« May 2011 | Main | July 2011 »
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Headline in the Arizona Daily Star: Vermin found in Arizona State Capitol building:
Senators, representatives, lobbyists and mice are sharing space at the Arizona State Capitol in Phoenix.
The Arizona Republic reports rat remnants have been found in the House of Representatives, the Senate and the executive tower.
It's too easy.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
I received a message this afternoon from the AIRC meeting that "Tea Partiers have taken over the redistricting meeting and are demanding that Coleen Mathis resign."
Any member of the public who wants to resist this Tea Party tyranny threatening our democratic process should head on over to the AIRC meeting this afternoon (if it has not already been suspended). I hope to have reports from those in attendance later. If you have first-person reports, please post them in the comments.
The AIRC is holding a meeting today in Tucson at 1:00 p.m.
Location: Pima Community College – District Office
4905 E. Broadway Blvd.
Building “C” Room #105
Tucson, AZ 85709 (West of Rosemont Blvd.)
On the Agenda http://www.azredistricting.org/docs/Meeting-Info/Agenda-063011.pdf is a presentation by the newly hired mapping consultant Strategic Telemetry. The Commission may also take action on setting up the schedule of public hearings for its work.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
The U.S. Supreme Court has bastardized the 14th Amendment by finding that corporations are "persons" too and enjoy the "privileges and immunities" of political speech under the First Amendment in Citizens United v. FEC (where's your "original intent" jurisprudence now, Justice Scalia?)
Not only that, but corporation's rights are superior to your individual rights -- corporations can spend unlimited amounts of campaign money and not have to disclose the names of contributors or amounts given. This allows the Chicoms Chamber of Commerce to comingle money from foreign corporations in its general account and use those funds to influence U.S. elections (foreign campaign contributions in U.S. elections are prohibited - for now. There is actually a case in court challenging this prohibition). You and I, however, are subject to strict campaign contribution limits, and our contributions are a matter of public record disclosure.
The Federal Election Commission has been a completely dysfunctional regulatory agency for many years. Complaints take months, if not years to be determined, long after an election has been held and certified. And per se violations of the law -- as occurred with the John McCain campaign in 2008 -- result in a mere wrist-slap of a fine, if any enforcement at all. The FEC is a toothless tiger that no one fears or takes seriously.
I believe this is what comedian Stephen Colbert is mocking with his bit of performance art by filing an application to become a Super PAC with the FEC. And today, the FEC actually approved his application. Our election system is broken, and Colbert is proving the point. Outside FEC, Stephen Colbert Says His 'Super PAC' Is No Joke | TPMMuckraker:
The Federal Election Commission gets it -- Stephen Colbert is punking them. But the FEC treated the Comedy Central host's request for an advisory opinion like anyone else, and on Thursday granted him the ability to form a "super PAC."
Their ruling allows his parent company Viacom to pay for most of their "coverage" of Colbert Super PAC's activities under a press exemption without having to disclose such expenditures as in-kind donations.
The law of unintended consequences, Mr. Colbert, would suggest that FAUX News personalities will now follow the precedent you have set. And that is not a good thing. Be carfeful what you wish for.
Campaign finance reform groups opposed Colbert's motion because they said it would allow other media companies and politicians who have their own programs to promote their political action committees under the guise of a media exemption.
After the meeting wrapped, Colbert addressed a throng of supporters and reporters just outside the FEC building [jumpy video].
"Now some people have cynically asked, is this some kind of joke? Well I for one don't think that participating in a democracy is a joke," Colbert told the crowd. "I don't think that wanting to know what the rules are is a joke."
"But I do have one federal election law joke if you'd like to hear it," Colbert said.
"Knock knock?" Colbert said.
"Who's there?" asked the crowd.
"Unlimited union and corporate campaign contributions," Colbert said.
"Unlimited union and corporate campaign contributions who?" the crowd replied, not quite in unison.
"That's the thing, I don't think I should have to tell you," Colbert replied.
Colbert said he didn't know what he'd be doing with his unrestricted "super PAC" money, but said people should give him cash so they could find out.
"I don't know about you, but I do not accept limits on my free speech," Colbert said. "I don't know about you, but I do not accept the status quo. But I do accept Visa, Mastercard, and American Express. $50 or less please, because then I don't have to keep a record of who gave it to me."
* * *
Colbert -- who joked on his show that the first priority of his "super PAC" would be getting raises for the FEC -- said that the commissioners should get "full body scrubs." He said that Karl Rove and Sarah Palin should send them "bouquets of flowers" if they stay at Fox News.
Where Colbert goes with his bit of performance art from here is really up to him. I don't think anyone can predict what his comic genius mind will do with this.
I do think it would be more useful to reform our election system,
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
H/t to Lawrence O'Donnell of MSNBC for highlighting this editorial in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch from Sunday. I used to be a regular reader of this newspaper back in its heyday. Editorial: Eight myths to chill an old-school Republican soul (excerpt):
It's sad to see what has happened to the Party of Lincoln, and for that matter, the party of lesser mortals like George H.W. Bush of Texas, Bob Dole of Kansas and Jack Danforth of Missouri. No one ever would mistake them for liberals, but they were statesmen who put country before party.
Today we have the spectacle of smart, patriotic men and women putting their brains and integrity on ice to please a party dominated by anti-intellectual social Darwinists and the plutocrats who finance and mislead them.
Consider the mythology that makes up GOP orthodoxy today. Imagine the contortions that cramp the brains and souls of men and women of intelligence and compassion who seek state and national office under the Republican banner.
• They must believe, despite the evidence of the 2008 financial collapse, that unregulated — or at most, lightly regulated — financial markets are good for America and the world.
• They must believe in the brilliantly cast conceit known as the "pro-growth agenda," in which economic growth can be attained only by reducing corporate and individual tax rates, especially among the investor class, and by freeing business from environmental rules that have cleaned up America's air and water and labor regulations that helped create America's middle class.
• Though rising health care costs are pillaging the economy, and even though health care in America is now a matter of what you can afford, Republican candidates for office must deny that health care is a basic right and resist a real attempt to change and improve the system.
• GOP candidates must scoff at scientific consensus about global warming. Blame it on human activity? Bad. Cite Noah's Ark as evidence? Good. They must express at least some doubt about the science of evolution.
• They must insist, statistics and evidence to the contrary, that most of the nation's energy needs can be met safely with more domestic oil drilling, "clean-coal" technology and greater reliance on perfectly safe nuclear power plants.
• They must believe that all 11.2 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States can be rounded up, detained, tried, repatriated and kept from returning at a reasonable cost.
• Even though there are more than four unemployed persons for every available job, GOP candidates should at least hint that unemployment benefits keep people from seeking jobs.
• They must believe that the Founding Fathers wanted to guarantee individuals the absolute right to own high-capacity, rapid-fire weapons that did not exist in the late 18th century.
By no means is this list complete. It almost makes you feel sorry for the people who pretend to believe this stuff. Almost.
And the Post-Dispatch published an editorial cartoon to accompany its editorial opinion.
by David Safier
This should come as no surprise: all low income homes are not created educationally equal. And it also shouldn't be a surprise that parents who play with and encourage their children in educationally productive ways, even if they live in poverty, produce children who are more ready for school than children from other low income homes.
A new study has concluded that poverty alone isn't an impediment to school readiness. What it calls "rich learning environments" in homes help narrow the "school readiness gap."
Most of us would arrive at that conclusion on our own, but it's too often overlooked when we picture the relationship between poverty and children's educational achievement. The fact is, low income homes vary more widely in their approaches to the education of their children than higher education homes. Children who come from economically comfortable homes can expect to see books in the home and have academic skills promoted, but low income homes can run the gamut from empty to rich learning environments.
According to recent research, an infant can grow up with as much as a 20 point difference in his/her I.Q. based on environmental factors. Think about what that means, taking the example of two genetically identical twins. One, raised in an environment which doesn't stimulate the kind of skill development and thinking with leads to greater achievement in school (dietary and health factors can also be an issue) tests out at 95 I.Q. -- on the low side of average. Stats say that child will do poorly in school, have a middlin chance of getting a high school diploma and be unlikely to attend college. The other, raised in an ideal educational environment, could end up with a 115 I.Q. That child would have a strong chance of being a B to A student and go on to college.
Almost always, that 20 I.Q. point gap would be the result of families' differing economic status. But a low income family with parents who stress education and know helpful ways to focus on their children's intellectual growth and motivation can bridge the I.Q. gap part, or all, of the way.
It's possible the best long term anti-poverty program is one that educates parents on how to nuture their children's school readiness, combined with preschool enrichment. Get those kids more ready for school, and you boost their chances of rising out of poverty as adults, which means their children will be more likely to succeed in school. The cycle feeds on itself.
It's a lovely thought. It sounds easy. Unfortunatey, no one has hit on a way to make it work consistently and at a reasonable cost.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
The Arizona Guardian reports that "New documents released Tuesday reveal what may be the full extent of Senate President Russell Pearce's trips around the nation on the Fiesta Bowl's dime." Pearce's political problems and the Fiesta Bowl (subscription required):
The documents show Pearce tops a list of 31 lawmakers who took cushy junkets in which they received free food, travel, hotel stays and football tickets.
Pearce took more than $39,000 in freebies from 2002 to 2009, according the records. His critics say they plan use that in an effort to remove him from office in what appears to be a likely recall election.
“It just tells us how disconnected he is, and how extreme his behavior is that he feels he can do anything and still get re-elected,” said Randy Parraz, co-chair of Citizens for a Better Arizona, the group that launched the recall of the Mesa Republican.
Speaking of the recall, Political insider: Announcement in Pearce recall election may be week or 2 away, official says:
Maricopa County elections officials have validated more than enough signatures to trigger a recall election of state Senate President Russell Pearce. But they're still a week or two away from an official announcement.
As of Tuesday night, elections officials had validated 10,374 signatures, a third more than the 7,756 needed to force a recall election of the Mesa lawmaker. The fighting will have to wait a bit, said county elections director Karen Osborne.
She estimates it will likely be the second week of July before the county can formally conclude its work. That's because Osborne and crew must compile a report they estimate will be 1,230 pages long to account for all of the 16,949 signatures submitted by the recall committee. The report will detail which signatures were tossed and for which reasons, as well as show all the valid signatures.
[B]oth sides are lawyering up.
If the county gets its report done by mid-July, it's looking more and more like a November recall election rather than next March. But, as Osborne cautions, one step at a time.
by David Safier
I'm not one to put much stock in how business journalists rank states' business climate. They put all kinds of variables in a hopper, perform some kind of regression analysis (I suppose) and decide which state is the best for business. What kind of business -- low wage, high wage, manufacturing, high tech? They don't say.
With that caveat, CNBC gave Arizona 24th place for its business climate, right in the middle. We slipped 6 spots from last year's number 18.
We actually have the nation's highest ranking on Workforce. Does that mean we have the cheapest, most plentiful labor? Here's a hint: more union membership gives a state a lower ranking. We're 10th in Infrastructure and transportion (which really surprises me), 13th in Business friendliness, 18th in both Access to capital and Technology and innovation. We're in the 30s for Quality of life, Cost of living and Cost of doing business. Our economy is 44th.
And -- Drum roll, please -- we come in 49th on Education.
In case you're interested, the 5 states with the top overall ranking are Virginia, Texas, North Carolina, Georgia and Colorado.
by David Safier
Get ready for the conservative howls of anguish over federal intrusion. The U.S. Department of Ed is demanding explanations of tuition hikes from 530 colleges. The featured higher ed institution in the CNN article is ASU, with our other two universities in the next sentence.
The nation's largest public university, Arizona State University is among those listed, after it hiked tuition 38% from $4,971 in the 2007-2008 school year, to $6,844 just three years later.
All three of Arizona's public universities were on the list -- not coincidentally, after the state government imposed some of the nation's harshest cuts on higher education. Since fiscal 2008, the state has slashed its university funding by 50% or $428 million. More statewide tuition hikes are on the way in the fall.
[Did you know ASU is the largest university in the country with over 58,000 students in 2010? If so, you knew more than I did.]
To be fair, ASU's 38% increase ranks 24th on the fed's College Affordability scale. Lots of California's universities had higher jumps. But of the 23 with higher percentage increases, only Georgia State and Georgia Institute of Technology have higher actual tuitions. At $4,300 to $5,000 per year, California's colleges are way cheaper than ASU's $6,800.
by David Safier
Goldwater Institute's Matthew Ladner has moved on to work with Jeb Bush promoting the "Florida Education Miracle" full time. The two have once again been called on their "research findings" by the National Education Policy Center.
The Bush/Ladner duo have a PowerPoint dog and pony show they're taking around the country, based on the same cherry-picking of data and the same skewing of Florida's educational reforms Ladner has been trading in for years.
Ladner isn't fond of mentioning, for instance, that Florida increased its ed funding and lowered its class sizes, as well as creating a more intensive reading and reading tutoring program in the early grades. He likes to stick to the A-F school grading system and the retention of third graders with low reading scores as the only changes in Florida.
Ladner also ignores evidence that any gains by the students retained in the third grade are short lived, fading within four years.
NEPC has noticed Ladner in the past. In fact, Ladner was one of the recipients of its 2010 Education Bunkum Awards.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Event notice from Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' office:
DEFICIT REDUCTION TOWN HALL
|
|
Join the Conversation!
The Office of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, in conjunction with the University of Arizona, invite you to attend an interactive town hall event about our nation’s deficit.
The town hall will feature the Concord Coalition’s Fiscal Solutions Tour, which includes an overview of the federal budget, national debt and our nation’s other major fiscal challenges. Leading the discussion will be two of our nation’s most respected voices of budget issues: the Honorable David Walker and Robert Bixby. They also will discuss options for closing our budget deficit and restoring fiscal sanity to Washington.
Additionally, the town hall will feature an interactive activity giving you and your fellow attendees the opportunity to try to balance the federal budget yourselves. By considering issues such as federal spending priorities, tax policy and entitlement reform, you will gain firsthand experience addressing the difficult issues facing policymakers in today's fiscal environment.
The Fiscal Solutions Tour will include presentations by respected voices on budget issues:
Special guests include the Tucson Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce. To RSVP, please email RSVPGiffords@mail.house.gov or call 520-881-3588.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
During the month of June 2011, Arizona has suffered its worst fires in history. Each year is more historic than the last. And yet the idiots in the Arizona legislature and our idiot governor authorized the sale of fireworks in Arizona in 2010. That move was opposed by every professional fire fighter and fire safety organization in Arizona. The fireworks lobbyists won.
The gimmick in the law is that vendors are permitted to sell fireworks, but local jurisdictions are permited to enact bans on the use of fireworks in response to fire conditions. This year, almost every governmental jurisdiction in Arizona has banned the use of fireworks for the July 4th holiday in response to the extreme fire conditions we have just witnessed.
Within 2 miles of my home there are three fireworks tents set up in parking lots, and three grocery stores also with fireworks for sale. There is enough firepower to wage a small war. People are buying fireworks, and they sure as hell are going to use them -- their safety and the safety of others be damned. My neighborhood will sound like a war zone all weekend, just as it did last year. You can't stop stupid people from being stupid, like these idiots. Pima County is sued over its ban on fireworks.
Maybe our Arizona legislature and governor should reconsider this ill-considered law and repeal it.
Grow up! Be a responsible adult. If you and your family want to see fireworks, there are several professionally managed fireworks shows you can attend. The Arizona Daily Star has a list of fireworks shows and other events in Pima County and elsewhere today. Get ready for a booming July 4:
July 1-4
JW Marriott Starr Pass Resort - 3800 W. Starr Pass Blvd. Activities for guests go on all weekend, including fireworks at 9:15 p.m. Friday and 9 p.m. Sunday. Special overnight packages available. 792-3500.
Hilton Tucson El Conquistador Golf & Tennis Resort - 10000 N. Oracle Road. Events (watermelon eating contests, dive-in movies at night, live music) for resort guests occur all weekend. Sunday, a barbecue buffet ($40 general, $27 for guests) will be served at the Last Territory Steak House from 5:30-9 p.m., with live music on the Pusch Ridge Golf Course throughout the night and, at 9 p.m., a 30-minute laser-light show. 544-5000.
July 2
KIIM-FM Freedom Fest - Kino Sports Complex, 2500 E. Ajo Way. Tracy Lawrence headlines the annual fest, with Neil Russell, Ash Bowers, Steve Holy and Sunny Sweeney. $20-$40 through Friday at Catalina Mart, $30-$55 at the gate; $75 VIP. 3 p.m.; fireworks around 10:15 p.m. Information online at kiimfm.com.
July 3
Red, White & Boom! - Pima County Fairgrounds, 11300 S. Houghton Road. With Starship featuring Mickey Thomas, Calexico and Savor (Santana tribute), plus food and a laser-light show. Free tickets at Tucson College and Naughtons Plumbing, Heating and Cooling. Gates open at 5 p.m. Information online at klpx.com.
The Ritz-Carlton, Dove Mountain - 15000 N. Secret Springs Drive. Barbecue buffet plus live entertainment and a laser-light show. 6 p.m. $38 adults, $18 children; free for laser-light show only, at 8:45. 572-3000.
Casino del Sol - 5655 W. Valencia Road. A fireworks display followed by lighting the copper dome at the top of the hotel tower. Inside, live music in the Paradiso lounge. Free. 8 p.m. 1-800-344-9435.
Desert Diamond Casino -1100 W. Pima Mine Road. It's an outdoor barbecue, with eats, root-beer floats and other refreshments for purchase. Fireworks and music from country-rock group the John Eric Band. Free. 5:30-8:30 p.m. 294-7777.
July 4
Tucson Padres game and fireworks - Kino Veterans Memorial Stadium, 2500 E. Ajo Way. The Tucson Padres take on the Reno Aces. A fireworks display follows. $6.50-$10.50. 7 p.m. 434-1367.
Star-Spangled Spectacular - Arizona Pavilions District, Interstate 10 and Cortaro Road in Marana. Fireworks, activities for kids, live music and a beer garden. Free. 6-10 p.m. 382-1946 or online at marana.com.
"A" Mountain fireworks - Tucson Convention Center parking lot, 260 S. Church Ave. Before the fireworks, the convention center is the host of a pre-show with vendors (including hamburgers, ice cream and a beer garden) and cars from the Southern Arizona Mustang Club. Free. 7 p.m. Fireworks at 9:15.
"A" Mountain fireworks viewing party - If you're affiliated with the UA, or are friends with someone who is, get a great view of the fireworks from atop the Sixth Street, Tyndall Avenue, Main Gate, Park Avenue, and Highland Avenue parking garages. Free. Garages open at 6 p.m. 621-3300.
"A" Mountain fireworks viewing party - Pima County Democratic Party's Annual 4th of July Party, at the home of Renee Morton, 526 S. Stone Avenue (downtown Tucson) at 8:00 p.m. Come watch the fireworks on "A" Mountain with family and friends. Lemonade, iced tea, ice cream, pie and desserts of all kinds will be served. BYOB. Suggested contribution is $5. For more information please contact Adam Kinsey at (520) 326-3716.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
The Arizona Capitol Times reports that the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission has hired Washington, D.C.-based Strategic Telemetry as the commission's mapping consultant. Redistricting panel hires D.C.-based, Democratically connected mapping firm:
Much as it did last month when it chose attorneys, the panel split 3-2 on the decision to hire Strategic Telemetry, a firm that has strong ties to high-profile Democrats, including President Barack Obama. Independent Chair Colleen Mathis sided with the two Democratic commissioners. The two Republican commissioners jointly dissented, saying they would have chosen to hire the firm that served the previous commission, National Demographics Corporation.
As Steve Muratore reported at The Arizona Eagletarian: Redistricting -- mapping consultant issues, Douglas Johnson from National Demographics Corporation was taking it for granted last Friday that he would get the contract, and did not go all out in presenting a well prepared offer.
Several of the commissioners acknowledged that Strategic Telemetry provided a detailed bid proposal, and that it received high marks for its methodology and attention to detail.
GOP partisans objected earlier this year when the Commission voted to hire Osborne Maledon and Ballard Spahr as its attorney rather than Lisa Hauser, who represented the previous commission. That commission did such a fine job in creating competitive districts - not. Putting a new "team" in place was definitely in order this year.
The secretive partisan group "Fair Trust" and Citizens for Commonsense Redistricting last Friday tried to make an issue out of Strategic Telemetry's work for Democratic campaigns suggesting political bias. That was reflected in yesterday's vote:
The panel’s two Republicans, Scott Freeman and Richard Stertz, joined with Republican observers in questioning the political leanings of Strategic Telemetry, which worked on the 2008 Obama presidential campaign and the 2004 John Kerry presidential campaign. Additionally, the firm is currently working on the effort to recall Republican Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker.
* * *
Before the vote, Freeman said he had a concerns that the selection of Strategic Telemetry could cause public perception problems, given their political ties, but said he hoped he would be proven wrong.
Like all consulting firms,it is pay-for-hire. It will represent whomever hires them, and its reputation depends upon producing quality work.
The firm’s principal, Ken Strasma, previously told the commission that he is a Democrat, but that his work requires him to deliver an unbiased product and that he intends to do so when drawing Arizona’s political lines.
* * *
Strategic Telemetry’s public input manager, who will attend mapping hearings and focus on all public input issues, is a Republican and former Texan who served in the White House as associate director of political affairs for George W. Bush.”
Steve Muratore reports at The Arizona Eagletarian: Redistricting -- mapping consultant chosen:
Yes, the vote was 3-2. Yes, the five commissioners voted the same way on this decision as they did for the legal services contracts.
Remarks made by the two Republican commissioners, Stertz and Freeman, are most noteworthy. Both made it clear that they intend to work with Strategic Telemetry and do not want this vote to be a distraction. In saying that, there can be no doubt they are referring to the public comments that have been made at every AIRC meeting since the vote on the legal services contracts decrying the partisanship of the decision.
* * *
From the pensive looks and thoughtful comments, it was clear that all five commissioners took today's decision very seriously and intend to settle into the work at hand in a professional and diligent, yet collegial manner.
The AIRC is holding a meeting today in Tucson at 1:00 p.m.
Location: Pima Community College – District Office
4905 E. Broadway Blvd.
Building “C” Room #105
Tucson, AZ 85709 (West of Rosemont Blvd.)
On the Agenda http://www.azredistricting.org/docs/Meeting-Info/Agenda-063011.pdf is a presentation by the newly hired mapping consultant Strategic Telemetry. The Commission may also take action on setting up the schedule of public hearings for its work.
by David [Spon] Safier
Dr. Word was thumbing through a Sports Illustrated, something he rarely does, when a word jumped out at him from a full page ad: Sponsafier.
Spon-Safier? he asked himself. What is a Spon-Safier?
The Safier name is uncommon enough, one rarely sees it in the media. The last occurrence Dr. Word recalls was in a few Sopranos episodes when a newscaster was named Manny Safier. Before that, the only reference Dr. Word remembers was sometime around 1960 when a young man named Fred Safier (no known relation) went to Harvard when he was 13. That made a bit of news. Not much, but a bit.
So, Spon-Safier? In a Toyota ad?
Reading further, Dr. Word discovered the term, which is actually an unhypenated "Sponsafier," is a Toyota PR gimmick where people submit designs for a Toyota racing car, and the winning design is put on the company's NASCAR entry.
And, to Dr. Word's disappointment, the word has no connection to the Safier surname. It refers to one who Sponifies, a gimmicky way of referring to designing the winning paint job for the Toyota Nascar entry. That makes one a Sponsafier -- pronounced spon-suh-fy-er -- as opposed to the surname's pronunciation, Suh-fear.
The good doctor will continue scouring the media and the internet in search of the family name. One example: David Safier, German novelist and screenwriter. No known relation.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Daily Kos reports the good news out of Ohio today. Campaign to repeal Ohio's SB 5 delivers more than 1,000,000 signatures:
The effort to get a referendum on Ohio's SB 5 needed 231,149 valid signatures from 44 counties. Today, pro-repeal groups marched in Columbus to deliver 1,298,301 petition signatures to the secretary of state.
Two weeks ago, when the repeal campaign announced that more than 700,000 signatures had been collected, Chris Bowers provided an overview:
The only public polls released on SB 5 have shown wide majorities of Ohio voter in favor of repeal. A Quinnipiac poll from mid-May showed repeal ahead 54%-36%, while a PPP poll from later in May showed repeal winning 55%-35%.This signature gathering campaign does not just force a November referendum on the bill. It actually prevents the bill from going into law until the results of the referendum are certified. As such, if the repeal wins in November, which seems likely, then SB 5 will never become law. This is shaping up to become a total defeat for Ohio Governor John Kasich and his union-busting allies.
I wish the citizens of Arizona were this politically engaged and willing to fight back against the Tea-Publican tyranny.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Via Ezra Klein Tax rates and job creation in one graph:
In theory, the GOP is so committed to resisting tax hikes because it’s so committed to creating jobs. “The fact is you can’t tax the very people that we expect to invest in the economy and create jobs,” says Speaker John Boehner.
But Michael Linden’s chart comparing average annual job creation at different marginal tax rates begs to differ:
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
I have said it before and I will keep saying it: This shapeshifter, Willard "Mittens" Romney, is a shameless liar.
The latest lie that Mittens, as well as many other Tea-Publicans, likes to tell is that "Obama made the recession worse." This, of course, is demonstrably false to any sensient human being. Greg Sargent at the Plum Line explains. Mitt Romney again repeats debunked claim that Obama made recession “worse”:
No matter how many times independent fact checkers debunk it, Mitt Romney will continue making the claim. The Boston Globe reports:
“He did not cause this recession, but he made it worse,” Romney said during a visit to the lead presidential primary state, here he has staked much of his campaign. “It will be essential to have a person who understands how the economy works, understands what it takes to create and grow jobs, in the White House.”
The Globe piece doesn’t tell you this, but Romney’s claim — which is now central to his sales pitch — has been repeatedly knocked down. After Romney made the assertion his announcement speech, fact checkers demolished it.
As Post fact checker Glenn Kessler noted, the National Bureau of Economic Research said the recession ended in June of 2009. Kessler concluded: “with NBER saying the economy is now out of a recession, it is difficult to see how Romney can claim that Obama made it worse.”
The Associated Press, meanwhile, pointed out that the gross domestic product, the prime measure of economic strength, picked up modestly after he took office, adding that while unemployment is still very high, the “recession officially ended six months into his presidency.”
“Obama did not, as Romney alleged, make the economy worse than it was when he took office,” the AP concluded.
Yet Romney is cheerfully repeating the bogus claim again.
Steve Benen suggests the questions that the media villagers ought to be asking the Tea-Publicans every time they repeat this oft-debunked lie. Political Animal - Romney won’t let reality get in the way:
Let me make this easy for Romney and the reporters who cover his campaign. It’s a surprisingly straightforward exercise, consisting of two short questions:
1. When Obama took office, the economy was shrinking. Now it’s growing. In what way is that “worse”?
2. When Obama took office, the economy was hemorrhaging jobs. Now it’s gaining jobs. In what way is that “worse”?
As best as I can tell, there are basically only three explanations. Romney is either lying and hoping no one will notice; he doesn’t know what “worse” means; or he considers a healthier economy worse than a deep recession.
Which is it, Mitt?
As Benen notes in a later post, "We generally don’t see the media do this — facts appear to have a well known liberal bias..."
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
In a major legal victory for the Obama administration, the first court of appeals level decision in the country has held that the Affordable Care Act is constitutional. Political Animal - 6th Circuit finds Affordable Care Act constitutional:
In another legal win for the Affordable Care Act, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the Affordable Care Act is constitutional. The ruling is online here (pdf).
It is the first federal appellate bench to rule on the constitutionality of the reform law.
How significant is this decision? Quite the opposite result was anticipated by many court observers. The 6th Circuit is considered one of the nation’s more conservative appellate benches. Also:
One of the judges who upheld the constitutionality of the ACA was Judge Jeffrey Sutton, a nominee of George W. Bush, and a former clerk for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Indeed, Sutton, a Federalist Society veteran, has been described as “one of the nation’s leading advocates for conservative states-rights positions.”
Far-right activists hoped, and many assumed, Sutton would be a key ally in overturning the law. He was not. Indeed, he is the first federal judge to consider the legality of the ACA on the merits who “broke ranks” — that is, a conservative judge who sided with the Obama administration’s position.
From the ruling, of which Sutton was a part:
“By regulating the practice of self-insuring for the cost of health care delivery, the minimum coverage provision is facially constitutional under the Commerce Clause for two independent reasons. First, the provision regulates economic activity that Congress had a rational basis to believe has substantial effects on interstate commerce. In addition, Congress had a rational basis to believe that the provision was essential to its larger economic scheme reforming the interstate markets in health care and health insurance.”
"The lower court agreed with the Obama administration, and now the appeals court has done the same. It’s hard to see this as anything but a major victory for the law, the administration, and common sense."
It appears the Affordable Care Act will have a date with the "felonious five" of the U.S. Supreme Court in its next term.
UPDATE: More on this opinion from the Political Animal - Resolving the ACA’s ‘inactivity’ question:
[C]onservatives argue [that] those who choose not to buy coverage aren’t engaging in an activity; they’re engaging in inactivity. Therefore they fall outside the law’s reach, and the mandate is unconstitutional.
This has always been a very poor argument. When the 6th Circuit announced today that the health care is perfectly constitutional, the three-judge panel had no use for the right’s activity/inactivity argument. Adam Serwer explained:
Martin rejected the notion that going without health insurance constitutes an “inactivity” that can’t be regulated under the Commerce Clause, noting that, “The uninsured cannot avoid the need for health care, and they consume over $100 billion in health care services annually.” Martin adds that “Self-insuring for the cost of health care directly affects the interstate market for health care delivery and health insurance. These effects are not at all attenuated as were the links between the regulated activities and interstate commerce in Lopez and Morrison.”
That last point is key, because Republican appointees, conscious of the fact that Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion in Raich stands as a substantial obstacle to arguments against the idea that the individual mandate is unconstitutional, concocted the “inactivity/activity” distinction as a rhetorical loophole that would allow Scalia to avoid the implications of his argument that “where Congress has the authority to enact a regulation of interstate commerce, it possesses every power needed to make that regulation effective.”
Keep in mind, all three judges on the 6th Circuit panel agreed on this point. Two of the three were put on the bench by Republican presidents, and one is very conservative.
In other words, this was a no-brainer.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
President Obama called out the deficit peacocks and framed the debate over deficit reduction and raising the federal debt ceiling in his press conference today. Political Animal - Obama puts GOP in a box on debt, taxes, revenue:
At a White House press conference this morning, the president did a very effective job at putting Republicans in a box. Either policymakers accept a balance approach, Obama argued, or the GOP will be exposed as deficit frauds who care about protecting the rich at the expense of everyone else. Greg Sargent ran this transcript from the event:
“If we choose to keep those tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, if we keep the tax break for corporate jet owners, if we choose to keep tax breaks for oil and gas companies that are making hundreds of billions of dollars, then that means we’ve got to cut some kids off from getting a college scholarship. That means we have to stop funding certain grants for medical research. That means that food safety may be compromised. That means that Medicare has to bear a greater part of the burden. These are the choices we have to make….
“The Republicans say they want to reduce the deficit. Every single observer who’s not an elected official or politician says we can’t reduce our deficit in the scale and scope we need to without having a balanced approach that looks at everything. Democrats have to accept some painful spending cuts that hurt some of our constituencies that we may not like. And we’ve shown a willingness to do that for the greater good….
“If you are a wealthy CEO or hedge fund manager in America right now, your taxes are lower than they’ve ever been. They’re lower than they’ve been since the 1950s. And you can afford it. You’ll still be able to ride on your corporate jet. You’ll just have to pay a little more…. My belief is that the Republican leadership in Congress will hopefully sooner rather than later come to the conclusion that they need to make the right decisions for the country, that everybody else has been willing to move off their maximalist position. They need to do the same. My expectation is that they’ll do the responsible thing.”
The White House message is obviously taking shape. Obama and his team want the public to know the administration is committed to debt reduction and tough choices, which will include calling on broad sacrifice, but which will protect key investments in education and health care. Republicans, on the other hand, aren’t really committed to debt reduction if they’re only willing to look at one side of the budget ledger, aren’t especially concerned about education and health care, and will fight to the death to ensure the wealthy don’t have to sacrifice at all.
Unfortunately, "shared sacrifice" for the "greater public good" are concepts foreign to the modern-day GOP. I still believe these ideological true believers are willing to kill the hostage and commit economic suicide if they do not get everything they want. We are not dealing with rational, reasonable people here. These are economic terrorists.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
C'mon, who did not see this coming? The Arizona Supreme Court has rejected the appeal by Marshall Home™ challenging the right of Jonathan Rothschild to be a candidate for mayor because he is a lawyer. Game over, Dude. A copy of the unsigned order from the Clerk of the Court below.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
A most curious report in the Arizona Daily Star today: Rothschild kin benefit from fund that owns crumbling barrio house. Front page lede onto page four.
The Star's creative headline writer is suggesting something nefarious, nay, perhaps even llegal. Do tell:
A significant, but crumbling, adobe building on South Convent Avenue, in the heart of Barrio Historico, has been an eyesore, a magnet for transients and a blight on that neighborhood south of downtown for years.
Still, residents say they fear the 125-year-old building, owned by a law firm pension fund benefiting the family of mayoral candidate Jonathan Rothschild, will be demolished.
That concern is based partly on the fact the run-down row house has essentially sat vacant since the 1960s, declared uninhabitable by the city, and partly because that's what the pension fund representative threatened to do when the city wrote the property up last August.
Uh- huh. So? Nothing nefarious or illegal here.
[Jonathan] Rothschild, who was the managing partner of the Mesch, Clark & Rothschild law firm until he stepped out of that role to run for mayor, is not a beneficiary of the pension fund. His father, Lowell Rothschild, and attorney Doug Clark are the only beneficiaries of the profit-sharing plan that bought the 5,600-square-foot building in 2006.
Rothschild says he is an advocate of preserving historic neighborhoods, and said the property should be preserved. But as mayor, he said, he won't vote on anything that has to do with the law firm because of a conflict of interest.
So Jonathan Rothschild is not a beneficiary of the pension fund, he is an advocate for historic preservation, and he quite rightly says he will recuse himself from voting on any matter that would benefit the partners of his former firm. An ethical man running for office.
So what's the problem? Get to the point already. "Some" neighbors have complained:
[N]earby property owner and developer Warren Michaels, who notes that the home is rapidly approaching what he calls "demolition by neglect," because it's nearing the point at which stabilization efforts will start failing. "I'd love to see it renovated, but just boarding it up and throwing plaster on the exterior isn't going to stabilize it."
* * *
Susan Frank, the owner of a downtown exercise studio, has lived next door to the house for four years. She continues to have concerns about safety, since last year at this time, fireworks were set off in the yard, which has a large amount of debris.
What Rhonda Bodfield fails to report is that there is another nearby neighbor, a certain editor of the Arizona Daily Star, who has been grumbling about this property for some time. That's a failure to disclose who prompted this waste of column space in the Star today, Rhonda. Add some quotes from your editor and fully disclose who prompted this report.
And maybe the Arizona Daily Star can take up a collection or start a fund to "preserve this historically significant building" (a matter for reasonable debate) that "will be a multi-million-dollar project," as the Star reports, if it's so all-fired important to this editor. Be proactive, dear editor, and remove that bug from your behind.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
As I have written previously:
Remember when Tea-Publicans ran for Congress in 2010 -- they said their three top priorities were "jobs, jobs, jobs." And Americans fell for it.
Since Tea-Publicans have been in control of Congress their top three priorities have been ending women's reproductive health care, repealing "Obamacare" and repealing all regulations of the financial services industry, i.e., the banksters of Wall Street who blew up the world's financial system and economy with the worst economic catastrophe since the Great Depression. Back to the future!
Oh sure, ... the Tea-Publicans finally issued a glossy pamphlet with lots of pictures and super-sized type purported to be the "GOP jobs plan." It was the same old wine from the past 30 years in a shiny new bottle -- tax cuts for corporations and the über-rich (the alleged "job creators"), ending government regulations (particularly on the financial services industry), and cutting government spending for regulation and social programs. There has yet to be a vote in Congress on any "GOP jobs plan."
Mr. Boehner, where are the jobs?
In fact, Tea-Publicans in Congress have been actively working to eliminate jobs in America. Media Matters reports House Republicans Have Tried To Eliminate Up To 6.7 Million Jobs In 2011 | Political Correction:
Since the Republicans took control of the House in January, they have made deficit reduction their top priority. However, while Republicans dutifully argue that slashing spending will create a positive "environment for job creation," their proposed budget cuts will cause significant job losses in the near-term. In just three bills this session, House Republicans have voted to eliminate between 4 and 5 million jobs, with some economists calling their estimates "conservative." Including proposed legislation that has not yet passed, House Republicans have attempted to eliminate up to 6.7 million jobs.
Political Correction has prepared the following graphic charting the job losses that could result from legislation the House GOP has voted on or introduced since taking the majority in January:
Here is a brief summary of the GOP's job-killing bills:
For the analysis of each bill, continue reading Political Correction.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
The Prop 13 Arizona web site has a scrolling box at the top of the page that focuses heavily on school district taxes (secondary property taxes). Here are screen shots of what is currently displayed on the web site.
Our knowledgeable education policy readers here at Blog for Arizona will find fault with some of these assertions. Have at it.
There is an additional "bullet point" further down the Prop. 13 Arizona web page:
Highlights of Prop. 13 Arizona
In Arizona, it is county supervisors who set property tax rates. County supervisors also set county excise tax rates.
What about this assertion of "out of control rate hikes"?
In Pima County, The Board of Supervisors on May 17 approved a tentative 2011-2012 budget, to begin July 1, that reduces Pima County property tax collection by $18.3 million. From Supervisor Richard Elías' District 5 News (emphasis mine):
As a result, most homeowners will pay a bit less to the county next year than they paid this year.
This figure consists of a $12.2 million reduction in primary property tax collections for the General Fund and a $6.1 million reduction in secondary property tax collections for debt service, the Library District, the Flood Control District and the Fire Assistance District.
Overall, the county will collect $284 million for the General Fund and $119.4 million for the secondary categories.
In the 2011 session, the Arizona Legislature and Governor Jan Brewer enacted measures shifting $8.3 million in state costs to Pima County for the upcoming year. As a result, the Board approved a tax-rate increase of 10.45 cents per $100 assessed value to raise $8.2 million so critical programs will not be cut. Overall, the assessed value of Pima County’s private property went down for the 2011-2012 year by 7.04 percent.
* * *
The Legislature began shifting costs to and diverting revenue from the county in the fiscal year before this one, in 2009-2010. Over the three years counting 2011-2012, state lawmakers have shifted $19.3 million in state costs to the county and redirected $15.7 million in tax revenue from the county back to the state. Overall, the county has lost more than $35 million. When that is added to the amount the county traditionally contributed to state programs, the total comes to $92.6 million.
The overwhelming majority of county-operated programs and county-provided services are paid for with federal or state funds, so the overall 2011-2012 county budget will be just under $1.3 billion, a 9.53-percent reduction from this year.
While Pima County did slightly increase its tax rate, due to substantially lower assessed values of property in Pima County, the overall property tax burden for most homeowners is a little less than in the previous tax year.
Prop. 13 Arizona does not even attempt to address the fact that the Arizona legislature is shifting state expenditures to Arizona counties, which the counties then must find a way to pay for, all so that the Arizona legislature can claim it balanced the state budget without raising state taxes. This legislative gimmick shifted state tax liabilities to local jurisdictions, which raise tax revenue through property taxes.
Nor does Prop. 13 Arizona even attempt to address the fact that the Arizona legislature has been sweeping state revenue sharing funds from Arizona counties and incorporated cities to balance the state budget, again so that the Arizona legislature can claim it balanced the state budget without raising state taxes. This loss of revenue sharing funds from the state has to be made up somewhere to avoid critical cuts to essential government services for health, safety and welfare.
Prop. 13 Arizona's focus on secondary property taxes for school districts belies their true purpose. Many school districts have scheduled override elections in the past two election cycles for capital improvements or classroom funding. Some have passed, many more have failed. The Arizona legislature has substantially reduced education funding in the past few years, and they will be back in January with more cuts to K-12 and university funding. The temporary one-cent sales tax increase approved by voters in May 2010 ostensibly for the purpose of preventing cuts to education and public safety funding will expire in May 2013. This will only put more pressure on school districts to pursue override elections, which Prop. 13 Arizona opposes.
Arizona adopted an assessment increase limit in 1980. Each parcel of property has two separate values, a fair market value (FMV) and a Limited Property Value (LPV). The statutory annual growth limit for the LPV is the greater of 10 percent and 25 percent of the difference between last year’s LPV and this year’s FMV. (In no case can the LPV exceed fair market value.) Although Arizona has a limitation on assessment increases, it does not have an acquisition value assessment system. Instead of basing taxes on market value in the event of new construction, improvements, or change in use or ownership, the LPV for such property is recalculated based on the ratio of LPV to FMV for like properties in the surrounding geographic area. This ratio is then applied to the property's FMV to find the LPV. See, "Property Tax Limitations," by John V. Winters, Fiscal Research Center (June 2008) http://aysps.gsu.edu/Rpt_179FIN.pdf.
What about this notion that property taxes are "out of control" in Arizona? They are not. Here is what the Tax Foundation has to say about Arizona. The Tax Foundation - Tax Research Areas - Arizona:
Arizona's State and Local Tax Burden Below National Average
Arizona's 2009 state and local tax burden of 8.7% of income is below the national average of 9.8%. Arizona's tax burden has decreased overall from 10.3% (18th nationally) in 1977 to 8.7% (38th nationally) in 2009. Arizona taxpayers pay $3,140 per capita in state and local taxes.
* * *
Arizona’s 2011 Business Tax Climate Ranks 34th
Arizona ranks 34th in the Tax Foundation's State Business Tax Climate Index. The Index compares the states in five areas of taxation that impact business: corporate taxes; individual income taxes; sales taxes; unemployment insurance taxes; and taxes on property, including residential and commercial property. The ranks of neighboring states were as follows: California (49th), Nevada (4th), Utah (9th), Colorado (15th) and New Mexico (33rd).
These Prop. 13 type initiatives over the years have focused on residential homeowners, which makes Prop. 13 Arizona's bullet point "Arizona has the 4th highest property taxes on businesses, the passage of Prop. 13 will encourage businesses to relocate to Arizona" all the more curious.
As I pointed out yesterday, the so-called "jobs bill" (HB2001) included historic business property tax relief that, when fully implemented (going from 25 percent down to 18 percent Class 1 ratio in 2016), will mean a 28 percent reduction in the business property tax assessment ratio.
This initiative is a solution - a really bad solution - in search of a problem that does not exist. It is bad public policy and has always been bad public policy. (Expect to see the Arizona legislature come back with the "Flat Tax" bill and the TABOR bill again in January). This is an element of the ideological anti-tax conservative movement that wants to "drown government in the bath tub," as Grover Norquist says.
To read this proposition, Click here for full text of initiative: PDF. Description: PROP 13 ARIZONA limits property taxes. Prop 13 Arizona caps the total property tax rate at 0.5% for all residential property and 1.0% for all other real property, eliminates all exceptions to the tax caps, and limits valuation increases to 2% or less per year.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
The Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission has noticed a second meeting this week. In addition to its meeting in Phoenix on Wednesday, the AIRC will meet in Tucson on Thursday. http://www.azredistricting.org/docs/Meeting-Info/Agenda-063011.pdf.
Location: Pima Community College – District Office
4905 E. Broadway Blvd.
Building “C” Room #105
Tucson, AZ 85709 (West of Rosemont Blvd.)
Date: Thursday, June 30, 2011
Time: 1:00 P.M.
The Commission may vote to go into executive session, which will not be open to the public, for any item listed on the agenda, for the purpose of obtaining legal advice (A.R.S. §38-431.03 (A) (3)) or reviewing confidential documents (A.R.S. §38-431.03 (A) (2)). One or more of the members may participate via telephone or video conferencing.
All matters on the agenda may be discussed, considered and are subject to action by
the Commission.
The agenda for the meeting is as follows:
I. Call to Order.
II. Call for Public Comment. This is the time for the public to comment. Members of the Commission may not discuss items that are not specifically identified on the agenda. Therefore, pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.01(H), action taken as a result of public comment on matters not on the agenda will be limited to directing staff to study the matter, responding to any criticism or scheduling the matter for further consideration and decision at a later date.
III. Executive Director’s Report:
- Announcements by Executive Director and summary of recent events
- Budget report
- Update on PIO position
-Update on outreach staffing.
IV. Presentation by staff, discussion and possible decision concerning logistics for first round of public meetings, timeline and preliminary discussion for second round of public hearings.
V. Presentation by Mapping Consultant. Discussion and possible action on presented information.
VI. Discussion and possible action on the process for receiving of other public input such as maps, email and other submittals.
VII. Agenda items and dates of future meetings.
VIII. Adjournment.
A copy of the agenda provided to Commission members (with the exception of material relating to possible executive sessions) is available for public inspection at the Arizona Independent Commission’s office, 1100 W. Washington St. (The Evans House) Phoenix, Arizona 85007.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Oh dear God, when will this fool ever learn? Lynne Weaver, a California transplant who should know better, is again chairing a committee for an initiative dubbed "Prop. 13 Arizona." This is Weaver’s third bid to put the issue on the ballot. Prior efforts in 2008 and 2010 failed because she did not collect enough signatures. Howard Fischer reports Proposed initiative would limit property taxes in Arizona:
Armed with a new fundraising tactic, proponents launched a new drive Monday to cap what homeowners and others can be forced to pay in property taxes.
Dubbed Prop 13 Arizona, the ballot measure would roll back the assessed value of homes and businesses to what they were in 2003, before speculators helped spike prices. Those rising sales prices, in turn, boosted the tax assessments of everyone else in the neighborhood.
OK, let's pause right there. Ms. Weaver clearly knows little about real estate, or she would be aware that property values since the real estate bubble burst in 2006 have declined precipitously in Arizona, and have almost returned to pre-bubble valuations. Arizona has a substantial inventory of foreclosure and vacant homes. The real estate market has not yet hit bottom, as home values have continued to decline into 2011.
If Ms. Weaver would take the time to speak to county assessors she would learn that there is approximately a 2-3 year lag time for these reduced property values to be reflected in assessed valuations for purposes of property taxes. Those lower assessed values have already begun to be reflected in property tax bills (some Arizona counties have adjusted their tax rates to compensate for the loss of revenue due to the lower assessed values). This market-based system is adjusting to the market without imposing an idiotic gimmick like Prop. 13.
By the way, residential property taxes will be going up in the near future not because of rising home values (which will take many years to recover from the collapse) but because of the Arizona legislature. The so-called "jobs bill" (HB2001) included historic business property tax relief that, when fully implemented (going from 25 percent down to 18 percent Class 1 ratio in 2016), will mean a 28 percent reduction in the business property tax assessment ratio. This tax burden will be shifted to residential home owners to make up for lost revenue. If you want to get upset about something, let's start here.
For nearly two decades the Tax Foundation has published an estimate of the combined state-local tax burden shouldered by the residents of each of the 50 states. The Tax Foundation - State and Local Tax Burdens: All States, One Year, 1977 - 2009. Arizona's tax burden is low at 8.7%, ranking 38th out of the 50 states in 2009. That number has likely gone down since 2009.
A 1980 voter-approved constitutional provision already caps property taxes for homeowners at 1 percent of the home’s “full cash value.’’ Article 9, Section 18, Ariz. Const. There are numerous other tax exemptions and tax limitations imposed in Article 9 of the Arizona Constitution. This notion that people are being "taxed out of their home" is false. If someone is losing their home in Arizona, it is because they have lost their job and cannot make the mortgage payment.
Arizonans also adopted what was dubbed the "mini-Prop. 13" at the time, Prop. 105 in 1992, which requires a two-thirds super-majority vote in both chambers of the legislature to raise taxes, or to eliminate tax credits or exemptions. This has been the single most destructive act ever enacted into law in Arizona. It is the source of our structural revenue deficit today.
That two-thirds super-majority vote provision was in Howard Jarvis' Prop. 13 in California and is the source of that state's structural revenue deficit as well. California's Budget Crisis: The Effects of Prop 13 - TIME:
[Howard] Jarvis created a similarly impregnable institution. When he rode the wave of anger over skyrocketing property-tax assessments to pass Proposition 13 in 1978, he included a two-thirds vote requirement for the passage of any new taxes in California — an insurmountable obstacle built on populist allergy to any kind of new levy. Beholden to a tax-averse electorate, the state's liberals and moderates have attempted to live with Proposition 13 while continuing to provide the state services Californians expect — freeways, higher education, prisons, assistance to needy families and, very important, essential funding to local government and school districts that vanished after the antitax measure passed.
Now, however, that balancing act no longer seems possible. In the state's current fiscal crisis, California's public schools stand to lose $5.3 billion on top of $7.4 billion in cuts last year. Superintendents and school boards foresee teacher layoffs, increased class sizes, the loss of computer labs and libraries and, in some districts, insolvency.
Why would Ms. Weaver want to introduce this dysfunction created by California's Prop. 13 in Arizona? Ideology -- she is an anti-tax zealot.
[A]t the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the anti-tax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era. In Washington, the Reagan-Bush era is over. But in California, the conservative legacy lives on.
If anything, Arizona desperately needs to get away from its over-reliance on the regressive sales tax for tax revenue and return to a balanced approach of income, property, sales and excise taxes/fees for service to alleviate its structural revenue deficit. Arizona's tax code needs a complete overhaul, but this is not possible as long as Prop. 105, the "mini-Prop. 13" two-thirds super-majority requirement, remains law. Ms. Weaver's "Prop. 13 Arizona" gimmick would only make our situation in Arizona far worse, like California.
I would be happy to buy Ms. Weaver a one-way bus ticket back to her "Prop. 13 Paradise" of California. Just stop trying to screw up my state, lady. The legislature is managing to do a fine job of it without your help.
UPDATE: To read this proposition, Click here for full text of initiative: PDF. Description: PROP 13 ARIZONA limits property taxes. Prop 13 Arizona caps the total property tax rate at 0.5% for all residential property and 1.0% for all other real property, eliminates all exceptions to the tax caps, and limits valuation increases to 2% or less per year.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
More encouraging news on the recovery of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. ABC News reports Gabrielle Giffords Appears With Mark Kelly for Spaceflight Medal Ceremony:
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords made her first public appearance in front of a crowd since being shot in the head Jan. 8, rising from her wheelchair to hug and kiss her husband, former astronaut Mark Kelly, when he received the Spaceflight Medal.
Giffords, D-Ariz., being pushed in a wheelchair, entered to a standing ovation from a crowd of hundreds at the awards ceremony auditorium at Space Center Houston, which is next to the Johnson Space Center.
* * *
Her hair was much shorter than in previously published photos [due to recent surgery to replace a piece of her skull.] She was wearing glasses, a beige scarf, a light shirt, jeans and sneakers. She smiled and waved to the crowd.
Giffords and Kelly held hands for most of the event. She appeared to chat with people sitting around her, and laughed when the crew of STS-134, the Space Shuttle Endeavour's last mission, was introduced. Kelly commanded the mission.
Giffords left during home movies of the crew, shown during the event.
The Spaceflight Medal is awarded to shuttle astronauts who return safely from their missions.
Come home soon, Gabby. We'll leave the light on.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
For the right, facts do not matter, only the narrative. They believe what they want to believe despite lack of evidence or provable facts to the contrary. As an aide to George W. Bush once famously described to author Ron Suskind, "we create our own reality." This "alternate reality" is a celebration of the ignorant and the delusional.
And so it goes with the right-wing noise machine here in Arizona. Stephen Lemons of the Phoenix New Times reports on the latest "big lie" of the delusional right-wing noise machine as it circles the wagons for "King" Russell Pearce. Russell Pearce's Supporters' Claims of "Massive Voter Registration Fraud" Contradicted by Elections Officials - Phoenix New Times:
As of Monday morning, Maricopa County Elections Director Karen Osborne said the county had validated 10,356 signatures from petitions seeking the recall of state Senate President Russell Pearce.
That's 2,600 more than the 7,756 signatures required by statute from Pearce's Legislative District 18.
But if a recall election is now inevitable, so too are the bogus allegations of massive "fraud" emanating from Pearce's camp.
Osborne told me that so far, based on what she's seein during the validation process, such characterizations are "inaccurate."
She pointed out that some people have signed the petition more than once, but there's nothing wrong with that, as long as they're signing their own names.
Anyone familiar with signature-gathering will tell you that duplicates are common. And duplicates are not proof of fraud.
Yet, Pearce and his slavish supporters have no recourse but to press on with their scurrilous claims. So along comes "reporter" Linda Bentley of the Cave Creek-based, far right bi-weekly Sonoran News to aid and abet in the mudslinging and misinformation.
A committed nativist and a die-hard birther despite President Obama's release of his long-form birth certificate, Bentley reveres Pearce. And she did him a big favor by writing her June 15 article, "Pearce Recall Petitions Indicate Massive Voter Registration Fraud."
As I reveal below, this misstatement of fact masquerading as a headline is actually belied by Bentley's primary example. And yet, her shabbily-reported piece has been effective in telling the wingnuts what they want to hear, truth be damned.
The article has been quoted as fact by several right-wing Web sites, including the Sonoran Alliance and Seeing Red AZ blogs, as well as the sites for the Maricopa County GOP and the Arizona Republican Party. [Charter members of the right-wing noise machine in Arizona].
Pearce himself disseminated the inaccurate information by proxy, specifically via e-mail fundraising blasts sent out by the organization Ban Amnesty Now, run by one-time Arizona GOP executive director Sean McCaffrey.
* * *
Problem is, Bentley's main example of this supposed fraud is not fraud at all.
In fact, Osborne emphatically stated that the main petition-signer Bentley cites, a woman by the name of Benita Lantigua, has done absolutely nothing wrong.
* * *
Did Bentley contact county elections about the matter? Osborne said she has not been contacted directly by Bentley or her paper. She had the item researched after the article's publication.
Nor does Bentley quote any county personnel. If she had contacted the county, she might have discovered that the names had not been consolidated and the woman had done nothing wrong.
Moreover, Bentley apparently did not bother to contact Lantigua, the woman she's maligned.
* * *
Did Bentley choose Lantigua to pick on because of her Hispanic surnames? I don't know, but Bentley does uses some coded language implying that some of those who signed were illegal immigrants.
She writes: "There were plenty of other examples of people signing the petition with Latin names who could barely print, let alone sign, claiming a birthplace of Mexico, Guatemala or `Not Provided.'
"Many stated their occupations as `laborer' or, in some instances, as `laborers.'"
Web sites for the Arizona GOP and the Maricopa County GOP reproduced Bentley's false allegation against Lantigua verbatim.
Seeing Red Arizona gushed effusive praise:
"Ace investigative reporter Linda Bentley has done another bang-up job with her exposé of voter and registration fraud revealed in the Pearce recall petitions."
* * *
I advised Lantigua that she may wish to consult an attorney. And I have sent her the various links to the Web sites involved.
And she's not the only one who could be considering possible legal action over [false] accusations of "fraud."
Friday, Chad Snow, chairman of the recall effort and himself a lawyer, fired off a letter to Pearce, Ban Amnesty Now, and Pearce's lawyer Lisa Hauser [who is currently engaged in a dispute with the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission over not being hired as its attorney], demanding immediate retractions to the B.A.N. smears.
Snow wrote:
"It is one thing to call us `open borders extremists', `socialists,' `anarchists,' the `open borders cartel,' `mafia members,' `thugs' and the like - petty name calling, while unbecoming of a Senate President, is what we have come to expect from you.
"But when you start disseminating information accusing us of `supporting massive voter fraud' and `illegal' activities, you have crossed a line into defamation, which is recognized as a tort in the State of Arizona."
As for Bentley, I can certify from having met her before that she's imbibed deeply of the nativist Kool-Aid, though that's hardly an excuse in this case.
The right-wing noise machine must be worried if it is already resorting to the "big lie" technique to circle the wagons for "King" Russell Pearce, even before the recall election has been certified. Political reporters working for credible news organizations are going to have to cut through the crap eminating from the right-wing noise machine and tell voters the truth -- and keep telling it.
Greg Sargent at The Plum Line noted in a recent post that there are limits to "fact-checking — something we rediscover every cycle. Candidates, party committees and outside groups make false claims. Media fact-checkers go to work and debunk the claims. The candidates and groups go right on making them anyway. Reporters stop pointing out that they’re false." Do not stop reporting that what Pearce's supporters say is false. The truth will set us free.
by David Safier
If you've been following the news and my posts about Mexican American Studies, you understand the controversy, but for a look inside the program from a philosophical, pedagogical and personal perspective, you have to attend an SES forum. I went to the last one, and as much time as I've spent looking at the program from the outside, I learned a whole lot more there.
Lest I made it sound too heavy duty, the forum is also very enjoyable.
Save Ethnic Studies Forum
You are invited to meet with the Mexican American Studies teachers and discuss with them the curriculum, Course Work, and Teaching Materials used!
Come see for yourself what the Mexican American Studies program is all about!
-Learn about the curriculum
-Sit in on a teaching session
-Browse the reading lists/Books Used
Thursday, June 30, 2011 at 7:00 pm
South side Presbyterian church
317 W 23rd St.
Tucson, AZ 85713
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
The Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission could use a better managed web site. Like maybe posting meeting notices and agendas on the web site well in advance of scheduled meetings to encourage public participation and testimony. It's almost as if the Commission doesn't want the public to know when they are meeting, or at least limit notice to a select few. I'm just saying. (You can sign up for e-mail notices of meetings at http://www.azredistricting.org/Meeting-Info/default.asp).
In any event, the AIRC is meeting this Wednesday, June 29 at Noon, in the State Library Conference Room, Suite 200, Historic Capitol 1938 Edition, 1700 W. Washington Street, Phoenix. See http://www.azredistricting.org/docs/Meeting-Info/Agenda-062911.pdf.
On the Agenda: Discussion and consideration of confidential documents associated with the evaluation of responses to the mapping consultant request for proposal (RFP) and a review and ranking of submitted proposals after consideration of interviews.
For more information about the RFP interviews last Friday and a preview of Wednesday's meeting, see Steve Muratore's blog posts at The Arizona Eagletarian http://stevemuratore.blogspot.com/. Steve provides the detailed reporting that the Arizona media miserably fails to provide. Maybe an enterprising reporter will look into the mysterious "Fair Trust" that does not seem to be registered with the Arizona Secretary of State. Steve explains it all for you.
Also on the Agenda: Discussion and possible action on presentation by the Arizona Competitive District Coalition (Ken Clark); presentation by staff, discussion and possible action concerning logistics for first round of public hearings, timeline and preliminary discussion of second round of public hearings; discussion and possible action on the process for receiving public input such as maps, e-mail and other submittals; Agenda items and dates of future meetings; and a call to the audience for public comment (please limit your comments to items specifically identifed on the Agenda).
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
After bigfooting Willard "Mittens" Romney's campaign kickoff in New Hampshire with her magical mystery tour bus trip to nowhere with the sycophant media villagers in tow, Sarah Palin is now headed to Pella, Iowa on Tuesday to bigfoot today's campaign kickoff for the Minnesota Loon, Rep. Michelle Bachman (R-MN) in Waterloo, Iowa.
The Quitta from Wasilla is headed to Iowa to attend a special premiere of the documentary film "The Undefeated," a documentary about her - naturally. Sarah Palin in Iowa for premiere of 'The Undefeated,' a new chapter in the politics of documentaries - latimes.com. Bonus bigfoot:
Interestingly -- likely coincidentally -- President Obama will also be in Iowa on Tuesday, promoting manufacturing jobs in Bettendorf. No word whether the two have a date to split corn dogs, but we doubt it.
Oh, the sycophant media villagers will be wetting themselves with excitement. Wall-to-wall Palin tweets.
By the way, John Wayne called. He wants his movie title back.
The Palin promotional documentary premiers nationally on July 15th, which coincidentally happens to be the same day that “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II” hits the big screen, as well as the new "Winnie the Pooh" movie for kids hits the big screen. Guess who is going to be "defeated" in this weekend box office head-to-head matchup.
The Palin movie will play exclusively at AMC Theatres, says a news release from CRC Public Relations. The film will launch in Dallas, Denver, Oklahoma City, Orlando, Atlanta, Orange County, Phoenix, Houston, Indianapolis and Kansas City. Palin movie to premier in Iowa this month | Iowa Caucuses.
Sarah Palin dreaming of a movie career reminds me of this classic song from Buck Owens:
Well, I hope you come to see me in the movie
Then I'll know that you're gonna plainly see
The biggest fool that's ever hit the big time
And all I gotta do is act naturally
by David Safier
The Capitol Times' cover article (subscription only) has one of the better graphics I've seen lately: an unhappy looking Russell Pearce next to a Spanish language copy of The Book of Mormon.
Pearce has a problem. His church doesn't agree with his stand on illegal immigration. Pearce loves to talk about the church's teaching that you should support the rule of law, but that's as far as he's willing to go. In recent statements, the Mormon Church has taken its teachings to a higher moral level.
In a position paper, the church declared:
The bedrock moral issue for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is how we treat each other as children of God.
Sure, respect the law. But how we treat each other is the "bedrock moral issue."
Here's what the position paper says about immigration laws.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is concerned that any state legislation that only contains enforcement provisions is likely to fall short of the high moral standard of treating each other as children of God.
The Church supports an approach where undocumented immigrants are allowed to square themselves with the law and continue to work without this necessarily leading to citizenship.
In furtherance of needed immigration reform in the United States, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints supports a balanced and civil approach to a challenging problem, fully consistent with its tradition of compassion, its reverence for family, and its commitment to law.
The position sounds like it stops short of a path to citizenship, but it's still miles ahead of what Pearce advocates.
The Mormon Church has now joined other churches in advocating for humane immigration reform. Where does that leave Pearce?
“They said enforce the law,” Pearce said about the statement. “Read the whole thing…. I’m going to enforce the law.”
Deep Thought: If you change a law which works against treating people morally and compassionately, then you can have it both ways. The laws you enforce can be moral as well as legal documents.
I'm hoping Pearce's quarrel with the position of his own church will give Mesa Mormons the push they need to vote against him in the upcoming recall. It might even help non-Mormons understand that this pompous, self righteous, morally bankrupt individual can no longer pretend he's adhering to a higher morality when he calls for ever more draconian immigration laws. He's nothing more than a scared, hateful bully.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
A day after Chris Wallace of FAUX News Sunday asked the Minnesota Loon, Rep Michelle Bachmann (R-MN), "Are you a flake?" Chris Wallace asks Bachmann if she's a 'flake', (for which Wallace has caved under pressure from angry viewers of FAUX Nation and apologized for suggesting Bachmann was a "flake"), the Minnesota Loon kinda proved Wallace's point today.
In an interview with FAUX News (who else?), Bachmann boasted: "But what I want them to know, just like John Wayne was from Waterloo, Iowa, that's the kind of spirit that I have, too."
Yeah, about that spirit of "John Wayne" in Waterloo... Bachmann Confuses John Wayne With John Wayne Gacy:
In fact, the actor John Wayne (real name, Marion Morrison) was from Iowa, but not from Waterloo -- he was from Winterset, Iowa, about 120 miles away. [Any true John Wayne fan knows this!] But as it turns out, there was another "John Wayne" with some history in Waterloo: Serial killer John Wayne Gacy, Jr. known as the "Killer Clown," who raped and murdered over 30 young men before he was finally incarcerated and put to death.
[Image: John Wayne Gacy, Jr. as "Pogo the Clown."]
To be exact, John Wayne Gacy, Jr. was born and raised in Chicago, Illinois. In his 20s, he lived for a few years in Waterloo, with his first wife and their two children. However, at age 26 he was sentenced to prison for sodomy, in a case that involved his having sexually assaulted two teenage boys, and then hired another Waterloo teen to physically assault his accusers in order to intimidate them out of testifying against him. Gacy never lived in Waterloo again.
New job posting at the Bachmann campaign today: fact checker, must be proficient in data research including use of "The Google."
I suppose in the fact-free world of FAUX Nation, it really doesn't matter what the Minnesota Loon says. Never mind.
by David Safier
During Brewer's two day special session called to extend unemployment, where no bill was ever brought to the floor, Democrats suggested legislators should turn their per diem pay back to the state. Making money by refusing to help Arizona's unemployed? It doesn't make sense.
The Republicans, of course, weren't interested.
So the Democrats have decided to donate their per diems to help the unemployed and homeless. Here's the media release:
Democratic lawmakers to donate paychecks to jobs organization
STATE CAPITOL, PHOENIX – Democratic lawmakers will hold a press conference Tuesday to donate their per diem from the special session on unemployment to Community Voice Mail, the only organization in Arizona that has the capacity to provide free, local voicemail service to the unemployed and homeless.
by David Safier
Where to start in today's Nuke News? How about in the good old U.S. of A.
I remember writing in a recent post, Nebraska's nuclear reactors are protected from Missouri River flooding by earthen berms and rubber walls. What could go wrong?
Here's what. The rubber wall can deflate, as it did at the Fort Calhoun Reactor.
Before dawn, a piece of heavy equipment nicked an eight-foot-high, 2,000-foot-long temporary rubber berm, and it deflated. Water also began to approach electrical equipment, which prompted operators to cut themselves off from the grid and start up diesel generators. (It returned to grid power later Sunday.)
But everything is still OK, because "the facility is designed to remain secure at a river level of up to 1,014 feet above sea level" and the water is only at 1,006.5 feet. The mighty Missouri crested 7.5 feet below danger level. (No, as satirical as this sounds, I am not making this up). It's better to be lucky than prepared, right?
At Cooper Station, another Nebraska reactor, the assistant operations manager was asked by the N.R.C. chairman, what would happen if water gets in the reactor? Here's the answer. Again, I am not making this up.
“We’ve got a sump pump over here,” said Dan Goodman, the assistant operations manager, leading him around to the other side of the giant diesel generator, which is the size of a tractor-trailer.
Why don't I feel safer knowing the reactor is one sump pump away from serious problems?
In other news, the Star has the third article in AP's excellent Aging Nukes series. It speaks of our woefully inadequate evacuation plans for the area around nuclear plants, made far worse by the increases in population in those areas since the plants were built. If a 50-mile radius evacuation were called for around the Indian Point reactor, for instance, which is 25 miles outside of New York City, 6% of the country's population would have to take to the highways and byways -- 17.3 million people. Better hope you have a helicopter parked on the roof of your condo, because you ain't gettin' anywhere by car.
Meanwhile, at Fukushima, people who live nearby have detectable levels of radiation in their urine. And the new system to remove contaminants from the radioactive water is referred to as a glitch-prone system. It gets clogged up, and water is leaking from hoses. How big a problem is the contaminated water? They're storing enough of the stuff "to fill 40 Olympic-size swimming pools." They're running out of space.
I'm hoping the U.S. doesn't have to learn the extreme dangers of nuclear power the hard way, like Japan has recently and the Soviet Union did earlier. We dodged a bullet at Three Mile Island and ignored what we should have learned. It's an antiquated, dangerous 20th century technology which is aging and deteriorating day by day and year by year. It's time to decommission these things on a timetable similar to what's already planned in Germany and Switzerland and is being considered in Japan as well.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion of the majority in a 5-4 decision striking down the matching funds provision of Arizona's Citizens Clean Elections law, reversing the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Justice Elena Kagan wrote the dissent in Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom PAC v. Bennett and McComish v. Bennett.
The opinion strikes down the matching funds provision, but the opinion also notes the court is not holding that the First Amendment forbids all public financing of elections, in a nod to Buckley v. Valeo (1976).
I will update when I have had a chance to review the opinion.
UPDATE: The problem here, as in all public financing of elections cases, is rooted in Chief Justice William Rehnquist's formulation that "money = speech" in Buckley v. Valeo (1976), i.e., "mo' money = mo' speech." This false dichotomy invariably leads to the result that restrictions on the expenditure of money equals a restriction on the exercise of free speech under the First Amendment.
For most candidates participating as a Clean Elections funded candidate, they will be at a distinct disadvantage in any race where there is a well-financed candidate or, more importantly, an independent expenditure committee (PAC) spending unlimited amounts of money in that race, as permitted by Citizens United v. FEC.
As I have said before, if you want to change this, it is going to take an amendment to the U.S. Constitution providing for public financing of elections.
The opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court in Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom PAC v. Bennett (together with McComish v. Bennett) http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/10-238.pdf (selected highlights):
Held: Arizona’s matching funds scheme substantially burdens political speech and is not sufficiently justified by a compelling interest to survive First Amendment scrutiny.
(a) The matching funds provision imposes a substantial burden on the speech of privately financed candidates and independent expenditure groups.
(b) Arizona’s matching funds provision is not “ ‘justified by a compelling state interest.’ ” Davis v. FEC, supra, at 740.
(c) Evaluating the wisdom of public financing as a means of funding political candidacy is not the Court’s business. But determining whether laws governing campaign finance violate the First Amendment is. The government “may engage in public financing of election campaigns,” and doing so can further “significant governmental interest[s].” Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U. S., at 57, n. 65, 92–93, 96. But the goal of creating a viable public financing scheme can only be pursued in a manner consistent with the First Amendment.
Argument of the majority opinion:
Petitioners contend that their political speech is substantially burdened in the same way that speech was burdened by the so-called “Millionaire’s Amendment” of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Actof 2002, which was invalidated in Davis v. Federal Election Comm’n, 554 U. S. 724. That law — which permitted the opponent of a candidate who spent over $350,000 of his personal funds to collect triple the normal contribution amount, while the candidate who spent the personal funds remained subject to the original contribution cap — unconstitutionally forced a candidate “to choose between the First Amendment right to engage in unfettered political speech and subjec-tion to discriminatory fundraising limitations.” Id., at 739. This “unprecedented penalty” “impose[d] a substantial burden on the exercise of the First Amendment right to use personal funds for campaign speech” that was not justified by a compelling government interest. Id., at 739–740. Pp. 8–10.
The logic of Davis largely controls here. Once a privately financed candidate has raised or spent more than the State’s initial grant to a publicly financed candidate, each personal dollar the privately financed candidate spends results in an award of almost one additional dollar to his opponent. The privately financed candidate must “shoulder a special and potentially significant burden” when choosing to exercise his First Amendment right to spend funds on his own candidacy. 554 U. S., at 739. If the law at issue in Davis imposed a burden on candidate speech, the Arizona law unquestionably does so as well.
The differences between the matching funds provision and the lawstruck down in Davis make the Arizona law more constitutionally problematic, not less... [First], the direct and automatic release of public money to a publicly financed candidate imposes a far heavier burden.
Second, in elections where there are multiple publicly financed candidates — a frequent occurrence in Arizona — the matching funds provision can create a multiplier effect. Each dollar spent by the privately funded candidate results in an additional dollar of funding to each of that candidate’s publicly financed opponents.
Third, unlike the law in Davis, all of this is to some extent out of the privately financed candidate’s hands. Spending by independent expenditure groups to promote a privately financed candidate’s election triggers matching funds, regardless whether such support is welcome or helpful. Those funds go directly to the publicly funded candidate to use as he sees fit. That disparity in control — giving money directly to a publicly financed candidate, in response to independent expenditures that cannot be coordinated with the privately funded candidate — is a substantial advantage for the publicly funded candidate.
The burdens that matching funds impose on independent expenditure groups are akin to those imposed on the privately financed candidates themselves.... The effect of a dollar spent on election speech is a guaranteed financial payout to the publicly funded candidate the group opposes, and spending one dollar can result in the flow of dollars to multiple candidates. In some ways, the burdens imposed on independent groups by matching funds are more severe than the burdens imposed on privately financed candidates. Independent groups, of course, are not eligible for public financing. As a result, those groups can only avoid matching funds by changing their message or choosing not to speak altogether. Presenting independent expenditure groups with such a choice — trigger matching funds, change your message, or do not speak — makes the matching funds provision particularly burdensome to those groups and certainly contravenes “the fundamental rule of protection under the First Amendment,that a speaker has the autonomy to choose the content of his own message.” Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Group of Boston, Inc., 515 U. S. 557, 573. Pp. 10–14.
The arguments of Arizona, the Clean Elections Institute, and amicus United States attempting to explain away the existence or significance of any burden imposed by matching funds are unpersuasive.
Arizona argues that the provision actually creates more speech. But even if that were the case, only the speech of publicly financed candidates is increased by the state law. And burdening the speech of some — here privately financed candidates and independent expenditure groups — to increase the speech of others is a concept “wholly foreign to the First Amendment,” Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U. S. 1, 48–49; cf. Miami Herald Pub-lishing Co. v. Tornillo, 418 U. S. 241, 244, 258.
The burden on privately financed candidates and independent expenditure groups also cannot be analogized to the burden placed on speakers by the disclosure and disclaimer requirements upheld in Citizens United v. Federal Election Comm’n, 558 U. S. ___. A political candidate’s disclosure of his funding resources does not result in a cash windfall to his opponent, or affect their respective disclosure obligations.
Arizona is correct that the candidates do not complain that providing a lump sum payment equivalent to the maximum state financing that a candidate could obtain through matching funds would be impermissible. But it is not the amount of funding that the State provides that is constitutionally problematic. It is the manner in which that funding is provided — in direct response to the political speech of privately financed candidates and independent expenditure groups. Pp. 14–22.
There is ample support for the argument that the purpose ofthe matching funds provision is to “level the playing field” in terms of candidate resources... The text of the Arizona Act confirms this purpose. The provision setting up the matching funds regime is titled “Equal funding of candidates,” Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §16–952; and the Act and regulations refer to the funds as “equalizing funds,” e.g., §16–952(C)(4). This Court has repeatedly rejected the argument that the government has a compelling state interest in “leveling the playing field” that can justify undue burdens on political speech, see, e.g., Citizens United, supra, at ___, and the burdens imposed by matching funds cannot be justified by the pursuit of such an interest. Pp. 22–25.
Even if the objective of the matching funds provision is to combat corruption — and not “level the playing field” — the burdens that the matching funds provision imposes on protected political speech are not justified. Burdening a candidate’s expenditure of his own funds on his own campaign does not further the State’s anticorruption interest. Indeed, “reliance on personal funds reduces the threat of corruption.” Davis, supra, at 740–741; see Buckley, supra, at 53.
The burden on independent expenditures also cannot be supported by the anticorruption interest. Such expenditures are “political speech . . . not coordinated with a candidate.” Citizens United, 558 U. S., at ___. That separation negates the possibility that the expenditures will result in the sort of quid pro quo corruption with which this Court’s case law is concerned. See e.g., id., at ___–___.
Given Arizona’s contribution limits, some of the most austere in the Nation, its strict disclosure requirements, and the general availability of public funding, it is hard to imagine what marginal corruption deterrence could be generated by the matching funds provision.
[T]he fact that burdening constitutionally protected speech might indirectly serve the State’s anticorruption interest, by encouraging candidates to take public financing, does not establish the constitutionality of the matching funds provision. The matching funds provision substantially burdens speech, to an even greater extent than the law invalidated in Davis. Those burdens cannot be justified by a desire to “level the playing field,” and much of the speech burdened by the matching funds provision does not pose a danger of corruption.
By the State’s logic it could award publicly financed candidates five dollars for every dollar spent by a privately financed candidate, or force candidates who wish to run on private funds to pay a $10,000 fine, in order to encourage participation in the public funding regime. Such measures might well promote such participation, but would clearly suppress or unacceptably alter political speech. How the State chooses to encourage participation in its public funding system matters, and the Court has never held that a State may burden political speech — to the extent the matching funds provision does — to ensure adequate participation in a public funding system. Pp. 25–28.
The government “may engage in public financing of election campaigns,” and doing so can further “significant governmental interest[s].” Buckley, 424 U. S., at 57, n. 65, 92–93, 96. But the goal of creating a viable public financing scheme can only be pursued in a manner consistent with the First Amendment. Arizona’s program gives money to a candidate in direct response to the campaign speech of an opposing candidate or an independent group. It does this when the opposing candidate has chosen not to accept public financing, and has engaged in political speech above a level set by the State. This goes too far; Arizona’s matching funds provision substantially burdens the speech of privately financed candidates and independent expenditure groups without serving a compelling state interest.
By Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings
By now, most folks have heard of the incident where the hacker group LulzSec accessed then released some confidential records from the Arizona Department of Public Safety.
Arizona's new House Speaker Andy Tobin (R-bleepin' Yankees fan) responded with predictable outrage, stating that the hackers should be "prosecuted to the full extent possible."
Sen. Frank Antenori (R-Don't say I represent Tucson, even though I live there!), responded just as predictably, advocating for a massive expansion of "full extent possible."
From the Political Insider in today's Arizona Republic -
Quote of the week: "We should cut off their fingers." - State Sen. Frank Antenori, R-Tucson, suggesting the appropriate punishment for those who hacked into DPS e-mails.
Ummm...the last time I checked, Arizona criminal law doesn't call for the amputation of body parts as punishment.
However, Sharia law does.
by David Safier
I see Arizona's future as a school voucher state in a long, investigative article about Florida private "schools" -- they definitely are private, but for many of them, "schools" belongs in quotes -- participating in the state's voucher program. It is not a pretty picture.
I can't begin to do justice to the article about the unregulated, sometimes unaccredited schools which take Florida voucher money with outstretched hands, so I'll just pull together some frightening tidbits:
Private school vouchers have turned into a $148 million a year industry in Florida. As with Arizona's new legislation, it's only supposed to serve students with learning and physical disabilities. But at this point in Florida, "physical disabilities" can include peanut and other allergies, and asthma. And I know from my teaching years, "learning disabilities" can be found in 50% of students if you look hard enough.
The "Florida Education Miracle" looks pretty seedy in this article. Journalists should be watching our voucher system carefully over the next few years. There could be many stories that need to be told.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Sen. John "just build the dang fence" McCain got into trouble last week for suggesting the fires in southern Arizona were set by illegal immigrants before an investigation has been completed and without any evidence. He just feels it in his old bones. McCain and his GOP pals with him claimed a federal forest official briefed them on the cause of the fire, but the federal forest officials denied ever saying any such thing -- because they like to wait for an investigation to be completed and have actual evidence.
As we learned from news reports it was Sen. Jon Kyl who whispered in McCain's ear that illegal immigrants are fire starters. This was followed by McCain's good buddy Sheriff Larry Dever in Cochise County saying the same thing to back him up. The usual suspects.
Not one to be outdone, Sheriff Joe Arpaio wanted in on this action. Arpaio Orders Deputies To Start Asking Undocumented Immigrants About Wildfires | ThinkProgress:
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has entered the fray.
Arpaio, who never misses an opportunity to scapegoat or harass immigrants, eagerly released a statement this week in response to McCain’s baseless charge. Arpaio announced he had instructed his deputies to question all detained undocumented immigrants about their connection to the wildfires, even though he admitted it’s “a long shot” that these interrogations will yield any information:
Deputies arrested 20 immigrants as they made their way through Maricopa County Wednesday morning.
All were reportedly from Mexico and said they were headed to locations in Texas, Tennessee, and New York state.
They all entered the border near where the fires are burning in southeast Arizona, according to the news release.
“It’s a long shot I know,” Arpaio said. “But since we already gather information from them about their U.S. entry points and travelling routes and methods, this is simply one more area of intelligence to explore that may help us to determine the origins of these fires.“
After McCain said at a press conference that there was “substantial evidence that some of these fires are caused by people who have crossed our border illegally,” U.S. Forest Service Officials rushed to dispute his charge. Spokesman Tom Berglund told ABC News “there’s no evidence” indicating immigrants had any role in the fire.
* * *
Meanwhile, Sen. Kyl has repeatedly come to McCain’s defense this week, and continues to stand by their debunked claim that undocumented immigrants are to blame for the Arizona wildfires. He reiterated that position today on Hugh Hewitt’s conservative radio show. When asked what he thought of McCain’s comments, Kyl said, “Well, he was correct. I was right there.” [He's the one who said it!]
He went on to broaden the circle of guilt-by-suspicion to “drug smugglers,” saying “a lot of these fires are said to be, or we have substantial evidence, they’re caused by drug smugglers and illegal immigrants.” Like McCain, Kyl cited the Border Patrol and the Forest Service as the basis for his claim, even though the Forest Service has directly disputed it.
Well, as we all know, "it was not intended to be a factual statement."
h/t Cheri
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Event notice from Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' office:
DEFICIT REDUCTION TOWN HALL
|
|
Join the Conversation!
The Office of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, in conjunction with the University of Arizona, invite you to attend an interactive town hall event about our nation’s deficit.
The town hall will feature the Concord Coalition’s Fiscal Solutions Tour, which includes an overview of the federal budget, national debt and our nation’s other major fiscal challenges. Leading the discussion will be two of our nation’s most respected voices of budget issues: the Honorable David Walker and Robert Bixby. They also will discuss options for closing our budget deficit and restoring fiscal sanity to Washington.
Additionally, the town hall will feature an interactive activity giving you and your fellow attendees the opportunity to try to balance the federal budget yourselves. By considering issues such as federal spending priorities, tax policy and entitlement reform, you will gain firsthand experience addressing the difficult issues facing policymakers in today's fiscal environment.
The Fiscal Solutions Tour will include presentations by respected voices on budget issues:
Special guests include the Tucson Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce. To RSVP, please email RSVPGiffords@mail.house.gov or call 520-881-3588.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
The Political Calendar is posted on Sundays. Please send us notice of your political events prior to the Sunday before your event (7 days would be most helpful). See the calendar icon in the right-hand column of the blog page for easy access to the calendar.
Political Calendar For The Week of June 26, 2011
Sundays, 6:00 p.m.: Drinking Liberally, at The Shanty, 401 E. 9th Street (at 4th Avenue). An informal, inclusive progressive social group, and lively discussion. Our guests this week are Green Party candidates for mayor of Tucson, Dave Croteau and Mary DeCamp. Contact: www.livingliberallytucson.org.
Monday, June 27, Noon: Democrats of Greater Tucson luncheon, Dragon's View Restaurant (400 N. Bonita, South of St. Mary's Road between the Freeway and Grande Avenue, turn South at Furr's Cafeteria), buffet lunch costs $8.50. Featured speaker is Isabel Garcia, Pima County Legal Defender. Visit DGT's web site at www.tucsondemocrats.org. Next Week: No DGT in observance of Independence Day.
Monday, June 27, 6:00 p.m.: Legislative District 27 meeting, at the Main Library, 101 N. Stone Avenue (parking in basement under library). For more information please contact Greg Wagner at gregory.m.wagner@gmail.com or (520) 784-8355.
Wednesday, June 29, 6:00 p.m.: Pima County Working Young Democrats meeting, at A Whole Lot of People for Grijalva Campaign office, 452 S. Stone Avenue (Tucson). For more information please contact Greg Wagner at gregory.m.wagner@gmail.com or (520) 784-8355.
Wednesday, June 29, 6:30 p.m.: Pima County Democratic Party Voter Registration Committee meeting, at the Pima County Democratic Party HQ, 4639 E. 1st Street (one block South of Speedway and West of Swan). Training on the Voter Registration form, and subcommittee formation/work session. Anthony Elmo, the new Arizona Field Director will be in attendance. For more information please contact Lee & Ruth Misevch at misevich@gmai.com and Priscilla Teran at priscillateran@hotmail.com.
Thursday, June 30, 5:30 p.m.: Regina Romero Volunteer Appreciation Pool Party, at the Riverpark Inn, 350 S. Freeway (Tucson). There will be fun, food and drinks. Please RSVP to Regina@votereginaromero.com or (520) 406-9778.
Thursday, June 30, 6:30 p.m.: Deficit Reduction Town Hall, at the University of Arizona, Student Union Memorial Center, North Ballroom, 303 E. University Blvd. The Office of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, in conjunction with the University of Arizona, invite you to attend an interactive town hall event about our nation’s deficit. The town hall will feature the Concord Coalition’s Fiscal Solutions Tour, which includes an overview of the federal budget, national debt and our nation’s other major fiscal challenges. Leading the discussion will be two of our nation’s most respected voices of budget issues: the Honorable David Walker and Robert Bixby. They also will discuss options for closing our budget deficit and restoring fiscal sanity to Washington. Additionally, the town hall will feature an interactive activity giving you and your fellow attendees the opportunity to try to balance the federal budget yourselves. By considering issues such as federal spending priorities, tax policy and entitlement reform, you will gain firsthand experience addressing the difficult issues facing policymakers in today's fiscal environment. Special guests include the Tucson Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce. To RSVP, please email RSVPGiffords@mail.house.gov or call 520-881-3588.
Thursday, June 30, 7:00 p.m.: Save Ethnic Studies Forum, at the Southside Presbyterian Church, 317 W. 23rd Street (Tucson). Meet with the Mexican American Studies teachers and discuss with them the curriculum, Course Work, and Teaching Materials used. Come see for yourself what the Mexican American Studies program is all about! See the Save Ethnic Studies Facebook page.
Saturday, July 2, 10:00 a.m.: [Canceled] Legislative District 30 meeting, at the Pima County Democratic Party HQ, 4639 E. 1st Street (one block South of Speedway and West of Swan). For more information please contact Andre Mixon at remix8@yahoo.com.
Saturday, July 2, 10:30 a.m.: Mule Mountain Democrats will meet with the Progressives at the Y meeting room. We will continue last week's discussion about getting an issues forum ready. Everyone is to bring their ideas (in writing so we'll have records). Please contact Sandyhummingbird@cs.com or (520) 432-7305.
Saturday, July 2, 5:00 p.m.: Start Our State hosts the first annual Baja Arizona Independence Day, at the Rialto Theater, 318 E. Congress Street (Tucson). Live music, food, voter registration, petition signing, and informal information sessions so that voters can learn what the effort is all about. Scheduled to perform at the event are local standouts Gabe Sullivan and Taraf de Tucson, Tom Walbank, Silverbell, Seashell Radio, Yardsale Heart, and more acts to be announced. Attendees can also expect various speakers, including Start Our State's chairs Paul Eckerstrom and Peter Hormel, along with voter registration and information on the Start Our State movement. We will also be collecting signatures to get our initiative on the Pima county ballot for the November 2012 elections. Things get started at the Rialto at 5:00pm, with a suggested donation of $10, or $5 for new registrants/petition signers. For more information, please drop a note to startourstate@gmail.com or check the Start Our State website (http://startourstate.com/) or Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/startourstate).
Note: for additional Democratic Party events around the state see http://azdem.org/events/Calendar/.
Special Announcements:
Pima County Democratic Party's Annual 4th of July Party
Monday, July 4, 8:00 p.m.: Pima County Democratic Party's Annual 4th of July Party, at the home of Renee Morton, 526 S. Stone Avenue (downtown Tucson). Come watch the fireworks on "A" Mountain with family and friends. Lemonade, iced tea, ice cream, pie and desserts of all kinds will be served. BYOB. Suggested contribution is $5. For more information please contact Adam Kinsey at (520) 326-3716.
Tuesday, July 5, 6:30 p.m.: Pima County Democratic Party Executive Committee meeting.
Wednesday, July 6, 7:00 p.m.: Legislative District 28 meeting, at the Pima County Democratic Party HQ, 4639 E. 1st Street (one block South of Speedway and West of Swan). Special guest speaker is Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’ district director, Ron Barber. For more information please contact Ted Prezelski at prezelski@aol.com or (520) 326-3716 (leave message).
Saturday July 9, 12:30 p.m.: Democratic Club of the Santa Rita Area meeting, at Green Valley Democratic HQ, Continental Shopping Plaza, 240 W. Continental Road (exit 63), Upstairs Meeting Room (elevator is available). Special guest speaker is Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik. For more information please call HQ at (520) 838-0590 or visit our web site at www.gvdemocrats.org.
Monday, July 11, 6:00 p.m.: Legislative District 29 meeting, at the Sam Lena Library, 1607 S. 6th Avenue. For more information please contact Matt Kopec at LD29Chair@gmail.com or (520) 400-3020.
Thursday, July 14, 5:30 p.m.: Pima County Democratic Party Nucleus Club meeting, at the Viscount Suite Hotel, 4855 E. Broadway Blvd. Forum on the pros and cons of the Rosemont Mine. For more information and to RSVP please contact Martin Bacal at (520) 326-36716.
Thursday, July 14, 6:00 p.m.: Tucson City Council Member Shirley Scott Fundraiser, at the Hotel Congress, 311 E. Congress Street (Tucson). Enjoy music, hors d'oeuvres and a cash bar while Shirley Scott shares her thoughts on the campaign and more! Suggested donation $20, maximum allowed $430. Please RSVP to info@shirley2011.com.
DCSRA Discussion Group
Wednesdays, 11:00 a.m.: Democratic Club of the Santa Rita Area hosts a Current Events Discussion Group at Green Valley Democratic HQ, Continental Shopping Plaza, 240 W. Continental Road (exit 63), Upstairs Meeting Room (elevator is available). Join us at the weekly meeting of the Democratic Headquarters Current Events Discussion Group. We'll talk about some of the major events of the previous week, including but not limited to political topics, and try and go behind the news for a deeper understanding. For more information, please contact Amy Johnson at acalkins10@aol.com.
Democracy for America - Grassroots Action Summit
July 13-14, 5:00-9:00 p.m.: The DFA Action Summit brings local activists, advocacy organizations and community leaders together for 2 nights of intensive issue advocacy training. Training at the Arizona Democratic Party HQ, 2910 N. Central Avenue (Phoenix). Professional trainer will help you plan and execute a winning grassroots strategy. Check out our training agenda at: DemocracyforAmerica.com/actionsummit.
Cochise County Democratic Party Special Meeting
Wednesday, July 27, 6:00 p.m.: Special meeting of the Cochise County Democratic Party, at the Cochise County Democratic Party HQ, 1010 E. Fry Blvd. (Sierra Vista). We need your Ideas! The CCDC Executive Committee wants to hear from you! We will have a short business meeting covering only the necessary items. We will close as soon as possible to allow for an Open Forum. Bring your best ideas for the future of the Party:
For more information please contact Acting CCDC Chair, Rich Brownell, seelifedive@gmail.com.
President Obama's 50th Birthday Bash!
Thursday, August 4, 5:00 p.m.: Pima County Democratic Party hosts President Obama's 50th Birthday Bash, at The Shanty, 401 E. 9th Street (at 4th Avenue). Please join the Pima County Democratic Party to celebrate the 50th birthday of President Barack Obama with beer, wine and hors d'oeuvre at one of our favorite local businesses, The Shanty. Long form birth certificates will not be required, but a contribution of $50 would be greatly appreciated. This event is free for current Catalina Democrats. For more information please contact Adam Kinsey at (520) 326-3716.
Mohave County Democratic Party Annual Picnic
Saturday, August 6, 11:00 a.m.: Mohave County Democratic Party Annual Picnic at Metcalfe Park, 315 Beale Street (Kingman). Good food, music, games. Auction items and raffle Tickets. $20.00 per person, children under 12 yrs free. Guest Speaker to be announced. To purchase tickets please contact the Kingman office (928) 753-0004, the Bullhead City office (928) 704-2774, or the Lake Havasu City office (928) 855-4805.
Democratic Women of Southeast Arizona Women's Equality Day High Tea (Costume Party)
Saturday, August 13, 2:00 p.m.: Democratic Women of Southeast Arizona host an English high tea costume party on the theme of "suffrage and beyond," at the Casa de San Pedro Bed & Breakfast, 8933 South Yell Lane in Palominas on the banks of the San Pedro River. Cost per person: $30.00. You will get to visit with dynamic women (past and present) all in costume and hear about their contributions to women’s suffrage. For more information and to RSVP please contact DWSEA Vice President, Pat Hickey, at (520) 459-1054 or jopath54@live.com for reservations.
Save the Date! Arizona Democratic Party Summer State Committee Meeting - Flagstaff, AZ
Saturday, August 20, 9:00a.m.-5:00 p.m.: Arizona Democratic Party Summer State Committee Meeting in Flagstaff, AZ. Caucus meetings and general business session. Election of DNC national committeeman to fill the position vacated by the resignation of Fred DuVal. Details TBA.
Pima Area Labor Federation 15th Annual Labor Day Picnic
Monday, September 5, 10:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m.: Pima Area Labor Federation (PALF) 15th Annual Labor Day Picnic, at the Reid Park Bandshell, 1100 S. Randolph Way (Tucson). PALF, a subsidiary of the Arizona AFL-CIO, will host their 15th Annual Labor Day Picnic to honor Tucson’s working families and union members. With the phrase “WE ARE ONE” as our theme for Labor Day we are reminding the entire Tucson community that all of us standing together are a stronger force than any one of us alone. This event will allow all of us to celebrate with family, co-workers, and friends, the impact that solidarity has in our lives. It also serves as a voice and reminder to all of us the sacrifices and efforts of past and present union workers. The event is free and open to the public. Guests will enjoy hot dogs, musical acts, dancers, labor history exhibits, children’s activities, “Union Olympics” games, and more. For more information please contact Laura Hogan at (520) 388-4139 or visit http://az.aflcio.org/pimaalf/.
65th Annual Navajo Nation Fair
September 5-11: 65th Annual Navajo Nation Fair - “The Largest American Indian Fair & Rodeo,” at the Navajo Nation Fairground, located 0.9 mile west of BIA Junction N12 & Highway 264 in Window Rock. The Navajo Nation Fair has become a world-renowned event that showcases Navajo Agriculture, Fine Arts and Crafts, with the promotion and preservation of the Navajo heritage by providing cultural entertainment. Rodeo, parade, carnival midway, arts & crafts, entertainment and concerts, and great food. For more information visit http://www.navajonationfair.com/.
Equality Arizona 20th Anniversary Annual Awards Dinner
Saturday, September 24: Equality Arizona 20th Anniversary Annual Awards Dinner, at the Arizona Biltmore Hotel, 2400 E. Missouri Avenue (Phoenix). Every year Equality Arizona hosts an awards dinner which recognizes corporate and community leaders who have stood for LGBT equality. This year, the organization celebrates its 20th Anniversary. Local and national leaders are expected to attend. Further details TBA. Information will be available at Equality Arizona's website at www.equalityarizona.org.
County Fairs - Save the Date!
Coconino County Fair: September 2-5, Flagstaff, AZ.
Apache County Fair: September 8-11, St. Johns, AZ.
Northern Gila County Fair: September 9-11, Payson, AZ.
Gila County Fair: September 15-18, Globe, AZ.
Navajo County Fair: September 14-18, Holbrook, AZ.
Greenlee County Fair: September 15-18, Duncan, AZ.
Mohave County Fair: September 15-18, Kingman, AZ.
Santa Cruz County Fair, September 16-18, Sonoita, AZ.
Cochise County Fair: September 22-25, Douglas, AZ.
Yavapai County Fair: Sept. 29-Oct. 2, Prescott Valley, AZ.
Graham County Fair, October 6-9, Safford, AZ.
Arizona State Fair, Oct. 14-Nov. 6, Phoenix, AZ.
Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
Now that the prurient political cartoonists are done with Anthony Weiner (almost), they are focusing on other topics.
Like the U.S. Supreme Court decision in favor of Wal-Mart this week...
And the Republican Party presidential primary candidates...
And the Republican Party's road to perdition with the Tea Party...
Tucson:
The Shanty
401 East 9th Street
Every Sunday from 6pm onward
Also in Tucson:
Please link to this site. Deep linking as well as landing page links are encouraged and appreciated. Here are site graphics you can use for graphic links.
BforAZ Merchandise:
Purchase of goods via or donations to this site do not constitute a donation to any political candidate or party and are not tax deductible. This site is run by volunteers and is not authorized by any political campaign, party, or PAC.
Opinions expressed are solely those of the authors and do not reflect the opinions or positions of any other organization, entity, or officials.
Recent Comments