Here’s what you’ve all been waiting for– candidate and proposition endorsements by moi!

For the most part on the candidates, I’m keepin’ it local and not getting into the other legislative districts beyond mine.

For CD8, LD28.
I endorse Democrats + one independent.

Gabrielle Giffords for Congress. I have been calling Gabby’s office and asking for her vote on issues since she was in the Arizona Legislature. She is strong on public health, education, and women’s issues.

Steve Farley and Bruce Wheeler for Arizona House in LD28. Steve has been a voice of reason for many years in the Legislature, and God knows we could use more like him, which is why I also back Bruce.

Dave Ewoldt for Arizona Senate in LD28. This 4-way race for Senate really had me stumped for months. I could have filled out my mail-in ballot the day it arrived, but I couldn’t figure out what to do with this race. After hearing Dave in multiple interviews on the radio, I voted for him. There has been bad blood between Paula Aboud and Ted Downing for years– since she used smear-tactic robo calls against him. (I received them, so I know.) However, this doesn’t give him the right to use nasty ads against her. Greg Krino, the opportunistic Republican who jumped into this mess, is a Jesse Kelly-knock-off and would not appropriately represent this heavily Democratic district.

For statewide offices
I support the Democratic Party candidates. In a “throw the bums out” year– Arizona’s governor, statewide office holders, and Legislative extremists should be at the top of everyone’s list of who to toss out of office. Our state is fighting for the bottom in education and fighting for the top in every measure that points to bad management of the state: poverty, unemployment, budgetary insolvency, rates of incarceration, infant health, teen pregnancy, etc., etc.

Terry Goddard for Governor. We need an intelligent leader for governor — not a puppet who is controlled by lobbyists and beholden to the private prison industry. Terry would offer us some sanity and a firewall between the wacky state Legislature and the rest of us poor souls.

Chris Deschene for Secretary of State. Chris is an upright guy– a former Marine officer, an engineer, a lawyer, a small-businessman, and family man. He also is running against a puppet controlled by lobbyists. His opponent, the current appointed Secretary of State, also allowed Maricopa County Republicans to pick up homeless people from Mill Avenue and put them on the ballot as fake Green Party candidates. (There’s real voter fraud.)

Penny Kotterman for Superintendent of Public Instruction. This is one of the most crucial races for our state because it will shape the future of our children. Kotterman’s opponent has a history of voting against education in the Arizona Legislature for 18 years. He is one of the reasons we are at the bottom.

Felicia Rottelini for Attorney General. Felicia is a fireball of energy. She has run major legal departments and successfully tried one of the state’s most famous fraud cases in Arizona history. Her opponent, on the other hand, is barred from the Securities and Exchange Commission for committing fraud.

Andrei Cherny for State Treasurer. Andrei is another rising star– a former assistant Attorney General who has a background in economics. The current state treasurer has shown no leadership as our state has sunk further and further into debt.

On the propositions
The back of your ballot is FILLED with propositions– don’t forget to turn it over.

A quick-and-dirty way to look at this if you are a progressive is to vote “NO” on everything proposed by the Arizona Legislature. This would be “NO” all of the 100s and 300s, which is what I did. The 400s were put on the ballot by the City of Tucson (400, 401) and Tucson Unified School District (402). I reluctantly voted “yes” on the Core Tax (400) but “NO” on the other 2.

The only proposition that was put on the ballot by the people of Arizona is 203– medical marijuana. Vote “Hell, Yes!” on this one. It’s time to allow patients to use an affordable, natural product to reduce their pain and suffering related to chronic or terminal illness.

Three of the more heinous propositions are 106, 107, and 302
Props 106 and 107 were put on the ballot by outside groups with gobs of money.

Prop 106, Arizona’s Health Care Freedom Act, allows Arizona voters to opt out of nationwide healthcare reform. Funded almost entirely by special interest groups from outside of Arizona, this is one of those propositions that sounds good but isn’t. Arizonans voted this proposition down before, but the backers have enough money to try again. Here is an except from their website:

Arizona’s Health Care Freedom Act disrupts this theft of liberty and makes real health care reform possible – by ensuring that any solution begins not with appeasing industry, but by listening to patients.

Let me go on the record as someone who would have preferred single-payer, universal healthcare (oooooo…spooky…socialism!) This quote sounds like that, but it isn’t. Basically, when they say “health care freedom” they mean “you’re on your own” and no one is going to bail you out. Remember Sicko? Healthcare reform saves money, covers more people, and eliminates pre-existing conditions. Vote NO on 106!

Prop 107, Arizona Civil Rights Initiative is another one that sounds good but isn’t and is another one funded by special interest groups from outside of Arizona. Proposition 107 is the brainchild of white supremisist Ward Connerly. It would prohibit all programs that offer women, girls, and people of color equal opportunity in education, business contracting, and employment. Supporters of this measure have been shopping it around to different states; it has passed in some and failed in others. Connerly, who is from California, put it on the ballot first there. Since it passed, diversity among California’s college students has dropped dramatically. Vote NO on 107!

Prop 302, Arizona First Things First Program Repeal is an attempt by the Arizona Legislature to steal more money from Arizona children because they failed to balance the budget (despite Governor Brewer’s contention that they did). The First Things First Program benefits children and families and was created by a ballot initiative several years ago. It is fully funded by the tobacco tax. Since the Arizona Legislature refuses to make tough choices about Arizona’s eschewed tax system and wants to continue the trickle down economics welfare to the rich, they have to find money somewhere. Unfortunately, kids don’t vote, so they are a favorite target of the Arizona Legislature. Vote NO on 302 and keep one of the last pro-children programs left in Arizona.

The Tucson Weekly and the Pima County Democratic Party have issued their ballot endorsements. (Click on these links to find them.) For the most part, they agree, but the Weekly votes no on the city charter changes (Prop 401), and the Dems changed their minds last week and are now endorsing it. (Boo.)

VOTE! If you don’t know where to go to vote, check out the Pima County Recorder’s website. Don’t forget to bring picture identification that lists the address where you are registered. If you have a mailed paper ballot, fill it out and bring it to a polling place today– don’t mail it.

The Roberts’ Court ruling overturning campaign finance laws in January 2010 opened the gates for corporations to flood the 2010 midterm election with cash… anonymously. Hundreds of millions of dollars in secret funds are being pumped into media markets across the nation in order to defeat progressive candidates and stop the progressive agenda in Washington, DC.

Right here in our own backyard, small government advocate Grover Norquist created a $230,000 TV attack ad for politically-untested, 28-year-old, Tea Party darling Ruth McClung, who is challenging CD7 Congressman Raul Grijalva.

If you connect the dots, you can see that local big businesses are using money and influence to change our local government, change the way we hold local elections, control key political positions, and basically take over Tucson. Here is the evidence…

1. The Southern Arizona Leadership Council (SALC), a group made up of the richest businessmen in Southern Arizona, is sponsoring Prop 401. This proposition– if passed by voters on November 2– would change to the Tucson City Charter  and make the unelected city manager the most powerful person in Tucson; increase the power of the Mayor; diminish the power of the City Council (while giving them a 155% pay raise to roll over); and change the City Council election cycle, enabling all Council members to be elected in the same year (and also enabling people with enough money to sweep the Council).
2. If you follow the Prop 401 money trail, you will see that there are several donations of $1000-$10,000 and almost no donations under $100. The moneyed backers include Tucson Association of Realtors, Diamond Ventures, Jim Click, several other car dealers and developers, and many other businesses. (Although the Yes on 401 advertising says that unions back Prop 401, there are no union donations.)
3. It was revealed this week in the Tucson Citizen that Raytheon’s political action committee made one campaign contribution in this election cycle– $15,000 to Yes on Prop 401. (Raytheon belongs to SALC. Ov course, thanks again to the Roberts’ Court, Raytheon probably also made other anonymous donations.)
4. On last week’s All Things Political talk radio show hosted by former City Councilman Steve Leal on AM 1330 we learned that SALC sided with the Arizona Legislature in a lawsuit against the City of Tucson. (Click the link to hear the audio from the radio show.) In the last legislative session, the Arizona Legislature passed a law forcing the City of Tucson to hold non-partisan elections. The City of Tucson is suing the Legislature over this law that specifically targets Tucson, and SALC is a co-defendant in the suit. Tucson voters have rejected non-partisan, ward-only elections more than once at the ballot box. Now the Arizona Legislature and SALC are trying to shove it down our throats. (Unfortunately, this is nothing new; SALC has a history of trying to manipulate Tucson and Southern Arizona.)
5. SALC is in the process of installing their vice president, John Pedicone (1, 2), as the new superintendent of Tucson Unified School District. SALC has a side project– Tucson Values Teachers– which encourages private citizens to buy schools supplies and gift cards for teachers. Helping and valuing teachers is a noble cause, but I find it ironic that the richest men in Southern Arizona are asking the rest of us for financial support. Also, no where on the TVT website does it say that they value public education. What would Pedicone do as superindent of TUSD? Will he be a champion for public education? This is unclear. Who does SALC back for state superintendent of public instruction? I have hunted around for the answer to that question but couldn’t find the answer. Do they favor Republican John Huppenthal, who as a state legislator worked to dismantle public education? Or Democrat Penny Kotterman, a life-long educator and advocate for children?
6. Not stopping with trying to take over city government and TUSD, a Raytheon employee– Ruth McClung– is running for Congress in Congressional District 7. McClung and her husband both work for our local defense contractor. (Interestingly enough, McClung campaigns against big government spending, while being supported 100% by big government spending.) I’m sure it would be a sweet deal for SALC and Raytheon to have an inexperienced, young Congresswoman at their disposal.  (Also, don’t forget that Tucson Mayor Bob Walkup is a retired Raytheon big-wig.)

Personally, I think this is chilling evidence of a local coup in the making. It shows that these local moneyed forces are working behind the scenes at several levels to change Tucson. Is democracy for sale? I hope not. For more on this topic, check out this link to today’s version of All Things Political.

Drinking Liberally Tucson Chapter

Sunday, October 10, the Tucson Chapter of Drinking Liberally will host a discussion on the ballot propositions– and thanks to the Arizona Legislature, there are lots of them. (You see, when they don’t want to make a tough decision or don’t want to be blamed for making a tough decision– like last spring’s sales tax increase “for schools”– they put an initiative on the ballot.)

As usual, many of the propositions have names that sound good but actually aren’t good for the people of Arizona. (No wonder people are upset with the political system in the US.) As a general rule of thumb, vote NO on all of the propositions with 100 and 300 numbers; these are the ones the Legislature put on the ballot. (Check out the links below to the Tucson Weekly are the Pima County Democratic Party endorsements for a more nuanced viewpoint.)

Three of the more heinous propositions are:
Prop 106, Arizona’s Health Care Freedom Act, allows Arizona voters to opt out of nationwide healthcare reform. Funded almost entirely by special interest groups from outside of Arizona, this is one of those propositions that sounds good but isn’t. Arizonans voted this proposition down before, but the backers have enough money to try again. Here is an except from their website:

Arizona’s Health Care Freedom Act disrupts this theft of liberty and makes real health care reform possible – by ensuring that any solution begins not with appeasing industry, but by listening to patients.

Let me go on the record as someone who would have preferred single-payer, universal healthcare (oooooo…spooky…socialism!) This quote sounds like that, but it isn’t. Basically, when they say “health care freedom” they mean “you’re on your own” and no one is going to bail you out. Remember Sicko? Healthcare reform saves money, covers more people, and eliminates pre-existing conditions. Vote NO on 106!

Prop 107, Arizona Civil Rights Initiative is another one that sounds good but isn’t and is another one funded by special interest groups from outside of Arizona. Proposition 107 is the brainchild of white supremisist Ward Connerly. It would prohibit all programs that offer women, girls, and people of color equal opportunity in education, business contracting, and employment. Supporters of this measure have been shopping it around to different states; it has passed in some and failed in others. Connerly, who is from California, put it on the ballot first there. Since it passed, diversity among California’s college students has dropped dramatically. Vote NO on 107!

Prop 302, Arizona First Things First Program Repeal is an attempt by the Arizona Legislature to steal more money from Arizona children. The First Things First Program benefits children and families and was created by a ballot initiative several years ago. It is fully funded by the tobacco tax. Since the Arizona Legislature refuses to make tough choices about Arizona’s eschewed tax system and wants to continue the trickle down economics welfare to the rich, they have to find money somewhere. Unfortunately, kids don’t vote, so they are a favorite target of the Arizona Legislature. Vote NO on 302 and keep one of the last pro-children programs left in Arizona.

The Tucson Weekly and the Pima County Democratic Party have issued their ballot endorsements. (Click on these links to find them.) For the most part, they agree, but the Weekly votes no on the city charter changes (Prop 401), and the Dems changed their minds last week and are now endorsing it.

Mike Bryan, of Blog for Arizona fame, will lead the Drinking Liberally discussion on the propositions.

Drinking Liberally is a nationwide organization of progressive thinkers. Although their slogan is “Improving democracy one pint at a time,” wine-drinkers and non-drinkers are welcome. Be prepared for wide-ranging discussions on the left side of the political spectrum.

Tucson’s Drinking Liberally meets religiously every Sunday evening on the patio at The Shanty, at the corner of 4th Ave. and 9th St. Open discussions begin at 6 p.m.; speakers usually start at 7 p.m. I personally prefer Drinking Liberally Classic, when there is no speaker.

In case you can’t read it, one of my messier neighbors has “Yes on 401, Fix City Government” sign in his front of his junk car.

This is a perfect example of not knowing what you are voting for.

You see… a few months ago the neighborhood association turned this particular neighbor– among others– into the city for violating the ordinances against tall weeds and grass and visible junk cars.

Should I tell him that even if Prop 401 passes, he’ll still have to keep his yard cleaned up and cover– or preferably ditch– that junk car with the flat tires? (After all, even covered, it’s an eyesore.)

From the get-go, tonight’s Pima County Democratic Party meeting had the feeling of a showdown on Prop 401, and it was.

The room was tense as each member of the Executive Committee spoke for the allotted 2 minutes, and there was no call to the audience. Most people passed or said just a few words. Tom Prezelski and Jim Hannley, both EC members and officers in the Protect Local Control No on Prop 401, spoke eloquently against the measure.

Chairman and Prop 401 supported Jeff Rogers gave the history of the measure; first the Democrats were working with the City Council on a strong mayor charter change, but eventually he folded his efforts into those of the Southern Arizona Leadership Council (SALC), who was proposing strong city manager charter changes.

One young EC member read excerpts from a letter from the three City Council members who stood with their constituents and voted against the charter changes back in July. He asked that the EC “not throw them under the bus.”

In the end, the mostly white, mostly male, mostly over 60 Democratic EC voted 19 yes, 5 no, and 1 abstain to endorse Prop 401.

Jon Stewart often says that one of the biggest differences between Republicans and Democrats is that Republicans (being more homogeneous) are able to keep their base marching forward in lock step, while the Democrats (who represent many diverse interests) often devolve into squabbling and “eat their young”.

Tonight, I’m afraid the Pima Dems will “eat their young”– or at least a few City Council members. Earlier in the summer, the Pima County Democratic Party Executive Committee voted to officially remain neutral on Prop 401, the City of Tucson proposed charter changes.

This was a wise decision, since the Democratic-controlled City Council vote was split on this issue back in July. Council Members Richard Fimbres, Karin Ulich, and Regina Romero listened to their constituents at well-attended public forums and voted not to send the charter changes to the ballot. Blue Dog Democrats Paul Cunningham and Shirley Scott sided with Republicans Steve Kozachik and Mayor Bob Walkup and voted successfully to send the initiative (now Prop 401) to the ballot.

Even though the Pima Dems officially remained neutral on the issue, Party Chair and local lawyer Jeff Rogers and Vice Chair and Ward 2 City Council aide Katie Bolger have been actively hawking Prop 401 for the corporatists of Southern Arizona Leadership Council (SALC). In addition, according to Prop 401′s campaign finance reports, Bolger has been paid $2000 for her pro-Prop 401 lobbying efforts.

This is a free country, and I respect Rogers’ and Bolger’s right to have their own opinions and speak out for or against political initiatives– as private citizens.

But tonight’s Executive Committee meeting is another matter.

Through what appear to be parliamentary machinations, the Pima Dems Executive Committee will re-vote whether or not to endorse Prop 401 tonight at the Democratic Headquarters.

Rehashing and re-voting the Prop 401 endorsement is a waste of time. This is like rearranging the deck chairs as the Titanic sinks.

Workers and the middle class are under siege in Arizona and nationwide. It’s time for the Democrats to march in lock step to elect as many Democrats as possible and save our country from extremists– not devolve into cannibalism.

The Feldman Neighborhood, which has a reputation for fiery politics, hosted the most polite community forum ever last night. Was it the gentle ambiance of the historic but hard-to-find St. Luke’s Chapel, built by Josias Joesler. Or the lack of suits?

About a dozen citizens gathered in the chapel to discuss the pros and cons of Prop 401, the proposed changes to the Tucson City Charter. Local lawyer, environmentalist, and Tucson Charter Change Coalition (TC3) executive committee member, Mitch Coker spoke in favor of Prop 401. Political gadfly and former blogger, Luke Knipe represented Protect Local Control, the No on 401 committee.

The free-form, unstructured forum was dotted with controversy and consensus. There was major discussion of what the charter changes would fix, deceptive advertising by Prop 401 supporters, government accountability, the impact of shifting the election cycle, the pros and cons a stronger city manager, and the pay raises for politicians.

When asked what city government problems the charter changes would fix, neither Coker nor Shirley Kiser (one of the architects of Prop 401, along with her husband Jim Kiser) could answer the question. They waffled around what the charter changes would do but couldn’t name any problems they would fix. I asked a follow-up question but still no specifics.

My point to them was that the Southern Arizona Leadership Council (SALC) has raised almost $50,000, talked with hundreds of people, and spent thousands of dollars on yard signs and a giant “Fix city government” billboard at the gateway to downtown. And they can’t tell us what they want to “fix”?

Finally, since they couldn’t come up with an answer, I said that I believe SALC is trying to “fix” the City Council. The proposed charter changes would dramatically weaken the City Council’s power and influence over decision-making. Here’s how: 1) electing the entire city government in one election (instead of stagger elections, as they are now) would allow moneyed forces (like SALC) to a sweep the entire Mayor and Council out in the same year; 2) the charter changes would take the City Council out of many hiring and firing decisions and give all authority to the unelected city manager; and 3) giving more power to the Mayor weakens the City Council.

Taking power away from the elected City Council reduces government accountability. Repeatedly Coker and Kiser gave examples of strong city manager cities that are “well run”. The examples they gave were cities that had had the same unelected city manager for 10-20 years. It dawned on my later that the corporatists want an iron-clad impervious leader for the city; they want the City of Tucson to be run by a despot– a CEO!

Unfortunately for them, we live in a democracy, and democracy is messy.

As to be expected during election season, I am greeted with campaign ads in my mailbox nearly everyday.

Yesterday, I received the above pro-Prop 401 card (without the circles and numbers, of course). This is one deceptive ad; in fact the statements circled in blue are blatant lies. (The items circled in yellow can be dismissed as unsubstantiated public relations claims.)

Prop 401 does absolutely NOTHING to (1) streamline city government or (2) cut bureaucracy. Prop 401 changes some hiring and firing procedures, but these changes actually strengthen the city’s bureaucracy by further consolidating power in the office of the unelected city manager. No bureaucratic positions are eliminated, no budgets are cut, and no departments are eliminated by Prop 401.

Regarding (3) hold bureaucrats accountable, I contend that only elected officials are accountable to the voters– not bureaucrats. Less government accountability is my biggest beef with Prop 401. By taking power away from the Mayor and City Council (while at the same time more than doubling their salaries), Prop 401 strengthens bureaucracy. (Yes, with Prop 401, certain department heads will lose their civil service protection, but the bureaucrats in these positions never have been accountable to voters, so it’s a bit of a red herring, in my opinion.)

So, I’d like to see the Southern Arizona Leadership Council (SALC) send out a mailer that tells what Prop 401 actually does:

1- Prop 401 more than doubles the salaries of the Mayor and Council, while diminishing their power.

2- Prop 401 changes hiring and firing processes to increase the power of the unelected city manager.

3- Prop 401 eliminates civil service protection for some department heads and allows the unelected city manager to more easily eliminate staff, which also increases his power.

4- Prop 401 eliminates the off-year elections, thus, enabling the election of the Mayor and all City Council members in the same year. (This saves money, but also potentially weakens our elected officials. SALC members have big bucks; if the entire city government is up for election in the same year, they could easily flood the election with money in an attempt to take over the Democratically-controlled City Council in one fell swoop.)

The bottomline is that Prop 401 is an attempt by big business to weaken and, therefore, control Tucson city government (the way they control the Arizona Legislature). These corporatists are using money and lies to sway your vote.

One look at the Yes on Prop 401 campaign finance reports tells us who the puppeteer is behind the curtain– big business. Yes on Prop 401 has received a handful of $100 donations, but by far the donations in support of Prop 401 are $500- $10,000 donations from businesses. What are they doing with these funds? Yes on Prop 401 has paid thousands of dollars to a public relations firm, a marketing firm, and a paid lobbyist– to sway your vote.

In stark contract, the grassroots, all-volunteer Protect Local Control Vote No on Prop 401 group has $70 in the bank.

Don’t buy the lie. Vote NO on Prop 401.

P.S.– As a snarky side note to the PR firm, you’ve got a run-on sentence in the blue section at the top.

UPDATE October 4: The Arizona Daily Star posted a story about the groups for and against Prop 401. They reported that as of last week, Prop 401 supporters have raised $47.000, while the Protect Local Control committee has raised $320.

Today, September 30, and Monday, October 4, two neighborhood groups will host community forums on Propositions 400 and 401, which will be on the November ballot.

Prop 400 would increase the city’s sales tax to pay for core services (police, fire, parks) (1, 2), and Prop 401 would change the city’s charter (1,2).

The Tucson City Council voted in July to allow both initiatives to be put on the ballot. The sales tax increase would help the city balance its budget, but it has been a contentious issue on the City Council, with Councilman Steve Kozachik offering alternative Plans C and D to City Manager Mike Letcher’s Plans A (Prop 400) or Plan B (15% across the board cuts).

Prop 401, although more esoteric, also has been very contentious. Prop 401 is the baby of the Southern Arizona Leadership Council (SALC); this big business group claims that the City Charter should be changed because city government doesn’t run efficiently* and because it’s old. The grassroots opposition to Prop 401 takes issue with the huge Mayor and Council pay increases that are included. (I am against Prop 401 because it increases the power of the city’s bureaucracy [particularly the unelected city manager] and, therefore, makes government less accountable.)

Want to learn more about these initiatives, ask questions, or voice your opinion? Check out one of these forums. The last Props 400-401 forum, hosted by Ward 6, was a standing-room-only event (above). (Kozachik called the event “lively;” other attendees described it as wild political theater.)

Southside
Tonight, the Southside Neighborhood Association Presidential Partnership (SNAPP) will host a community forum on both Props 400 and 401 from 6-8 p.m. The event will be at the El Pueblo Activity Center Multi Purpose Room, 101 W. Irvington Road. The entrance to the parking lot is south of Irvington Road on Nogales Highway.

University area
On October 4, the Feldman Neighborhood Association will host a community forum on only Prop 401, beginning at 6:30 p.m. The event will be at the chapel of St. Luke’s Home at Lee and N. First Ave.

* Regarding the efficiency of city government: well, anyone who has been following the downtown hotel hell (1, 2, 3, 4) or the other Rio Nuevo real estate deals could make a case for inefficiency. But, personally, I don’t think bigger bureaucracy is going to fix it. I believe we need strong leadership. Prop 401 should have been broken up, which would have allowed people to vote for the parts they favor.

As I have said on many occasions, Tucson lacks “the vision thing”. In my opinion, we need a strong mayor to lead us out of our economic and social problems– not stronger bureaucrats, which is what Prop 401 would give us.

Hurricane Hazel has been mayor of the 6th largest city in Canada for 33! years– 11 terms. Eight-eight-year-old Hazel has a 92% approval rating, a vibrant city, and no municipal debt. Check out her story.