about Jeff Flake and John McCain in Playboy. It's much more interesting.) I was pro choice and attended church every week. I have many pro-choice friends who attend church, mass or synagogue regularly. Some of them send their kids to All Saints, or Brophy, they go to mass every Sunday or wouldn't dream of working on Yom Kippur. This question is addressed to them..."where do we go when we die?" Are we like cats and dogs who simply decompose, or is there a God and we spend eternity with Him? If you think we are like cats and dogs, then you probably believe in some sort of balancing test that takes into account the inherent value of the potential life of the fetus and compares it to the right of a woman to control her own body. You may oppose late-term abortion and support parental consent but you are probably pro choice. You need read no further. But what if we go somewhere? After all, it seems pretty silly to spend Sundays in church if you don't believe in a living God. What if it's true and we really go to God when we die? That means that a portion of us--the soul, spirit, chi, whatever you want to call it--lives on without us. And this soul has a consciousness that contains the essence of what we were on Earth--our thoughts and memories continue. Once created, the soul is able to live forever, independently of our body. So if there is a God, and our soul goes to Him after we die...when does he create it? I saw a headline in today's paper that said "Life Begins at 50." I thought that might an article about Planned Parenthood, but it was about cruises, spas and retirement. Seriously, when would God decide to create this soul--birth? 26 weeks? high school? If the soul is independent of you being alive, He certainly doesn't have to wait until viability. I think the only answer is that God creates your soul at conception. That means that if you die anytime after conception, you go to God and live forever--never having been born. Could that really be true? I think it is. I think it would be difficult to believe in God enough to regularly attend church and come up with a different conclusion. That means that in God's eyes, you were as alive two days after conception as you were at your high school graduation--and just as deserving of protection. It was that realization that converted me. Think about that the next time you miss a good football game to go to church. And if you attend church or synagogue regularly and disagree, please send me a (polite) note to let me know where my analysis falls short.
That's a Really Bad Visual... Playboy magazine has finally decided to grace its pages with a pair of Arizonans who don't live in a sorority at a major state university. Sen. John McCain and Rep. Jeff Flake of Mesa — fully clothed — each earned a glowing mention in the Hugh Hefner publication for telling it like it is. "They are the rarest of politicians, those who dare to say what they mean and mean what they say," the magazine says of the two Republicans in an article appearing just a few staple-free pages away from Miss February. I wonder if McCain's Senate Bio is going to be revised to say that he likes long walks on the beach and reading poetry in the hot tub.
January 23, 2006
Espresso Pundit in Opinion Journal On January 18th, I commented on Dennis DeConcini's appointment to the Board of Regents. The online edition of the Wall Street Journal picked it up this morning.
How to Cure
Pork Some universities end up employing or being run by the very people who bring them this largesse. Last month Democratic former senator Dennis DeConcini was given a prestigious appointment as a regent of the University of Arizona. Mr. DeConcini retired from the Senate in 1995 after being tarred as one of the "Keating Five," a group of senators who improperly intervened with federal regulators on behalf of corrupt savings-and-loan owner Charles Keating. Mr. DeConcini then became--no surprise--a Washington lobbyist. He now admits he needs to be brought up to speed on education issues. But he had a ready explanation for his appointment: "I used to be very close to the universities. I was able to secure them millions of dollars when I was in the Senate." The office of Gov. Janet Napolitano, who appointed Mr. DeConcini as a regent, agrees with his assessment. Spokeswoman Jeanine L'Ecuyer told the Arizona State University newspaper that the former senator "was selected for his experience on Capitol Hill, where he helped Arizona universities secure federal funding for research." Greg Patterson, a Republican former Arizona state legislator, calls the DeConcini appointment outrageous: "Imagine if a former senator was appointed to the board of Boeing and said 'Golly, I don't know much about planes, but when I was in the Senate, I got Boeing a ton of contracts and now I've got this really cool job.' " As they say...read the whole thing. Here's the original espresso pundit piece.
Dems ask "Who Lost Yuma"? YUMA, Ariz. Democratic state Senator Robert Cannell of Yuma says he won't seek re-election this year. He cited health and family reasons for his decision not to seek another two-year term. Republican Representative Russ Jones of San Luis says he will run for Cannell's seat. Cannell says he may run again for the Senate in the future. Cannell served in the House from 2000-2003 before being appointed to the Senate by the Yuma County Board of Supervisors to replace former Senator Herb Guenther. Cannell won the Senate seat in 2004. Looks to me like the Senate will have at least 19 and possibly 21 Republican next year.
Hugh Hewitt on Jon Kyl. Trent Lott has his eye on being whip, and Jon Kyl may as well, in which case Kyl would have the edge. But Kyl may be looking down the road to his turn as Judiciary Chair just as a new president arrives, or perhaps even to the number 2 slot on the national ticket if the nominee is from other than the west. Wow, the number 2 slot. You heard it here first, unless you read Hugh Hewitt, then you, like, you know, heard it here second.
This poll is Shaking up the race to Replace Kolbe I mentioned last week that I thought Weiss would beat Giffords. Among Registered Democrats in the general election, 65 percent have a favorable impression of Weiss, while 42 percent are favorable to Eva Bacal, and 27 percent to Gabrielle Giffords. Among registered independents, 48 percent are favorable to Weiss and among Republicans 41 percent are favorable. By contrast, Giffords is viewed favorably by only 12 percent of independents and 12 percent of Republicans. I have two word for those of you who underestimate the power of TV--Congressman Hayworth.
The Right Man at the right Time... ...An Interview with John Shadegg
The earliest memory I have of John Shadegg, he was in a rumpled blue suit, strikingly pale and visibly shaking. It was 1991, I was a freshman legislator and Shadegg had been hired by the House of Representatives to represent the Republicans as we redrew the legislative and congressional boundaries following the 1990 census. We were in caucus, it was already dark and Shadegg had run back to his car to get some papers. The street behind the capitol is one-way with all the traffic coming from Shadegg’s right. He had jogged toward the street, looked left, and stepped off the curb directly into the driver’s side door of a passing car that approached him from the right. The impact started to pull him under the car but he held on to the driver’s mirror and window edge for the few seconds that it took the driver to stop. I was standing in the back of the caucus room when he came back in and told me about being dragged under the car. I’ve known him for 15 years, but when I think of John Shadegg, that’s the image that I always see. Shadegg retrieved his papers, regained his composure and gave his presentation. John Shadegg and I got a lesson in federal power as judges took over the redistricting process and redrew our congressional district lines that year. Shadegg ran an insurgent race for one of those congressional seats in 1994 and became part of the “Republican Revolution”. Ten years later, he is in leadership and is running an insurgent campaign for Majority leader. There are moments that mark a man’s life—falling in love, watching the birth of your first child, losing a parent. The accumulation of those marks is what defines us. Being dragged under a car for 2 seconds has a defining impact that is roughly equivalent to the first year of law school. Shadegg’s career seems to have incorporated the lessons he learned that night. He never again stepped into a street without completely assessing the situation and he has never taken for granted a threat from his right. On Thursday, I was invited to participate in a conference call with Shadegg and uber bloggers Hugh Hewitt, Michelle Malkin, Red State.org and Captain’s Quarters among others. Shadegg was unscripted, answered every question and showed up without entourage or handlers. His main competitor, Roy Blunt, was on a later call and gave the opposite impression--questions were tightly controlled, answers were tightly scripted. Shadegg still sounds like a revolutionary. No matter how deep inside the beltway he gets, Shadegg seems to see himself as an outsider. Shadegg’s father was a main confidant of Barry Goldwater and a 15-year old John Shadegg was backstage at the Cow Palace during Goldwater’s nomination speech in 1964. Shadegg came out swinging on the call. He repeated his call to forfeit pensions of any Congressman convicted of bribery. He pointed out that Roy Blunt had inserted a provision benefiting Philip Morris into a bill while his son and a friend worked as a Philip Morris lobbyists. Here’s how the Washington Post reported the incident. Only hours after Rep. Roy Blunt was named to the House's third-highest leadership job in November, he surprised his fellow top Republicans by trying to quietly insert a provision benefiting Philip Morris USA into the 475-page bill creating a Department of Homeland Security, according to several people familiar with the effort. Shadegg’s statement that congress “only does two things well—nothing and overreact.” Is not simply rhetoric. Shadegg’s insurgent appeal is to the Young Turk wing of the party. That wing believes that Shadegg is the one who can eliminate earmarks, cut spending and get the Republican “Revolution” to look more like the American Revolution and less like the French one. He's making headway getting that message out. Here's the New York Times on Shadegg. Mr. Shadegg endorsed changes limiting the ability of lawmakers to insert pet projects in spending bills. He also renewed his push to deny Congressional pensions to lawmakers convicted of taking bribes. Shadegg’s race is gaining momentum. Rep. John Shadegg's uphill battle to be House majority leader got a boost Thursday when the chairman of a key bloc of more than 100 conservative House members threw his support behind the Arizona Republican. Pence's backing had been considered one of the key unclaimed prizes in the race among Shadegg and Reps. Roy Blunt of Missouri and John Boehner of Ohio to succeed Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas as the No. 2 Republican in the House. Shadegg isn't Hayworth Unlike most Congressman who know how to give a great speech and eventually learn about issues, Shadegg is an issues expert who is learning to give speeches. Shadegg and Hayworth were elected at the same time, and the contrast between them is sharp. When JD Hayworth gives a speech, 40 year old men who are 50 pounds overweight and have 4 little kids at home decide that they want to join the Marines. I call it the “Top Gun” effect. In contrast, I attended an energy summit in Prescott a few years ago and Shadegg was the keynote speaker. Shadegg opened by saying “Thank you for inviting me here, my speech has 32 points.” We all thought that was really funny until he painstakingly went through all 32 points. Point number 5 about the implications of Arctic drilling on the environment and world oil markets was good. By the time he got to point 30—long term effects of repealing certain provisions of the 1934 Public Utility Holding Company Act—I was sure that my rights under the Geneva Convention had been violated. There have been times in the past and there will be times in the future, when congress needs great orators, deal makers and caretakers. Now is not that time. Congress is in need of what John Shadegg has to offer: an issues expert who is skeptical of congressional power, an insider who thinks and acts like an outsider… …a man who has been under a car but isn’t afraid to step into traffic.
Post Script If you want to listen to the full interview, click here and scroll down to "Blogger Call Audio." Special thanks to Hugh Hewitt for setting up the call.
January 19, 2006
Looks Like it's Going to be a Long Session
Illustration Courtesy of Alliance For School Choice, John Taylor 2006 Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano on Wednesday vetoed a school-choice measure that the Republican-led Legislature passed last week in a long-pledged reaction to her surprise veto of a similar proposal last spring. The governor opposes the tuition tax credit but agreed to the 2005 proposal as part of a budget agreement in which Republicans agreed to spending that she wanted. Earlier in the week, I predicted that she would let the bill go into law without her signature in a show of good faith. I apparently over estimated her.
Sam Coppersmith's Running Again No, not for Congress. The Coppersmith household had a big day Sunday at the Rock-n-Roll Arizona Marathon and Half-Marathon--as a family, we ran 39.3 miles, even with three members opting to take the day off. Both my son and I managed to achieve a personal record in our respective events. I couldn't quite break the 4 hour barrier, but I was very happy with my new best-ever time, and hey, if I was a woman I'd have qualified for Boston, but I think having the operation and running another marathon is more than I want to tackle this spring. Theoretically, if I keep up this rate of improvement in my time since 2004, in about 16 years I would finish before I start. You know the drill, go to this link, enter "Coppersmith" in the last name field, and see how we both did. Photos aren't available yet, maybe by next week's post. I clicked the link and he maintained a 9:25 pace for the full marathon--and he's 50. Wow, congratulations. That's really impressive.
January 18, 2006
Shadegg in the Wall St. Journal. Ten years ago, the American people put Republicans in control of the House of Representatives for the first time in more than 40 years. It was a historic achievement, made possible because we stood for the principles the American people believed in: smaller government, returning power to the states, lower taxes, greater individual freedom and--above all--reform. As they say, read the whole thing...
Congressional corruption is the big story so far this year. We've all read about Jack Abramoff and seen the Dick Tracy picture. But corruption comes in all shapes and sizes and not everyone who games the system is dumb enough to dress like a gangster. Grover Norquist sent me an email last week in which he discussed a different type of corruption--and his solution to it. Anyone who puts an earmark into a piece of legislation is banned from ever getting a job or contract from that entity (business, person, university, state government) for the rest of their lives. Getting a $1000 contribution for an earmark is small potatoes. What about the congressmen who funnel money to the state university for ten years and then cash in with a big job upon "retiring" from congress. Hmm. That got me thinking about a local mystery. Political insiders will tell you that that the most coveted appointment that a Governor can make is to the Board of Regents. Heads shook and eyes rolled last month when Governor Napolitano appointed retired Senator Dennis DeConcini to the Regents. DeConcini has been out of the public eye for many years, he was one of the original Keating five and hasn't been active in education issues for a decade. Why appoint him to the Board of Regents? In fact, when asked about the appointment, DeConcini confessed that he wasn't really up to speed on education issues DeConcini said he needs to become re-educated on higher-education issues. Then he added this revealing statement. "I used to be very close to the universities," he said. "I was able to secure them millions of dollars when I was in the Senate." Can you imagine what would happen if a Republican who served in the United States Senate for 18 years was appointed to the Board of Directors for Boeing and said "golly, I don't know much about planes, but when I was in the Senate, I got Boeing a ton of contracts and now I've got this really cool job"? That's fine if DeConcini thinks he got the best appointment in state government because he was able to deliver the fatted pig for all those years, but what is the governor's office saying? Actually, they agree with DeConcini's assessment. DeConcini was selected for his experience on Capitol Hill, where he helped Arizona universities secure federal funding for research, L'Ecuyer said. I contacted the Governor's office and they confirmed that they were referring to the federal funding that he secured for the universities in his capacity as a United States Senator. Well, I'll give DeConcini points for his honest response, and he gets extra credit for not wearing a black hat. Of course, the Regents appointment needs to be confirmed by the State Senate. I wonder if they are going to ask him about his hat collection?
Moderate for a Day I mentioned yesterday that Randy Graf was moving to the middle in an effort to position himself for the general election. Of course he's making sure not to forget his base. According to the Star Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo is headed to Tucson to help Randy Graf get to Washington. Tancredo, the self-proclaimed GOP point man for a get-tough border policy, will headline a $75-per-person breakfast fund-raiser for Graf on Friday at a Downtown hotel. The opinion page of The Wall Street Journal recently described Tancredo as the guy who wants "to make America the world's biggest gated community." The front page of The New York Times dubbed him a one-time "Capitol pariah on immigration" who is now a force to be reckoned with.
The Secret of Jim Carrey's Success. I've also cut way back on caffeine, "I have one coffee a day now rather than seven. The world is living in a coffee-induced hyper mode that is insane." Wow, who would have guessed that Carrey is bouncing off the walls in a caffeine frenzy? If he ever cranks it back up to a couple pots of coffee a day... he could spend every night for 14 months franticly writing a political blog...but that would be insane.
January 17, 2006
Alito opposes Affirmative Action for the Left Handed. One was a black man convicted of murder by an all-white jury sitting in a courtroom where local prosecutors had eliminated all African American jurors in five consecutive murder trials in the space of a year. Alito, dissenting from a verdict overturning the conviction, wrote that the makeup of the jury was no more significant than the fact that "Although only about 10 [percent] of the population is left-handed, left-handers have won five of the last six presidential elections." I once took a test to get into graduate school and they separated the left-handed applicants from the right-handed applicants and then seated all of us who were left-handed in the back of the room. I'm sure that under Judge Alito, this practice will be allowed to continue.
God Smote New Orleans because he's Mad at Black People. Mayor Ray Nagin suggested Monday that Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and other storms were a sign that "God is mad at America" and at black communities, too, for tearing themselves apart with violence and political infighting. "Surely God is mad at America. He sent us hurricane after hurricane after hurricane, and it's destroyed and put stress on this country," Nagin, who is black, said as he and other city leaders marked Martin Luther King Day. So where's the outrage? Pat Robertson wouldn't be allowed to say something like that. But Nagin's going to get a pass. Just Like Eddie Basha got a pass when he compared Wal-Mart's low prices to the Holocaust. "I call it the economic holocaust," Basha, chief executive of Bashas', the state's largest homegrown supermarket chain, said in an interview with The Arizona Republic. "It's no different than what the Nazis did in World War II. It's a blitzkrieg. They are doing economically what the Nazis did militaristically." But if Pat Robertson calls for the assassination of Hugo Chaves, or predicts that the ungodly will be destroyed by Hurricanes, all Hell breaks loose. Of course, we know why Nagin and Basha get a pass and Robertson gets blasted--Robertson is left-handed. I'm sure that under Judge Alito, this practice will be allowed to continue.
Ain't that the Truth.. Here's the headline from the Star's lead editorial on Monday. Metropolitan Tucson needs a psychiatric hospital
That's why I buy my bread at Costco. I was shopping at Fry's when one of those really annoying ads came over the loud speakers. It started like this. A healthy pregnancy begins in the bread aisle. I went over to the bread aisle to check it out, but I didn't see much action. Actually, most pregnancies probably start in the liquor aisle and involve those who forgot to visit the pharmacy aisle.
January 16, 2006
You don't see that every day... Len Munsil's website has been up for two weeks and it now has a bright red scrolling banner that says. PLEASE DON'T SEND ANY MORE SEED MONEY! WE ARE MAXED OUT.
Dreaming... I checked out a cassette copy of the I Have a Dream speech from the library last week. We don't home school the kids, but occasionally we do a history unit at home and I'm hoping to recite the speech to my kids today. I've been working on it since early January, and I wanted to hear King's cadence. I have to say the the result was stunning. It was much different--and much better--than I expected. We've all seen clips, but they are usually only about a minute long. I've read Bearing the Cross, so I understand that Dr. King's ministry had its shortcomings, but I have to say that this speech, delivered in that manner, at that location, with that crowd, deserves its place as one of the greatest moments in American History.
Moving toward the middle... I've predicted that Graf will beat Giffords. Tucson Blogger Ted Prezelski points out that Graf is sounding a bit more progressive these days. The right wing of the Republican party,
especially the anti-immigrant right, is owned by Graf. This, plus the fact
that there seems to be no serious moderate challenger to him in the
primary, has enabled him to already make stabs at the moderate vote. If you don't believe me, check his website. There on the front page is a (very selective) listing of his legislative accomplishments: expansion of access to state parks, encouraging energy conservation, keeping tuition down and whistleblower protection. It almost makes him sound like he's Phil Lopes. I don't have to be consistent... Of course, since I'm from Tucson and feel like I grew up with Patty Weiss I'm also predicting that Weiss will defeat Giffords. When Hayworth beat Schweikert and Husk, I vowed never to underestimate the power of TV. In fact I was so impressed that I went out and bought one. (It's actually a pretty cool set. I gave Stan Barnes $50 for the TV that used to be in his kids' room. The on/off switch is missing and there was a big jelly stain on the back, but it works really well.) But can Graf beat Weiss? Now that's a tough question...
Here's Interesting Economic News The American economy continues to surge ahead, though you won't read much about it in mainstream media. Economic growth in the third quarter was 4.1 percent--despite Hurricane Katrina!--the 10th consecutive quarter with growth over 3 percent. Unemployment is 5.0 percent--lower than the average for the 1970s, 1980s, or 1990s. Since April 2003 the economy has created a net 5.1 million new jobs. Core inflation is only 2.1 percent, and gas prices, which surged above $3 a gallon after Katrina, are now down around $2. Productivity growth for the five-year period of 2000-2005 is 3.4 percent, the highest of any five-year period in 50 years.
January 13, 2006
Media Alert. The Espresso Pundit will be on Channel 12 at 8:05 Sunday Morning for Sunday Square Off with Rick DeBruhl. Topics include: Hayworth/Abramoff, Shadegg's leadership race and the Governor's State of the State address.
The Jones Report is Out. New Times paid for the expert witness that Senator Harper used to inspect the voting machines used in the District 20 recount. Confusion abounds as to whether the report will be released to the general public, or if New Times was paying for a scoop. The question is now moot. Here's a copy of the Jones report. Here's the Republic's take on it.
Tuition Tax Credits: Even The Star Knows the Truth. Napolitano promised to sign such a bill last year, then vetoed it because the final version included only a review of the program after five years. She wanted a "sunset" requirement that extension of the credits beyond 2010 would require a new legislative vote. That sunset is in the measures approved Tuesday. Of course, the AEA is apoplectic. AEA opposes tuition tax credits. These schemes divert taxpayer money from our woefully under funded public schools to private schools who are not accountable to taxpayers for providing quality education. This bill will become law unless Governor Napolitano vetoes it within ten days. Please click the take action now send her an email asking her to veto HB 2004. I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that she lets it go into law without her signature. It's a measly $5 million in a $7 billion budget, so it's not the money that matters. Republicans feel like they trusted her and she lied to them. The bill now contains the provision that she complained was absent, so they believe that they have compromised further. The relationship between the Governor and the Republican leadership is rocky, but it exists--there is a relationship. They may not like each other, but they can work together. If she vetoes the bills again, that relationship is over. Even the Republican moderates will have a tough time working with her. I think she underestimated the reaction to the original vetoes. If she wants to get anything done this session, she needs a face-saving way to defuse the situation. Letting them become law without her signature is a good compromise. This has escalated into a mini Cuban missile crisis and she needs to decide if she's going to be remembered as JFK or Castro.
The Final Recipient of the Abramoff Money... ...was, of course, the media. I wonder if they are planning to give their "ill-gotten" gain back to the tribes. Here's a list of some of Hayworth's expenditures. Doesn't it seem a tad hypocritical for the recipients of the money to pummel the contributor for the alleged ethical issues associated with the donations--while keeping the money?
January 12, 2006 Timing is Everything
Kyl challenger, Jim Pederson,
stood next to Harry Reid at a press conference yesterday while Reid
blasted Kyl and said "this is a Republican scandal, not one Democrat
received money from Abramoff."
Appearing at a campaign event with Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., Pederson singled out several Kyl Senate votes since 1995 against lobbying-reform amendments as evidence that Kyl is too close to special interests. The charge came amid growing efforts by Democrats to blame congressional Republicans for the unfolding scandal involving disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Then today, the Washington Times listed the top 5 targets in the Abramoff scandal and one of them was Reid. A Justice Department investigation into influence-peddling on Capitol Hill is focusing on a "first tier" of lawmakers and staffers, both Republicans and Democrats, say sources close to the probe that has netted guilty pleas from lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Law-enforcement authorities and others said the investigation's opening phase is scrutinizing Sens. Conrad Burns, Montana Republican; Byron L. Dorgan, North Dakota Democrat; and Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, along with Reps. J.D. Hayworth, Arizona Republican, and Bob Ney, Ohio Republican. Mr. Reid has acknowledged receiving contributions from Abramoff's clients, but has said he does not intend to return the money because it represented legal donations. The sources said Mr. Reid is thought to have collected as much as $61,000 in donations from Abramoff clients, including Indian tribes.
This is not going to look Good on a Resume... You may have noticed that one of the above-mentioned "first tier" was Hayworth.
Here's a letter about the Gov's latest Immigration Flip. Greg
So now I'm really confused. You point out that
Napolitano has changed positions on troops and the border, but
it appears that the legislature has too. Did you see Ken Bennett on
Horizon last night, critizing the proposal? He said, based on
their trip down there last year, that he does not believe (and the Guard
told them) that they are not trained to do border patrol. Is this a
Republican flip flop or what?
Is it possible for anyone at the
Capitol to be consistent???
Kate James
Actually, Bennett has never supported sending troops to the border. My point is that she has adopted the positions of the two people who have been vilified as the most extreme on the issue. Isn't that ironic? Nearly every Republican legislator opposes putting troops on the border and she decides to adopt the proposal of the founder of the minutemen and the author of Prop 200 while 1,000 Hispanics stand in the mall protesting her actions.
Here's a note from Dean Martin Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), America's leading taxpayer advocacy organization, announced that Senator Dean Martin will chair the Arizona Senate Taxpayer Protection Caucus and Representative Warde Nichols will chair the Arizona House Taxpayer Protection Caucus. To join the caucus, legislators must sign and keep the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, which is a written commitment to their constituents to “oppose and vote against any and all efforts to increase taxes.” Every state (with the exception of Nebraska) will have both a Senate and House Taxpayer Protection Caucus, consisting of all pledge signers in the legislature. Currently, there are 32 Arizona Pledge signers, 14 in the Senate, and 18 in the House. “Arizona taxpayers are looking forward to seeing their position strengthened through the new caucus that will represent their interests,” said Grover Norquist, President of ATR. “Under Sen. Martin’s and Rep. Nichols’ leadership, the Arizona Taxpayer Protection Caucus will fight for Arizona families and businesses to keep more of their hard earned money." The Taxpayer Protection Caucuses provide a single voice on tax issues among pro-taxpayer legislators, and form entire bodies of legislators that believe in the same principle: No new taxes. Considering the budget surplus battle facing Arizona, tax relief and spending restraint continue to be very high on the radar screen for members of the public and the media. With the volume of bills introduced and debated each session, the Taxpayer Protection Caucus will serve as a resource and focal point for research and discussion on developing and supporting the members’ common goal of lower taxes. In addition to providing a forum for discussion, the Taxpayer Protection Caucus will encourage accountability amongst each other to the taxpayers of Arizona. Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) was founded in 1985 at the request of President Ronald Reagan. ATR is a non-partisan coalition of taxpayers and taxpayer groups who oppose all federal, state and local tax increases.
January 11, 2006 Here's an excellent District 20 Timeline. (I printed it last week, but the link didn't work)
Welcome Aboard Troops on the Border? “So even if we thought it was a good idea – and I don’t think it’s a good idea – we wouldn’t have the manpower to do it,” Governor Napolitano Nov. 6, 2003,
"This is really a job for the federal government or the Border Patrol, and we should not further stretch the limited resources of our National Guard for that purpose," Napolitano's spokeswoman Pati Urias, April 19, 2005
"If I was the governor, the first thing I'd do is put the National Guard on the border in a modest manner, assign patrols and really beef it up. She can do that today," he said. "I'd declare an emergency under federal law because of the impact of a billion-dollar cost to the criminal justice system, to the health care system and the education system." Russell Pearce July 10, 2005
Governor Napolitano declares a state of emergency along Arizona's border with Mexico. August 2005
We need the National Guard on this border immediately," Minuteman Founder Chris Simcox August 28, 2005
Napolitano spokeswoman Jeanine L'Ecuyer August 28, 2005
Governor Napolitano January 9, 2005 "Governor Napolitano's border security proposal should be supported by the Arizona Legislature" and passed into law immediately to better protect Arizonans." Minuteman president Chris Simcox January 10, 2005
Ahead of his Time
Greg,
January 10, 2006 A House Divided... Alice Lara has the best Rolodex in town. Sam Campana calls 911 to ask for directions and I call Alice when I need a phone number. Our calls go something like this... Alice Lara: "Copper State Consulting Group, this is Alice." Espresso Pundit: "Hi Alice, is Stan in? AL "No, he doesn't talk to you during session, he'll call you back in April." EP "Cool, what I really need is that guy who used to work at KTAR, or maybe it was KFYI...what's his name..." AL "Leibowitz?" EP "No, the other guy..." AL "Tom Liddy?" EP, "yeah, what's his cell phone number?" AL. Here you are... I think I could call and say, "The guy in DC who walks with a cane and breaks the ties in the Senate" And she says "Cheney?" Yeah, that guy, what's his cell phone number? And she would say "Here you go..." Alice Lara is also a Latina Republican--self reliant, Pro-life, hard working, Catholic and proud of it. Alice, and the growing number of Hispanic conservative middle class professional women like her, are the Democratic Party's worst nightmare. Here's an article that she wrote for Latino Perspective Magazine. I am a minority within a minority. I am a Latina Republican. How can our Latino culture with its history of fighting prejudice be so prejudicial about politics? I struggle with how our conservative culture, predominantly self-reliant, Christian and pro-life, remains loyal to that other party which for the most part does not champion these values anymore. Read the whole thing. Here's a Response from Representative Gallardo. (I don't know who he's going to call when he needs Cheney's phone number.) STANDING UP FOR DEMS, LATINOS
I was disappointed
to read in your November edition that a
Rep. Steve Gallardo, District 13-Phoenix
Meet the Leading Edge of the School Choice Movement... ...and get free lunch too. The Institute for Justice is bringing Virginia Walden-Ford to town.
Randy Pullen on the City of Phoenix bonds
VOTE NO ON ALL PROPOSITIONS A YES vote will result in your property taxes increasing. Property taxes have already more than doubled for many homeowners in recent years. This year alone, your property taxes will increase, on average, by 23%. The total bond amount of $878.5 million is misleading. In actuality, the cost will be much higher due to interest charges (with rates as high as 12%), financing fees, commissions and legal costs. The real cost due to interest charges alone could be as high as $2.8 BILLION; three times higher than advertised. Historically, city bonds have been primarily used for capital improvements and emergency services that impact the well being of all city taxpayers. Bonds should not include funds for special interest groups, non-profit organizations or repayment of political campaign promises. Nearly 51% of the proposed bonds, almost a half-billion dollars, are slated for building the ASU Downtown campus; funding non-profit organizations such as the Salvation Army, Arizona Opera and Ballet, Black Theatre Group, and the Family Advocacy Center; and for funding charter schools (a Mayor Gordon campaign promise). While many of these items are worthwhile charities and endeavors, they should be paid for with private funds or state funds and not with our property taxes. If you vote NO there will be MORE money available for police, fire protection and city infrastructure improvements; as well as a future property tax rate reduction achieved through elimination of interest and principal payments. Vote NO to free up money for police, fire protection, roads and a REDUCTION in your property taxes. Respectfully, Randy Pullen
January 9, 2006 The Left Hand Doesn't Know what the Right Hand is Doing. Last Sunday, the Republic brought in Jeff Groscost and Steve Tuttle to handicap the Len Munsil candidacy. The choice of Jeff Groscost as the conservative raised some eyebrows. Jeff's analysis was fine, but his tone was combative, shrill and caustic--especially when juxtaposed with Steve Tuttle's courteous, thoughtful and professional analysis from the left. Unfortunately, without a disclaimer, readers assumed that Groscost represented the Munsil campaign. Incredibly, the Republic compounded the error Sunday by printing a letter to the editor lambasting Munsil for Groscost's tone. The author of "Point," described as a past-and-present politician, uses his 24 column inches to lambaste the current governor, her party, Clean Elections, former President Bill Clinton, and liberals in general. He had an excellent opportunity to present his candidate's qualifications and plans in a major newspaper. Instead, he opines a one-sided verbal attack that I find somewhat offensive. Len Munsil would do well to distance himself from Jeff Groscost's negative ranting and to court more well-reasoned persons similar to Stephen Tuttle to speak on his behalf. The original mistake is excusable. The Viewpoints section is planned long in advance and the editors couldn't have realized that Groscost was going to come unhinged and create a backlash that made Len Munsil look shrill and unprofessional. However, printing the letter lambasting Munsil for an error that was entirely the Republic's is inexcusable. The Republic needs to issue a statement to make it clear that they selected Jeff Groscost to write the analysis without Munsil's knowledge or consent and that the Republic and Groscost, not Munsil are responsible for it's ferocity--and any backlash.
Grover Norquist is a big fan of Blogs Greg. Thank you for sharing your column and the nice back and forth dissecting Talton. I have been overseas in Jerusalem and just getting back to what passes for civilization in Washington D.C. We have a huge fight this spring. Well, two fights that are the same. How to limit runaway spending. How to tamp down bribery to get at that spending in Congress. They are the same fight. Less money being thrown around means fewer "lobbyists" trying to get their hands on it. If you leave a birthday cake under the sink you will have cockroaches. If you have billions given away in earmarks, people will figure out how to get it. One: we should term limit membership on the Appropriations committee in the House of Representatives. That way no member sees himself as a Spender all the time he or she is in congress. Two: anyone who puts an earmark into a piece of legislation is banned from every getting a job or contract from that entity (business, person, university, state government) for the rest of their lives. Getting a $1000 contribution for an earmark is small potatoes. What about the congressmen who funnel money to the state university for ten years and then cash in with a big job upon "retiring" from congress. The left will rue the day they decided to focus on "ethics" or "corruption." The party of Chicago, New Orleans and Philadelphia, the AFL, Teachers unions and trial lawyers is not a credible party of reform. And we can make real progress fighting corruption only by cutting the budget back and reducing the occasion to sin. Jack Abramoff is an old friend of mine and I am pleased that he never approached Americans for Tax Reform with anything that wasn't on the level, but it is also silly for the left to pretend that he is a large part of Washington. It is up to us to put forward real reforms that will save taxpayers money and reduce corruption. The democrats have no solutions. Grover Norquist
Here's a Letter from Senator Harper Greg, I received pressure from some House leadership to end the
investigation. The Senate President, wanting to stay on the sidelines,
said the Senate would not fund the investigation.
January 6, 2006 There does not appear to be a structure at the address that Representative Pete Rios lists as his home address in Dudleyville. Rios is registered to vote at 9620 North Malpais in Dudleyville and he claims the same address in Legislative records in order to claim his mileage reimbursements and as proof that he actually lives in the Legislative District that he represents. However the Pinal County Assessor’s website shows that there is no parcel at that address and there is no one named “Rios” who owns property on Malpais. Calls to the assessor’s office confirmed that they have no record of a parcel at that address and the friend whom I sent to find the property was unable to locate the address. Furthermore, his mail from the Legislature is forwarded to a PO Box in Hayden and he votes by mail. (Click the link above and type "Malpais" in the "Name" box on the bottom right.) Legislators who live too far to commute to and from the Capitol must maintain a home in their district and then generally rent an apartment or check into a hotel near the Capitol. They are reimbursed for their actual daily mileage to and from the “session” home near the Capitol. They also receive reimbursement for one trip each week for the actual mileage driven to and from their “District” home. If they don’t return to their Districts, they are not entitled to the mileage to and from the district house. Rios’s living arrangements don’t fit this pattern. He lists a “district” home in Dudleyville, 101 miles from the Capitol. That would be normal. But his temporary or “session” home is in Apache Junction; 37 miles from the Capitol and well over an hour commute in rush hour. Furthermore, he and his wife own the Apache Junction “session” home and it’s the only property that he owns in Pinal County. Why would he buy his “session” home and why would he choose to locate his temporary residence in the far East valley? One possible clue lies in the fact that the Apache Junction home was within the boundaries of Rios’s legislative district at the time he purchased it. But the Legislative boundaries changed in 1991 and again in 2001 and Rios’s Apache Junction home is now 2 blocks inside Eddie Farnsworth’s District 22. It is possible that Rios bought the home with the intent to live in his district and commute to the Capitol. Redistricting eliminated that option, but he chose to keep the home and claim a location well within his district as his primary “district” home and reclassify the Apache Junction home as a “session” home. So what are the possibilities? Well, if there is a home at 9620 North Malpais in Dudleyville, and if Rios indeed drives there every weekend, then there is no problem. I am open to that possibility. A second possibility is that there may be a property in Dudleyville to which Rios has some type of connection that allows him to somehow claim that it’s his residence. Residence is often a state of mind and there have certainly been examples of Legislators who had very loose connections to their districts. Polly Rosenbaum, Debra Brimhall and Sylvia Laughter come to mind. But as Mary Peters discovered residence isn’t completely a state of mind. Your Mileage May Vary Of course, the second option leaves a big question about the mileage. If his brother owns a tool shed in Dudleyville and Rios claims it’s his home, does he drive there every week? Does he really drive past the Apache Junction house that he and his wife own so that he can spend every weekend in Dudleyville? House members sign a form on which they state the mileage to their session and district homes. Rios claims 202 (round trip) to the Dudleyville home and 74 (round trip) to the Apache Junction home. The form includes this statement “I understand and agree that, if I do not travel to my home address at least one time per week, I will notify the House of Representatives Accounting Office immediately to avoid reimbursement for mileage not traveled.” (Emphasis in the original) I have a copy Rios's form and his initials appear next to the statement and his signature is on the bottom of the page. Incredibly, when Rios originally filled out the form, he did not include the Dudleyville mileage and has since amended the form and requested to be reimbursed for nearly 4,000 additional miles. The third scenario is the meltdown scenario. Let’s suppose that in the late 1980s Representative Rios bought a house in Apache Junction that was in his district, but the district boundaries changed and he didn’t bother to move or to establish residency in the district. He simply claimed 9620 N. Malpais as his district home. That would be incredible. If true, it means that he lives in District 22 but he unlawfully represents District 23 in the Legislature and votes from a fake address in a district in which he doesn’t reside. Furthermore, it means that he has been reimbursed thousands of dollars for mileage that he hasn’t actually driven. I don’t know whether it’s option one, two or three. So I will simply restate my original question. Where does Pete Rios live?
January 5, 2006 Media Bias comes in Many Forms A textbook case of media bias is developing before our eyes. Paula Aboud and Len Munsil have appeared prominently in the local papers. Aboud was just appointed to fill the seat vacated by Gabrielle Giffords and Munsil is set to announce his candidacy for Governor. They have similar yet opposite backgrounds, but you won't read about that in the newspapers. Unless you're just back from Tibet, you will know that Munsil is the former director of the Center for Arizona Policy. The Center for Arizona Policy advocates for traditional marriage and pro-life causes. Every article about Munsil includes this fact and many of the articles go on to disparage Munsil and the Center based on the issues that they advocated. The least pejorative statements about munsil describe him as an outspoken social conservative. The most pejorative articles use media dirty tricks to make him look bad. First, we have the fabricated quote trick used to describe the Center for Arizona Policy The group distributes a voter's guide each election cycle that some have accused of being thinly veiled advocacy for staunch social conservatives. Corporate advocacy on behalf of candidates--staunch social conservatives or otherwise--is a crime. So who are these "some" who would accuse the Center of these crimes? If you Google the Center and "veiled" the only person who has made such an accusation is Republic Columnist Richard Ruelas, and he offered no support for his assertion. Are the political reporters quoting their own columnist who alleges these crimes and simply not disclosing that he is the source? Who are these "some have accused?" But what About Aboud? Paula Aboud is the former President of the Maine Lesbian Gay Political Alliance. But this fact was omitted from every newspaper description of Aboud. The Pima County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday picked Democratic Party activist Paula Aboud to serve out the final year of a two-year state Senate term. Aboud, 55, is a former president of the Democrats of Greater Tucson. She
has never held elective office but ran unsuccessfully for a Tucson City
Council seat in 2001. She is a former high school English teacher and
athletics coach who manages her family's real estate company. Funny, I thought she was a staunch social liberal who is the former President of a Gay, and Lesbian advocacy group that distributed thinly-veiled advocacy pieces on behalf a slate of liberal candidates. But that would probably be biased.
Richard Ruelas on Tax Cuts. The group of five multimillionaires has a theory that it wants Arizona to turn into policy. The theory has to do with tax cuts. It says cutting taxes is good because it makes businesses relocate here or expand. And that people, given more of their own money, will invest it or at least spend it more wisely than the government would. Yada yada yada Here's Roy Miller on Ruelas
Greg
Richard Ruelas' article "Theory on cutting
taxes doesn't hold EVEN (emphasis added) for its proponents" was a
cheap shot at best. The headline would suggest to the reader that
Ruelas was presenting some data to show that tax cuts are not good for
economic growth, countering the Arizona Free Enterprise Club's
arguments to the contrary. Ruelas did nothing of the kind. He
presented no studies or research. He simply went on a diatribe about
the backers of Arizona Free Enterprise and tried to made a big deal of
how they have prospered in the allegedly high tax environment of
Arizona that they seek to remedy.
The fact that the five business entities
he cites succeeded in spite of obstacles like high taxes is not an
argument against tax cuts. The combination of the misleading headline
with the ad hominem arguments in the column is a low point for
journalism. Is this the best that the Republic can do?
Roy Miller
Taxpayer Rally at the Capitol Next Wednesday, January 11, State Rep. Laura Knaperek (R-Tempe) will hold a press conference at the state capitol in support of a major tax-cut package. The Taxpayer Appreciation and Investment Act of 2006, would reduce each of Arizona’s personal income tax rates by ten percent, providing much-needed tax relief for the working people and retirees of Arizona. She will be joined by House Speaker Jim Weiers (R-Phoenix) and Senate President Ken Bennett (R-Prescott), as well as other sponsors of the bill. The press conference is at 11:00 a.m. in the Ice Cream Parlor, in the north end of the old capitol building, 1700 West Washington Street in Phoenix. It has been almost ten years since working Arizonans had an income tax cut. Arizonans deserve tax relief, and tax cuts make great economic sense.
Remember: This is your money, not the government’s. Please contact your state legislators and ask them to support tax relief. To find your legislators, visit the state legislature’s website, and search under the members section for the House or Senate: View the 2005 Arizona Federation of Taxpayers scorecard to see which legislators are friendly to taxpayers and which are not. For more information contact: Chad Kirkpatrick, Chairman, Arizona Federation of Taxpayers, chair@aztaxpayers.org Tom Jenney, Executive Director, Arizona Federation of Taxpayers, vc@aztaxpayers.org, (602) 478-0146
January 4, 2006 Gov. Janet Napolitano said Tuesday that her agreement to accept a proposed tax break to help students attend private schools ended when Republican lawmakers balked at having a special session to replace that bill and another controversial education measure she also vetoed last spring. Napolitano objects to tuition tax credits - both the existing one for individuals and the proposed one for businesses - but she agreed last spring to let the corporate credit become law as part of an agreement with Republicans on a new state budget and related issues. The voters aren't going to care if the Governor made a budget deal and then backed out of it. Joe Sixpack won't notice that the Legislature acted in good faith and passed the entire package only to have her sign the provisions that benefited her while vetoing the provisions that benefited the Legislature. The polls won't reflect that she now says that she will make no effort to fulfill the agreement and that the she expects the legislature to renegotiate for the provisions they won last time. But the thousand people who work around the Capitol will know. Her appointees, supporters and staff will know. The press corps will know. And deep down, they will understand that this was a classless and unprofessional act and even her close supporters and friends will think just a little bit less of her.
My Other Predictions should Turn out This Well... Last week I likened the governor's opposition to a border fence as a gymnastics routine that concluded with a full-twisting dismount. After beating the drum for a federal plan to secure the border, she sided with Vicente Fox in opposing Congress's proposed border fence. She said "You show me a 50-foot wall, and I'll show you a 51-foot ladder." That's a great quote and I described it as "soon to be famous." Well, it's getting more famous now. Here's national radio host and top blogger Hugh Hewitt on the quote. I've copied it in its entirety.
Just How Hard Is It To Make and Carry a 50 Foot Ladder?by Hugh HewittJanuary 3, 2006 06:20 AM PSTThe Washington Post-ABC poll reports that solid majorities of Americans want stepped up border security:
Some smart Arizona reporter and/or voter should
ask the Governor why the fence along San Diego's border has operated to
dramatically lower illegal crossings along its length? Are there more 51
foot ladders along her portion of the border than along the
California-Mexico border? Napolitano's response is foolish and sidesteps the obvious effectiveness of fencing. Her obliviousness to common sense may actually give her re-election opponents some traction. Expect a 51 foot ladder to start following Napolitano around.
OUCH
Speaking of things that hafta Hurt... In a stunning defeat for Reps Bradley and Downing, the Pima County Board of Supervisors has voted unanimously to send Paula Aboud to the Senate. Aboud's only experience with elected office was a failed run for the Tucson City Council. The Pima County Board of Supervisors unanimously appointed Paula Aboud to serve as District 28 state senator, completing the term of Gabrielle Giffords, who resigned to run for Congress. Downing has indicated that he would run for the seat if he wasn't appointed to it. We'll see. The power of incumbency is formidable and Aboud might just be willing to point out that Downing isn't eligible to serve in the Senate and keep his University of Arizona position. Since Downing is earning two full time retirements from the same employer at the same time, I predict he'll keep his head down and stay in the House.
January 2, 2006
Groscost is back and boy is he Ticked Off. The Republic provided a little preview of the Munsil candidacy with Steve Tuttle and Jeff Groscost playing the parts of Jane Curtin and Bill Murray. (Folks have been asking me...Couldn't Len Munsil have found someone better than Jeff Groscost to defend him? Actually, I confirmed with the Republic that they chose Jeff without consulting Munsil.) Jeff was in rare form.. Traditionally, Democrats and their union thug cronies have had a lock on the large databases of names who are conditioned to give now and ask questions later. The fun will be watching Napolitano in the hinterlands, trying to avoid kissing this tar baby or risk alienating her enlightened core constituency by caving to what they believe are the uninformed masses that hold her future in the balance. She is a Clintonista, the same President Clinton that moved her to Arizona as our carpetbagging U.S. attorney as a reward for her roll in Anita Hill's hatchet job on Clarence Thomas. Equally discomfiting for the Janenator should be the fact that there will not be a casino initiative on the ballot, with backers spending upward of $80 per yes vote to roil her voters out of the bars and alleys and into the polling booth. Wow, I'm occasionally tempted to write like that, but I, like, have a job. Once you get past the references to tar babies, carpetbaggers and union thug cronies, his analysis is right on.
And now for something completely different..or maybe not. The really interesting piece was Steve Tuttle's counterpoint.
If nominated, Len Munsil will be a legitimate candidate with a genuine chance to win. Democrats, astonishing as it sounds, face overconfidence. They must work every bit as hard as they did four years ago to succeed. And they must tread exceedingly lightly when it comes to Munsil's
fundamentalist religious beliefs. Attempts to portray him as a radical
kook could backfire. Hmm, it looks like Steve Tuttle thinks there might actually be a race.
Here's a letter about the Montini Post
Greg
I'm surprised that Mr. Montini, is so concerned about the relatively small amount of Tribal contributions received by Rep. Hayworth ($150,000 over seven years, or about $22,000 a year). Doesn't he know that the Arizona Democratic Party, led by then chairman and current Senate candidate Jim Pedersen, received almost $1.3 million in contributions from Arizona tribes during the 2002 elections? I'm not sure what $22,000 a year will get you, but $1.3 million is sure to get you noticed.
Keep up the great blog,
Jim Morse
My number one Fan
Greg
Anyone who would take you seriously is either an idiot or a Kool-Aid drinking, Bushite, Reich-wing X-tian, Repuglican, oh wait, I'm being redundant. I'd suggest you open your eyes, mind, and heart but I seriously doubt your ilk capable.
Sincerely,
Mike Shelby
Ph. 602-430-3897
My little Cameo in the Insider... There has been a recent kerfuffle brewing about campaign expenditures made by Democratic House candidate Ed "Margaritaville" Ableser of Tempe during his unsuccessful 2004 run. A Republican online blogger took Ableser to task a while back because his campaign, in the last days of the 2004 election, got about $7,000 in Clean Elections matching funds on Election Day, obviously at a point where it was too late to spend them on campaign ads or anything else that might help him win. So what did Ableser do?
|
|
|||
Jack Abramoff (nice hat)