The CD-5 Primary has been anything but dull the last few weeks but despite the crowded field of Republicans in the race, only two candidates have take front stage.
David Schweikert, the former Maricopa County Treasurer a conservative Republican entered the race last October while cable industry lobbyist, Susan Bitter-Smith, a stealth liberal Republican decided to jump in the race in mid-May.
Throwing the first punch was Susan Bitter-Smith who accused David of ”bankrupting” two Maricopa County school districts through “improper accounting practices.” She also claimed that David was fired from the Maricopa County Special Health Care District when he “failed his fiduciary responsibilities.” Bitter-Smith then lied about a 1993 vote Schweikert cast while in the Arizona Legislature on a bill that repealed Arizona’s onerous weight-distance tax.
But it gets better.
Bitter-Smith then lied about her own record. In her own mailings, she claims that she never raised taxes and that she even lowered taxes!
This is a common political tactic in which a candidate attacks his/her opponent in order to distract the voters from looking at their own record.
David Schweikert had no choice but to swing back – with the truth – especially since what Bitter-Smith was questionably libelous.
The Schweikert campaign has responded with the following facts and the truth about David Schweikert and Susan Bitter Smith.
David Schweikert’s role as Maricopa County Treasurer required him to watch over and protect taxpayer dollars. This included school district budgets that are under the Maricopa County Superintendent. When two school districts teetered on the edge of a budgetary crisis, David alerted the districts that they were on the verge of bankruptcy, that the Treasurer’s Office would not honor their checks and that the State Superintendent of Public Instruction would need to intervene. This is exactly what happened.
If anything, this actually demonstrates the leadership that David Schweikert asserted as a fiscally responsible official of the County. Susan Bitter-Smith lied about David Schweikert’s role as County Treasurer which leads us to believe that she either doesn’t understand the role of County Treasurer or she’s getting desperate. (Read the official documents by clicking here.)
Susan’s lie that David was “fired” from the Maricopa County Special Health Care District is also a gross distortion. Here’s the truth: While County Treasurer, David Schweikert, requested that the County Attorney look into the banking and investment practices of MCSHD. It was discovered that MCSHD was violating Arizona law and thereby putting taxpayer monies outside of the County with a risky private investment firm. David Schweikert then informed Betsey Bayless, the CEO of MCSHCD, that the district would be directed to deposit taxpayers’ monies under the County Treasurer’s watch. Essentially, David Schweikert directed MCSHCD to comply with Arizona Revised Statute 48-5561. MCSHCD refused the directive and it wasn’t until the new County Treasurer, Hos Hoskins took office did MCSHCD claim the Treasurer had no jurisdiction. No one was fired. Rather, David Schweikert again asserted leadership in protecting the taxpayer’s monies and abiding with state law. (Read official documents by clicking here.)
Bitter-Smith then lied about a vote David made while in the Arizona Legislature. According to a hit piece that featured an ominous picture of a handgun and diesel fuel pump on it, Bitter-Smith alleged that David Schweikert raised fuel taxes by 44% while insinuated that Arizona families should be afraid of David Schweikert.
This has to be the best fear-mongering we’ve seen from a candidate in a long time.
The truth – which was covered in an earlier post – is that David Schweikert actually repealed Arizona’s burdensome fuel tax in a 1993 vote in which conservative lawmakers had bi-partisan support to eliminate the tax. I won’t go into the background but you can read the earlier post and an excellent write-up by former Republican State Rep, Greg Patterson on his blog, EspressoPundit and a letter written by the Arizona Trucking Association.
But what about Susan? She’s not only lied about David’s record. She’s lied about her own!
In one of her mailpieces, she proclaims, “I’ve never raised taxes.” The fact is that Susan has a pattern of raising taxes in every position she has served. While on the Scottsdale City Council, Bitter-Smith rasied taxes both in 1989 and in 1990. While serving on the Balsz School District, Susan voted for a tax levy for property owners in the district. To add insult to injury, Susan managed to miss 30% of her meetings. Now that’s taxation without representation!
In another mailpiece, Bitter-Smith, states, “I lowered Water District Taxes by 25%.” This is great deception because in reality, Susan actually adopted an expanding levy and larger assessment resulting in an increase in your Central Arizona Water Conservation District portion of your tax bill. But don’t take my word for it. Take a look at your latest tax bill and the direction of the little arrow next to the tax (example).
But did you also know that while serving on the Central Arizona Water Conservation District Board of Directors, Susan DID vote for an increase in the levy with the latest votes on June 21, 2008 and June 19, 2007.
With all the lies and deception from Susan Bitter-Smith, the voters of Congressional District should realize the type of person they should avoid electing in next Tuesday’s Primary Election. Anyone who was around in 2000 will remember the tactics used by Bitter-Smith when she tried to smear Jeff Flake and Tom Liddy at the same time. Well, that Susan – the one the Arizona Republic aptly nicknamed Gutter-Smith – is back but nothing’s changed.
Voter Beware!
See the Truth vs. Lie webpage at David Schweikert’s campaign website.
what about the fact that Susan is also pro-choice! Not exactly the most conservative position out there…
Also you are not exactly telling the whole story on Schweikert either.. the guy was endorsed by the AFL-CIO twice!
Its not like he was just randomly endorsed by these groups either to be endorsed by the AFL-CIO one has to sign a write to work document… So lets be real here neither of these candidates are the greatest “conservative”
Stupid Joe…
The name is fitting… When you start to regurgitate your campaign’s talking points, make sure you understand them first…
1 – it is “RIGHT TO WORK” not “WRITE TO WORK”
2 – “RIGHT TO WORK” is an ANTI-UNION position – Stating one has the “RIGHT TO WORK” without having to join a UNION. (Which by the way Schweikert supports…)
3 – Lastly here is a newsflash for you!! The AFL-CIO was endorsing many legislators on the RIGHT SIDE of the Aisle in the early 90’s as all the greenies were killing the timber and mining industries in Arizona…
But by all means… continue to cling to your “We’ve got Schweikert now with this one….” beliefs.
Perhaps the most concerning about your comments is that you are supposed to be one of the educated, well-informed voters…
Heaven help us!!!
Susan Gutter Smith gives the Republican Party a bad name. Her campaign tactics are exactly what turns voters off. (Including her looks) Does anyone else find it interesting that the only reason she is doing well in this race is because she is ridding the coattails of Arpaio??? David Schweikert isn’t running against Susan, he is running against Joe and Susan’s lies. Why doesn’t the general public see through her BS??? As a result of Joe supporting Susan I decided not to vote for him on my early ballot. He is just another politician. If you need proof just look at the fact that Susan is adamantly pro-choice and Joe as adamantly pro-life. If he really believed that Susan was the right choice for Congress than he should publicly come out and pronounce the he is no longer pro-life. These two are despicable. I hope that Susan looses and sees the writing on the wall and never runs for another office again. Doesn’t she realize that she has lost more races than the Green Party?
Sounds like the AFL-CIO endorsement was nothing more than a “spurned lover” situation between the Dems and the union. The AFL-CIO must have gotten mad enough at them to throw some symbolic support towards Republicans just to piss off the Dems.
Susan Sucks…
The time has come to put this AFL-CIO issue to rest. The fact of the matter is Schweikert never pursued the endorsement of this organization.
Schweikert has never voted for, or sponsored legislation that would weaken Arizona’s Right to Work laws and never will.
I have attached a copy of the press release from 14 years ago to hopefully end this conversation.
Respectfully,
Michael Juel
David Schweikert for Congress
http://www.eastvalleyweb.com/schw/images/Press%20Release%20Endorsements.pdf
Well, that settles that. Thanks for the information Michael.
How does some one simply get away with making, and repeating all of these lies?
Is there not a civil or criminal penalty?
At a minimum, doesn’t the party have oversight responsibility?
Doesn’t the party have the ability/responsibility to remove/sanction an individual (such as Susan) from the party?
It is because the State Party does not care.
Roger Maris:
Who is it exactly that I am working for?? It couldn’t be baby killer Susan and its obviously not labor loving Schweikert…
I was just curious whose campaign talking points I was regurgitating?
Also, with the AFL-CIO endorsement in order to be endorsed by the AZ AFL-CIO you do need to sign some sort of document endorsing labor workers and unions in the state. Why don’t you call the AZ AFL-CIO to get some real information that is what I did.
If I were in CD5 this would be a no brainer. On one hand you have Schweikert; honest, good on fiscal issues and pro-life. ON the other hand we have Bitter-Smith; not-honest, bad on abortion, and willing to say/do anything to win (no wonder she pal’s around w/ Arpaio). Schweikert is clearly the better pick to represent the convictions of our party.
However, something that fails to get much attention is the fact that this is a primary, and waiting for the winner is incumbent Harry Mitchell – who will be well financed and ready to play that (false) Jimmy Stewart type Jefferson Smith role that a lot of voters buy into and like. Bitter-Smith can’t raise the money to take on Mitchell, so she’ll go negative (again). Doing so will only alienate more Republicans and Independents that would vote with us – and Mitchell will have the money and gravitas to maneuver around Bitter-Smith’s amateur mud-slinging and get 2 more years. For what it’s worth, the only way we take back JD’s seat is by putting Schweikert up against Mitchell.
Rgds,
APK
You guys are laughable with your revisionist history. Schweikert threw the first punch here because he was losing. He sent out three mailers with no citations for the information on them — according to a post on this very website, that’s a sign of unethical politics.
There was an audit of the Treasurer’s office. It found them out of compliance with State law. The Treasurer serves as the bank for hundreds of entities in the county. He honored those school checks on accounts that didn’t have any money. That money is now going to come from you and me. The current Treasurer is doing the right thing by not honoring the checks from Pappas. If David would have done the same/right thing those two Districts wouldn’t be in the hole by a combined $6 million.
APK, the Club doesn’t play in the General, so there goes David’s money.
Even Patterson (David’s best man) said the gas tax hit was factual.
Azred,
I’m not sure about Club for Growth in the general, but look at individual contributions (according to the CPR) – Schweikert has raised $560k to Bitter-Smith’s $110k. Mr. Schweikert clearly has the ability to raise more money, and considering that Mitchell is sitting on a $1.3 million war chest, money will be critical if we are to take back this seat.
Rgds,
APK
I agree azred5,
The first time this race got any real coverage was when Schweikert sent those 3 hit-pieces against Susan in as many days. He told the AZ Republic he was forced into it because of what was being said in the blogs. I guess he was worried about losing the 1/10 of 1 percent of the vote that even knows these sites exist.
I’m still not convinced about the union issue on Schweikert either. What about the fact that he attended that anti-NAFTA, pro-union parade?
Let’s be honest, David thought it would help his political career which is why the AFL-CIO came back in 1994 and endorsed him again…this time for Congress while Schweikert was pitted against JD Hayworth.
It is nice to see we got under Susan’s skin. Susan (aka azRed5), it is no different than blaming the bank when you write bad checks. Are you so idiotic that you cannot see that? One of two things is happening here. Either you are too stupid to understand what really happened at the Treasure’s office or just up to your old tactics of throwing dirt. Either way you are unfit for Congress. Go get a real job and stop wasting our time…
P.S. Susan, you claim that Schweikert raised fuel taxes on AZ families by 44%. This is such BS! If you were a descent human being you would have told the voters that you mailed your “Hit-Piece” out to that the tax was only for truckers and never reached the average citizen. You also would have mentioned that this bill saved thousands of Arizona jobs from leaving. Thanks for proving, once again, that your ideas are out of touch with true conservative principles.
APK,
Whoever wins this primary is not going to have a problem raising money for the general. You can put as much weight on primary totals as you want but even Knaperek will be rolling in cash if she comes away with the nom. Overall electability should be the argument.
Since when is the truth a “HIT PIECE”…
She has raised taxes
She is against FISA
She is pro-choice
She is a lobbyist
Where on the other hand
Schweikert did not bankrupt two school districts
Schweikert did not raise Gas taxes
Schweikert did not get fired from a Hospital District
THAT’S A HIT PIECE…
Those peices that Schweikert sent out were not “Hit-Pieces” they were merly comparison pieces. Susan, also known as azRed5, those mailers did nothing bu highlight the contrast between what you are stating and what your record shows. You lied about you record to voters and David Schweikert had the courage to stand up for what was right. And what was right was to not let you lie your way to D.C.
Susan & Joe, sitting in a tree, K I S S I N G… How does a liberal Republican like Susan get endorsed by the Toughest Sheriff in America? Easy…you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours. True Conservatives can read between the lines and that’ll be the difference at the polls next week when David takes the primary. All you’re doing Susan is weakening the district with your inaccuracies and desperate accusations to win a seat in Congress in order to further advance your own personal business initiatives. Ahh, did that sting a bit? The bickering and mud-slinging that Susan’s campaign is offering the district’s public is about as palatable as eating greasy pork sandwich served in a dirty ashtray. No thanks!
Well said Josh!!!
There is a difference between a compare-contrast piece and a hit piece. Schweikert’s mail dealt with issues and how he and Susan differed on issues. She turned around and put out a hit piece – NOT addressing issues – but rather concocted allegations against David that were easily refuted. It’s pretty clear that Susan has AVOIDED dealing with issues while David has run on them.
If Susan wins this primary, she will have burned so many bridges with Republicans and pissed off so many Independents and used up all her money, that Mitchell will waltz right back into a traditionally held Republican district with no opposition.
Susan (azRed5), how is it that you can have the endorsement of Sheriff Joe and yet you and your husband contribute money to Mayor Gordon??? I think when William James was writing “The Social Me” he defiantly had you in mind. You will say anything that people want to hear.
Go Away!!!!!!!!
IdRatherBeFlying,
I think I did make the argument that Schweikert would be better vs. Mitchell. Bitter-Smith’s attack and mudslinging tactics will be a disaster against Mitchell; the voters like Mitchell because of the image he has carefully crafted over the years – clean, nice, honest. Schweikert can play that role as well – and offer up policy differences on conservative principles that will appeal during the general to voters.
It may be a fair point that the NRCC and others will kick in cash for the general regardless of who wins, but individual contributions are still going to be very important. Schweikert has demonstrated an ability to raise money in and out of state – Bitter-Smith has not.
Schweikert is the better Conservative. Schweikert can raise more money. Schweikert is more electable. Why shouldn’t Schweikert be the nominee for CD5?
Rgds,
APK
Stupid Joe…
Did the AFL-CIO also tell you that it was “WRITE TO WORK”…
The only one who has a shot at beating Mitchell is SCHWEIKERT…
Laura and Mark are nice people but can’t raise a dime… Ogsbury is a lobbyist just like Susan… (except he is also a nice guy)
There is only one choice on TUESDAY
Didn’t I read some place that a big chunk of that change in David’s coffers came from his own pocket? Like about $250,000 of it?
85000000….
Susan has put more than $250,000 of her own money in her race. Schweikert is a solid conservative and needs our vote!!!!
Here are the facts:
Susan is liar.
Susan thinks voters are stupid.
Susan’s supports killing innocent children.
Susan is a lobbyist that had the nerve to lobby Cong. Mitchell while running against him.
Susan is NOT a Reagan Republican.
Susan owes David Schweikert an apology.
Susan will bring more harm then good to Washington.
Susan is part of the problem, not the solution. She is wrong for this district.
Finally, Susan needs to stop running for office.
Here’s a thought…
Vote Laura Knaperek
Here’s a thought…
Vote for David Schweikert. He is the only one who can beat Harry. Laura would not stand a chance. Neither would Susan.
I’m sorry if you all have see this before. This is in case AZRed (aka susan) managed to avoid seeing it the first time.
I received a political “hit” piece in the mail that highlights the dirty politics seemingly running rampant today. It not so cleverly shows the first sentence of a cover letter to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors attached to an April 2007 audit report. What it doesn’t show is the second paragraph, conveniently covered up, which reads in its entirety “For the Period reviewed, we found the Treasurer’s portfolio to be in compliance (emphasis added) with State Statutes and with Treasurer’s Office policy. We also found that the interest is apportioned in compliance with authoritative guidelines.”
Is this “hit piece” the kind of misleading information we want from our leaders? Misleading, cowardly personal attacks cannot be tolerated by voters. We should elect candidates with the highest integrity to represent us. Don’t give your vote to candidates stooping to this level. It’s up to all voters to put a stop this despicable tactic.
And by the way, no school district has gone bankrupt. Susan counts on the fact people will not investigate he allegations. If anyone wants a PDF copy of the transmittal letter in susan’s hit piece let me know and I’ll be glad to send it to you. Or ask susan. She clearly has it, including the paragraph she doesn’t want you to see.
Schweikert is a lightweight who spends most of his time thinking of cute PR stunts to gain attention, not to actually accomplish anything of substance. Susan is a bitter, nasty person who has no integrity. Anyone but Schweikert and Susan!
Jack…
What are you talking about?
This is so much misinformation on both sides it is shameful. Distortion rules the day, both SBS and DS and his shills (see above) are twisting the facts.
The issue at hand on the Internal Audit was not that second paragraph at all. That paragraph is a stand alone statement with respect to the portfolio and the treatment of interest. It does not negate the recommendations for the correction of five internal control weaknesses stated:
1) Lines of Credit and Warrant Registration
2) Investment Management
3) Human Resource Management
4) Account Transaction Information
5) Information Technology
The Audit stated that laws and GAAP could have been compromised. It didn’t say clearly that laws were broken..Point David.
On the flipside, it suggests a shall we say relatively “hands off” approach to management and lack of internal controls..Point Susan.
As a member of CD5 I will support the winner of the Tuesday election, regardless of who that happens to be.
The end result of this nonsense is Ogsbury, Knaperek and Anderson will surely benefit. Many, many early voters I have spoken to were turned off with the negative campaigning and voted other than DS or SBS. Stay tuned folks, there may be a surprise come Tuesday.
You might want to actually read the audit and even better the audit response. The audit was extremely unprofessional and was clearly designed to justify an attack by the Board of Supervisors. You are of course aware there is a County opinion stating the Board exceeded it authority in its recent attack on the Treasurer. Unfortuanately, you will have to wait until the issue if finally settled to see the facts.
A County Attorney formal opinion the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors broke the law. Why isn’t someone talking about that issue. Once this is all resolved, David will be completely vindicated.
I have read the audit, all 32 pages…Here is the link, minus the spin…
https://maricopa.gov/Internal_audit/PubDocuments/FY2007/Reports/Treasurer.pdf
Let the SA readers decide for themselves..
See the Executive Summary. You will find both the DS and SBS camps cherry picked sentences here and there to further their campaigns.
Read the official response and the County Attorney opinion.
Blah blah blah… he said… she said…
I’ll tell you what I see that DOES matter:
Despite the fact that Schweikert has more or less been the establishment’s annointed one and has a clear cash advantage, he hasn’t been able to distance himself from the pack. He has run a depressingly disappointing campaign. How is he ever going to be able to take on Mitchell?
It’s also noteworthy that Bitter-Smith has been pretty scrappy and has been on the offense this entire time. I think she has the spunk and gal to beat the hell out of Mitchell come November. She has also signed a NO NEW TAX PLEDGE which is very impressive. Has Schweikert?
Yo Mamma,
Schweikert has run a good campaign on some fronts (fund raising, commercials, office set-up, email) and a poor one on other fronts (failure to define who he is and why we should vote for him).
Small things also hurt. Take the picture above for example…SBS tried very hard to improve her appearance. Many women in their 40s and 50s do the very same thing. The before and after split picture is not only a cheap shot, but also an affront to middle age women who view this as disrespectful and curiously “catty”. Not a manly way to fight, that is for sure. Stick to the issues David.
Bittersmith, who threw her hat in the ring late, rode front runner DS coat-tails in an attempt to leap-frog the other candidates into relevance. She tried to make this a two person race. Schweikert was too happy to oblige. The Sheriff Joe endorsement is huge. Ask John Kavanagh about the nice bump Sheriff Joe gave him in the 2006 LD8 primary. Say what you will, Joe brings home the bacon in elections. In the end, SBS ran a very negative campaign that ticked a lot of people off, the extent of which is unknown. DS also ticked off a few folks which hurts him.
It really comes down to who will show up on Tuesday. CD5 is big with a lot of unknown GOP voters (ask JD and other 2006 LD11 victims).
It is still up for grabs. Down the home stretch, better give it all you got, after Tuesday there may be no political tomorrows.
Great-keep ripping each other apart like dogs and we will end up with Mitchell again,
Hey Shaun
I liked my thought better….
Lynn…
Agree to disagree???
….decided to roll in the mud w/ the pig. He has turned off a lot of voters that never were really behind him anyway. They saw the out of state $$ that was thrown his way (and subsequently burned) and thought that maybe he was the guy. But his problem is he didn’t have enough of a base to withstand the drop he took when he started to get dirty with SBS. It’s POL-101 to know that when you go negative on your opponent that not only do their numbers drop, but so do yours. David’s #’s dropped too low to overcome, especially with 4 other candidates that weren’t involved in the mud-slinging. On top of that 2 of those other candidates that DS and SBS decided to forget have very solid pro-life, pro-tax cut, records. And one of those, namely Laura Knaperek, is known as the Rep. that lead the charge for fiscal and social sanity in the AZHOR. She is the one that will win later today. She has the best voting record in Cd-5 and she has run the best grassroots campaign I have ever seen. I went by yesterday to pick-up yard signs and I saw around 50 volunteers at her HQ from college aged kids to baby boomers. All of whom were poised for victory and ready to do whatever job was needed to win.
Stand with me and vote for Laura Knaperek today!!!
….ran a positive and fact based campaign. I invite all of the CD-5 Republicans to vote for Laura Knaperek today and help her beat Harry Mitchell in November.
Royce Flora…
Your primary duty as Chair of LD8 is to leave an even playing field until after the primary. You DO NOT endorse a candidate until then. Royce, step down and let Travis do your job. He already does. Obviously, you’re more of an underhanded snake than David and have no regard for your office. Susan’s doing her job. You haven’t and never will. And please stop listening to that crank Littlefield.