Blog For Arizona

AZ AG Terry Goddard Ready for Debate on Legal Pot

by Michael Bryan

Terry Goddard's measure of political courage just went up slightly in my estimation: he went on national TV and suggested that this country should look seriously at the merits of legalizing marijuana to cut off the flow of money to drug cartels fueling violence along the Mexican border and throughout Mexico.

He backfills immediately by claiming that he is not personally in favor of legalization, but only that there should be a debate. Well, is Terry going to play a role in that debate? He doesn't say.

Well, Terry, if you're listening, here's your invitation to debate the issue. Myself, or any advocate of legalization you prefer, versus you. Anytime. Anywhere. Maybe here on this blog. I will certainly post any statement or responses from you or your office. Let's have that debate.

I'd love to hear why Goddard is not personally in favor of legalization. Knowing as he does how thinly stretched our enforcement and prosecutorial resources are, how porous our border is, how much of the Mexican cartel's income stems from the illegal profits from pot (Goddard claims 70%, though how he knows that is beyond me), and given the historical lessons regarding the effects of alcohol prohibition on crime in this country and the objective scientific evidence that pot is much less harmful than legal indulgences such as tobacco and alcohol, why does Goddard oppose legalization other than mere political caution?

Right now 44% of Americans support legalization - not a majority opinion - so of course politicians are skittish about coming out for pot. But in Western states, that percentage trends up to as much as 58%. Considering the strength of Western public support and what he has seen and learned as Attoney General of Arizona, I don't understand why Goddard doesn't lead from the front rather than the rear on this issue.

With U.S. Attorney General Holder finally halting the deplorable Federal raids that had been defying state legislative action to rationalize marijuana policy in their jurisdictions, now is the perfect time for a border state like Arizona to re-examine its own policies. At the very least, perhaps we could stop treating sick people as criminals in 2010. Maybe we can even embrace some decriminalization such as that which garnered the support of 43% of voters in 2002's Prop 203, despite furious opposition from all sides of the political establishment.

If ever this nation is going to seriously reform our drug laws, it must happen now that progressive forces are in ascendancy. And it has to happen from the ground up. Eight states repealed prohibition before the ball got rolling in the Federal government. There must a groundswell that forces the risk-averse to side with reason.

Terry, you took a positive step by seving up the legalization ball. Do you have the political courage to return the ball when volleyed?

Karl Reiner: There is a war raging in our backyard

By Karl Reiner

The production and distribution of illegal drugs is big business. According to estimates compiled by the Office of National Drug Control Policy, American consumers spend about $65 billion per year on illegal drug products. If the illegal drug trade was ranked as an American business, it would be among the nation’s 30 largest enterprises. Its annual dollar volume would put it in 28^th place, producing slightly less revenue than Boeing and just ahead of COSTCO.

The illegal drug business operates with low overhead costs, pays virtually nothing in taxes and employs a quick and brutal method of resolving disputes among vendors and customers. Even when the losses inflicted by law enforcement are factored in, the return on investment is high. Despite the risks, the drug trade will always attract people primarily interested in large monetary gains.

Although some Tucsonans may be unaware of the problem, the 350 mile Arizona-Mexico border has become a haven for some of the Mexican trafficking organizations servicing the illegal drug market in the United States. Located only 65 miles from the border, Tucson is considered by the Drug Enforcement Administration to be a transshipment hub for a portion of the cocaine, heroin, marijuana and methamphetamine smuggled into Arizona.

The contraband moves across the border hidden in commercial trucks and private vehicles. As an alternative shipping method, it is transported through rough border terrain areas on pack animals and by human backpackers. Although local drug production is reported to be minimal, Tucson is a site where illegal drugs are warehoused prior to distribution to other stateside locations.

The slowing national economy is not having much of an effect on the drug trade. U.S. Customs and Border Protection reports a 200 percent increase in the amount of heroin seized at Arizona’s ports of entry thus far in 2008. Due to the lucrative nature of the U.S. market, competition is ferocious in the drug underworld. In Mexico, rival gangs are battling each other for control of the transportation routes.

Prodded into action by the U.S. government after years of ignoring the problem, Mexican authorities are now attempting to suppress the traffickers. Army units have been deployed to support the police. More than 48,000 traffickers have been reported arrested in Mexico since late 2006.

The drug lords are hitting back, often killing at will. The chief of Sonora’s state police was ambushed and killed in Nogales, Sonora in early November. The highly respected officer was one of the latest casualties in the escalating fight between the powerful drug cartels and law enforcement.

Through November, the city has suffered 103 confirmed homicides, up from 52 for the entire year 2007. The new murder rate record is a cause for concern. As a consequence of the spreading violence, the State Department added Nogales, Senora to its travel alert list. The travel warning has hurt the city’s once vibrant tourist business because the number of visitors from Arizona has drastically dropped.

As the drug gangs fight with each other for control of the profitable routes into the United States and resist the government’s effort to crack down on organized crime, casualties soar. Across Mexico, over 4,000 people have been killed thus far this year. By way of comparison, the U.S. has suffered 4,207 military deaths in Iraq since 2003.

The drug mobs have amassed massive amounts of money and firepower, enabling them to often outgun the police. Mexican officials point out that many of the 24,000 illegal firearms they have seized originated in the United States.

Awash in ill-gotten cash, the mobs have the ability to corrupt officials at the highest level. In one of the latest scandals, senior officials in the Mexican attorney general’s office and an employee of the U.S. Embassy were arrested for cooperating with the mobs.

Mexican authorities have begun moving to clean up the country’s scandalously corrupt police forces. Mexican President Calderon has candidly agreed with estimates that about half of the members of the state and local police forces are untrustworthy and that the federal service is riddled with corrupt officers.

Earlier this month, the U.S. government released $197 million of a $400 million aid package to Mexico. Providing equipment sorely needed in the drug battle, it is an indication of a closer and more cooperative effort by the two governments as they attempt to deal with the problem.

Tucson police believe drug-related crime is responsible in part for Tucson’s soaring homicide rate. The residents of Tucson have reason to feel less secure. If the ongoing struggle along the border slides up the supply chain, we should be prepared to see an increase in violence in Tucson.

Duelling Conventions Answer Key Questions

by John Adams

We have seen the past two weeks the best presentation of our Party’s message in Denver, contrasted with the best presentation the Republicans could muster in St. Paul. The results are starkly impressive.

Let’s consider some of the questions posed about our two Campaigns just a few short weeks ago...and answered so well by the duelling Conventions.

Can our Democratic Party unite?  Honestly, can anyone who watched the collective leadership of our Party speak at Denver seriously question whether we are united today?

Does our Party have the national security credentials to keep America safe in this dangerous world?  Not only did we put national security issues -- and endorsements of veterans, military leaders, and national security policymakers -- front-and-center last week in Denver, but it’s clear once again from McCain’s bellicose and feckless rhetoric on Georgia these past weeks that he has neither the temperament nor the strategic sense to deal with the critical questions of war and peace.

Barack Obama’s national security message at Denver was three-fold, highlighting his judgment, competence, and most of all trustworthiness in addressing American national security.  Barack knows that American national security is related to both the strength and intelligence with which America addresses complex challenges of this century.  And Barack knows we need to muster all elements of our national power, including a strong, ready military, but reserving it for the last resort, after we’ve tried diplomacy and all the other tools at our disposal.  For their part, veterans know, as is obvious from the numerous powerful endorsements in Denver, that they can trust Barack Obama to honor their service when they come home. Growing thousands of national security experts, veterans and family members, many of whom were out front in Denver, are adding their enthusiastic endorsement of Barack as our next Commander-in-Chief.

Contrast this with the central message of John McCain…that the belligerent and reckless strategy of the Bush Administration over the past eight years should not only be continued, but that it was too timid. If you listened to McCain pop off in Fall 2001, we should have attacked Iraq, Iran and Syria in response to 9-11. If you listened to McCain in 2003, our adversaries included France and Germany in addition to Iraq. John McCain wants to keep American troops in Iraq for as much as 100 years. And John McCain actually jokes publicly about bombing Iran. Simply speaking, John McCain lacks strategic sense, and lacks the temperament befitting a Commander-in-Chief.

And what about McCain’s allegations these past months that Barack lacks experience? Well, John McCain must have had a senior moment last Friday when he settled on Sarah Palin’s resume.

Again, nothing is more important for a President than the decisions on war and peace…and for this reason alone, McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin is alarming. Yes, as the renowned Fox News scholar Steve Doucy has said, she is the governor of Alaska which is next to Russia. Some recommendation.

Palin is truly a foreign policy blank slate, ripe for neocon engraving.

Actuarial tables and American history tell us that Palin has a nearly even chance of acceding to the Presidency…in McCain’s first term. In selecting Palin, John McCain confirmed once again that his judgment is seriously impaired.

So truly, we Democrats had a great Convention…full of substance and full of energy. We are fired up and ready to go!

We have a powerful, compelling message for the American people and the world, that addresses the real challenges Americans face at home and abroad. We have brilliant, convincing nominees in Barack Obama and Joe Biden…and they’re out front in the polls as well as in the electoral vote forecasts.

We’re going to coast to victory in November, right?

Unfortunately, assuming victory at this stage is absolute lunacy.

Not only are the stakes far too high to take anything for granted, but we can expect the Republicans to do whatever they have to do to retain the White House. They will pull out all the stops.

And the greatest enemy we face is not the Republicans, but voter apathy.

The real lesson of the duelling Conventions, for this first-time Delegate, is that now more than ever, it’s important to take the energy, the enthusiasm, the issues, and the facts back home to our neighborhoods here in Arizona. The work that good Democrats do every day, the canvassing, the phone-banking, the discussions with your friends and neighbors…that hard work is what will get us to victory in November.

Our hard work will bring John McCain “home”, wherever that is, because we must not let him occupy the White House.

And only our hard work will elect Barack Obama the next President of the United States.

We will win this election, not because the polls and pundits say we will, but because of the hard work of everyone in the Party, pulling together these next few weeks. For my part, I’m looking forward to marching with you, to our battle with the Republicans, and to our victory in November.

"It's Not About Me, It's About You"

by John Adams

Dateline Denver...the inspiration of Day 4 was matched only by the determination, shared among tens of thousands at Invesco, and tens of millions who watched, to work for the change we deserve, and the change we need.  We know it's up to all of us, together, to make the difference on November 4.  We know we must ensure we awake on November 5 to the promise of a new dawn.

Speech after speech, message after message, motivated the audience...yes, it was a celebration, but more than that, a call to action.  This was a working convention.

We know what change is, and that Barack is singularly prepared to lead this country.  He has the judgment, the experience, and the character to be our President, and our Commander-in-Chief.

And we know what change isn't, and that John McCain has abetted George Bush's destructive presidency.  McCain has shown by his reckless and dangerous foreign policy blunders, and his disregard for the plight of the American people, that he deserves to be out to pasture.

A few observations from others with whom I spoke at Senator Barack Obama's Acceptance of the Nomination for President:

US Representative Joe Sestak, Seventh Congressional District, Pennsylvania:  "Many have said that Barack Obama needs to introduce himself to the American people.  He's certainly done so.  But this election will be won by the candidate that can demonstrate to the American people that he knows them."

US Representative Patrick Murphy, Eighth Congressional District, Pennsylvania:  "As an Iraq US Army combat veteran myself, I want a Commander-in-Chief who knows how to take care of troops, while they're in combat, and when they come home.  Barack Obama takes care of troops; he's there for them.  We trust him on foreign policy and on veterans' issues."

General Wesley Clark, US Army (Retired), former Supreme Allied Commander Europe and Commander-in-Chief, US European Command:  "We can expect almost anything from the Republicans, to try and divert attention from the achievements of this convention, and to distract from the issues."

General Merrill "Tony" McPeak, US Air Force (Retired), former Chief of Staff of the Air Force:  "I'm feeling great about where this campaign is.  After this convention, and these past months of campaigning, I don't think there are many Americans who don't know who Barack Obama is.  I think the issues that will resonate this election will be 49 percent economic; the rest will be national security.  We need a hard focus on the economic issues, because that's what the American people expect.  The national security debate is hugely important, but Americans are looking for a President that understands how to fix the economy, and can do the job.  Barack's A-Game is just getting started...just you wait!"

Dan Abrams, Chief Legal Correspondent, MSNBC:  "This convention has an energy I've never seen before."

Lorin Dealey, Assistant Communications Director, Obama-Biden Campaign:  "Barack's first challenge is to restore the faith of the American people in our government, in trust.  We have a government that knows everything about us, but about which we know very little.  They read our emails, but we don't know what goes on behind their closed doors.  I trust Barack Obama to restore our faith in our own government."

To follow-up on Joe Sestak's observation, the great success of this Convention has been to give the American people that sense that Barack Obama knows them, and that they can trust him.  That's going to make the difference in November in our battle for the White House.

And as Barack has said so many times, this movement is not about him, it's about us.  This is our Time.

The Southern Arizona Team is Fired Up and Ready to Go!

We're All Fired Up and Ready to Go!!!

Who We Are

by John Adams

Dateline Denver...first night of the DNC.  Tonight was all about who we are as Democrats, and about who we nominate to lead this country out of the night of the past eight years.  We were treated to numerous moving, powerful, evocative speeches and images.

Not least of which was the beautifully planned marriage proposal -- on the Convention floor -- by Arizona Delegate Ruben Gallego to his now-fiancee, Kate Widman.  Perfectly timed to correspond with the other events of the evening, Ruben (who also serves as our Delegation whip -- he who orchestrates Delegation floor activities, including cheering and sign-waving) did us all proud -- and touched us -- in sharing this hugely important event!  Kate said yes...congratulations by all followed!

There were other wonderful, more public, moments...my favorite was when Ted Kennedy made his appearance, to the joy and universal respect of the Convention Hall.  And that after a beautiful speech by Caroline Kennedy...all of us shared the privilege just to witness this beautiful and touching moment in the history of the Kennedy family, and in the history of modern American politics.

And Michelle Obama's speech was magnificent...powerfully delivered, eloquent, and convincing.  We'll be fortunate to have a First Lady who understands and inspires the American people...as well as the President.

A few other Delegates' perceptions during the evening:

John Rayson, Florida:  "The Convention is our preparation for taking on the Republicans this Fall, and one of our challenges is to more fully introduce Barack Obama to the American people.  That's what tonight is about.  The Convention is also about building teamwork among the party leadership, harnessing the efforts toward the goal of winning the election."

David Hageman, North Carolina:  "My father's a US Navy officer, and used to be a strong supporter of John McCain.  He's still a Republican.  I'm not sure whether he'll vote for Obama this Fall, but he's thinking a lot about it, and he seems to understand why I'm so committed to Obama and to the change he represents."

Carolyn Wagner, Arizona:  "One of Obama's strengths will be that he'll encourage cooperation with our international partners, particularly the European Union, on a wide range of global issues."

As an aside, several of our concerned Delegates have created a website, http://www.FreeCindyMcCain.com to address the need to bring relief to the long-suffering wife of our senior Senator...visit if you get a chance before the Republicans trot the unfortunate pair out next week at the Republican Convention.

This first evening of our Convention was about telling the story of our heritage as a Party -- and about passing the torch to a new generation, as Ted Kennedy said, to Barack Obama and the movement for change he has ignited.  Tonight was both educational and inspirational...a great start for what promises to be an excellent staging ground for our battle to take our country back this Fall.

Now we need to take the offensive, to get on to Who They Are -- to provide the stark contrast between our Party's leadership and the destructive prospects of four more years of Republican disaster.

Real Heroes

by John Adams

Dateline Denver...the gavel goes down tomorrow afternoon in the Pepsi Center. 

Already there's huge energy building.  A rousing speech by National Chair Howard Dean welcomed the Delegates, honoring those who have suffered so much under the Bush Administration, and motivating us Delegates throughout all fifty states -- yes, especially Arizona! -- to work for victory this Fall, to take our country back.

A few brief observations:

- Great hospitality...everyone I met in the city was friendly and welcoming.  Denver's red carpet is out.

- Lots of security, everywhere.  Police from throughout Colorado are in Denver to keep the peace.  I like that just fine.

- Cool architecture downtown.  Like downtown Bisbee only bigger.

- Great spirit within the Arizona Delegation...forward-looking, ready to battle with the Republicans.

As I took the measure of the Convention scene today, the most moving experience I had was meeting Laura Dempsey, the Founder and Co-Chair of an organization of military spouses who support Barack for President, Blue Star Families for Obama.

Blue Star Families for Obama is a grass-roots organization of military spouses and family members.  Like the troops themselves, military families have sacrificed much these past years.  Like our troops, they have done their duty...steadfastly supporting their husbands, wives, parents, and children who serve us all so well.

No one can impugn the courage and dedication of our military.  They serve our Constitution with honor, determined to do their duty to the best of their ability.  And they have performed magnificently. 

Our troops are not responsible for the wrong-headed ideology that led us into the misadventures in Iraq.  On the contrary, our troops deserve immense credit for their heroism and their devotion to the Constitution.

And our troops' families serve as well, supporting, upholding, and sacrificing their own lives, families, and well-being for the cause of defending our national security.  Our troops' families know the costs of a war that should never have been fought.  They also know that we need a strong military, a military that can preserve our national security.  They want their sacrifices to be honored, and certainly not taken for granted.

Laura Dempsey and the hundreds of members of Blue Star Families for Obama are dedicated to electing a president who honors their sacrifices, who understands that we need a strong military, who will respect our troops, and who will guard our national security.

Our troops' family members are real heroes, as are our troops.  Meeting Laura Dempsey, and seeing the dedication of Blue Star Families for Obama, inspired me today as our Convention begins.

This week in Denver, the Democratic National Convention will honor our troops and their families, conveying respect and appreciation for all they have done.  The Convention will feature several events to highlight Barack Obama's plan to restore American security after the destruction of the Bush Administration.  And central to restoring our security is honoring the sacrifices of our troops and their family members.  Indeed, we must honor the sacrifices of those who serve our country...and in contrast to John McCain's casual disregard for our veterans and our national security, Barack Obama will keep faith with our military and their families. 

Barack Obama will restore our national security.

Blue Star Families for Obama is growing by the day...as more and more family members of our military realize that America's national security has been squandered by the wrong-headed Bush strategy, and that the Bush Administration has not only mortgaged American national security, but disrespected our military as well.  And John McCain promises more of the same. 

Our troops and their families yearn for the change that Barack Obama will give as our Commander-in-Chief...he will privilege America's security first, and he will honor the sacrifices of those who defend our country.

As for me, I'm moved by the dedication of these young military spouses of the Blue Star Families for Obama, forging a grass-roots movement on their own dime, and doing wonderful outreach to other military families to accelerate our movement for change.  Blue Star Families for Obama members are my heroes.

If you're a military family member, please join Star Families for Obama and join this growing movement for change, and for respect for our military.  Their website is:

http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/BlueStarsForObama

...It's Sunday, the day before the DNC gavel goes down...we're just getting started with staging our assault on the Republicans who have wrought such carnage on the American people.  With Barack Obama as our next President, we are going to take our country back. 

Obama y Biden - Que Viva "Change We Can Believe In!"

by John Adams

Dateline Denver, the 2008 Democratic National Convention...staging ground for victory for the American people in November.

Why Joe Biden?

Let's ask the neocon icon, Mr. William Kristol, his thoughts on the question:  "There's lots to like about Barack's choice of Senator Joe Biden as his running mate: Biden's bowling score, honed by years of practice...now that will help the ticket."

OK, I admit I didn't ask the unctuous, reptilian Kristol to answer the question...rather I overheard the above flippant BS as Bill K spoke to one of his slobbering minions in the lobby here at the Hyatt Regency Tech Center...I like this hotel lots, but why couldn't they book better peeps than Fox News to share OUR delegation's convention residence?

But that begs the question, why is Joe Biden such a good choice as Barack's running mate?

1) Biden is a fighter.  After all, we're in for the political struggle of our lives over the next couple of months, and Biden is proven in battle.  Great message for all of us on the campaign...it's time to take the offensive.  McCain's earned whatever we throw at him...Biden's already firing fastballs.  This convention is all about marshaling our resources to take on McCain and the Republicans, and Biden's strong, sharp attacking style is just what we need.

2) Biden is grounded.  He knows personal adversity, he knows public adversity, and like Barack, he understands what it's like to have to work hard to make it in America.  He wasn't born rich, he's not now, and he has no problem answering questions like how many homes he has.

3) Biden knows the stakes for this election: War and Peace.  Wannabe Emperor McCain doesn't understand how unsafe the Iraq War has made America; in fact, he's spoiling for a new war with Iran.  On the other hand, like Barack, Biden knows that the issue of war and peace is the most important question facing any President, and he's determined to keep us safe and at peace.  Like Barack, he has the courage to oppose the war-mongers who continue wasting American blood and treasure in Iraq...and he has the courage to oppose the twisted ideologues who want to expand the conflict to Iran.  Biden knows the world, he knows the value of diplomacy, he knows the risks of war, and he knows the importance of peace not only to restoring America's place in the world, but to healing our suffering economy.  In the Senate, Biden's proven himself to be an insightful expert in foreign policy and issues of national security.  He'll bring these talents to the campaign, and to the Office of Vice President. 

4) Biden's ready to lead now...dedicated to his role as Barack's Number 2.  Biden is a strong, forward-looking Vice Presidential candidate who's dedicated to electing Barack Obama this fall, and to serving the Constitution as Vice President, rather than as some sort of co-President.  If the situation ever arose, Biden will be ready to step up to the White House, but he respects and is dedicated to Barack Obama as the leader of our movement and as our next President.

5) Biden's selection is well-timed.  Of course, we always expected to know the selection prior to the convention kickoff, and thank God for that.  Next week in Denver is about moving forward, about winning the election, and restoring our country to the American people.  Biden's selection puts to rest one of the most often-cited issues for many who've had trouble putting the primary season behind them...we need to move on, and having a strong, talented running mate helps us do that. 

After the night of the past eight years, it will be wonderful to have a Vice President who serves the Constitution and is dedicated to preserving American national security.

Barack Obama leads a movement that will bring change to our deserving people -- now he's selected an excellent Vice Presidential nominee to accelerate our victory in November.

And as for our hotel-mates at Fox...I expect I'll hear more lame drivel over the next few days from Bill Kristol, Bill O, or one of the other Fox News idiots...but perhaps I should spare you more of that...

The Convention starts officially on Monday, and with the good news of Senator Joe Biden's selection to complete our White House ticket, we in the Arizona Delegation are ready to help ensure Hope becomes Fulfillment this November.

Keeping Faith With the American People: Ending the War in Iraq

by John Adams

Critical to Democratic prospects in November, as well as to our country’s future, is keeping the commitment to the American people to end the war in Iraq. Yet there exist so-called “democratic realists” (some of whom are also Democrats, cousins of the “neoconservatives”…you know, those guys who wanted to “liberate” Iraq and “democratize” the broader Middle East) who consider Iraq their base for future mischief in the region, continue to enjoy billions of dollars in contractual profits, and want to occupy Iraq indefinitely. Although Barack Obama has always forthrightly opposed invading and occupying Iraq, we must not allow the “realists” to undercut his determination to end the war.  He will keep the promise to the American people, but we need to have Barack's back.

And we who have a voice here at home, in this critical election, need to bring our brave troops home safely and now.  We need to honor their sacrifices. 

We need to have our troops' backs.

Tacking to the center on Iraq is analogous to scuttling the ship.

Fortunately, the recently completed draft Democratic Party Platform’s plank on Iraq reflects Obama’s determination to end the war rather than the so-called realists’ – and John McCain’s -- determination to remain. In the paragraph entitiled “Ending the War in Iraq," the Platform calls for:

• “bring(ing) the Iraq war to a responsible end.”
• “re-center(ing) American foreign policy by responsibly redeploying our combat forces from Iraq and refocusing them on urgent missions.”
• “giv(ing) our military a new mission: ending this war and giving Iraq back to its people.”
• “remov(ing) our combat brigades at the pace of one to two per month and expect(ing) to complete redeployment within 16 months.”
• “keep(ing) a residual force in Iraq to perform specific missions: targeting terrorists; protecting our embassy and civil personnel; and advising and supporting Iraq’s Security Forces, provided the Iraqis make political progress.”
• "mak(ing) clear that we seek no permanent bases in Iraq."

Of course, there’s much more in the Platform…and more that we all need to focus upon, both analytically and with energetic political advocacy.  But this represents a solid plank on the war in Iraq.

And we must remember that no matter how sweet the Platform, only the ultimate policy results count.

We invaded and continue to occupy Iraq based on false pretenses. We took our eyes off Al Qaeda, and instead attacked a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 (have we forgotten the Iraq WMD sham?)

Those who wanted to invade Iraq in the first place have not lost their dream of having American troops based in Iraq -- accompainied by multi-billion dollar sweet deal contracts.

How many brave American lives must be lost in a war which makes America less safe?

How many more billions must be wasted in Iraq while our own economy suffers?

How many more young lives will be shattered fighting a war that should never have been fought?

If we want to make our country more prosperous and the world safer, we must:

• Bolster our Party’s stated determination to end the war in Iraq.
• Elect Barack Obama in November, giving him a clear mandate to end the war.
• Following the election, guard against the machinations of the so-called foreign policy and national security realists as they do whatever they can to maintain our occupation of Iraq indefinitely.

Nothing is more important to American security and prosperity than ending the nightmarish misadventure in Iraq.

Our Southern Border Policy Lacks Cohesion

By Karl Reiner

The U.S. government’s effort to improve security along the Mexican border is delivering results.  The combination of towers, physical barriers, better intelligence and an increase in the number of agents has made the crossing more difficult.  As a consequence, the number of arrests made by the Border Patrol is down approximately 12%.

 

According to the Border Patrol, 202,563 arrests were made in the Tucson Sector between October 1, 2007 and April 30, 2008.  Of the apprehensions, approximately 96% were Mexican nationals and about 3% came from Central America.  While improved enforcement is slowing the rate of illegal migration, the underlying causes remain to be addressed by our reluctant national policymakers.

 

While focusing attention exclusively on border control may generate a feeling of real accomplishment in some political circles, it is akin to trying to walk in the desert with only one boot on.   Because border defense and economic issues are intertwined, we cannot continue to ignore the other half of the problem.

 

The overall standard of living in Mexico is about a quarter of the living standard in the United States. The growing imbalance and the resulting lack of opportunity fuels the need migrate in search of work.  Addressing the economic problem has to be part of our overall strategy if we want to achieve long-term success.

 

Infrastructure- poor southern Mexico is stagnating.  While the northern part of the country has mostly benefited from the impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the southern part of the country has not.  Nearly 50% of the population of Mexico’s southern states - Guerrero, Oaxaca, and Chiapas - lives in extreme poverty.  In the adjacent Central American countries things are no better; 30% to 50% of the population is below the poverty line.

 

The United States has long avoided pressuring the Mexican and Central American governments into confronting the problems fostering migration.  Unless we decide to act, southern Mexico and Central America will remain ensnared in a poverty trap that cripples regional development and continues to force people to head north to find work.

 

Mexico’s Ministry of Agriculture estimates that only 6% of the nation’s farms are highly efficient and profitable.  When NAFTA began, a program to help small Mexican farmers switch from growing corn and coffee to more profitable and labor intensive crops such as fruits and vegetables was supposed to have been implemented.  Nothing much in the way of support actually materialized; the funds apparently went to other purposes. 

 

The governments of Mexico and the Central American countries rely on a defacto policy of exporting labor as an economic safety valve and as a major source of national income.    A review of CIA and World Bank data reveals that the remittances workers send back to Mexico are the country’s second largest source (after oil) of foreign income.

 

In El Salvador, the remittance inflow nearly equals the income generated by the nation’s exports.  In Guatemala and Honduras, remittance income equals two-thirds and three-fourths of the value of those nations’ exports.

 

By uncoupling the need for economic progress from the issue of border security, we are setting the stage for failure. If migrant workers can’t go north while development at home remains stifled, instability and political chaos will eventually result.  We face a stark choice. We can start to push economic development and reform now, or plan to deal with the more menacing problems that will develop in the future.

 

In 1950, with America’s blessing, war-devastated Western Europe began to rebuild its economy when France, West Germany, Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands agreed to form the European Coal and Steel Community.   From those humble beginnings emerged what today has become the European Union (EU).

 

Over time, the EU has developed into an economic powerhouse with 27 member states.  With a population of nearly a half billion, it accounts for almost a third of the world’s gross national product despite the fact that more than 20 languages are spoken within its geographical boundaries.

 

Strangely, the EU the current administration once considered irrelevant and out of touch with modern military reality, also believes prosperous countries have an obligation to help poorer and less developed nations if peace and stability are to be maintained. We need to relearn that lesson, the same one we taught to Europe at after World War II, and apply it to our foreign policy south of the border.

 

Polls reveal that over 75 % of Americans are dissatisfied with the way things are going in the United States. The president’s approval rating is in the 20% range.  Not to be outdone, Congress has managed to do worse, with a dismal approval rating of 14%.

 

The consequences of a terribly flawed war strategy, the lack of an energy policy and the mediocre results delivered by world’s most expensive health care system have made Americans apprehensive.

 

The situation is made worse by the self-inflicted economic damage of the ongoing mortgage debacle and the festering problems stemming from countries below our southern border.  The governments of Mexico and Central America have ignored the need for economic development for years.  The impact of their failure to act has been compounded by a United States that remains oblivious to the result.   

 

The next president will have the unenviable job of trying to rejuvenate a malfunctioning government while trying to salvage something from a host of failed international policies.  Let’s hope he also gets a Congress more inclined to face reality rather then wallowing in political platitudes.         

A Meeting with our Future Commander-in-Chief

by John Adams

Last Wednesday, June 18, in Washington, I had the privilege of joining a group of thirty-seven retired generals and admirals in a meeting with Senator Barack Obama, to discuss national security issues. 

I entered the meeting with Hope, believing with all my heart that Barack Obama can bring the change our country needs, to restore our safety and prosperity.  I left the meeting with Fulfillment, knowing that this is a leader who is ready to be our Commander-in-Chief today.

A small but revealing digression...as our group waited for our meeting to start, greeting each other, including (for me) some whom I hadn't seen for years (previous assignments in the Middle East, the Balkans, the Pentagon), speaking of why we were together, suddenly we recognized -- literally in our midst -- the voice we've all come to know, that of Barack Obama.  The room hushed immediately.  Barack told us he was running about fifteen minutes late, and he wanted to let us know that he regretted the delay, but we'd get down to business soon.  He could have sent someone to tell us, of course, but that's not his style.  Instead, he told us himself. 

The mark of a leader who respects others...

As the outlines of the meeting have been reported in the press, I'll take the liberty of commenting on the atmospherics within the bounds of discretion, as the points of our discussion must remain "closed-door."

Senator Obama opened the meeting with a heartfelt thanks to all of us -- and to those who wear the uniform of the United States of America -- for our service.  He asked us not to hold back in the discussion on national security issues -- encouraging us always to do the right thing, to speak our minds with absolute candor.  His demeanor was calm, relaxed, purposeful, and completely businesslike. 

Throughout the meeting, he genuinely listened -- and responded appropriately to -- our concerns.  His tone of urgency and determination to address the serious issues facing our country inspired all of us to voice our concerns in the same spirit.  And Barack's encouragement -- to speak our minds honestly and directly -- found success.  No one held back. 

And though Senator Obama was clearly in charge of the meeting (setting the broad topics, responding thoughtfully and knowledgably to our observations), he listened to our group far longer than he spoke to us. 

The mark of a leader who values counsel...

Senator Barack Obama is both brilliant and wise.  Vitally important for a Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States of America, he knows how to lead, and how to call professionals to duty in service to our Constitution.  He knows the national security issues facing our country internationally -- and domestically.  He understands the process by which our national security strategy should be derived -- and he also understands how the process can go off the rails. 

Most important for Americans who trust in his leadership and wisdom, he is already tackling national security issues with both urgency and determination...as a Senator and as our Party's standard bearer now, but looking forward to the challenges he'll face in office.  Barack Obama leans forward.

The mark of a leader with his priorities straight...

We've all seen how masterfully Barack has run the most successful primary campaign in recent memory, harnessing the energy of tens of millions of Americans, a host of committted volunteers, as well as a skilled professional staff, to build a movement that overcame all the odds to win.  Now we can see he has hit the ground running in the general election campaign. 

Among other things, I took away from our meeting last Wednesday that Barack Obama feels a solemn duty to Americans to restore our national security after eight years of the Bush Administration's disregard for our safety and prosperity.  As Barack quotes Martin Luther King, this movement is about "the fierce urgency of now"...

The mark of a leader who serves the American people...

And you can believe -- on national security as on all the other urgent issues crying out for leadership and competence -- President Barack Obama will hit the ground running in January.

First Post - In Defense of Liberty!

by John Adams

First of all, thanks to Mike Bryan and Blog for Arizona for the opportunity to contribute to this exciting, progressive community.  It's a privilege to share our thoughts on today's issues.

Since this is my first post, please allow a brief introduction.

I retired from Active Duty in the US Army in September 2007, as a Brigadier General, with over thirty years' service to our Constitution as a Military Intelligence officer, Army Aviator, and Foreign Area Officer.

With on the ground experience in both Iraq and Afghanistan (temporary duty in 2004), I also served in Africa (Operation Guardian Assistance, Rwanda, 1996), Europe (Operation Allied Force, the Balkans, 1999), and the Middle East (Operation Desert Storm, Saudi Arabia, 1991).

On 9/11, I was at the Pentagon, 100 yards from the crash site...and on that tragic day I participated in the rescue and recovery of the shattered bodies of our brothers and sisters-in-arms. As a committed servant of the Constitution of the United States of America, I am determined to combat the murderers who attacked us on 9/11.

But I am just as determined to combat the fear-mongering criminals in the Bush Administration who assault our Constitutional rights under the guise of protecting us—and who under false pretenses, send our brave troops to die in the unconscionable occupation of Iraq.

From first-hand experience, I know national security issues. I also know that the Bush Administration cynically exploits our fears to gain ever more control of our national security apparatus, benefit the richest among us economically, and eviscerate our constitutional liberties.

Although I have taken off my Army uniform, I am no less committed to fighting for our Constitution—and for real national security—than I was when on Active Duty.

However, as John F. Kennedy said in his acceptance speech for his nomination as the Democratic Party candidate for President in 1960, "We are not here to curse the darkness, but to light a candle that can guide us."

In that spirit, please allow me to address a brighter subject...the movement to elect Barack Obama as our next President. Barack has a life experience that demonstrates his capacity for hard work and commitment...and most important for someone who aspires to the Presidency, Barack is a brilliant, caring, perceptive, and courageous leader.

My own life experience convinces me that Barack Obama is the greatest leader we have seen in America for generations. He has the experience, the judgment, and the passion to inspire all Americans, to unite us, and to carry this country forward beyond ethnic and economic divisions.

As a delegate pledged to Barack Obama, I will fight to make him our nominee at our Democratic National Convention.  With the help of Americans united in the conviction that we must change the course of our country, and chart a new one that benefits all our people, we will elect a President of whom all Americans will be proud.

I am privileged to call Blog for Arizona my "home," including at the upcoming Democratic National Convention. I welcome your thoughts—and your counsel—as we march toward Denver and beyond.

Giffords and Mitchell: The New Center? Let's Hope Not... UPDATED!

NATIONAL JOURNAL: "The New Center"

National Journal is getting a lot of ink locally (e.g., here and here) due to their ranking the ideology of many of 2006's frosh congresscritters, including Arizona's Gabby Giffords and Harry Mitchell, smack dab near the center of the political spectrum.

When you take a closer look at the actual votes on which National Journal based their ratings, however, what they actually seem to be measuring is mostly how two key issues - Iraq and immigration - are causing some Democrats to throw out their principles in the name of expediency and poorly-judged pragmatism.

Note: The headings stand for Economy, Social,  and Foreign policy.

A closer analysis of the fairly small sample of bills upon which the rankings are based indicates that in most respects Giffords and Mitchell both generally hew closely to the party line on most issues other than immigration and Iraq. The moderate nature of both candidates is largely a feature of their shared (and mistaken, in my view) hands-off approach to the war in Iraq, and their perceived need to armor themselves against the immigration fire-fight in Arizona.

Giffords is not ranked as notably more "economically moderate" than, say, Rep. Ed Pastor - at least in terms of her actual votes. She has not been nearly as much of an economic conservative in her votes to date as her overall centrist ranking, and her membership in the Blue Dogs, might suggest.

What Mitchell champions, however, is clearly out of step with most of his caucus - not surprising considering he too made a bid to join the Blue Dogs. What is surprising is that his rhetoric, and to a lesser extent his votes, actually indicates that he is much more in tune with conservative tax philosophy (coddle the rich and soak the middle class), yet it was Giffords who got the nod from the Blue Dogs. Maybe Mitchell's tax rhetoric put him too far to the right even for the Blue Dog's comfort. In the end, I think that Mitchell's ranking as a 'moderate' on economic matters, is rather too generous. He actually deserves to be in amongst the Republicans proper when you take into account his advocacy, as well as his votes.

UPDATE 3/14/08: Mitchell has made it two years in a row now that he has voted against his own party's budget. If he's trying to establish his fiscal conservative credentials, I think he's more than done the job.

Despite their fairly middle-of-the-road rankings in social policy, neither member is sending many overt signals to the 'values voters'. They do score considerably more conservative than other Dems in the Arizona delegation and the Caucus overall, but that is almost entirely down to votes having to do with immigration and immigrant rights.

The big difference between 'social centrists' like Gabby and Harry and the rest of the caucus is how terrified they are of creating a record that can be characterized as 'pro-immigrant.' The callousness and pettiness that these 'centrists' will stoop to in order to avoid giving racists and xenophobes any ammunition is often farcical.

On foreign policy, both members score more conservatively than their Arizona Democratic delegation-mates, but that is predominantly down to their votes on Iraq. Their score also includes a few instances when their urge to throw money at a military system outstripped any fiscal restraint or desire to look deeper at our actual strategic needs - a common and unfortunate Democratic habit that our members default to in order to forestall being labeled as anti-military, but that results in massive pork and a flabby, wasteful military.

I will take a closer look at the particular votes that earned Giffords and Mitchell their milquetoasty middle-of-the-herd street cred after the flip, and consider how well-deserved are their carefully-crafted, centrist images...

 

Sheriff Arpaio Gets Into the Foreign Aid Game (UPDATED)

Sheriff "I Just Love, Love, Love the Hispanic Folks" Arpaio has been spending RICO funds to train Honduran police in a region of Honduras, a tropical paradise known for its sunny climes and great scuba-diving. 34 paid officer work weeks, over 30K in direct expenses, and an unspecified amount of equipment have headed south of the border in connection with the program. The Phoenix New Times broke the story and channel 12 reports:

Hmmm. Considering recent controversial jail closings justified by budgetary constraints and the generally tight budget environment, one wonders why this is a priority for Sheriff "Want Some Paid Vacay, Hendershott, My Boy?" Arpaio? We'll see if sheriff department employees will still be headed south in March as scheduled, now that the cone of silence on the program is gone. The U.S. invaded Honduras on March 21st, 1907, perhaps Arpaio's boys are going down to participate in a historical recreation of the event?

In my view, this is clearly a case of a thinly justified use of RICO funds to send favored employees on paid vacations using seized booty. The training program likely has some real benefit to Hondurans, and there does seem to be some approval by the Maricopa Board of Supervisors and the Governor's office for a training relationship with the Hondurans, but it is unclear that the extent of the program, or the paid man-hours involved, were directly authorized. Looks to me like Joe got the thin edge of the wedge in by getting the Supes and Governor to give a nod to some donations of equipment, and then tacked on junkets for his cronies himself.

Regardless, all of this is of questionable value to the citizens of Maricopa. I think they likely expect and deserve that seizures and forfeitures from criminals operating in Maricopa be used to ameliorate the effects of crime in Maricopa, not Honduras.

I like to know the officers on our streets well-rested and recently-laid, as much as the next guy, but there's a fine line between treating employees well and misuse of public funds. Lowered stress for these public servants is certainly a public good, but this program certainly gives the impression of being a slush fund for deputies to head south for a little paid vacay in exchange for giving a few lectures or demonstrations. If Sheriff "How Do You Say 'Per Diem' in Spanish?" Arpaio can produce some proof that these were really working vacations with 8-hour-a-day training schedules justify those man hours, I might change my mind about whether this program is actually corrupt, but regardless of any taint of corruption it seems like a wasteful use of limited resources.

It seems apparent that some enforcement agencies are getting up to some questionable stuff with these non-budget recovery assets, such as RICO funds. Recently, both the Maricopa and Pima County Attorneys blew a big wad of such non-budgetary funds on big glossy public information puff-pieces that were clearly campaign literature on steroids. Both offices justified the publications with the plausible public purpose of educating the public about their services and programs, and helping to prevent crime, but like these trips to Honduras, there is clearly also a plausible private benefit derived from the expenditures. The policies as to how and where these funds can be deployed clearly could use some tightening to avoid any appearance of impropriety when we discover some are being used to buy Margaritas in Honduras.

The episode with the county attorneys and some controversial billboards featuring Governor Napolitano have prompted some action in the state legislature to restrict the use of any public funds for public communication that could be deemed to promote an incumbent candidate for office. Such legislation, if properly drafted and implemented (two caveats that I do not give the current majority caucus the benefit of the doubt on), could be useful, but it only addresses one aspect of the problem. Sheriff "I wonder if any police agencies on the Riviera need some training?" Arpiao's little Honduran adventure indicates that the legislature's response may not be nearly comprehensive enough.

UPDATE 2/27: Well, it didn't take long for Sheriff "Does my tail look good tucked between my legs like this?" Arpaio to shut down his Honduran sub-station.

And it turns out that County Attorney Andy "Arrest the Press!" Thomas is the public official with the responsibility of seeing that RICO funds are spent wisely. Why am I not surprised that he approved this little boondoggle for his buddy Sheriff "Andy, my boys could use a tan" Arpaio.

The Maricopa County Democratic Party released the following statement about the scandal:

Sheriff Joe Arpaio has caved in to public pressure and the media and has suspended his controversial foreign aid project to Honduras, telling KTAR that "until we get out of this budget crunch, we're going to put it on hold." The MCSO attempted to provide cover for this waste of RICO funds saying it was to track the MS-13 gang, but never explained why they have never sent anyone working on gangs to the country, and instead sent two traffic investigators, a homicide investigator and an aviation expert. Let's just hope that this doesn't end the investigation.

A new report by Channel 12 states that the operation spent 34 of payroll, 125 hours of overtime, nearly $6,800 in shipping costs, and charged to a MCSO credit card $2,976 to buy measuring equipment, traffic accident templates and fingerprint kits that were given to the Honduran government--all paid for with YOUR tax dollars. Again, if this is an anti-gang project, why do they need traffic accident templates? What is even more revealing is that the story reports Maricopa County Attorney Andy Thomas is the person responsible for approving these funds!

One other small problems with Sheriff Joe "All them brown folk are interchangeable anyhow" Arpaio's excuse of MS-13 as the basis for he program: MS-13 originates from El Salvador and operates to a lesser extent in Guatamala and Mexico, but not in Honduras.

MS stands for Mara Salvatrucha. Get it? El Salvador? And Mara is La Mara, a street in El Salvadoe. If Sheriff Joe "Get me an atlas" Arpaio doesn't even know that about MS-13, color me unimpressed by his anti-gang efforts.

U.S., Japan, India and Education

by David Safier

The New York Times ran an article last month that caught my eye: Losing an Edge, Japanese Envy India’s Schools. The article begins:

Japan is suffering a crisis of confidence these days about its ability to compete with its emerging Asian rivals, China and India. But even in this fad-obsessed nation, one result was never expected: a growing craze for Indian education.

Despite an improved economy, many Japanese are feeling a sense of insecurity about the nation’s schools, which once turned out students who consistently ranked at the top of international tests. That is no longer true, which is why many people here are looking for lessons from India, the country the Japanese see as the world’s ascendant education superpower.

A few decades ago when it looked like Japan was the world’s economic powerhouse, we wrote glowing stories about their schools. If only our schools were as good as Japan’s, we thought, we would have a chance to compete against them. Now that Japan’s economy is fading and India’s is on the rise, they’re looking at India’s schools as a model.

There’s a lesson here. While good schools are a prerequisite for a strong economy in today’s world, schools are not the engine that drive that economy. Other factors too complex for me to fathom are at work in all these economic shifts. Blaming schools for economic successes or failures is not only a vast oversimplification, it can create “educational solutions” that cheat our students out of the human component in education, the part that can’t be measured in dollars and cents.

Education may function as the oil that lubricates the engine of the economy. It can even be thought of as the parts factory that supplies new pistons, cogs and wheels to replace those that are wearing out. But it is not the reason one country is an economic powerhouse and another is stalled. And our children are more than lumps of coal to be fed into an economic furnace to keep it burning.

Let’s imagine for a moment that Japan’s schools were every bit as good as we thought they were in the 1980s and 1990s. The students graduating from those schools during those years should have raised Japan’s economy to higher heights if education was the key factor. But Japan began tanking as those students joined the workforce.

Let’s imagine, while we’re at it, that our schools were as bad in the 1980s and 1990s as reports said they were. The graduates from those schools spearheaded our high tech revolution. Where did all those amazing minds come from, able to imagine cyber-worlds that didn’t exist, then create those worlds from scratch? From failing schools?

We longed for schools as good as Japan’s, until their economy tanked and we stopped talking about the Japanese miracle. A few years ago, when the Japanese thought they weren’t creating enough entrepreneurs to breathe life into their economy, their educators began visiting our schools to see how we managed to encourage creativity and a sense of adventure in our youth. Now the Japanese are flocking to schools created on the Indian model.

We need to do what we can to create the best schools possible for the sake of our children, so they can grow as skilled, thinking, caring human beings. The closer we come to that ideal, the better for all of us. If we are successful, when those children become adults, they will be well rounded people who, in the process of living their lives, will help move our economy forward as far as it can go in this ever-more-competitive world.

America and Iraq: The Economic Background of the Conflict, by Guest Commentator Karl Reiner

When he launched his brutal invasion of Kuwait on August 2, 1990, Saddam Hussein shocked the world.  As his forces callously swept over the small neighboring state, he also deliberately smashed a budding rapprochement with the United States.  Although Saddam’s government had been peddling regional stability as an objective, it viciously repudiated that policy when it went to war. American intelligence officers were stunned and mortified.  Their analyses of Hussein’s intentions regarding Kuwait had been wrong.  No one had seen the invasion coming - not even the Kuwaiti leaders fleeing in terror toward the Saudi border.            

During the early 1980s, Iraq’s emissaries to Washington began pushing to improve relations with the United States.  They said Iraq wanted to end the war with Iran.  In their newly found desire to promote regional stability, the Iraqis expressed a willingness to support whatever agreement the Israelis and Palestinians worked out.  Had the bitter war with Iran forced Saddam Hussein to alter his policies?  An emphasis on economic development, the calls for regional peace and closer cooperation with the United States were taken as signs that the government of a war-weary Iraq was bending to reality.

More of Karl's unique first-hand perspective of the history of the Iraq conflict after the click...

 

Freerice.com: Feed the World, 20 Grains of Rice at a Time.

by David Safier

I’m going to leave yesterday’s controversial tax-and-spend posting behind for today, though I have to ask, in response to one comment: Why is it people talk about “throwing money at education” but you never hear anyone use the phrase “throwing money at military defense”? Just asking.

If you haven’t visited the site, freerice.com, you should take a look. Here’s what you’ll find. On the screen is a vocabulary word and four possible definitions. If you choose the right definition, the site contributes 20 grains of rice through the United Nations to people who are hungry, and a new screen comes up with a new word. If you choose wrong, it tells you the right answer and gives you a new word to try. The site adjusts the vocabulary level based on your right and wrong answers to keep challenging you without frustrating you.

Since October, 2007, when the site began, 17 billion grains of rice have been donated (These are the site’s figures.) Scanning the web, I found varying figures for the number of grains of rice in a pound, but let’s go with the ballpark figure of 25,000 grains/pound. That would mean the site has donated 680,000 pounds, or 340 tons of rice to date (I think I got the math right, but correct me if my figures are wrong).

Where does the money for the rice come from? The wonderful, free enterprise answer is, it comes from advertisers. The creator of the site, John Breen, who also created poverty.com, says he makes no money from the site, and all the advertising revenue goes toward buying rice. In fact, he has raised the reward for each right answer from 10 grains to 20 due to increased ad revenues and hopes to increase it again in the future.

Teachers can use freerice.com with students. (Imagine a computer lab full of students, each of them racking up 20 grains of rice every few seconds! Then comes the math question at the end of the period: "How many grains of rice did we send today? How many pounds is that?") Parents and their children can do it together at home. Adults like me can develop minor addictions (“OK, just one more vocabulary word, and that’s it.” “YES, I got it right! OK, just one more.” “Damn, I missed that! I can’t quit now and be a loser.”) And the bottom line is, you’re doing a little bit to feed the world’s hungry with every right answer. That’s positive reinforcement times two.

By the way, you get a running vocabulary skill level number as you go, with the top being 55. I’m at 44. Beat that, sucker!

Ron Paul Points the Way For Democrats in Congress

Rs and Ds at all levels, but especially among those competing to be the next Commander in Chief, constantly fight over which party is the champion of our armed forces.

The Rs claim that title by dint of massive and reckless appropriations and a belligerant, wooden-headed foreign policy that gives the armed forces plenty of opportunity to ply their craft.

The Ds claim the honor by lavishing as much attention and money as possible on veterans benefits, trying to improve the conditions and equipment the soldiers must endure during active duty, and, of late, madly shoveling money in the maw of the Iraq occupation in the vain hope that no Republican will be mean to them.

It is deeply ironic, therefore, that the odd man out in the Presidential race, the Republican who advocates for a much more limited and humble foreign policy than any Democrat dares, and who demands an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, and who levels an even harsher criticism of the policies that led us there than most Democrats can (because he actually voted against the invasion), leads by a very wide margin in fund-raising among armed forces personnel.

In fact, one can clearly see that the more of a "surrender-monkey" the candidate is on Iraq and foreign policy in general, the better our men and women in arms likes him (or her).

Military donations in the 4th quarter of 2008:

Paul: $286,764 (1349 donors)

Obama: $81,037 (466 donors)

McCain: $79,597 (413 donors)

Clinton: $49,523 (181 donors)

Romney: $29,250 (140 donors)

Huckabee: $24,562 (94 donors)

Nor is this a one-time anomaly, it is an established pattern. Ron Paul is the bottom-line choice of the active duty military.

The one exception to the trend is McCain, who obviously gets points and well-deserved respect from the troops for his biography. Were it his position on the Iraq occupation that soldiers were rewarding, he would be bracketed by Romney and Huckabee, who also support the continuation of the failed Iraq occupation, rather than Obama and Clinton.

If McCain would have reversed himself on Iraq earlier, he wouldn't have wandered in the political wilderness until GOP primary voters got panicked enough to turn to him, and he would be a much stronger Presidential candidate for it -- and likely the top pick of the military instead of Paul.

As Democrats running for Congress carefully triangulate to ensure that they "don't abandon the troops" by cutting off funding for Iraq to bring Bush to the bargaining table, they might keep Ron Paul's overwhelming military support firmly in mind.

That means you, Gabby Giffords and Harry Mitchell -- as well as you hopefuls, Bob Lord and Ann Kirkpatrick. The troops want brave leadership willing to bring a misbegotten war to close every bit as much as most other Americans.

Our troops have tremendous esprit de corps and a steely determination to accomplish the mission - even if it is an impossible one. It's their job to lock their jaws and squeeze the life out of our enemies.

The job of the political leadership is to have the wisdom to know when and where it is prudent to unleash the dogs of war -- and when to put them back in the kennel. Our troops clearly recognize and value the kind of political leadership needed to end this mission-less war, even as they say they are determined to stay the course when the pols come wandering through like baby ducklings on yet another fact finding tour through the international zone.

Karl Reiner: Some of the Consequences of Our Apathy and Detachment

It has been said that American voters like solutions to political problems that are quick, cheap or paid for by someone else.  In such an environment, elected officials are encouraged to postpone addressing problems that don’t fit the mold.  After a problem escalates into a crisis, the unnerved electorate reverses its position and the political leadership rushes to repair the damage. 

It may not be the best way to conduct national affairs, but we seem to like it. We have grown accustomed doing nothing for long periods and then reacting with a self-righteous vengeance when the problem spins out of control. 

Congress oversees the federal agencies responsible for border security, immigration and foreign relations.  It is aware that the majority of migrants attempting to cross the border into Arizona are Mexican nationals trying to enter the U.S. to find work.  For the past 25 years, Congress and the White House have ignored the fact that Mexico’s ongoing anemic economic performance was contributing to the problem.  Mexico is linked by geography to the southwestern United States.  It is a major U.S. trading partner and a component in resolving the illegal migrant issue. 

Through September 2007, our two-way trade with Canada totaled $277.0 billion.  For the same period, the total for Mexico was $167.8 billion.  A large number of jobs on both sides of the border depend on the commercial relationship between the three countries.  If Mexico had been a foreign policy priority for the last 25 years, the total for Mexico would be a great deal higher today due to its economic expansion.             

Because Mexico and Arizona share part of the national border, our futures are linked in many ways. Economic stagnation in Mexico drastically impacts Arizona. On the other hand, a prosperous and economically viable Mexico will benefit Arizona to a great degree. 

The U.S. government is proposing to provide Mexico with $1.4 billion to fight drug trafficking over the next three years.  At the same time, Congress and the White House should be looking into ways to get the Mexican government to stimulate economic growth.  The country’s legendary corruption problem needs to be addressed along with Mexico’s atrociously poor productivity growth rate.  The impediments stifling business formation, competitiveness and innovation in the economy have to be removed. 

The committee on foreign affairs in the U.S. House of Representatives made national headlines recently when it announced it had determined that the killing of the Armenians during the World War I era was a genocide carried out by the Ottoman Empire.  While the dismal fate of the Armenians during the period of collapsing Ottoman rule nearly 100 years ago is a subject worthy of historical study and evaluation, Arizonians should rightly question the priority given the subject by a Congress unable to come to grips with the immigration problem here at home.

Citizens have to demand that Arizona’s congressional delegation prod Congress to focus on Mexico’s economic situation because it is a key factor in determining how successful Arizona’s economic future will be.  The matter certainly should rate as high in importance as the recent revisit of World War I events.

The “no amnesty” policy championed by many as the solution to the illegal alien (as they call them) question has a goal of ridding the United States of approximately 12 million undocumented individuals.  While the implementation of this policy would create new government contracting opportunities for those willing to seek out, incarcerate and transport large numbers of people, it would be extremely disruptive to society as a whole.  Humanitarian concerns aside, the chaos caused by the roundup and wholesale deportation of a sizable chunk of the U.S. workforce is not an event this economy can easily withstand.

Deportation would also be a peculiar position for the government to embrace given its previous policy of more or less ignoring the situation.  By not acting when it should have, the U.S. tacitly encouraged the workers to come in.  The new immigrants, as were most of those in the past, were not bent on the destruction of the United States.  They came from places of little opportunity to find work in a country where they were allowed to fill jobs.  Their much derided economic contribution has been real; it cannot be simply discounted as being irrelevant.  The economic consequences of a deportation policy are real.  They have to be seriously considered as the debate over immigration policy continues.

In the 1980s, industry lobbyists persuaded Congress to deregulate the savings and loan industry.  As part of the process, Congress purposefully had the government retain responsibility for guaranteeing the safety of deposits in the deregulated savings and loans. The unpleasant consequences of the newly liberated environment became apparent to all when Charles Keating and his Lincoln Savings in Phoenix leaped into the headlines. 

To the astonishment of lawmakers, the deregulated and rowdily managed savings and loans were not helping to generate greater national prosperity; they were imploding on a massive scale. Their sequential failures during the late 1980s and early 1990s resulted in the severest blow to the U.S. financial system since the Great Depression. Over 1,000 savings and loans eventually failed.  The government dutifully acted on its guarantee, and the taxpayers footed a bill of nearly $124 billion to clean up the wreckage.  This amount was on top of the once overconfident industry’s own substantial losses. 

The lessons learned in cleaning up the savings and loan mess didn’t seem to stick.  The housing industry, one of the major drivers of the U.S. economy, has now become entangled in a financial mess that may take two to three years to remedy. It is estimated that about two million homeowners are carrying $600 billion in subprime adjustable-rate mortgages.  The low initial interest rates on these mortgages are expiring.  They are scheduled to ratchet up during the next two years. 

As a result of the combination of slipshod lending practices, cheap credit and the unrealistic belief that housing prices would always continue to climb, many of the home buyers are finding themselves holding mortgages they will be unable to carry at the new rates.  The regulators didn’t pay attention as the inventive mortgage financing industry promoted its teaser rate inducements to unwary buyers.  No one questioned the industry’s motives as it developed ways to turn these mortgages into investment securities, a process that detached the lender from the risk of default. Since the lender’s motivation to closely check the creditworthiness of borrowers was reduced, a degree of misrepresentation and even outright fraud crept into the system.

To make matters worse, the neatly packaged securities containing the subprime mortgages were marketed to buyers around the world as first-class investment products.  When the low preliminary mortgage rates began to expire about the same time as the housing market began to slow and prices leveled off, defaults on subprime mortgages started to rise.  Billions in what may be reduced value investments are now on the balance sheets of the largest global banks. The mounting losses could easily spill over into the pension and mutual funds that invested in the same securities.

One after another, large banks have begun writing down the value of their subprime assets and CEOs have started to exit. In this uncertain situation, many of the small borrowers, who didn’t understand what kind of obligation they were taking on, will get wiped out.  The banks will have to take massive write-offs, significantly devaluating their investors’ stock holdings.  Large numbers of employees will be laid off, the lucky ones getting severance pay. 

The corporate officers and directors, who organized, ran and oversaw this ugly show will do nicely. They will suffer a little mortification from the wave of relentless press stories exposing their lack of judgment and poor management practices.  They will, however, be able to retain the all bonuses and hefty salaries already in the bank. They will not be forced to give up their big houses or multiple cars.  Thanks to the money made in mortgage securities, they will not have to rely on social security payments when they retire.            

The effects are ricocheting through the economy.  The U.S. Department of Labor estimates around 100,000 jobs related to the financial services sector have already disappeared.  Foreign investors have become distrustful of American offerings; the value of the dollar is plunging.  Housing sales are slumping, construction is slow, and the median price of homes has dropped approximately 5 percent since last year.  Analysts are predicting an additional 5 to 9 percent drop before housing prices level off. 

The shock waves of the creative financing binge will reverberate throughout the economy, maybe pushing it into a recession.  The final cost has yet to be tallied.  It remains to be seen if the taxpayers will have to provide a bailout.

It is now clear that the undisciplined dealings in mortgages and securities will put a sizable dent in America’s economy.  As it did with the savings and loan debacle, Congress will hold hearings and move to tighten regulations.  The White House will look for ways to control the damage because the president’s appointees supervise the regulatory agencies. 

The problem has already hit home.  Arizona has been affected, the housing slump driving the state’s economy into a downturn. The University of Arizona’s researchers have found that, along with Michigan, California, Nevada and Florida, we have entered the beginning phases of a recession.

Karl Reiner is a friend of this site and an active voice for a fact-based approach to the issue of immigration from Mexico. He asked me to post this commentary here on BlogForArizona.com. This blog published previous articles by Karl on the world's richest man, the failure of the immigration bill considered by Congress this year and the economic underpinnings of Mexican immigration, as well as the transcript of an erudite lecture Karl gave on that subject.

Karl managed international trade and economic policy analysis at the U.S. Department of Commerce in Washington, DC. He served as an acting deputy assistant secretary during the first Bush and Clinton administrations. A Vietnam veteran, he is a graduate of the Ohio State University and holds a MS degree from the Garvin School of International Management. After retiring from government service in 1994, he did consulting and authored a novel, "Sgt. Bellnapp’s Secret", published in 2001, and a collection of historical essays, "Remembering Fairfax County, Virginia," last year.

 

GOP planning to campaign again on immigrant issue

Link: GOP pressing immigrant issue.

I didn't realize that Republican strategists were actually pushing Congressional recommit votes on immigration-related language to paint Democrats as pro-immigrant. I have to say, I'm utterly delighted that they are hanging that anchor around their own necks.

I think most Americans, and especially independents, recoil at policies and political stands they see as cruel, petty, or mean. And there is little in American politics today that is meaner and slimier than the hatred wrapped in patriotism that is the hard-right GOP message on immigration. I get a little frisson of delight when I imagine the ads they are brewing up using these votes.

"Gabby Giffords didn't vote to cut off the health care coverage of immigrant children. She didn't vote to kick immigrant children out of public housing. She wouldn't vote to punish public schools that enroll the children of undocumented immigrants. Gabby Giffords: she just won't screw those immigrant children."

Yeah. That'll work on the vast majority of Americans who aren't eaten up with xenophobic mania.

The GOP apparently didn't learn their lesson in 2006 when their ($) candidates who made immigrant-baiting a major theme of their campaigns got their clocks cleaned across the board. If they need some more tutoring, I think we Democrats should be happy to give it to them.

We need to establish a Democratic system of values regarding the immigration debate, however. The only reason why Republicans are driving this issue is because they at least have a consistent narrative - hateful and divisive though it may be. We Democrats need  to talk about eliminating the need for illegal border crossings, saving lives and reducing the crime along the border, treating both American and Mexican laborers fairly in both countries, and the great American tradition of welcoming and assimilating new citizens.

Democrats sound soulless and stupid when we ape Republican themes of cracking down on employers, and militarizing the border, and treating immigrants as criminals and undesirables; when our Democratic politicians 'me too' the block-headed policy initiatives of Republicans - like building a damn wall - it simply makes the insane seem sensible.

I don't want our party to create a compromise with the sheer insanity that passes for policy among Republicans. I would prefer the status quo ante to compromises that would make life even worse for the immigrants already here, endanger the lives of those that will surely come, and entrench harmful policies in our immigration law for another generation. This is a fight that we can win if we stop accepting the Republican terms for this debate: hatred, fear, xenophobia, and prejudice.

So the GOP wants to square off and make immigration a central issue? I say bring it on, because they have nothing useful to say on the subject. The only we won't win is if we accept that their vision of immigration of in America is in any way legitimate or useful. We have to name the prejudice and hate fueling the GOP's obsession with the immigration issue, or they get to continue to appeal to voters anxieties and prejudices without paying the electoral price. I am sickened when I hear Democrats talking about immigration in the same fearful and divisive way that Republicans do, simply because Democratic leaders aren't offering an alternative vocabulary of ideas.

We got lucky in 2006 that the American people are naturally resistant to demagogues, and largely resisted the GOP siren songs without much help from Democrats; we would be foolish to continue to rely on Americans' continued self-discipline if we aren't even offering a counter-narrative they can stop their ears with.

Guest Commentary by Karl Reiner: The World’s Richest Man Is a Symptom of Mexico’s Shortcomings

A number of business publications recently carried reports regarding Carlos Slim. With a fortune estimated at $60 billion, the Mexican businessman has become the world’s richest man.  Slim replaced Bill Gates of the United States who held the top spot for a number of years.  According to the reports, Slim’s family business holdings in Mexico account for an astounding 5 percent of the country’s gross domestic product.  The companies controlled by Slim have a massive impact on the Mexican economy.  They comprise 35 percent of the value of the Mexican stock market.  Slim holds a dominant position in the telecommunications industry and is a major player in the automotive, retailing, and banking sectors.

The Mexican government has followed an imprudent policy of opening some markets to privatization and limited competition, while at the same time doing little to regulate them.  Slim and other shrewd business operators have taken advantage of the situation and have become billionaires in the process. One of the sad consequences of this policy has been the stifling of competitiveness and innovation in the Mexican economy. The government has allowed a colossal concentration of economic power to develop in a country desperately in need of real competition and the new investment needed to spur economic growth.  According to Mexico’s Finance Ministry, the country has recorded an atrocious zero percent increase in productivity during the last 25 years. 

Mexico could be said to be on the road to becoming a plutocracy - a government of, by and for the rich.   As economic power concentrates and the economy languishes, the 7 percent annual economic growth rate needed to improve education, create jobs and trim down the country’s staggering poverty level has become unachievable.  Those unfortunate enough to be caught at the stagnant bottom end of Mexico’s economic spectrum have little choice but to trek north, to search for work on the U.S. side of the border. 

Carlos Slim can’t be faulted for taking advantage of the irresolute regulatory situation prevailing in Mexico.  With his business acumen, he would have also found success in a more structured commercial environment. His triumph does, however, highlight the need for the Mexican government to make the changes needed to foster true competition, implement the rule of law, attract investment and deter corruption. Given the power of the entrenched interests with a stake in maintaining the status quo, it is going to be a difficult process. The reformers in Mexico are going to need all the outside support they can get. With the immigration situation the U.S. faces as a consequence of Mexico’s flagging economy, it is high time we acted.  President Bush didn’t press the matter in talks with Mexican President Calderon at the Summit of the Americas meeting held on August 20-21 in Quebec.  Being the former governor of a border state, one would have assumed he would have been willing to put a great deal more emphasis on the subject.

What would have been the result if Congress decided 15 years ago that national security considerations required our government to support Mexico in getting its sputtering economy up to snuff?  What would the relationship be like today?  There probably would not be a crisis on the Arizona-Mexico border and a large number of additional jobs would have been created in Arizona as a consequence of the growing Mexican market.  The fact that the problem has been ignored in the past by lawmakers, doesn’t excuse continued inaction.  Arizona’s congressional delegation needs to take a stand and start pushing the subject in Washington.  The issue can’t continue to be ignored because it affects Arizona’s security and long-term economic welfare.

If Mexico’s south, which is economically lagging and hemorrhaging people, got into a development mode, things would be a lot better on both sides of the border.  If we adjusted our policies to support the effort, the North American Free Trade Agreement could actually turn out to be a remarkable arrangement between three countries (Canada, the United States and Mexico) with similar standards of living.  Our total merchandise trade (exports & imports) with Mexico totaled $332.3 billion in 2006, continuing the upward trend of the past several years.  Our support of economic reform in Mexico would guarantee the upward trend will continue.

Karl Reiner is a friend of this site and an active voice for a fact-based approach to the issue of immigration from Mexico. He asked me to post this commentary here on BlogForArizona.com. This blog published previous articles by Karl on the failure of the immigration bill considered by Congress this year and the economic underpinnings of Mexican immigration, as well as the transcript of an erudite lecture Karl gave on that subject.

Karl managed international trade and economic policy analysis at the U.S. Department of Commerce in Washington, DC. He served as an acting deputy assistant secretary during the first Bush and Clinton administrations. A Vietnam veteran, he is a graduate of the Ohio State University and holds a MS degree from the Garvin School of International Management. After retiring from government service in 1994, he did consulting and authored a novel, "Sgt. Bellnapp’s Secret", published in 2001, and a collection of historical essays, "Remembering Fairfax County, Virginia," last year.