After doing everything possible to undermine a border security candidate in 2006 (Graf) the NRCC and RNC have been calling and mailing asking for money based on, get this, doing something about illegal immigration. This is only one small issue that I believe has resulted in some strong skepticism within the ranks of the Republican Party.

     I believe Newt Gingrich’s article from last week honestly and correctly addressed this skepticism, not only among Republicans but among many within the overall electorate. Newt has not entered the race but I think this message would get the attention of the electorate, whoever delivers it. Whether he enters the race or not his intellect and vision would be helpful to the party.

     Mitt Romney came pretty close to Newt’s tact with this ad. He also released an open letter to Republicans hitting on the same theme. I do not think Romney addresses the issue as well as Newt but he is getting closer.

     Anyone running for Congress this year (seems like half of the legislature) would do well to reflect on Newt’s words.

     I guess the NRCC is having a little trouble connecting with the party faithful. I wonder if their betrayals in 2006 were worth it?

Since the East Valley Tribune does not post their commentaries online, we thought you might enjoy reading this:

East Valley Tribune
Sept. 23, 2007

Gov’s budget fixes would put state in a fix

By Sen. Thayer Verschoor and Sen. Bob Burns

Like the rest of the nation, the people of Arizona are trying to come to terms with the fact that recent years of economic expansion are being challenged by a downturn in the housing and financial markets. How long that downturn will last and the impact it will have on Arizona households and various business sectors is being debated by economists.

We were glad to see Gov. Janet Napolitano acknowledge Wednesday that current economic conditions are creating a projected budget shortfall of at least $600 million. We were also glad to see her put forward a proposal and begin a dialogue with the Legislature on how best to address this problem.

How the state responds to this shortfall is crucial. If our response creates a fiscally unsustainable budget, taxpayers will be in jeopardy. We want to be perfectly clear that, whatever we do, we cannot increase the burdens on taxpayers who are already struggling to keep up with their mortgage payments and other household expenses.

Being a good steward of the state’s fiscal system means recognizing problems associated with overburdening the revenue producers as well as needs of government. We will only worsen the economic situation by increasing taxes.

Recognizing the impact of skyrocketing property values and local government property tax increases, the Legislature enacted a $235 million property tax reduction that expires, by the governor’s insistence, in the tax year of 2009. The Democrats have opposed efforts to make that rate reduction permanent, meaning it will reappear on your property tax bills.

We are concerned that Napolitano’s proposed response to the budget shortfall could put the state’s finances in a precarious and unsustainable position. Most worrisome is her continued advocacy for the state budget to become addicted to a series of long-term, interest-bearing, debt obligations to finance costs for school construction we will face each and every year for decades into the future. At some point, the debt service payments for that accumulated debt will exceed the annual amount of cash needed. This is like taking out multiple mortgages to pay for utilities.

The governor also proposes using the state’s “rainy day fund,” a onetime cash source, to keep ongoing programs afloat. She apparently is counting on some yet-to-be determined revenue increase to occur at some yet-to-be determined time in the future. This is like taking out a payday loan to cover spending based on the hope that your boss will suddenly decide to double your salary.

These responses to a financial problem do not, in our view, represent wise fiscal management. We suspect that most families and businesses understand the dangers of going into debt for ongoing spending demands. That is why we were glad to see the governor include recognition that some degree of belt-tightening should be part of the solution.

The current revenue situation requires decisive action to examine the state’s financial management and look for areas where we might be able to improve. Much of our budgeted expenditures are driven by statutory formulas that basically run on automatic.

Budget shortfalls provide a good opportunity to retain, eliminate or modify government programs and the formulas that drive their funding. The executive and legislative branches and the people of Arizona are all in this together. We have a better chance of responding appropriately if we work cooperatively, as we have in the past.

Sen. Thayer Verschoor is the Arizona Senate majority leader from District 22 in Gilbert. Sen. Bob Burns is the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee and represents District 9 in Peoria.

The Exploratory Committee web site for David Schweikert is online.

Thanks to Arizona Politics for catching the news.

I couldn’t help but visit one of the other political blogs tonight to see what they had going on as far as posts. As I was running through their topics I noticed a link on their blog roll to another blog called “Some Moron Alliance.”

“That’s real cute,” I told myself as I followed it back to Sonoran Alliance.

But I also had to ask myself, “Self, what’s the reason for so much animosity toward Sonoran Alliance? After all, Sonoran Alliance hasn’t really gone after Politico Mafioso. Hmmm…”

Just so I could put things in perspective, I went over to Alexa.com to see where we (SA) lined up against Politico Mafioso. Now keep in mind that Alexa measures traffic for the big boys out there like Drudge, The New York Times and MSNBC. So what you see below is a snapshot of our little sphere of the Arizona political blogosphere measured as a big fish in a giant ocean.  Here’s the graph that Alexa generated. The blue spikes you see are the number of page views for Sonoran Alliance while the red spikes, well, I can’t seem to find any on the graph, belong to Politico Mafioso. (Click on the graph to see a bigger image of it.)

So I’m going to have to follow some advice my grandmother used to tell me. And that is, “If you don’t have anything nice to say about anyone, than don’t say anything at all.”

Nevertheless, just to be nice to our “friend” over at Politico Mafioso, I’m going to put a link on our blogroll to his.

Have a great day Jeff!

Friday, The Arizona Republic ran a story about Maricopa County refusing to fund the printing of a monthly newsletter put out to homeschool families by the Maricopa County Superintendent of Schools, Dr. Sandra Dowling.

Here is what the Republic printed:

Maricopa County officials are refusing to print a newsletter from Maricopa County Superintendent of Schools Sandra Dowling’s office because of what they call an “inappropriate” opinion column.

The column defends Dowling in the ongoing court drama involving Thomas J. Pappas schools for homeless children and blasts the Board of Supervisors. It was written by Alan Richardson, a former public-information officer for the office. Dowling read it and “thought it was pretty good,” said deputy superintendent Ted Carpenter.

Richardson wrote, “The goal of the Board of Supervisors appears to be to remove Dr. Dowling from office.”

Dowling faces charges including misuse of public money and conflict of interest.

She has relinquished control of the Pappas schools, but is still the county superintendent of schools.

The taxpayer-funded newsletter would cost about $3,500 and was to be sent to fewer than 10,000 households, Carpenter said.

“You can’t publish a newsletter with public money to make a personal case. The law won’t allow it,” said Lisa Graham Keegan, acting director of county communications.

Sonoran Alliance contacted Dr. Dowling to see what all the fuss was about and to request the column. Here is the column and a link to the actual newlsetter (Home Notes) that Maricopa County and the Republic refuses to print:

OPINION – By Alan Richardson

Nearly everyone is aware of the charges brought against Dr. Sandra Dowling, Maricopa County Superintendent of Schools. There have been allegations of misappropriation, theft, fraud, and nearly any such claim as could be thought of by the government.

Many home schooling parents have called and asked about those charges and the status of Dr. Dowling.

Through all of this, Dr. Dowling has repeatedly noted she denies each and every one of the alleged actions. Many of the claims against her have been dismissed by a judge who ruled that the prosecution withheld evidence from the grand jury in a systematic manner. The evidence would have given reasons for the grand jury to believe Sandra Dowling did not commit the crimes alleged against her.

Terry Goddard, the Arizona Attorney General who brought the case against the Superintendent has since withdrawn from the matter because of a conflict of interest.

The goal of the Board of Supervisors appears to be to remove Dr. Dowling from office.

A civil case brought by the County Supervisors against Dr. Dowling has been dropped by the Board. Since then, they have brought a separate civil action against Dr. Dowling that is pending in the courts. The reason for the change in courts appears to be, according to friends of Dr. Dowling, designed to create insurmountable legal fees for her.

Still, Dr. Dowling has maintained her determination to see this to the ultimate vindication of her character. In the meantime, she continues to serve the people of Maricopa County as the Superintendent of Schools, including the parents who home school their children.

With nearly 20 years of service to our children and residents, Dr. Dowling remains committed to the education of our young people.

Of course, this all begs the question whether this has now become a free speech issue – censorship vs. sponsorship. Occassionally, the Board of Supervisors publishes an opinion or advocacy piece of their own via their district newsletters.

Ultimately, this is about who controls the money and how such leverage can be used for or against other elected officials.

Last week, Sonoran Alliance posted the news that the Board quickly passed a resolution requesting Arizona’s Congressional delegation to revoke the exception allowing the county to receive federal funds for Thomas J. Pappas school for the homeless. Look for this political battle to rage on as one side tries to break the other…

According to this Arizona Republic article many Phoenix police officers do not like the restriction placed on them regarding illegal aliens. The Republic uses the term sanctuary twice in the article, putting the word in quotes. If you look at the URL in your browser you will see what they titled the story – 0921sanctuary0921.html

     Someone went to a lot of trouble to produce a video about Tim Bee. Technically it is well done but we are not so sure about using Bruce Springsteen. He was one of the artists performing for Vote for Change. In case you don’t remember that was the concert tour in 2004 that was raising money for moveon.org. If Bee is considering using this as the official campaign theme song he might want to re-evaluate the decision.

Former State Representative, Laura Knaperek, has announced her intention to seek the CD 5 Congressional Seat currently held by Democrat, Harry Mitchell. Laura currently serves as the Executive Director of United Families International, a Mesa-based pro-family organization but has a long track record of service in the State House.

Mitchell won the seat in 2006 in a political anomoly when the voters decided not to renew their contract with JD Hayworth.

This is likely to be a very interesting primary race with a handful of Republicans battling for the GOP nod. State Representative Mark Anderson, has already announced the formation of an exploratory committee. Washington Lobbyist, Jim Ogsbury, jumped in the race over a month ago. Meanwhile, Maricopa County Treasurer, David Schweikert, will make his announcement momentarily.

Republicans outnumber Democrats in Congressional District 5 so this race will break hard for the Republican once the primary is over. The battle will come down to who can raise the most money and force his/her opponent to spend it first. For conservative candidates, its a game of conservation.

City Councilman, Claudia Walters, has made it official and will enter the race for Mayor of Mesa. Because of Arizona’s resign to run rule, Walters will not have to resign her post as she is in her final year.

Earlier this year, Scott Smith, a former director of Mesa United Way, also announced his intention to seek the post.

Because current Mayor, Keno Hawker, is term-limited he will not seek re-election.

Tom Freestone, a former State Senator, will shortly announce his intention not to run. 

However, next week, Councilman and business entrepreneur, Rex Griswold, will resign his council seat and become the third candidate to announce his candidacy for Mayor of Mesa.

Next year’s mayoral race will probably be an indicator of the cultural and religious shift taking place in Mesa as more Californians, Mid-Westerners and retirees make Mesa their home. With the steady growth and influx of non-Mormons into the community, the political landscape is undoubtedly transforming.

Both Walters and Smith are Mormons and will find themselves in a race against Evangelical, Rex Griswold, in a city that is experiencing rapid church growth among Catholics and especially Evangelicals.

In addition, Arizona faces a presidential preference election early in the year which will spark interests in candidates like Mitt Romney. This could either work in favor or against Mormon candidates as new voters head to the polls with Mayoral candidates on the mind.

As the candidates enter the arena, watch for religious undertones to shape the race and perhaps the mind of the East Valley voter.

We need to show more sympathy for these people.
  * They walk many miles in the blistering, deadly summer heat.
  * They risk and many lose their lives crossing a border.
  * They are grossly underpaid by an employer who wouldn’t think of doing the same work.
  * They do jobs that others won’t do or are afraid to do.
  * They live in crowded conditions among a people who speak a different language.
  * They are separated from their families for months and years, and face adversity all day every day.

I’m not talking about illegal aliens;

I’m talking about our troops! 

(In addition to their service to all of us, they do not have a habit of shooting our local law enforcement officers in cold blood.)

Doesn’t it seem strange that our Congress seems willing to lavish all kinds of social benefits on illegals, but don’t support our troops or their families adequately and are now threatening to defund them while they are serving in a war zone? 

It is a time for our government to pass a DREAM Act for our volunteer soldiers and their families.  They’ve earned it!

I received this from my daughter-in-law tonight.  Her husband (my son) is serving as a bomb disposal tech ‘across the pond’. 

KNXV-TV is reporting that an illegally alien who broke into a Mesa home does not qualify under Prop 100. The article does not say if the suspect is free or not.

I am not quite sure how much it will take for citizens to demand that the border be secured. I would imagine more stories like this and people will finally demand something be done. I did not initially think Representative Russell Pearce had much of a chance against Congressman Flake. News items like this change my view of the race. Pearce may not only have a chance of winning the Republican primary in CD-6 but also winning the general.

No doubt that Jeff Flake and Michael Crow are working on an ASU scholarship for Mr. Oscar Rivera. Maybe Mac Magruder could find him a part time job while he attends the university.

Had enough yet? Visit the exploratory web site of Russell Pearce and let him know what you think or contact Congressman Flake.

KTAR is reporting that Phoenix police officer Nick Erfle’s killer was in the U.S. illegally.

In case you missed it, the Kingman Daily Miner has a good story on State Senator Ron Gould. Who knew that journalists could still write news stories?

   Arizona’s Champion of Change, Sydney Hay, is running for Congress in Congressional District One on a platform of reforming what’s broken in Washington. Over the course of the campaign, Sydney will unveil details on her change agenda. First, we start with Health Care, in response to Hillary Clinton’s recent announcement of her health care plan of government mandates.

A Prescription for Health Care Reform
by Sydney Hay
“First, do no harm.” Congress should follow the Hippocratic Oath when proposing to fix what ails health care in America. Hillary Clinton’s newly-rolled-out proposal is, once again, a massive expansion of government into the heath care of Americans, disguised by the words “Health Care Choices.” Its massive new mandates on employers will be harmful to small business and dramatically stifle their creation of new jobs in America while doing little to improve the quality of health care or its delivery. To recast our system in the mold of the socialized systems in Canada, Great Britain, Cuba (Michael Moore’s favorite) etc. is not the answer. There is a reason why Canadians who can afford it come to the United States when confronted with a serious illness. There is a reason why our U.S. Cancer survival rates are far higher than those in Great Britain and other countries. There’s a reason why Cubans suffer from diseases like leprosy and typhoid fever that have been nearly eliminated elsewhere. Let’s fix what’s broken in our health care system, not damage it further by a government take-over. Do you want the folks that were in charge of the Hurricane Katrina relief efforts in charge of your Mom’s cancer treatment? I don’t think so.

Americans want real solutions, not just tinkering around the edges.

There is one thing that rings true in the fantasy film by Michael Moore — the title. There are some “sicko” aspects to health care in America. Serious systemic change is warranted.

First, we, the American people are the best reformers of our health care system. Empowering people (not their employers, not corporate bean counters, not federal bureaucrats) to decide from a menu of wants and needs and then weigh the associated costs of each is the best system for Americans.

WHAT WE HAVE DONE WRONG

1. We have taken the consumer out of health care. This is one major reason why costs have risen so dramatically. When someone else is paying the bill, there is no incentive to negotiate price, to shop around, to even contemplate whether a high-priced procedure is truly necessary.

2. And while we have removed the consumer, we have inserted an army of lawyers, ready at the drop of a hat to file junk lawsuits. Not only has this resulted in a cost of malpractice insurance that beggars the imagination, it also results in the over-prescription of expensive tests.

3. The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) has cost rural areas such as those in Congressional District One of Arizona dearly. Well-meaning though the passage of this law in 1986 was, it hurts the very people it was meant to help: low income people in a medical emergency. And it hurts the rest of us, too, as emergency facilities close due to the heavy burden. From 1994 to 2004, the number of emergency room visits increased by 18 percent. During that same time period, 425 emergency departments disappeared. Fully one-third of patients visiting emergency rooms have only minor problems.

SOLUTIONS:

1. Transform EMTALA by converting this program into one of direct assistance to the uninsured in the form of premium assistance or health care vouchers, thereby enabling them to buy private insurance coverage. This will give them access to primary care for minor problems, and free up ERs for true emergencies. It will also take away much of the burden of uncompensated care from our ERs, stopping the flight of emergency facilities away from rural and low-income areas.

2. Stop encouraging the surrender of control of our health care from the individual to the employer. By promoting large Health Savings Accounts we will stop the loss of coverage when someone is in-between jobs (a large percentage of the uninsured fall into this category), give control back to workers, and put downward pressure on health costs by bringing the consumer back into the equation. If HSAs became widespread in America we would also go a long way toward lessening the day of reckoning that is fast approaching on Medicare.

3. Allow interstate competition in health insurance. Over-regulation at the state level and required purchasing within state, are major factors in the high cost of insurance. When the exact same policy can be purchased for half the price in one state vs. another, there is a clear argument for changing this. Individuals should be allowed to purchase insurance across state lines.

4. Enact legislation that provides for the formation of large groups that small businesses and individuals could join to gain purchasing power.

5. Enact malpractice reform and look at establishing voluntary no-fault medical insurance.

6. Address the lack of providers in poor and rural areas through various tuition loan forgiveness programs. Privately-operated for-profit health clinics could be established that would gain federal tax incentives like the ability to issue stock that is exempt from capital gains taxes or the ability to use federal tax-exempt bonds to finance the clinics.

7. Change the unfair tax treatment of employer-provided health insurance vs. individuals purchasing their own. Right now, the tax incentives are in place to favor employer-provided insurance. By offering a health care deduction to every taxpayer you can level the playing field and increase the incentives for individuals to purchase their own health insurance directly, rather than relying on their employers to do it for them. That way, they can choose only the coverage they want or need. For example, why should a 60 year-old be forced to pay for maternity coverage?

CONCLUSION

These reforms will transform our health care system into one that provides value and freedom of choice; that expands private health care coverage, instead of expanding government; and that puts downward pressure on health care costs, thereby reducing them.