The Republican Party was sweep into control of the U.S. House of Representatives in the 2010, and large part of their campaign was their vow to “repeal and replace what they call “Obamacare”, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the law, they seem to have completely forgotten the “replace” part and are hellbent only on repealing the law. GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney vows to repeal “Obamacare” on his first day in office as President. Never mind that Presidents don’t get to repeal laws, only Congress can do that. House Speaker John Boehner says “Today’s ruling underscores the urgency of repealing today’s harmful law in its entirety”. He has scheduled another meaningless vote to repeal the law on July 11. Meaningless because if they vote to repeal it will go nowhere in the Democratic led Senate, and even if it did President Obama would veto it. But if Republicans sweep this November’s election, they would be in position to repeal and replace nothing. Let’s take a look at what the Republicans want to repeal if you vote them into power this November:

Benefits in Effect Now:

• Expanded coverage for preventive care and screenings

Seniors who have Medicare Part B as well as those covered by many individual and employer-sponsored health plans are eligible for free (no co-pay payment) preventive and wellness benefits, such as annual health exams, immunizations, mammograms and other screenings for diseases including diabetes and certain cancers Learn more at HealthCare.gov. Vote Republican and bring back cancer and other screenings only for those who can afford to pay for it!

• New options for people with pre-existing conditions

Adults whom private insurers consider to be “high-risk” due to prior or current health problems — and who have been uninsured for at least six months — are eligible to buy insurance through the federal Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan (PCIP) in their state. Learn more at PCIP.gov. Vote Republican and bring back health insurance only for the healthy!

• Lowered costs for people in the Medicare Part D “Doughnut Hole”

People with Medicare Part D who fall into the prescription drug coverage gap will automatically receive a 50 percent discount on most brand-name prescriptions and biologic drugs, as well as a discount on generic drugs. For 2012, the generic drug discount is 14 percent. Vote Republican and bring back full priced Part D prescriptions! The drug companies will thank you!

• Greater consumer protections against insurance cancellations

A common practice among insurers seeking to deny payments for costly medical care has been to re-examine customers’ initial applications and cancel or “rescind” policies. Now, due to the health care law, as long as you pay your premiums, your health insurance is guaranteed. The health care law prohibits insurers from rescinding coverage because of unintentional mistakes or minor omissions on an application.Vote Republican and bring back the insurance companies using any excuse possible to cancel your policy if actually try to use it!

• An end to lifetime limits on health insurance coverage, and higher annual limits

Insurers can no longer limit how much they will pay out in essential medical services over a person’s lifetime. This benefit is now automatically in effect on all insurance policies. Most insurance plans must now cover medical expenses up to at least $1.25 million per year. Vote Republican and bring back “so sorry, you got too sick and now you’re out of luck, and coverage”!

• Expanded coverage for adult children up to age 26

Young adults who don’t have access to an employer health plan can now stay on a parent’s health insurance policy until they turn 26, even if they are married or don’t live at home. Previously, most insurance plans kicked young adults off family policies when they turned 18 or, if the young adult was in college, soon after graduation.Vote Republican and bring back “over 18 and not in college? You’re on your own”!

• Insurance supports for early retirees

If you have retiree health coverage through your work and are between 55 and 64, funding from the new Early Retirees Reinsurance Program can help your former employer maintain your health benefit until you reach Medicare age.Vote Republican and bring back “work ’til you drop because you need that insurance coverage”!

There many other benefits of the ACA already in effect:

• Greater protections for children with pre-existing conditions
• Free wellness care for babies and children
• Easy-to-use resources for finding affordable insurance
• Easier access to specialty care
• Expanded rights of appeal
• Insurance supports for small-business employers

All of those benefits are in effect now, but will be gone in a heartbeat if the Republicans get their way with Repeal and not replace a single thing. And there are many more benefits when the law comes into full effect in 2014.

Benefits Still to Come:

•  An end to denials and expensive premiums due to gender or pre-existing conditions

As of Jan. 1, 2014, insurance companies will no longer be able to deny adults health coverage because of pre-existing conditions, or charge higher premiums due to gender or gender-specific medical needs, such as childbearing.

Actually, there’s a lot in the ACA that directly benefits women, who have been at a severe disadvantage in dealing with health insurance companies. Under a current practice known as “gender rating,” insurers can charge women higher premiums than men—in fact, women now pay up to 150% more than men each year for identical health plans in the individual market. This becomes illegal under the ACA in 2014.  Also in the current individual insurance market, coverage for maternity care is routinely excluded. Only 12 percent of plans sold in the individual market offer maternity coverage, which is frequently inadequate because of long waiting periods and deductibles that can be as high as the cost of the birth itself. This will end under the ACA.It’s also common in today’s market for insurers to refuse to cover women because of gender-based “preexisting conditions.” These conditions can include issues such as having had breast cancer or a Caesarean section or having been a victim of domestic violence or sexual assault. This practice, too, will be outlawed 2014 – unless the Republicans get to Repeal and Replace with nothing.

• The creation of health insurance exchanges

People without employer or other group coverage will be able to purchase insurance more affordably through state-based health insurance exchanges. Premium subsidies will be available for individuals and families with limited incomes.

• Expanded mental health and substance abuse services

While many group insurance plans today do include mental health and addiction services, by 2014 most individual and small group insurance plans will be required to do the same.

NOTE: The excellent article “The Health Care Law: What’s in Effect, What’s Still to Come” at AARP.org was the source for much of this information.

Of course, all this comes at a cost – the dreaded Individual Mandate.  It’s no secret that insurance companies manage to stay in business and even make a profit by taking in more money in premiums than they pay out in benefits. To be able to afford all these new benefits they need to increase their pool of healthy individuals paying premiums. But the intent of the ACA is not to “make” people buy health insurance, the intent is to persuade people to buy health insurance, by making it more affordable through insurance exchanges and subsidies to lower income families, and by making the benefits better for those covered. And contrary to what some extreme Republicans would have you believe, the feds aren’t going to come hunt you down and start breaking your fingers one by one until you yell Uncle and agree to buy a policy. No, if you still aren’t persuaded to buy more affordable policies with better benefits, all that happens is that the government sends you a bill, a tax bill. How big a tax bill? Well here, let Chief Justice John Roberts tell you:

For most Americans the amount due will be far less than the price of insurance, and, by statute, it can never be more. The penalty was not intended to be a criminal fine, because those who choose to pay it, rather than honor the mandate to obtain health insurance, would be in full compliance with the law.

Politifact.org has a very good article on the penalty tax for not being covered by a health insurance policy.

 The minimum amount — per person — will be $695 once the tax is fully phased in. But it will be less to start. The minimum penalty per person will start at $95 in 2014, the first year that the law will require individuals to obtain coverage. And it will rise to $325 the following year.

Starting in 2017, the minimum tax per person will rise each year with inflation. And for children 18 and under, the minimum per-person tax is half of that for adults.

$95 in 2014 for not having health insurance? A pack a day smoker pays that much in tobacco taxes in a month, a moderate drinker pays that much in alcohol taxes in a couple months. And many people are exempted completely from any penalty tax. Taxpayers who earn less than the minimum income required to file a federal tax return (currently $9500 for an individual) are completely exempt from any penalty for not having health insurance. If an employer offers coverage that would cost the employee more than 8 percent of his or her household income (for self-only coverage) that individual is exempt from the tax. The Secretary of Health and Human Services is empowered to exempt others that she or he determines to “have suffered a hardship with respect to the capability to obtain coverage”. Members of Indian tribes, persons with only brief gaps in coverage (such as changing jobs and there is a wait period for coverage with the new employer) are also exempt from any penalty, as are members of certain religious groups currently exempt from Social Security taxes such as Mennonite, Amish or Hutterite. Also, unlike income taxes, the law prohibits the IRS from seeking to put anybody in jail or seizing their property for simple refusal to pay the penalty tax for not having health insurance. The law says specifically that taxpayers “shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution or penalty” for failure to pay, and also that the IRS cannot file a tax lien (a legal claim against property such as homes & cars, or against wages and bank accounts) or a “levy” (seizure of property or bank accounts).

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act pleased almost no one. As it is often the case in a compromise in Congress you don’t get the best of both worlds, you get the best of what can get a majority vote. Those on the left wanted a single payer provision, an expansion of Medicare. Those on the right don’t like the idea of the “guvmint” telling anyone what to do, and on the extreme right many feel if one can can’t afford their own healthcare, then “let them die”. But the good far outweighs any negatives. Republicans want to Repeal and Replace with nothing out of pure demagoguery, out of their dislike for President Obama. Or is it maybe they just don’t like someone stealing their ideas? After all, the ACA is based on the law signed by Gov. Romney in Massachusetts, and which he advocated be adopted nationwide – until it was passed by the Democratic Congress in 2010.

The largest single reason for personal bankruptcy filings in this country is people who have incurred medical bills beyond their ability to pay because they didn’t have health insurance coverage, or they had insurance but their insurance company dropped them, denied coverage, or the expenses exceeded their policy maximum payouts. That is a national disgrace. The ACA directly addresses this. It is not a perfect law, there is room for strengthening and improvement. And a single payer option can be added – but that will never happen with a Republican controlled Congress. Don’t let the Republicans pull the wool over your eyes and bring back the days of pre-existing conditions, denial of coverage, and coverage inequality for women.

Libertarian Party 2012 candidate for President Gary Johnson  is finally getting some attention and, surprisingly, more and more supporters. I say “surprisingly” because while Libertarian candidates often do get some attention, it rarely translates to votes. 2008 Libertarian Presidential candidate Bob Barr received only .4% of the nationwide vote; that’s even less than the .56% Ralph Nader received. Barr’s vote total topped 1% in just one single state, Indiana, were he received 1.06%. In Arizona, Barr got only .547%, in Colorado only .454%.  But recent polling has Gary Johnson getting 7% of the vote in Colorado. In Arizona, Johnson is pulling as much as 9% of the vote, and in his home state of New Mexico he gets 12% of the vote.  So who exactly is Gary Johnson?

Gary Johnson founded New Mexico’s largest construction companies. He entered politics for the first time in 1994, winning the Republican nomination for Governor. He ran on a fiscally conservative, low tax and anti-crime platform. He defeated incumbent Democratic Governor Bruce King, wining 50-40%. 1994 was a Republican wave election year, with Newt Gingrich and his “Contract with American” sweeping the Republicans into control of the U.S. House and Senate for the first time in a generation, and sweeping a number of Republicans into the Governor’s seat with them. But when Johnson ran for reelection in 1998 he won by an even larger margin, 55-45%. In his first term as Governor Johnson pledged to reduce the then 10% growth in the state’s budget, and faced with a strong Democratic majority in the legislature he achieved reduction in state spending by heavy use of the veto power,  a national record of 48% of all legislation. But while he reduced state spending Johnson was also focused on improving education and actually increased spending for education. (Paying any attention, Gov. Brewer?)

Johnson continued his fiscally conservative approach to government in his second term, but was also gained widespread notice as the highest ranking elected official in the United States to advocate the legalization of marijuana. He called the War on Drugs was “an expensive bust” and compared attempts to enforce the nation’s drug laws with the failed attempt at alcohol prohibition. He proposed that drug abuse be treated as a health issue, not as a criminal issue. His approach to the issue garnered supportive notice from conservative icon William F. Buckley, as well as the Cato Institute and Rolling Stone. Johnson was highly praised for his hands-on management of the effort the combat and minimize the effects of the devastating  Cerro Grande fire in 2000.

On May 5, 2012, at the 2012 Libertarian National Convention, Johnson received the Libertarian Party’s official nomination for President of the United States. What are his positions? Johnson holds fiscally conservative, socially libertarian views, and a philosophy of limited government and military.

• Fiscal Conservatism: Johnson proposes submitting a Balanced Budget to Congress in his first year in office. He calls  for “ending excessive spending, bloated stimulus programs, unnecessary farm subsidies, and earmarks”. Johnson says we must reassess the role of the federal government and identify responsibilities that can be met more efficiently by the private sector. Johnson says he would eliminate the costly and ineffective military interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan and limit defense spending to actions that truly protect the United States.

A balanced budget in 2013? Are you nuts? Yes, the current level of deficit spending is not sustainable in the long term. The key here is “long term”. In the early 1940s the federal government was racking up huge deficits and government spending reached an astounding 120% of GDP.  And what happened? We defeated Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan and emerged as the strongest superpower on earth. Massive federal spending and deficits can serve as a means to an end – in the short term. The key is to reduce that spending and pay down the debt when times are good. Think of how much stronger position we would be in today if GW Bush hadn’t doubled the debt during his 8 years in office when 6 of those years the economy was strong and growing and he pissed away the money on tax cuts no one needed and wars that needn’t have been fought. The 2012 budget deficit is projected to be $1.1 trillion dollars. You take $1.1 trillion out of the economy overnight and you’ll throw the U.S. and the rest of the world in the deepest economic depression ever seen. But I’m sure willing to start with “unnecessary farm subsidies”, most of which go to millionaire “farmers”. And throw in oil and gas subsidies, most of which go to multinational corporate conglomerates.

•  Social Libertarianism: One of the primary points of contention I have with many so called “Libertarian” candidates is that while they call for “limited government” they far too often seek to expand government into private lives to impose their religious and/or moral views onto others. So I applaud Mr. Johnson’s true Libertarian views on social issues. Johnson believes “we are a nation of many peoples and beliefs. The only way to respect all citizens is to allow each to make personal decisions themselves“. He supports same sex marriage, saying “Government should not impose its values upon marriage. It should allow marriage equality, including gay marriage”. He believes “life is precious and must be protected. A woman should be allowed to make her own decisions during pregnancy until the point of viability of a fetus“. He believes the Patriot Act should be repealed. He supports stem cell research, although in keeping with limited government approach, he believes the research should be conducted by private companies and not with government funding.  He thinks the TSA should take a “risk-based approach” to airport security, and only high-risk individuals should be subjected to invasive pat-downs and full-body scans. Johnson calls for the legalization of marijuana, pointing out that over 1 1/2 million Americans were arrested last year on drug charges last year, and nearly 40% of those arrests were for marijuana possession alone. Does this make sense, he asks? He also points out that marijuana is Mexico’s #1 illegal export, legalizing it would result in dramatically reducing the power and wealth of the drug cartels. Johnson believes abuse of hard drugs is a health problem that should be dealt with by health experts, not a problem that should be clogging up our courts, jails, and prisons with addicts. Instead of continuing to arrest and incarcerate drug users we should ultimately choose to adopt policies which aim to reduce death, disease, violence, and crime associated with dangerous drugs. Johnson points out that America has cut teen cigarette use in half, not by criminalizing possession and use, but through a combination of honest education and sensible regulation.

There is not a single word there I disagree with. Kudos to Mr. Johnson for being a true Libertarian when it comes to social issues.

•  Limited Government and Limited Military: Johnson believes that we cannot have limited government at home while having “big government” abroad, and pledged to cut the military budget by 43 percent in his first budget as president. He believes our military should remain the most potent force on earth, but only for the direct protection of American soil and lives, and that we should resort to military action as the last option and only as provided in the Constitution. He would end our involvement in Afghanistan immediately, and also bring home the thousands of “advisers” still deployed in Iraq. He points out that decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union, American troops remain scattered throughout Europe. It is time to reevaluate these deployments.

Hmmm . . . can’t find much to disagree with him there either.

You can read more of Mr. Johnson’s positions and background at GaryJohnson2012.com. Political pundits often characterize a vote for the third party candidate is a vote to let the “other guy” win. I have never been a fan of choosing between the lessor of two evils, and have voted for minor party candidates several times when I couldn’t stand either candidate with a ‘R’ or ‘D’ after their name.  I may be a Democrat, but I have a strong dislike for Bill Clinton. The man is lying sonofabitch who gave us ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’, DOMA, and NAFTA.  And yes, Bill, the words “I promise to cherish and respect” are supposed to mean something. I enjoy a clear conscience in being able to say I never voted for him. 1992 was the only election win which I didn’t vote since being old enough, I was living and working overseas then. But back in the good old USA in 1996 I voted for Ralph Nader as my way of saying “None of the Above” to Slick Willy and Bob Dull (yes, Dole).

Make no mistake, I supported Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton (I like & admire Hillary, too bad she didn’t marry better – I didn’t want Bill Clinton anywhere near the White House again). I voted for Obama in 2008, and will vote for him again this November. I think he has done well with the bad situation he inherited, and I admire his leadership on many issues. And while I disagree with Gary Johnson’s positions in several areas,  I sure like his views on social issues and military/foreign policy. I would much prefer Gary Johnson over Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney is a spineless say anything to please anyone tool of the elites. Where is Mitt Romney this weekend? In a secluded, private retreat in the mountains of Utah, meeting with the Karl Roves and nameless, faceless billionaires who want to buy this election. If you can’t vote for Obama, instead of just voting for the lessor of two evils, take a look at Gary Johnson – at least you know where he stands. Can you say the same about Mitt Romney?

Very well clever, very funny campaign video by Utah 1st Congressional District Democratic candidate Ryan Combe :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=NnpBFxvLxJE

What does House Oversight Committee Rep. Darell Issa want? I have to admit that I haven’t been paying a whole lot of attention to the investigation into the “Fast and Furious” gun running operation, but it did kind of come to a head this week with the House Oversight Committee voting – strictly along party lines – to hold U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in Contempt of Congress. So I did some fast and furious Googling.

Fast and Furious was a gun-trafficking operation in which agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives allowed weapons to “walk,” or flow to Mexican drug cartels in the hopes of tracking them to leaders of the cartels and apprehending them.  As many as 2,000 guns were lost in the botched sting and two of them turned up at the sight of a shootout that cost the life of  U.S. border agent Brian Terry. Gun-walking has long been barred by Justice Department policy, but federal agents in Arizona experimented with it in at least two investigations during the George W. Bush administration before Fast and Furious. These experiments came as the department was under widespread criticism that the old policy of arresting every suspected low-level straw purchaser was still allowing tens of thousands of guns to reach Mexico. A straw purchaser is an illicit buyer of guns for others. The “Fast and Furious” operation was run out of the U.S. attorney’s office in Phoenix. No credible evidence has emerged showing that Holder had any knowledge of the controversial gun-walking tactic. Still, shortly after the gun-smuggling scheme run amok came to light, Holder quickly acknowledged that it was a disaster and ordered an internal investigation.

The House Oversight Committee has now been investigating “Fast and Furious” for over a year and a half, and it’s been contentious every step along the way. Rep. Issa has called AG Holder a “liar”, and has labeled the Obama Administration as “one of  the most corrupt in history”. I’m guessing Rep. Issa hasn’t read “How to win friends and influence people”. The Justice Department has handed over more than 7,600 documents related to the operation, but every time it has complied with the committee’s requests Rep. Issa has demanded more. The demand that led to this week’s standoff is Issa’s demand for 1,600 additional documents relating to the Justice Department’s strategy for responding to the Committee’s investigation. It is these documents that President Obama declared Executive Privilege this week. Think of it as attorney-client privilege. An attorney and his client will discuss their strategy for winning a case, and the opposing attorney can’t demand access to that – that’s like a coach demanding to see the other team’s game strategy. The opposing attorney can only demand any information relevant to the case, not the discussion between the other attorney and his client.

But even before President Obama declared Executive Privilege, AG Holder to make an offer to release 1,300 pages of the requested documents – BUT with one condition: if the committee would first agree that the production of these documents would end the committee’s investigation of the Justice Department. After all, this investigation has already dragged on for a year and a half, and every time the Justice Department has complied with requests it has only been met with yet more demands. The attitude of the Oversight Committee seems to be that if they can’t find what they want in almost 9,000 pages of documents, just keep digging – maybe they’ll find gold in them thar hills. Somewhere. Somehow.

But now details are emerging that reveal what Rep. Issa really wants: someone’s scalp. Or, in the words of Air Boss Johnson in the movie “Top Gun”: “I want somebody’s butt, I want it now. I want some butts!“.

Rep. Darrell Issa’s chief investigative counsel offered to stop the contempt vote against Attorney General Eric Holder in exchange for the resignation of Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer. Issa staffer Stephen Castor brought up the issue of “accountability” during a phone call with a senior DOJ official last week, according to the report. Castor reportedly said they could head off the contempt vote if Breuer stepped down.

DOJ officials think the offer to drop the contempt vote in exchange for Breuer’s scalp was further evidence that Issa’s investigation was more about making headlines than determining facts.

“The reason that this contempt motion happened is that Issa didn’t come up with any evidence and didn’t get a scalp,” Matthew Miller, DOJ’s former communications director, told Klaidman. “When you set expectations that high and you don’t deliver, you have to explain why.”

That’s it in a nutshell: Much ado about nothing, much ado about politics. After a year and a half of investigating, receiving and reviewing thousands and thousands of documents Rep. Issa and his “Oversight” Committee have come up with nothing in their witch hunt. No evidence that AG Holder and his Justice Department had any knowledge of the ATF’s rogue operation, no evidence of any coverup, no evidence of any wrong doing.  So instead of just sitting there with egg on his face looking stupid, Rep. Issa want’s some butt. They wouldn’t give him Asst. AG Lanny Breuer’s, so now he wants to try to embarrass the President and AG Holder with trumped up contempt charges. It’s Rep. Darrell Issa who should be held in contempt, contempt from the American people.

Politico has a rather interesting story this morning: In the waning weeks of the CD8 Special Election Martha McSally’s Campaign Spokesman Sam Stone approached a Ron Barber aide and offered her encouragement and advise, telling her “We really want to see you win. Really go after those social issues, particularly abortion, with women who haven’t voted yet“.

On the Thursday before the election, a top aide to Republican Martha McSally, a retired Air Force officer and a tea party favorite, approached a Barber aide at an event on the University of Arizona’s Tucson campus. That’s when something strange happened, according to the Barber campaign: The McSally aide, spokesman Sam Stone, offered the 22-year-old Barber staffer advice on how to beat Jesse Kelly, the GOP nominee who was running against Barber in the special election.

Stone offered the Barber staffer his business card, which on the back had the following hand-written suggestions: Focus on social issues during the race’s final days in order to win the support of still-undecided independent and Republican women.

Of course Mr. Stone denies he would ever do such a thing. He claims it was only a “quick friendly chat” and that he gave her his business card just in case they needed to be in contact in the future. But he didn’t bother ask the Barber aide for her contact information.

But Barber’s campaign provided POLITICO with a copy of Stone’s scribbled-on business card, along with time-stamped copies of emails, which the Barber staffer immediately sent to her superiors, detailing the conversation Stone had with her. The campaign provided the emails but asked that the aide not be named, saying she relayed the encounter to her bosses out of obligation but did not want to become enmeshed in controversy.
“On June 7, the McSally campaign approached one of our staffers at an event at the University of Arizona’s Bio5 conference,” Rodd McLeod, a Barber political adviser, wrote in a statement. “Martha McSally’s spokesman advised our staffer about how to beat Jesse Kelly, and he handed her his business card where he had written down some more detailed advice on how to defeat Jesse Kelly. We never asked McSally’s campaign for their advice or for further information. Any suggestion otherwise is ridiculous”.

It’s no secret the McSally campaign would not be heartbroken if Ron Barber defeated Jesse in the CD8 special election. After coming in a surprising second place to Kelly in the CD8 Special Primary – and winning more votes then Kelly on election day – McSally filed for the CD2 primary, but vowed to withdraw if Kelly won the CD8 election. Now that Jesse has withdrawn from the CD2 election McSally is the all but certain Republican nominee- she faces only token opposition from little known political newcomer Mark Koskiniemi.   Mission Accomplished.
Ronald Reagan famously said that his “11th Commandment” was to not speak ill of a fellow Republican. I guess he should have mentioned a “12 Commandment” – “And don’t tell Democrats how to defeat your fellow Republican”.

UPDATE: According to the Arizona Daily Star, McSally Campaign Spokesman Sam Stone stepped down from his position today:

McSally’s campaign issued a news release this morning saying Sam Stone resigned as communications director. The statement thanks Stone for helping to launch the McSally campaign during the Congressional District 8 primary but doesn’t address the exact reason for his ouster. Stone decided to step down to do what’s best for McSally, said her campaign manager, Christian Morgan. But McSally wasn’t pleased that Stone offered advice to Barber’s campaign, Morgan said.

Stone has not yet returned calls and emails seeking comment. Kelly declined to comment, via his spokesman, John Ellinwood.

Can’t say I didn’t see that one coming . . .

Per the Associated Press:

The Obama administration will stop deporting and begin granting work permits to younger illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children and have since led law-abiding lives. The policy change, described to The Associated Press by two senior administration officials, will affect as many as 800,000 immigrants who have lived in fear of deportation. It also bypasses Congress and partially achieves the goals of the so-called DREAM Act, a long-sought but never enacted plan to establish a path toward citizenship for young people who came to the United States illegally but who have attended college or served in the military. Under the administration plan, illegal immigrants will be immune from deportation if they were brought to the United States before they turned 16 and are younger than 30, have been in the country for at least five continuous years, have no criminal history, graduated from a U.S. high school or earned a GED, or served in the military. They also can apply for a work permit that will be good for two years with no limits on how many times it can be renewed.

Thank you Mr. President for doing the right thing!

Yes, illegal is illegal, and our borders must be secure. But so many of these young men and women aspiring to be Americans are guilty of only doing what their parents told them to do, or “guilty” of being carried across the border in their parent’s arms. They have lived in America almost their entire lives, know only American culture and language, and know little or nothing about the land of their parents. And like every other American they have dreams and hopes and aspirations. Like Joaquin Luna Jr., pictured above. Joaquin was a was a shy, lanky young man who played guitar in church bands and helped care for his diabetic mother. He was born in Reynosa, Mexico, and came to the United States as an infant. He was not like most other teenagers in his rural neighborhood of  run-down trailer homes. He drew the blueprints that were used to build his mother’s new house and spoke often of becoming either an architect or a civil engineer. He joked that he did not have time for a girlfriend, spending many weekends mowing lawns to pay for his electric guitar and lessons. At Benito Juarez-Abraham Lincoln High School, he was ranked 89th out of 467 students in the senior class. But Joaquin grew increasingly despondent over his status of living in the shadows, being a nobody. He was subject to being deported at a moment’s notice, he had no hope of going to college, working and living legally in his adopted country. On the last night of his life, the day after Thanksgiving 2011, Joaquin  filled the pages of a spiral notebook with goodbyes. In brief letters to relatives, friends and teachers, he asked one of his brothers to take care of his nephews and his niece and told a friend he had left a memento for her in his Bible. One letter was different from the rest. It was addressed to Jesus Christ, and in it he asked for forgiveness, and wrote:

“Dear Jesus: I’ve realized that I have no chance in becoming a civil engineer the way I’ve always dreamed of here … so I’m planning on going to you and helping you construct the new temple in heaven.”

He then put a put a handgun underneath his chin and pulled the trigger.

Rest in Peace, Joaquin. I don’t share your religious belief, but I do think that somehow that you have manged to build one beautiful new temple. And may you not have died in vain.

Politico is reporting that the spokesman for the Arizona Republican Party accused Arizona Republic’s Laurie Roberts of engaging in a “bitch session” with a female GOP organizer.

Laurie Roberts wrote a column last Saturday entitled “To dekook Arizona, start with the state Republican Party”. The column featured  an interview with Kathy Petsas, who claimed the Arizona Republican party has “been hijacked” and that she’s trying to reclaim it from ideologues.  Arizona GOP spokesperson Shane Wikfors then responded with a column of his own, writing on his blog:

“Kathy Petsas never made any attempt to provide any constructive criticism to the State Party,” he wrote. “Not surprisingly, I’ve never seen her come to the office to volunteer. Instead, Ms. Petsas ran off to Laurie Roberts and engaged her in a bitch session“.

Bold emphasis mine. Ms.Roberts said in an interview that she doesn’t have any problem with Wikfors’ “bitch session” phrase, saying “I don’t have any concern about the words. I’ve been called far worse“. Ms. Petsas however, did take offense, saying that she found Wikfors’ words “unprofessional” and “unfortunate”, and added that Wikfors “showed poor judgment on his part based on what his professional career is supposed to be about”. Both Arizona Republic columnist Robers and Mr. Petsas say that Wikfors missed the point of the column anyway, that it was not about criticizing the Arizona Republican Party, it was about encouraging people to vote and change the party from within.

The AZ GOP Spokesman is defending his comments and choice of words. He says the term “bitch session” is a “common colloquialism”. “Go to any corporate boardroom and you’ll hear that reference.”

Perhaps the vast majority of boardrooms comprised of all men. Yes, “bitch” session” is a common term for 2 or more people getting together to complain about something. But the “b-word” is also used far too often in a condescending and derogatory manner by men to refer to women. To use the term “bitch session” when referring to something regarding two women is far too easy to be misinterpreted – assuming he didn’t mean it in the derogatory manner to begin with.  And is that really the attitude of the Arizona Republican Party – that any criticism of the way things are being done is just “bitching”?

AZ GOP Spokesman Wikfors is standing by his choice of words, for now. The countdown to the announcement of his stepping down for “personal reasons” or to “spend more time with his family” starts in 3 . . . 2 . . . . 1 . . . .

Jesse Kelly announced today he will not make a third run for Congress and withdraw from the race for the new CD2:

“I would like to thank our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, my wife Aubrey, and our supporters for their unwavering commitment to the values that make America great. Looking at the results from Tuesday, we have decided to withdraw from the race for Congress in AZ-02 and to seek other opportunities. I will forever be thankful to our generous supporters and volunteers.”

After his second consecutive losing campaign, losing to Ron Barber by 7 percentage points Kelly (or more likely, party bosses) decided that his chances in the new CD2 – in which the Republican 6 point registration advantage in the current CD8 disappears – were slim to none. Kelly joins Pinal Sheriff Paul Babeau in withdrawing from Congressional campaigns after facing political reality.

Sheriff Babeau and Jesse Kelly in happier times for both:

Kelly’s withdrawal makes retired Air Force Colonel Martha McSally the presumptive GOP nominee for the new CD2. Political newcomer Mark Koskiniemi, who works in the Pima County Procurement Department is also on the CD2 GOP ballot, but is largely unknown – to anyone outside the Pima County Procurement Department anyway. State Representative Dr. Matt Heinz reaffirmed yesterday that he will remain on the Democratic ballot for CD2, challenging (then incumbent Congressman) Ron Barber. The other 2 Republican candidates in the CD8 primary – Dave Sitton and State Senator Frank Antenori did not file for CD2 by the May 30 deadline. Candidates for office in Arizona can run for only one office at a time. The Arizona Daily Star reported back in May that Frank Antenori had decided to run for reelection to the State Senate rather than run in the CD2 race after “seeing polls with Jesse Kelly far ahead” in the CD8 special election. Right about now we imagine Frank looks something like this:

Early mail-in ballots for the August 28 primary go out in a little over 6 weeks, Aug. 2. All registered Arizona voters are eligible to vote in the primary – Independent/non-affiliated voters may request the ballot of any political party.

So long Jesse, it’s been . . . . entertaining. But best wishes for continued good health and good fortune to you and your family.

If you watch Tucson TV stations in the early evening you’ve no doubt heard of Will Cardon – he’s been flooding the airwaves with ads denouncing Jeff Flake as a “career politician”, “world traveler” (at taxpayer expense), pro-amnesty, pro-cap and trade, and even lobbying the ultimate Republican insult: “liberal”.  He seems to be getting some bang for his buck – PPP (Public Policy Polling) reports when they first polled the race last February Will Cardon had little name recognition and Flake was trouncing him 56-7. But when they polled again late last month Cardon had shaved 27 points off Flake’s lead, narrowing it to 42-20. Yes, that’s still a pretty sizable lead, but the polling suggest momentum is on Cardon’s side. His name recognition has improved from 17% to 35%, and among those who know Cardon enough to have an opinion of him – either favorable or negative – he trails Flake only by 45-35.

And help may be on the way - both Politico and RollCall are reporting that Congressman Trent Franks appears set to endorse Cardon over Flake.

UPDATE: It appears I’m behind the time reading Politico & RollCall – Franks endorsed Cardin last night:

In front of more than a hundred Arizona voters in Sun City West Tuesday night, Congressman Trent Franks gave his heartfelt endorsement to Wil Cardon in Cardon’s bid for the U.S. Senate.

“Wil Cardon understands what Arizona needs in Washington,” says Franks. “He is committed to getting our economy back on track, upholding our country’s rule of law and looking out for Arizona families.

I also missed that Cardin has already been endorsed by recalled State Senator Russell Pearce:

“Wil, I think you’d do a great job there (in the Senate) — You’re my kind of guy,” Pearce said near the end of the broadcast on KFNX (1100 AM). “I hope we get a chance to expose you more to those folks who love this country, that want a champion, a warrior. A warrior! I’m tired of sending wimps to Washington. I want a warrior! I want our country back! I want a guy that doesn’t apologize — an unapologetic American. That’s what I want in Washington, D.C., and I think you’re the man that fits that.”

Well, it will be an interesting race to watch. We would love to see Will Cardon win the GOP nomination for US Senate – it’s high time Arizona have it’s very own Sharon Angle or Christine O’Donnell.

Public Policy Polling (PPP) released their poll of the CD8 special election this morning:

Democrats are headed for a victory in tomorrow’s special election to replace Gabby Giffords in the House. Democrat Ron Barber leads with 53% to 41% for Republican Jesse Kelly, with Green Party candidate Charlie Manolakis polling at 4%. Barber is well liked by voters in the district, sporting a 54/38 favorability rating. Kelly, meanwhile, has very high negatives with only 37% of voters rating him positively while 59% have a negative opinion.

Ouch! Nearly 60% of CD8 voters have a negative opinion of Jesse Kelly. Quick, Jesse – trot Grandpa out again to tell us that you’re really a nice boy and didn’t mean any that stuff you said in 2010. Of course it’s not over until it’s over. Well, actually, maybe it is -

Barber appears to have the race pretty much already locked up. 57% of voters say they’ve already cast their ballots, and with that group Barber enjoys a 21 point advantage at 58-37. People planning to vote tomorrow are much more evenly split with 46% for Barber and 45% for Kelly. Barber’s winning 90% of the Democratic vote, while Kelly’s getting just 82% of Republicans. Barber also has a 51-34 advantage with independents. Barber’s advantage is pretty thorough along demographic lines- he leads with men, women, whites, Hispanics, and voters in every age group.

No, of course it’s not over. There is only one way to make your voice heard – go out tomorrow and exercise your right and civic duty and vote!  Voters on election day often have a different opinion then those who vote by early mail-in ballots. Martha McSally won more votes on election day than Jesse Kelly. Many analyst credit Gabby’s victory over Jesse in 2010 to her lead in the mail-in ballots. This is no time for Democrats to rest easy, get out there and vote! Independents go out and vote, whichever way you see things. And yes, you Republicans go out tomorrow and vote as well. And remember that you have many much better qualified candidates to take on Ron Barber or Matt Heinz in November in the new CD2.

I have never been better represented in Congress than I was by Gabby Giffords, and it’s heartening to see so many of my fellow CD8 residents also hold her in such high esteem:

One final note- 67% of voters in Giffords’ district have a positive opinion of her to only 24% with a negative one. There aren’t many special House elections where the departing incumbent has a 67% favorability rating, and that fact makes this a very difficult  one for the GOP to win.

UPDATE: There are reports of fliers being left on registered Democrat’s doors with the pretense of encouraging them to vote, but listing an incorrect polling location. If you are uncertain of your polling location you can call the Pima County Recorder’s office at 520-740-4330 or the Ron Barber campaign office at 520-207-0937. The Pima County Recorder also has a Precinct Locator Page where you key in your address and it tells you your polling location.  A PDF listing all the polling locations for Santa Cruz County is here, and one for Cochise County is here.