Blog For Arizona

William Bennett's War on Drugs, battles with addiction and tendency to say reprehensible things

by David Safier

Now that Colorado has legalized marijuana and more people are talking about ending the incredibly destructive War on Drugs, it's a good time to take a trip down memory lane and think about my favorite soldier in the war, the nation's first drug czar, William Bennett.

Reagan declared a War on Drugs (I just found out that Nixon used the term in 1971, saying drug abuse is "public enemy No. 1") and Nancy launched her unbelievably patronizing "Just Say No" campaign (Nothing to it, Just Say No. Wasn't that easy?). William Bennett was Reagan's Secretary of Education. Come the Bush I administration, he was appointed the nation's first drug czar.

But there was a little problem. Bennett had a serious addiction to nicotine. He promised to quit, which he eventually did. When confronted with the fact that during his tenure as commander-in-chief of the drug war, the needle didn't move on drug use, he said, half seriously, that at least it got him to quit smoking.

What happened to Bill Bennett after that? Well, he went on to be one of the founders of K12 Inc., the publicly traded, for-profit chain of online charter schools which has received more bad press than any other charter school group I can think of -- and earned every critical word. He offered to resign when it was discovered he had a serious gambling addiction and lost millions of dollars (but he had plenty of money from the sale of his book, The Book of Virtues, so he said he really didn't have a gambling problem because he never put his family in financial jeopardy). K12 didn't accept his resignation.

However, some time later, on his radio show, Bennett said what he later claimed was a thought experiment.

"[I]f you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose -- you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down."

He followed that by saying it would be "an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do," but that it's true, that would lower the crime rate. After that statement, K12 Inc. decided to accept his resignation.

I could go on and on. For instance, Bennett was Reagan's second choice to be his Ed Sec. The first choice, Mel Bradford, had pro-Confederate views, and that's how Bennett got the job. And Bennett apparently said it was "morally plausible" to behead drug dealers, and he lamented that they were granted habeus corpus rights. I'll stop there.

Advanced directive? Maybe not, if you're a lady with a Holy Fetus inside her

I had not planned to do any blogging over the holidays but then there was this whitehot-rage-inducing item in the news today:

Marlise Munoz, 33, is in serious condition in the intensive care unit at John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth, Texas, hospital officials said. She is unconscious and on a ventilator, her husband told CNN affiliate WFAA, but she wouldn't have wanted her life sustained by a machine.

"We talked about it. We're both paramedics," he told WFAA. "We've seen things out in the field. We both knew that we both didn't want to be on life support."

Complicating an already difficult situation is that Munoz is also pregnant, about 18 weeks along, WFAA reported. Texas state law prohibits withdrawing or withholding life-sustaining treatment from a pregnant patient, regardless of her wishes.

Arizona Democratic Party Shows Its Progressive Side at State Committee Meeting

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Progressive voices were heard loud and clear at Saturday’s Arizona Democratic Party (ADP) State Committee Meeting in Maricopa, Arizona.

Unlike some past ADP meetingswhere progressives were ignored or where progressive resolutions were tabled and not heard by the full ADP membership, the Maricopa meeting was dominated by progressives.

During the morning caucus meetings, approximately 80 members of the progressive caucus (pictured here) met in the booming high school cafeteria to hear about legalization of marijuana, the plight of Dreamers, and a host of progressive resolutions.

In the progressive caucus, members unanimously endorsed resolutions: 1) in support of a Constitutional Amendment ending Citizens United and abolishing corporate personhood; 2) in support of passage of the Inclusive Prosperity Tax (AKA Robin Hood Tax); 3) against building the Keystone XL Pipeline; and 4) in support of allowing DREAMers to have Arizona drivers’ licenses and in-state college tuition. A resolution requiring clean elections candidates to give back extra funds passed, with some dissent. In addition, with only one dissenting vote, the Progressive Caucus voted to endorse Safer Arizona, the citizens’ initiative to legalize marijuana for personal use. [Votes from the entire State Committee after the jump.]

Oh SNAP! The GOP war on the poor

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

There is some good reporting on what the Tea-Publicans in Congress are planning to do with the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) aka "food stamps" that they bifurcated out of the Farm Bill before they left town on August recess. (Keep in mind that the Senate has already passed a routine Farm Bill with far less draconian cuts to the SNAP program than House Tea-Publicans fantasize about in their hatred for the poor).

Laura Clawson reports at Daily Kos, The real food stamp fraud is in the reasons Republicans give for cuts:

House Republicans aren't telling all the details of their plan to cut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by $40 billion over 10 years, but the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has taken a look at the information that is available and rounded up some of the bad news. The CBPP estimates that the cuts would deny food aid to "at least four million to six million low-income people, including some of the nation’s poorest adults, as well as many low-income children, seniors, and families that work for low wages."

ALEC’s Legacy of Destruction: PDA Members Join Anti-ALEC Protesters in Chicago (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Inside the 40th annual meeting of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) in Chicago, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and other right-wing big-wigs addressed ALEC members and on-the-dole politicians.

Outside, the people, who have been cut out of the legislative process by ALEC and big money donors, protested in the streets. (Photos here.)

In its 40-year history, ALEC has done more to destroy the American Dream than any other group. According to a report by the Center for Media and Democracy, 466 ALEC bills were introduced in 2013, and 84 of them became law. Every state and the District of Columbia considered ALEC bills this year. Read the highlights of this ALEC legislative report and watch a video of Chicago protesters after the jump.

The complexities and economics of Arizona's border relationship

By Karl Reiner

Although it is of little concern in the state capital, Arizona's exporters had a good first quarter of 2013.  U.S. merchandise exports to Mexico totaled $53.5 billion, an increase of $487 million over the same period last year. Texas was the leading state with $24.16 billion, followed by California, Michigan and Louisiana.  Arizona ranked fifth with $1.65 billion, up $132 million over the previous year's first quarter.

Mexico's stock market hit an eight-month low in May.  Sluggish sales to the U.S. (Mexico's largest export market) during the first quarter of 2013 slowed the economy.  Mexico's economic growth forecast was reduced to 3.1% from 3.5%.

New Research: Regular Marijuana Users See Pre-Diabetes Benefit

by Pamela Powers Hannley

A new research study published today in the American Journal of Medicine found that current marijuana users had significantly lower fasting insulin, were less likely to be insulin resistant (a pre-diabetic state), and were more likely to have high HDL (good cholesterol). (Read the study here.)

Marijuana (Cannabis sativa) has been used for centuries to relieve pain, improve mood, and increase appetite. Outlawed in the United States in 1937 and further restricted under the Controlled Substances Act by the Nixon Administration, marijuana use has continued to increase. There are an estimated 17.4 million current users of marijuana in the United States. Approximately 4.6 million Americans smoke marijuana daily or almost daily. With the recent legalization of recreational marijuana in Washington and Colorado and the legalization of medical marijuana in 19 states and the District of Columbia, US public opinion has moved toward less stringent laws.

In an accompanying editorial, Dr. Joseph S. Alpert of the University of Arizona College of Medicine calls on the federal government to open the doors of medical research to marijuana, allowing free investigation of the drug. Study details after the jump.

World of Beer Brings More Beer to Downtown Tucson. A Perfect Storm?

by Pamela Powers Hannley

A World of Beer franchise will be opening on the ground floor of The Cadence, that giant, six-story, white student housing complex rising from the old dirt lot next to the Rialto Theater downtown.

What could be more perfect than a 3000-square-foot bar located under a maxi-dorm with 465 apartments? This sounds like a capitalist's dream and a parent's nightmare.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I am not a beer drinker, so I don't see the point of opening another beer joint downtown-- especially a franchise (owned by some guy from Tempe). World of Beer will be in direct competition with local beer joints already in the immediate vicinity of The Cadence, namely The Shanty, Thunder Canyon Brewery, Gentle Ben's, Barrio Brewing, and Borderlands Brewery. More about beer after the jump.

Immigration Prisoners Released-- Thanks to Republican Filibuster of Sequestration Vote

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Even though the majority of US Senators voted to end sequestration and stop automatic budget cuts on Thursday, February 28, there were enough Repulbican Senators to filibuster this action and trigger the accross-the-board cuts that no one said they wanted. 

One unintended consequence of allowing sequestration to go forward is the nationwide release of hundreds of immigration prisoners from federal prison.

ICE claims it is releasing prisoners around the country-- including Arizona-- in order to live within its budget constraints. According to the New York Times, before the budget-cutting sequestration release,  ICE had a $2.05 billion incarceration budget and was holding 30,773 immigration prisoners. By releasing them (but not dismissing their cases), ICE reduced its per-prisoner cost from $122-164/day to hold them in a federal prison to $0.30-$14/day to allow them to live at home with their families while their cases are processed. (Why weren't we doing this already? Oh, yeah, I almost forgot. The Corrections Corporation of America and the American Legislative Exchange Council want to make big bucks on immigratants.) 

Check out the full story in the New York Times: Mass Release of Immigrants Is Tied to Impending Cut.

Whatever comes from sequestration, I lay the consequences at the feet of those two dysfunctional Senate twins-- Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell. Reid because he didn't have the balls to change the filibuster rules a fee weeks ago when he had the chance-- even though the majority of Senators and US citizens wanted him to. (Didn't he see this fight on the horizon?) And McConnell because yet again, he put ideology and ego before the good of the people. Don't be foooled, these bastards knew what level of havoc they would wreak on the American populace with this non-step.

Border Patrol removes blankets, water left by humanitarian aid volunteers (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Border Patrol agents have been caught on video destroying water jugs and removing clean blankets that No More Deaths humanitarian volunteers left in the Arizona desert for border crossers. 

From No More Deaths...
 

Tucson, AZ- A hidden camera video released by Tucson-based humanitarian organization No More Deaths shows an agent of the U.S. Border Patrol removing clean blankets and food intended for migrants in distress. 

Videos of Border Patrol behaving badly and more details after the jump.

New US immigration report reveals 'formidable' & expensive machinery to secure border

by Pamela Powers Hannley

A detailed new report release by the Migration Policy Institute reveals the sophistication and cost-- both human and monetary-- of the United States' immigration policy in recent years.

According to the nearly 200-page report, the US system is based upon 6 pillars: border enforcement; visa controls and travel screening; information and interoperability of data systems; workplace enforcement; intersection between criminal justice system and immigration enforcement; and detention and removal of noncitizens. Each area is described in detail. 

The report includes a wealth of information about the intricacies of the Department of Homeland Security and how immigration enforcement intersects with the criminal justice system, the FBI, and the CIA. Probably the most dramatic finding is:

The US government spends more on its immigration enforcement agencies than on all its other principal criminal federal law enforcement agencies combined. In FY 2012, spending for CBP [Customs and Border Protection], ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement], and US-VISIT reached nearly $18 billion. This amount exceeds by approximately 24 percent total spending for the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Secret Service, US Marshals Service, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), which stood at $14.4 billion in FY 2012.

Judging by resource levels, case volumes, and enforcement actions...immigration enforcement can thus be seen to rank as the federal government's highest criminal law enforcement priority.

Whoa. More key findings after the jump.

Jimmy Carter calls for legalization of marijuana (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Former President Jimmy Carter has given a "full throated endorsement" of states' efforts to legalize marijuana.

Alluding to a 1979 speech in which he called for decriminalization of marijuana, Carter said the US has gone backwards in its policies. (He called for decriminalization in 1979? How did I miss that? Oh, yeah, 1979, I ... er... must not have been paying attention ... for some reason.)

In an interview with CNN (video here), Carter also said that the nation's marijuana-related incarceration laws discriminate against blacks, Latinos and the mentally ill and are unnecessarily imprisoning far too many US citizens. For every person imprisoned in 1979 for marijuana, there are 8 in jail today, according to Carter.

More details, check out the CNN video, this story in the Huffington Post, or this story from ABC News. After the jump, watch the documentary Breaking the Taboo, in which Carter says the War on Drugs has failed, and the US should rethink its drug policies. (Well, duh. I'm glad a well-respected elder statesman like Carter spoke up. President Obama, the ball is in your court.)

The Revitalization of Mexico

By Karl Reiner

Through September 2012, Arizona's exports to Mexico were running $415 million ahead of last year's level.  Almost unnoticed by Arizona's politicians, Mexico is changing in ways that will benefit the state's economy.  It may be time for political leaders to rethink their view of the country across the border.

The U.S.-Mexican border is the world's busiest.  Border crossings have slowed because of security considerations and port of entry bottlenecks.  Some of Arizona's politicians seem to like it that way.  The undervaluing of trade and the fear of migrants has led the  legislature to pass such controversial legislation as SB 1070.

Immigration reform: What role will Ron Barber play?

by Pamela Powers Hannley

The Republican vs Republican-lite Congressional District 2 race has finally been called. Congressman Ron Barber defeated Colonel Marthy McSally in a very tight contest.

With the special election primary, the special election, and the general election, Barber has been running for office for 10 months of this year. Now, he can finally relax into his new Capitol Hill seat.

But, wait, there's more... now, he has to stand up and be our Congressman.

And immigration reform-- a hot-button Southern Arizona issue, for sure-- is at the top of President Barack Obama's priority list, after his rainbow-hued election win. With his delayed deportation for Dreamers and his focus on deporting undocumented criminals (and not your housekeeper), Obama has been inching forward on immigration reform. 

What will the role of Baja Arizona's new Congressman be? Find out after the jump.

Border bust: Barking dog earns her kibble (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

When my dogs race out the doggie door at night and start barking at passers-by, I figure they're just doing their job--warning ne'er-do-wells to move along and not linger by my gate. After all, there are plenty of seedy characters wandering the dimly-lit streets of midtown and downtown Tucson at night. If you live near the US-Mexico border, the seedy characters your barking dog encounters could be much more dangerous than drunken students, hookers, or small-time dope dealers.

After the jump, watch what this Bisbee dog found outside of her fence.

PDA: Envisioning a more progressive Arizona Democratic Party

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Are you one of those Democrats who grumbles about the Arizona Democratic Party’s (ADP) slide into Republican-lite territory?

 Are you tired of Blue Dog Democratic candidates?

 Are you tired of the party’s weak stances on hot-button issues?

Did you ever wonder why the ADP’s Progressive Caucus has so little power—despite being the state party’s largest caucus? (Maybe you didn’t even know that the ADP had a progressive caucus?)

Are you ready for change?

If you said, “Hell, yeah!” to any of the above questions, then it’s time to stop muttering and start acting. On Wednesday, Nov. 14, the Tucson Chapters of Drinking Liberally/Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) are holding a special meeting  at The Shanty—beginning at 6 p.m. with FREE pizza. The focus of the meeting will be on envisioning and brainstorming a more progressive Democratic Party in Arizona. Former Arizona Legislator and PDA Tucson coordinator Phil Lopes will lead the discussion.

Why should you attend? Read the details after the jump.

Arpaio is a chicken. Call him out! (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio knows that challenger Paul Penzone is nipping at his dusty cowboy boots this election season-- so Arpaio is taking the chicken shit standard Republican position of refusing to debate. Public pressure forced Republican Jeff Flake to debate Democrat Dr. Richard Carmona.

Maricopa County is a cesspool of corruption-- election fraud, tent city jails, sheriff's deputies shooting citizens, intimidation of elected officials and citizens, people being murdered in jail, immigration sweeps through neighborhoods, racial profiling ... need I go on? Arpaio is a big part of the problem. It's time for his retirement.

Let's put the pressure on Arpaio to debate Penzone. Here is a Facebook call to action from Randy Parraz.

 

Randy Parraz

Today is DAY 15 of Arpaio's NO DEBATE PLEDGE. On October 9th Sheriff Arpaio pledged to NOT debate Paul Penzone AND he thinks he can get away with it. Take action now - Call Arpaio's puppeteer, Chad Willems, at Summit Consulting and ask him why Arpaio is too chicken to debate Paul Penzone: (602) 235-9320. Please post your responses here.

Check out one of Penzone's early campaign speeches and a background video on Arpaio after the jump.

Saturday... Well... Weekend? Editorial August 11th, 2012

By Michael Bryan

I'd like to let you all know that Drinking Liberally will be meeting this week at the regular time and place (Wednesday, 6pm at The Shanty). This week our guest is... Me! I will be presenting the Propositions that will appear on this November's ballot (and a few that might not be...). We'll discuss the pros and cons (where such exists) and a have a few beers. For a preview, or if you can't make it, you can take a look at my 2012 Ballot Prop Guide.

I personally read almost every news source in Arizona - and keep up with national reaction to our politics, as well. I do it to bring you readers of BlogForArizona the Arizona Donkey Feed, which appears on our right-hand sidebar every day (you may also have the Feed emailed to you daily). Sometimes the avalanche of information available in our 24/7 news cycle can be overwhelming. I do generally succeed in keeping the Feed topically restricted to Arizona politics. But it is a lot of noise to sort through, so, I decided I might like to sit down once a week and take some time to look around, and try to get some perspective on the news.

This week, I chose to present an extended rumination on the Jared Loughner plea and the Arpaio trial. I sense some connections that might not be entirely obvious.

Read more after the click...

News flash: Drugs declared winner in War on Drugs

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Pot-smoking hippie anti-war activists like the Chicago 7 and LSD-popping elitist Harvard medical school researchers like Timothy Leary gave poor, paranoid President Richard Nixon a hard time back in the late 1960s. As they sipped their highballs, the moral majority-- Nixon's base-- decried the nation's drug abuse.

What's a president to do? Nixon declared drug abuse "public enemy #1" and instituted a blue ribbon commission to investigate the country's obsession with mood-altering drugs-- particularly "marihuana" (sic)-- and make recommendations. Unfortunately, US National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse's recommendations were not what Nixon expected or wanted. From the Arizona Daily Star...

A year later, the commission released its recommendation: Congress should amend federal law to decriminalize the personal use and possession of cannabis and the casual distribution of small amounts for no or insignificant remuneration, and state legislatures should do the same.

They also found that marijuana didn't meet the criteria of a Schedule I controlled substance, which would make it, like heroin, an illegal substance lacking any medicinal value.

The commission concluded: "criminal law is too harsh a tool to apply to personal possession even in an effort to discourage use. … The actual and potential harm of use of the drug is not great enough to justify intrusion by the criminal law into private behavior." [Emphasis added.]

What?! I don't remember this. Oh, here's why... the commission's report was buried.

Since the report ran counter to his personal beliefs, Nixon refused to read it, shelved it, categorized marijuana as a Schedule I substance and declared an "all out war" on drugs. [Kinda sounds like what happened to the MAS evaluation report that Huppenthal didn't like.]

Since then, some 21.5 million Americans have been arrested and prosecuted for violation of laws against marijuana. More than 80 percent of those arrested were charged only with possession, not sale. The cost of Nixon's "war on drugs," which intensified under Reagan and continues to this day, now exceeds $1 trillion.

The war on drugs has failed. It has had no significant effect on the use and availability of drugs. [Emphasis added.]

For more on failed War on Drugs, how it came about, and how drug policy has evolved in the last 40 years, check out this eye-opening guest commentary in today's Arizona Daily Star.

Guest Column: Time is long past to acknowledge US has lost the war on drugs

When will we adopt the Shafer Commission's recommendations and end the War on Drugs?

Medical Marijuana

Posted by Bob Lord

I’ve always supported medical marijuana. But I’ve never had any real life experiences to justify it. Until now.

Some months ago, a close friend of mine called to let me know he couldn’t make it to my daughter’s wedding. He would be traveling back to the mid-west to spend time with his own daughter, who’d been diagnosed with cancer. We spoke for a long while about her diagnosis and the outlook. He shared with me that it was pancreatic cancer. I didn’t mention that I understood pancreatic cancer to be perhaps the most deadly of all, but I sensed he knew that anyhow and also didn’t want it mentioned.

At some point, the conversation turned to his daughter’s treatment. I suggested he get her some pot. My friend is 15 years or so older than I am. He’s fairly liberal in his politics, but he’s definitely old school. He’d preceded the first of the pot smoking generations and never even considered trying it out. But he’s open minded, and was willing to try anything to help his daughter. So he asked me for more information. I explained how pot might alleviate pain and also make his daughter hungry. I recalled to him how a cancer doc once telling me that cancer victims ultimately die of starvation more than anything else, so maintaining an appetite is critical.

Well, last week he called with the bad news. When we spoke, however, he was effusive in his thanks for the pot suggestion. It had helped his daughter more than any traditional meds that were prescribed to her. That doesn’t undo the pain of seeing a friend lose a child, but it does make me that much more resolute in my belief that those who stand in the way of medical marijuana are not interested in the greater good.

I wonder what it will take for progressives to win this one small battle once and for all. It seems so ludicrous that it needs to be a battle at all.

Marijuana vs. Immigration

Posted By Michael Bryan

So let me get this straight, Jan. You think that Federal drug law ought to trump the right of Arizonans to set up a system of medical marijuana, but Federal immigration law does not trump the Arizona's right to set up its own system of immigration?

Do I detect a few planks of political preference supporting that grandstand of principle you like to stand on, Jan? 

Seems to me perhaps it is just politically convenient for you to accommodate xenophobic voters in your base, and politically dangerous to be seen having any truck with the demon weed.

State's rights... riiiight. Jan, your hypocrisy is showing... and its not attractive.

The 2010 ballot questions...

By Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings

A couple of the other BfA writers will be doing far deeper studies of the questions on November's ballot, but here is my take and how I'm going to vote on each one.

Early ballots drop later this week, and the deadline for registering to vote in November's election is on Monday, so it is time to start discussing specific positions on the ballot questions (and the timing is also good because it ties in with an earlier post)...

There are 10 statewide ballot questions this November. The legislature placed nine of them on the ballot, usually but not always on party-line votes.

While I have provided a very brief summary of the propositions (with my intended votes), with links to the actual text, other groups have put together far more comprehensive summaries -

The Arizona Secretary of State has released a Ballot Measures Publicity Pamphlet. It can be found at http://www.azsos.gov/election/2010/Info/PubPamphlet/english/contents.htm.  It contains the language of the propositions, a summary of each proposition from the Legislative Council, and “for” and “against” arguments.

When they have completed it, the Arizona Advocacy Network will have its own summary of the ballot propositions at http://www.azadvocacy.org/resources/ballotguides.html.

The Arizona chapter of the League of Women Voters has a guide to the propositions out, too - http://www.lwvaz.org/azvoterservice/LWV%202010%20Voter%20Guide.pdf


The first seven questions are proposed amendments to Arizona’s constitution, and all were placed on the ballot by the legislature.

Note: where the name of a national organization is indicated as opposing or supporting a specific measure, unless otherwise noted, I'm referring to the Arizona chapter of that national organization.

Proposition 106 - http://www.azsos.gov/election/2010/general/ballotmeasuretext/HCR%202014.pdf

Prop. 106 is an anti-health care reform supported by the insurance industry. It would bar the creation of a single-payer health insurance system or a viable “public option.” Based on arguments submitted for the publicity pamphlet, the measure is supported by the insurance industry, Republican Party, and the tea party wing of the Republican Party. It is opposed by the Green Party, NOW, Arizona Association of Retired Persons, Arizona Education Association, and the League of Women Voters. The medical community seems split, but most of the MDs/RNs who submitted “for” arguments had them paid for by one or another insurance industry front group.

NO.


Proposition 107 - http://www.azsos.gov/election/2010/general/ballotmeasuretext/HCR%202019.pdf

Prop. 107 would bar affirmative action measures and rules. It is supported by Republicans like Russell Pearce, Tom Horne, and Rachel Alexander (a lawyer who worked for Andrew Thomas as a communications person). It is opposed by the Arizona Education Association, League of Women Voters, NOW, Greater Phoenix Urban League, and Ann Wallack, chair of the Maricopa County Democratic Party.

Hell NO.


Proposition 109 - http://www.azsos.gov/election/2010/general/ballotmeasuretext/HCR%202008.pdf

Prop. 109 is an amendment to Arizona’s constitution that would give the right to hunt and fish in Arizona the same status as the rights of free speech and habeas corpus. It is supported by various Republicans, including Jan Brewer, and hunting and fishing advocacy groups. Opposed by the Humane Society and the Sierra Club.

NO.


Proposition 110 - http://www.azsos.gov/election/2010/general/ballotmeasuretext/SCR%201047.pdf

Prop. 110 would change the rules regarding state trust lands to allow the exchange of lands in order to protect Arizona’s military bases. Supported by a wide variety of groups; no “against” arguments were submitted for the publicity pamphlet.  While this measure has a lot of support, I’m hesitant about one clause.

Section D.4. (emphasis mine) -

D. Nothing herein IN THIS SECTION, or elsewhere in THIS article X contained, shall prevent:

4. THE DISPOSITION OF LANDS OR INTERESTS IN LANDS, OR THE RESTRICTION OF INTERESTS OR RIGHTS IN LANDS, HELD IN TRUST UNDER THIS ARTICLE, WITHOUT ADVERTISEMENT OR AUCTION...

Yeah...that language would allow the lege and a state government dominated by hacks to get rid lands meant to benefit Arizona and its education system and to do so without public notice.

There are specific conditions under which such transfers would be allowed, but without public oversight, who would know if those conditions were being met?

Pardon my cynicism, but NO.


Proposition 111 - http://www.azsos.gov/election/2010/general/ballotmeasuretext/SCR%201013.pdf

Prop. 111 is an amendment to Arizona’s constitution that would change the title of Secretary of State to Lieutenant Governor and require a party’s nominees for Governor and Lt. Governor to run as a single ticket in the general election. This one has a major problem that may not survive a legal challenge – the language of the proposition passed by the legislature effectively bars independent candidates from ever running for either position.

I understand and empathize the rationale behind the desire for creating a Lieutenant Governor in Arizona, but this isn't the way to accomplish that goal.

NO.


Proposition 112 - http://www.azsos.gov/election/2010/general/ballotmeasuretext/HCR%202018.pdf

Prop. 112 would change the deadline for submitting signatures for initiative petitions to six month before a general election. Current law requires petition signatures to be submitted four months before a general election. Many arguments in favor; none were submitted against the proposition.

There are 10 questions on the ballot.  The legislature has submitted nine of them, and the citizens of Arizona only one.  Yet the lege sees fit to make it more difficult for *citizens* to propose ballot questions?

NO.


Proposition 113 - http://www.azsos.gov/election/2010/general/ballotmeasuretext/SCR%201001.pdf

Prop. 113 is an anti-“card check” measure that would require a secret ballot in any election, including union organizing efforts. Supported by various industry groups; opposed by unions and the Arizona Advocacy Network.

NO.


Proposition 203 - http://www.azsos.gov/election/2010/general/ballotmeasuretext/I-04-2010.pdf

Prop. 203 would legalize the use of small amounts of marijuana for medically prescribed purposes. This is the only proposition placed on the ballot via the initiative petition process. Supported by patients; opposed by anti-drug use groups and law enforcement officials.

Probable YES.


Proposition 301 - http://www.azsos.gov/election/2010/general/ballotmeasuretext/HCR%202002.pdf

Prop. 301 would overturn a measure previously approved by the voters and sweep all funds from the Land Conservation Fund. Supported by the anti-tax group Arizona Tax Research Association; opposed by the Arizona Education Association, Sierra Club, League of Women Voters, Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection, The Sonoran Institute, and the McDowell Sonoran Conservancy.

Proposition 302 - http://www.azsos.gov/election/2010/general/ballotmeasuretext/HCR%202001.pdf

Prop. 302 would overturn a measure previously approved by the voters and terminate the First Things First early childhood education program and sweep all of its funds into the state’s General Fund. Supported by the Arizona Farm Bureau, Arizona Tax Research Association, and the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry; opposed by the Arizona Education Association, Valley of the Sun United Way, League of Women Voters, Pima County Pediatric Society, United Way of Yuma County, Arizona Public Health Association, Stand for Children Arizona, United Way of Northern Arizona, NOW, Arizona Dental Association, St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Arizona Child Care Association, Protecting Arizona's Family Coalition (PAFCO), Arizona School Boards Association, First Things First, Children's Action Alliance, Eddie and Nadine Basha, ASU president Michael Crow, former governor Rose Mofford, and former governor Raul Castro.

Hell NO on both of these.  They're shortsighted and soulless attempts to use the state's structural deficit, something created by Republicans with their never-ending drive to cut taxes for corporations and the wealthy, as a wedge to attack programs mandated by the voters.

The Republicans in the legislature simply want to siphon money intended for purposes that provide a long-term to benefit society into corporate coffers to pump up short-term profit margins via even more directed tax cuts and credits.

Arizona has a strong tendency of voting against ballot measures that seem to be even the least bit hinky; this year, that would be a good attitude for all voters to take with them when they vote.  Most of the measures have serious issues in regard to who they really benefit (hint: not average Arizonans!) or in how poorly they were drafted.

 

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?