Tim Bee's Big Surprise

Tim Bee stunned the Arizona political scene with a completely unexpected announcement that he is challenging Gabby Giffords for the CD 8 Congressional seat.

Seriously, though, Tim made it official -- he's in. I know, I was there. And, no, I didn't get tazed, Bro.

It was the kind of non-news news event one expects in the kabuki dance of American politics. But there were a few interesting bits.

Much more after the flip...

First, Jim Kolbe was there to lend his support to Tim. It's kind of hard to say whether Jim was endorsing Tim, or if Tim was endorsing Jim. In a very real sense, Tim is in better odor with his own party than Jim. Jim's cross-over for an all-but-explicit endorsement of Gabby last go-round rankled more than a few folks on the more populist side of the Right. In a lot of ways, Jim's presence there was a coming in from the cold for him, and as much a favor to Jim as it was to Tim.

I think Jim's endorsement might still carry some weight with the money men in D.C., whom Jim said he would be tapping on Tim's behalf in coming months. I think Tim is going to find it a hard slog to get the RNCCC and reliably GOP interest groups to pony up in CD 8; they are looking at CD 5 as the main chance in Arizona, so Kolbe might help shake some Benjis loose. Lord knows Tim's gonna need 'em, I expect him to be running his campaign at a 2:1 money disadvantage, at least.

Kolbe might also have some sway over some of the all-important Independents among whom this race will ultimately be decided. This race is a battle for the middle ground. The populist base of both party organizations have been effectively shut out of this race; on the left by an incumbent that won't listen to her party's activists, and on the right by a strong-arm clearance of the primary field by Jim Click (who was prominently on display) and his money mavens threatening economic assassination of anyone who dared challenge Tim. Thus there is likely to be a lot of sniping within the parties this election (I am exhibit A in that regard), as well as between the candidates.

Bee seems very vulnerable internally on the issue of immigration: he has Jim in his camp, which doesn't help him, he supports a guest-worker program and thus, of necessity, some form legal normalization that will certainly be labeled as 'amnesty,' and he is squishy about enforcing the new state employer sanctions law as-is, claiming to support revisions to the law, including those suggested by the Governess, which many to Tim's right will see as pulling the law's teeth in deference to guys like Jim Click and Bill Koponicki. I just see it as inconsistent, demonstrating short-sightedness, and a willingness to damage Arizona's economy for political expediency, since Tim was a sponsor of that legislation.

Gabby has similar problems with her own party on the issue of the Iraq occupation and impeachment -- but you'll hear plenty more about that from me in coming months. Jim says that he has nothing bad to say about Gabby other than she has failed to provide leadership in her first year, though he concedes that Freshman Congresscritters don't have much opportunity to lead other than by speaking out strongly on issues. So, in that criticism, I would join Kolbe's lament that Gabby has failed to provide vocal leadership on key issues of concern to Arizona and America -- though we are likely to disagree as to what those issues are.

Second was a moment I found highly revelatory of the central problem of Bee's campaign - lack of contrast between the candidates.

I give a big tip of the hat to Dan Scarpinato for asking an excellent question. He asked Tim what really distinguished the two of them since Gabby was making very similar noises on immigration and her voting record on the Iraq occupation was one of firm support for funding the continuance of the whole mess (my phrasing, not Dan's).

Tim went silent for what I deem to be an extraordinarily long time for a guy who is normally so smooth, and then started into his canned reel on how Gabby voted with her leadership over 90% of the time. You could hear the gears grinding and slipping as he sought a contrast message that would really pop their differences.

He couldn't do it.

Hell, John Shadegg probably votes with Pelosi well more than half the time, it ain't the lion's share that tells the tale, it's that minor variance. In Gabby's case, what gives her one of the most conservative Democratic voting records in Congress is that 5 -10% of the time she votes against her caucus.

Ultimately, all Tim could come up with is that while Gabby might have voted in support of the occupation, she also voted against it, and she didn't really support the occupation's aims. Tim claimed that he, like his good friend John McCain, really supports the aims of the occupation, though, of course he wants the troops to come home as soon as possible. Though we may have to leave a substantial residual force there.

If he's really in McCain's camp on Iraq, I guess that means that Tim, too, is fine with our troops being hunkered down in Iraq for the next 100 years.

If this is a main point of contrast for Tim's campaign, he's doomed. He's picked the right side of the equation for a primary race, but he doesn't have one of those. Who's he trying to please? Certainly not the 70%+ and growing of American's who want the occupation ended. If Tim is hoping to out-warmonger Gabby, he's not only going to lose that debate, but he's going to lose the electorate, especially the Independents he desperately needs to turn the tide with.

The GOP is already on the outs with Independents. Tim has to find issues that will turn that around in CD 8 in order to win, and talking about the occupation of Iraq sounding like McCain, isn't it.

Ultimately, the reason Gabby will kick Tim's behind is that voters won't be able to tell much of a difference between them and they'll go with the flow of the Presidential race, which Democrats will certainly win soundly in Pima County, at least.

Has that been Gabby's campaign strategy from the outset? Most likely. And it'll win, most likely. But what was the opportunity cost to our troops, our constitution, and our values? And what ever happened to electing leaders, rather than bland, poll-driven position-straddlers and obsfucationists?

Finally, I was finally able to have a conversation with Tim about his Schroedinger's Cat act during 2007.

I reminded him that 1) he had filed campaign statements as a candidate with FEC, and 2) that someone who files such statements is a candidate under FEC rules, and 3) there are only two choices for status under FEC rules, 'testing the waters' (which does not have reporting requirements) and 'candidates'. I asked him how he squared the circle that he was, in fact, a candidate complying with FEC rules under federal law, while claiming not to be a candidate under state law.

Tim said that he took legal advice on the matter and filed a letter with the FEC establishing his candidate's campaign committee stating that he hadn't yet decided to run, but was simply complying with FEC rules to avoid any violations. In other words, he was admitting he was candidate by his actions, while denying it with his words.

He doesn't have any excuse other than he got away with it.

And he has gotten away with it. It's water under the bridge. I hope that Terry Goddard will issue a new AG's opinion clarifying this obvious absurdity of Federalism that allows federal candidates to baldly deny they are state candidates for the purposes of the resign-to-run law. But there will be no consequences for Tim -- other than those exacted by citizens at the voting booth.

Even if you can't slip a stick between Tim and Gabby on the issues during this campaign, remember that when the law was inconvenient for Tim Bee, he twisted it to suit his agenda. At least Gabby in seeking her seat was honest and resigned her seat to run.

I think when Tim says he didn't really know if he would actually declare, he's being honest. And I also think it doesn't matter. He was raising money and campaigning like a candidate, filing disclosures like a candidate, and was de jure a candidate under FEC rules -- his subjective mental intent is irrelevant.

Tim knew that he had to hit certain fund-raising goals to appear viable. He needed to raise between 250 - 400K according to GOP sources. He didn't know if he would hit that mark until very recently. I grant that he truly didn't know if he would have to just fold his tent and skulk away until very recently. He was unwilling to gamble his Senate Presidency on that throw of the dice, so he slimed his way through a loophole so that he didn't have to make that choice.

I won't even go so far as to say that's unethical. Maybe it does serve the greater good for Tim to remain in office. But the truest test of character is to do the right thing, even when you know you can likely get away with doing the wrong thing. In this case, respect for the rule of law would, in my view, lead one to resolve any ambiguity in the law by doing the most honorable and conservative thing: resign. Ambition, self-regard, even mere convenience to your purpose might lead one to do otherwise.

It is for the voters to decide how Tim's choice reflects on his character. I don't think he's a bad man. Just the opposite, in fact. Just look at the guy with his family. He's clearly one of the white hats in this world. But even good guys do bad things for what they think are the right reasons. Indeed, that how most the bad things in this world happen.

I don't think Tim was being honest with the voters, or even with himself, about what he was doing. It's certainly not the worst thing in the world one could do to bend a slight ambiguity in the law in a convenient direction. As a lawyer, that is a practice I engage in every day, so I can certainly recognize it when I see it.

But the duty we place on public servants to serve the rule of law and to serve the public trust is much different than the obligation placed on lawyers to serve their clients. Public servants should be held to a much, much higher standard than 'whatever you can get away with.'

It is exactly this overly-legalistic approach to governance that has found barely plausible justifications for torture, unlimited detention of prisoners, spying on Americans by their own government, and war crimes.

Plausible justifications are the main problem with American government today.

Good luck with your race, Tim. You're going to need a lot of it.

If you enjoyed this post, consider subscribing to BlogForArizona.com with your favorite RSS reader, or get posts delivered to your email.

Comments

[kralmajales]

Damn...this is a fantastic article and not just because I am a Giffords supporter. You tackled a lot of problems with the campaign...Kolbe and Click, which I agree with completely. They evidence the split in the GOP that will make his votes this spring, very difficult and campaign questions, even more so.

The most stunningly correct and important part of you piece is what you said about Scarpinato's question. How do you really differ? The quandary is very very real for him. On one hand, if he tries to be different than her (goes with his base), he alientates moderates...and GOP biz types...and he loses. If there is not much "there" of true difference...then he faces the biggest reality...incumbency. He can't win by playing that he is better at being her than she is.

Finally, he is really not that well known among voters and get this...voters that come out in Presidential elections. They are clearly betting (and I read the conserv. blogs and those of his big supporters) that people will just vote party and that there will be enough of them to win. It won't work this year...and it won't work with an incumbent that is well liked "enough" (borrowing from Obama).

The last part is money. In order to make Giffords into the kind of rebel demon that you need to be to lose as an incumbent, they will need serious amounts of money...will have to attack hard...and that will not square well with his nice guy mistique.

He wont win this...period.

[Joe Pyritz]

Or you can place this Giffords quote from the Sunday article in there:

"I know people are mad. I know people aren't happy with me," she says. "My job, I'm sorry to say it, isn't to make people happy with me."

Then just WHOM are you beholden to?

[Tucson Activist]

Mike--You have this one wrong again.........Tim Bee will win this election for at least 2 very good reasons:

1.Gabby said the last election was about change. The changes she has voted for are higher taxes , pork barrel projects and restrictions on free speech and America's Union workers. Gabby said she would bring change but she is largely funded by big business interests and labor who now own her. Some change

2. CD-8 is a GOP district . Gabby's votes do NOT represent the majority of the views of voters in the district. She cruised to victory in 2006 telling some disaffected GOP voters she would be a "conservative-pro business " democrat. Some GOP voters bought her story who could not line up with their nominee. They won't in 2008. Independents bought same and were generally upset with the Republican Party and un happy with the GOP candidate also. Senator Bee will meet their tastes in 2008. Giffords cannot even get the most liberal in the democrat party to support her.

All of this will lead to a GOP victory in 2008. Don't forget...... you heard it here first.

[kralmajales]

Tucson Activist,

Its not a GOP district, it is a GOP plurality district. There are independents and those independents are leaning heavily Democrat this time...even more than they did during the time of the last election. You also assume that she won't capture some disaffected GOP voters...which she will. He has to hold his base, capture the independents and probably siphon some dems as well.

Not easy beating an incumbent either...let alone in times like these.

[mbryanaz]

Tucson Activist = Bruce Ash :)

Hi Bruce! Thanks for reading my very wrong blog.

Unfortunately, you couldn't be more wrong. Gabby doesn't need a single GOP vote to win in November. The fact is, she will likely get some, but even if she doesn't, Independents will determine the election, and they are breaking heavily for Democrats - and they will break heavily for Gabby unless Bee can do something to turn that trend here in AZ. I can't begin to imagine what that might be, but I don't think he's doing it so far.

[Tidball Fan]

Overall, I agree with your analysis of the District 8 race. Both Bee and Giffords have very little that distingishes them and both candidates leave me wanting. Giffords ran her campaign on immigration and has done nothing with regards to that issue. For that alone, she should lose her seat. Bee offers little as well. He has spent too much time in the Republican party to offer any change when that is exactly what is needed. However, have you contemplated the possibility of a third candidate? I heard Independent candidate Derek Tidball on the radio earlier this month and I liked what I heard. As a war vet, he would guarantee that our vets are taken better care of - something I think that we can all agree is in a dismal state. He's also tough on immigration - also of the utmost importance in District 8. And with the majority of District 8 voters now registering as Independents, I think he might just have a shot. What do you think?

[mbryanaz]

I think Independent campaigns have little chance of winning unless the candidate is a well-entrenched incumbent. Tidball might hope for 5% if he's a fantastic campaigner. If he is a fantastic campaigner and manages to raise a million dollars, he might become a serious spoiler for one of the major party candidates. Unfortunately, Duverger's Law simply precludes third party or independent candidates from being much of a factor in single member plurality district races.

Tidball would do well to simply challenge one of the candidates in their party's primaries, if he wants to be taken seriously. As a primary challenger, he might actually make a difference in the race.

[Tucson Activist]

Remember I never said that CD-8 was a GOP majority but they do hold a good lead over dem voters registered there. You ARE right about the independent vote. It WILL decide the November election up and down the ballot . Polls clearly show the nature of the CD-8 voter , however , amongst the independent registered is slightly right of center and will break against a tax and spend liberal like Giffords who has done little to earn support for her position on the war , the economy , the work place , free speech , border security and earmarks. Gabby sold her self in 2006 as a conservative democrat. She just isn't and it has hurt her support from GOP and indy folks who voted for her in 2006. Some of her positions while being un acceptable to GOP crossovers and indys also have enraged her support on the left. She's got real problems in 2008.

Also , don't forget the impact of a McCain for President attraction at the top of the ballot will have for d's and independents in this election. Further the GOP state candidates for Leg posts in LD- 30 and LD-25 posts and county supervisor in eastern Pima county and Green Valley/Sahuarita. She's going to be a lonely d out there on those ballots. Arizona will continue to be a RED STATE in '08.

What you have failed to note about Tim Bee is his bi partisan approach to legislation that has worked so well for him during a 7 year career in the Arizona Senate. Gabby votes right along with her leadership and has shown little independence. Bee is just flat out a great candidate who will out work his opponent to win in November . He doesn't bring the same image Mr Graf did in 2006. He is likable , thoughtful and a hard worker who takes his job seriously. The press will have a impossible task to paint him as they did Mr Graf.

Tucson Activist

[kralmajales]

Tucson Activist...or Bruce...

How on earth is Tim Bee going to outwork her when he will probably be in session...facing a major budget crisis until possibly June or July? How is he going to be able to travel the district and connect with voters and raise funds?

Remember that those compromises have angered many in your party. He also co-sponosored the Employer Sanctions bill and pushed it through. It has done very little but serve to tie the hands of business with more regulation, anger Hispanic voters, and more importantly, anger the people who should be funding him...Jim Click excluded apparently.

The GOP will be blamed for the war, this rotten economy, and the economy of this state. He was in the legislature promoting fiscally unsound policies (both voting with the Govs budget AND for lower taxes at the same time).

God I wish I could do that in my personal life and get away with it.

[Dwight D. Leister:Chair:Leister4Congress]

Hey FOLKS!!!

ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID!!

Giffords the Money Whore is a New York Stock Broker who got us into this sub-prime Goldman Sachs Banks money scheme to defraud you and me the Taxpayer out of $150 Billion plus of our tax dollars to fund a bank ponzi scheme?

Look the funding of the Iraq War costs every citizen in this country about 19 thousand dollars.

To fund the about 350 thousand sub-prime mortgage holders that will be "BAILED OUT" by the government plan supported by GIFFORDS is over $400,000.00 per mortgage holder costing EVERY SINGLE TAXPAYER IN AMERICA $300,000.00 Dollars EACH??!!

You site there kramajales saying with a straight face you support this diaper chasing money whore who thinks she is still working for the crooks on Wall Street with your tax dollars?

You better wake up!

[Dwight D. Leister:Chair:Leister4Congress]

Yesterday Jan.21,2008 saw the biggest meltdown in our or any other countries monetary system since 1929;1987 and 911!! ITS GLOBAL FOLKS!!!!

No one will be here or there to BAIL US OUT!!!!

HELLO:HELLO!!??

Your and my DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS IS HOLDING HEARINGS ON STEROIDS IN BASEBALL??!!

Iam getting sick and tied of Politics as usual and who has the most money to win CRAP!!!

Lets forget about the Giffords Kelly or whatever her name is as she changed her name from a Jewish sounding name to fend off anti-semitism or whatever and elect people that have run a balance sheet and knows what it is to BALANCE A BUDGET or BE FIRED!!!!!

HAVE WE ALL GONE MAD!!!!!!?????

[azw88]

Biggest Meltdown???

Come now, Dwight. It is time to put down the crack pipe, bottle of Ripple, Garden DeLuxe, or what ever mind-altering substance you are clearly close to OD-ing on.

Yes, the stock market dropped today (Tuesday) but it was far from a crash.

[mbryanaz]

Apparently at least one of us has gone mad...

[Dwight D. Leister:Chair:Leister4Congress]

The Fed had a EMERGENCY 12 midnight meeting and dropped interst rates BEFORE it meets next week by .75 points; where it is expected to DROP the rate AGAIN by .50 point!

The FED axw88 said" THIS IS A ONCE IN A GENERATION MOVE TO TRY TO PREVENT THE GLOBAL MELTDOWN THAT OCCURED ON BLACK MONDAY 01/21/2008!

Now I do not know where Mike or you live but it must be in some kind of dreamworld!

As for Pima County your friend and mine Chuck Huckelberry said," We are going to CUT JOBS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE COURTS FIRST then followed by THE PARKS,ROADS etc."

Now am I missing something here?

As for Mikes little snide remarks I point out that he as a County Employee of Isabelle Garcias Pima County Public Defenders Office is a COURT FUNDED COUNTY EMPLOYEE SUBJECT TO LAYOFF; I DO NOT THINK IAM A JKE OR NUTS MIKE!

[Dwight D. Leister:Chair:Leister4Congress]

Please for any of you that do not have access to anything other than CNN take a look at the pictures of the WORLD MELTDOWN posted on my web-site; just click on my name below and tell me what are all of those people around the world afraid of?

UFO'S?

[Dwight D. Leister:Chair:Leister4Congress]

Maybe now Raul Grijalva's little ILLEGAL Mexican Government South of The Freeway that has run amuck with the Tucson Sector APPREHENDING 348,000 ILLEGAL MEXICAN NATIONALS with more than ONE MILLION INVADING the TUCSON SECTOR with the blessing of GRijalva and Giffords will now KICK HIM IN THE ASS AND OUT OF OFFICE FOR BOTH OF THEM IN 2008!

The Pima County Property Taxpayer has had ENOUGH MIKE and azw88!

Prop 105 and The Arizona Tax Revolt are REAL FOLKS; and will BOTH be on the ballot in 2008!

Maybe YOU are in the Wrong Country and need to flee back to Mexico City with the rest of these Border Jumpers!

[Dwight D. Leister:Chair:Leister4Congress]

azw88;
The Stock Market, for your information was NOT down 100 points today but BEGAN with a close to 500 point DROP BEFORE the FED took the unpresidented move in MID SESSION to CUT RATES 75 basis points BEFORE ITS MEETING NEXT WEEK where another 50 basis points are in play.

It seems like we have alot of Government Employees here and Welfare recepients that are disconnected from the REAL JOB MARKET!

[Dwight D. Leister:Chair:Leister4Congress]

Market now DOWN over 3,500 points from highs over 15,000 last year folks; WAKE UP!

[kralmajales]

Holy f**K

Not sure what to say.