Listen to Alice Lara’s latest video discussing why she is running for Healthcare District Board #5, and if you like what she has to say, consider attending her fundraiser tonight from 4-6pm at Copperstate Consulting.
Attend Alice Lara’s fundraiser tonight? Why should you?
September 26, 2008 By 4 Comments
Legal Opinion: Husband to Remain
September 25, 2008 By Leave a Comment
Sonoran Alliance received the following email today regarding the status of Maricopa County Chairman, Tom Husband.
I am in receipt of the legal opinion issued by our Legislative Council which addresses the issue of whether an elected county official’s term ends when they are no longer an elected precinct committeeman. The conclusion they reach is that a party county office does not become vacant if an officer is not reelected as a precinct committeeman at the primary election and their term runs to the statutory organizational meeting in January. The full opinion may be viewed at SeeingRedAZ but we’ve also reprinted the opinion below:
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL MEMO - September 24, 2008
TO: Senator Thayer Verschoor
FROM: Kenneth C. Behringer, General Counsel
RE: County Party Officer Vacancy (R-48-129)
BACKGROUND
The current Maricopa County Republican Party chairman was not reelected as a precinct committeeman at the primary election held this month.
QUESTION
Does the office of chairman become immediately vacant or may the current chairman serve until a replacement is selected through the normal process?
ANSWER
The fact that the current chairman was not reelected does not mean that the office of chairman is immediately vacant.
DISCUSSION
The statutes are not explicit on what happens when a party county officer is not reelected as a precinct committeeman, but consideration of the specific county committee statutes and the general vacancy provisions indicate that the officer continues in the position until the county committee meeting at which the county officers are selected.
The county committee is comprised of all the precinct committeemen of a party in a county. Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) section 16-821. The precinct committeemen are selected at the primary election. Id.The county committee may meet for the purpose of organizing no earlier than ten days after the last organizing meeting of the legislative districts in the counties. A.R.S. section 16-824. The district meetings must be no earlier than the second Saturday after the general election. A.R.S. section 16-823. Therefore, the statutes provide that precinct committeemen are elected in September, but county officers are not selected until the following December or January.
It appears that the term of the county officers goes from one organizational meeting to the following organizational meeting two years later. Officers must be selected at the organizational meeting, and there is no provision for selecting officers at a different meeting. Also, nothing in statute requires that a county officer’s term endsbefore the organizational meeting, whether if because an officer is not reelected as a precinct committeeman or for any other reason. Therefore, a party county officer doesnot lose the officer’s position before the county meeting, if the officer is not reelected as a precinct committeeman.
To conclude otherwise would mean that whenever a sitting county officer decided not to seek reelection as a precinct committeeman. a vacancy would be created in the office. This conclusion is contrary to the legislative policy imbued in the statutes. Under A.R.S. section 38-295, every officer must continue to discharge the duties of the office until a successor has qualified. While this does not extend the term for the officer, the provision is designed to prevent vacancies in any office. State v. Macias, 162 Ariz. 316 (App. 1989). The section evidences the legislature’s intent that public offices not be left open. An interpretation of the county officer statutes that would frequently create an automatic vacancy would go against this policy.
Had the legislature intended the county officer positions to become vacant if an officer were not reelected, it would have stated this removal requirement. The statutes clearly provide for vacancy of precinct committeeman positions on change in party or precinct in A.R.S. section 16-822, subsection D. However, as noted above, there is no vacancy requirement for a county officer if the officer is not reelected as a precinct committeeman.
This issue arose in part because there is an opinion letter circulating concerning a situation in Pima County regarding the appointment of a person to the state committee. The letter opined that the person was ineligible to serve on the committee. However, the letter is inapplicable to the current situation, because the person in Pima County had quit membership in the party for a short time. Therefore, the Pima situation fell within the vacancy requirement in A.R.S. section 16-822, subsection D.
CONCLUSION
A party county office does not become vacant if an officer is not reelected as aprecinct committeeman at the primary election.
Arpaio & Thomas Explain Not Seeking AZ Republic Editorial Endorsement
September 25, 2008 By 12 Comments
John McCain isn’t going to be getting the New York Times endorsement over Barack Obama. And we have a hunch that the Arizona Republic probably isn’t going to be touting our re-election campaigns either.
And that’s OK, because it would seriously confuse our supporters were we to seek the
Republic’s editorial endorsement, as candidates typically do.
This is why we took the unusual step of politely and respectfully declining the paper’s recent offer to solicit its support by appearing before its editorial board with our opponents.
After all, the Arizona Republic board has been one of the biggest voices against steps we have successfully taken to reduce Valley crime. Even the paper’s own lawyer has been opposing us outside of its own pages.
Crime reduction is not hyperbole on our part. It is a fact. Are we the only ones responsible for this improvement? Of course not. Police officers and deputy sheriffs on the front lines deserve most of the credit.
But we have taken new forceful steps that have made a difference. And unfortunately the Arizona Republic has systematically opposed many of them.
Most notably, they have opposed our joint efforts to crack down on illegal immigration. Many people once said local law enforcement officials couldn’t make a difference. We are proving otherwise with our hard-hitting, cutting-edge approach. Illegal immigration is down, even leading to significant self-deportation. Crime is down.
This is not a Republican, Independent or Democrat battle. This is everybody’s issue, except the Arizona Republic’s.
We have also been criticized by the paper for pursuing the death penalty, prosecuting illegal immigrants under the human-smuggling law and the employer-sanction law which cracks down on businesses knowingly hiring illegal immigrants.
In opposing our candidacies the Republic will likely cite issues other than tough-on-crime policies and achievements.
They will likely talk about the Phoenix New Times illegally publishing Sheriff Arpaio’s home address and our respective office’s conduct after the fact.
They will talk about an approach toward judges they thought was too tough in the aftermath of some judges refusing to implement the voter-approved Proposition 100. This measure instructed the criminal justice system to deny bail to illegal immigrants committing heinous crimes.
They will talk about our opponents in glowing terms while ignoring their own research which would alert the public to embarrassing, disgusting or way too soft on crime information about our opponents.
Are we perfect public servants? We are not. We make mistakes like everyone else and learn from them.
But we continue to do many more good things right than wrong. That’s why crime has dropped and bad guys are spending more time and longer times behind bars. So while the Arizona Republic may not like our policies, the state’s leading police and border patrol organizations do because they have endorsed our candidacies, as have voters from all political parties.
So as you contemplate the Republic’s commentary consider their editorial pages
have swung so far to the left that they will actually suggest changing out the County Sheriff and County Attorney for opponents favored by the attorneys of Valley criminals and open border activists, and at a time when we are starting to win more of the war on crime. Then again, the
New York Times didn’t endorse Mayor Giuliani despite his success cleaning up New York City either. The New York Times was out of touch. The Arizona Republic editorial board is out of touch.
Schweikert to Mitchell: “Return The Money, Harry!”
September 25, 2008 By Leave a Comment
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 25, 2008
Contact: Lauren C. Barnett
Mitchell Called On To Return Charlie Rangel’s $28,000 – House Ethics Committee Forming Investigative Panel
SCOTTSDALE, AZ – In response to news that the House Ethics Committee is forming an investigative panel into Rep. Charles B. Rangel’s (D-NY) tax scandal, David Schweikert is calling on Rep. Harry Mitchell to return Rangel’s campaign donations.
“Apparently, Charlie Rangel forgot to pay his taxes, but remembered to give Harry Mitchell $28,000” said spokeswoman Lauren C. Barnett.
“If Harry Mitchell truly believes in ethical reform, he should return the money. It’s never too late to do the right thing,” said David Schweikert
In 2006 and 2008, Rangel’s congressional committee[i] contributed a total of $8,000 to Harry Mitchell’s campaign. Rangel’s political action committee also contributed a sum of $20,000[ii] to the Mitchell campaign coffers.
Recently, Rep. Dave Loebsack (D-IA) returned his campaign contributions to Rangel.
Barnett continued, “It is troubling that Harry Mitchell voted 1 week ago to block a House ethics investigation and against removing Rangel from the powerful Ways and Means Committee.”[iii]
“The fact that Mitchell refuses to return the tainted money is further evidence Mitchell is incapable of reforming Washington. Money for his re-election is apparently more important than being an independent voice for the people of Arizona’s 5th Congressional District,” said Barnett.
Barnett concluded, “We need to elect true reformers, like David Schweikert, to Congress.”
As he did in the Arizona legislature, David Schweikert will push for real reform to restore integrity and honor to Congress.
RSVP now for first County Attorney debate – space is limited
September 25, 2008 By 2 Comments
The Men’s Anti-Violence Network (MAN), part of the Arizona Foundation for Women, is sponsoring an issue forum featuring Maricopa County Attorney candidates Andrew Thomas (R – incumbent), Tim Nelson (D), and Michael Kielsky (L).
Date: Wed., Oct. 1st
Time: 6:00-7:00 p.m.
Place: Viad Building – Arizona Room
1850 N. Central Ave.
RSVP: space is limited, so RSVP to jliggett@azfoundationforwomen.org
Yea Coconino GOP!
September 24, 2008 By 6 Comments
Now for some good news.
Liberal Democratic stronghold, Flagstaff, has a new kid in town. Coconino County Republicans have opened up an office! Here is the press release from Diana Arendt, President of the Flagstaff Republican Women:
For years, the city of Flagstaff and surrounding communities have been without a Republican Headquarters. Now, that has changed! Opening Saturday, September 28th, we now have headquarters for the next two months. It is located at 2101 N. 4th Street, just before you reach the ‘Lite Company’. Our suite is #202 and is located on the second floor. A sign is on the building, identifying us as the “Republican Headquarters”!
This has become possible with the hard work of Mary Ellen Hamilton, long time FRW member. Thank you, Mary Ellen!
We will need office supplies and financial donations to use this space until November 18th. Volunteers to staff the office will be key to our success.
A grand opening will be held on September 18th and you are invited!
Thank you for your support!
Diana Arendt, RN, MSN
President
Flagstaff Republican Women
How Bad Is It?
September 24, 2008 By 16 Comments
I watched the President’s speech tonight – all 12.5 minutes of it. It doesn’t sound good. I almost expected him to say that an asteroid was headed for planet earth and we are all doomed.
Nevertheless, scanning the headlines over the current economic crisis, I get this extreme sense that we’re not being told just how bad it really is. Here is a sample of those headlines:
“Buffett Buys Goldman Stake in `Economic Pearl Harbor’” - Bloomberg.com
“People should be more scared than mad, Paulson says” – Politico.com
“Jack Welch says U.S. faces ‘deep downturn’” – Reuters.com
“Bush Urges Quick Passage of Bailout Plan to Avert Recession” – FoxNews.com
The older I get, the more risk averse I get and that usually translates to my tendency to make pessimistic statements. It drives my wife crazy. So much to the point that she bought me one of those “Half-Full” T-shirts. Late last year I started using the term the coming “financial holocaust.” That really drove my wife crazy.
Now that the President has taken to the national airwaves and the Congress is basically heading into an emergency session and the headlines continue to pound out crisis headlines, you could say I’m more than a little pessimistic.
So I’m going to open this post up to our readers to see if anyone has anything positive to say or can at least give us another Y2K lesson on preparedness.
Sheriff Arpaio & Andrew Thomas fundraiser
September 24, 2008 By 1 Comment
PLEASE COME TO AN EVENING WITH
MARICOPA COUNTY SHERIFF
JOE ARPAIO
AND
MARICOPA COUNTY ATTORNEY
ANDREW THOMAS
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2008
6:00 – 8:00 P.M.
At the Home of Jeff and Stephanie Rice
6133 SAGE DRIVE.
PARADISE VALLEY, AZ
DINNER AND BEVERAGES
MAXIMUM CONTRIBUTIONS ARE $390 PER PERSON TO EACH CANDIDATE PER ELECTION CYCLE
PAID FOR BY ANDREW THOMAS FOR COUNTY ATTORNEY AND RE-ELECT JOE ARPAIO 2008
ANDREW THOMAS FOR COUNTY ATTORNEY
4757 E. GREENWAY RD., #103-233, PHOENIX, AZ 85032
RE-ELECT JOE ARPAIO 2008
10632 N. 71ST PL., SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85254
PLEASE RSVP TO JASON ROSE OR JIM SHARPE AT 480.423.1414 or jimsharpe@roseandallynpr.com or jrose@roseandallynpr.com.
Harry Mitchell’s Ethical Lapses
September 23, 2008 By 1 Comment
Harry Mitchell Watch has an excellent post on Mitchell’s claims to bring ethics to Congress. One of the things we didn’t realize is that Mitchell voted to give Democrat Charlie Rangel $2 Million dollars of our money so he could embellish himself in the form of a library, archive (complete with archivist) and fully furnished library for you guessed it, Charlie Rangel.
Even CBS News had a damning video on it.
Harry Mitchell Watch also points out that Charlie Rangel’s PAC gave Harry Mitchell $2500 less than a month before Mitchell voted on Rangel’s taxpayer-funded fiasco.
CD-5 Debate: Schweikert vs. Mitchell on Taxes & Economy
September 23, 2008 By 4 Comments
Sonoran Alliance has learned that the stage may be set for what will likely be the most lively debate amongst the two candidates vying for the Congressional 5 seat. We have preliminary word that the Arizona Chamber of Commerce may host the event. A date is currently pending. Here is the text of a press release issued by the Schweikert campaign:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 23, 2008
Contact: Lauren C. Barnett
Schweikert Challenges Mitchell to Debate Tax and Fiscal Issues
Scottsdale, AZ – Today, candidate for Congress David Schweikert challenges Harry Mitchell to a debate on tax and fiscal policy.
Instead of Harry Mitchell’s campaign staff sending hollow press releases twisting and grossly distorting David Schweikert’s tax policy, David knows the voters want real dialogue,” said Schweikert campaign spokeswoman Lauren C. Barnett.
David Schweikert stated, “America is facing incredibly serious financial challenges. Families are worried about losing their home, struggling to pay their bills and witnessing unprecedented bailouts by the Federal government. The voters deserve to have me and Rep. Mitchell debate the matters impacting America’s financial future.
“I challenge Congressman Mitchell to a public debate on tax and fiscal policy,” concluded Schweikert.
Sheriff Arpaio & Andrew Thomas endorse Alice Lara for Healthcare District Board
September 23, 2008 By 13 Comments
Stan Barnes and the team at
Copper State Consulting Group
invite you to meet and support two candidates for
The Maricopa County Special Health Care District Board of Directors
Maricopa Integrated Health System
ALICE LARA (District 5)
GREG PATTERSON (District 2)
Friday, September 26, 2008
4:00 to 6:00
You’re invited to stay afterwards
to watch the first presidential debate.
Copper State Consulting Group
3033 North Central Avenue, Suite 900
Phoenix, AZ 85012
[SE corner of Central and Earll]
If you are unable to attend, contributions can be mailed to:
Committee to Elect Alice Lara
Committee to Elect Greg Patterson
8809 South 13th Way 13358 East Del Timbre
Phoenix, AZ 85042 Scottsdale, AZ 85259
www.alicelara.com
Maximum contribution:
$390 per individual / $780 per couple
As the only conservative with an Hispanic name running in this nonpartisan race in South Phoenix, she could really use our support. The fundraiser is early enough in the evening that it is possible to attend it before any other election-watching parties.
Mitchell’s Macaroni
September 22, 2008 By Leave a Comment
There’s a post from Paul Giblin in the East Valley Tribune today in response to a press release issued by Harry Mitchell’s campaign. What’s strange about Giblin’s post is that he doesn’t really address the substance of the Mitchell campaign’s press release – probably because he knows that it’s false anyway.
Sonoran Alliance posted a press release by the Schweikert campaign earlier today in which the Schweikert campaign called Mitchell’s latest press release a desperate act of distortion of Schweikert’s tax policy. You can read the details of that press release in an earlier post.
Here’s where it gets strange as Paul Giblin rightly states.
Seth Scott, the campaign spokesman for Mitchell called David Schweikert a “perennial congressional candidate.” Politicos only use the word “perennial” when they’re talking about a candidate who has a perfect losing record when it comes to running for office. These types of candidates continue to run for office election after election but never seem to become an elected official. They are ”perennial candidates.” The classic example is Joe Sweeney who runs for Congress every two years.
Giblin then points out the so-called “perennial” characteristics of both Mitchell and Schweikert. He lists each year and office they’ve been elected to. (Mitchell is a career politician if there ever was one.) The title “perennial” does not really apply to either Schweikert nor Mitchell since they have run for different offices and have won seats.
So I have to agree with Giblin’s post that the word “perennial” was improperly used to describe David Schweikert. The Mitchell campaign must be getting desperate and frantic if the only thing they can come up with is a false negative connotation.
Maybe if they put a feather in their hat, they could call it a macaroni.
The true story on Fannie Mae.
September 22, 2008 By 1 Comment
Here is an excellent article on what happened at Fannie Mae and which party stood by as conditions for the current crisis were falling into place.
A Bridge Too Far?
September 22, 2008 By 8 Comments
There is little question that the 2006 elections left the Democrat Party feeling pretty cocky, particularly here in Arizona. A tidal wave, a “perfect storm” of events if you will, led to Democrat pickups and gains in districts where Democrats previously had no reason to be hopeful. While more cautious political operatives might have given credit to the events surrounding the election and the “macro” circumstances, local Democrats fell into the prideful trap of believing that it was entirely the result of policies and candidates. They felt that the people of Arizona finally “got it!” and chose Democrats to fill these offices because this center-right state had suddenly swung hard-left.
Such hubris is a dangerous thing for a party, especially because it encourages a party to select and run candidates that appeal even more deeply to its base, in this case, liberal voters. Emboldened by their success in 2006, AZ Democrats are now running a handful of ultra-liberal candidates, including LD26′s Cheryl Cage. They seem to ignore that this is a GOP-leaning district with a nine-point registration advantage that only barely elected a Democrat in one of the worst years for Republicans in history. And that Democrat, Charlene Pesquiera, at least had the sense to run as a moderate. Consider the following positions that Cage has taken on her Project Vote Smart survey:
Abortions should always be legal (Partial-birth abortion advocates likely cheer this, but how many partial-birth advocates are there in LD26?)
Increase every area of state spending except Emergency Preparedness and Welfare. Those she would like to maintain at current levels. (Is Cage aware that the state is facing a multi-billion dollar deficit? How does she plan to pay for increases across virtually every category?)
Increase taxes on cigarettes and alcohol and consider extending sales taxes to cover Internet sales (Oh, that’s how… Does she know how high she’s going to be raising these taxes to pay for her plans? Start smoking Arizona!)
Opposes state education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students (Who needs standards anyway? The important thing is that these kids start smoking, and soon!)
Include sexual orientation and gender identity in Arizona’s anti-discrimination laws. (Because nothing makes your local Disney store happier than having to employ a 6’3″ bearded cross-dresser as a front-door greeter!)
Increase the state’s minimum wage. (Sure, it went up this year and it is going up next year too. In fact, it now gets adjusted every year for inflation. But Cage wants it higher still. How high does she want it?)
Opposes increasing production of traditional domestic energy sources and opposes funding for improvements to Arizona’s power generating and transmission facilities. (She does however, support more funding for open space preservation, so there you go, more desert, less light.)
Require a license for gun possession (Really? Because I thought that Democrats had learned that this issue was a sure loser for them?)
Legalize physician assisted suicide (At least she’s consistent and wants to get them coming and going.)
Wants Arizona to recognize same-sex civil unions AND same-sex marriage AND require the state to provide state-level spousal rights to same-sex couples.
There is more on the survey, like state-run guaranteed medical care for all citizens, but you have to ask yourself, what are the Democrats thinking, running such an extremely liberal candidate in a GOP-leaning district? Do they really believe that 2006 was a mandate for the loony left? Or have they overreached, as so many folks do, and nominated an extreme candidate who will be unable to deliver victory in November?
Schweikert: Mitchell Getting Desperate
September 22, 2008 By 4 Comments
For Immediate Release: September 22, 2008
Contact: Lauren C. Barnett
Schweikert: Mitchell’s Tax Attack Reeks of Desperation
Scottsdale, AZ – Today, David Schweikert for Congress spokeswoman Lauren C. Barnett said, “Harry Mitchell is becoming nervous and attempting to hoodwink voters instead of having a conversation about America’s broken tax system. Mitchell has resorted to grossly distorting David Schweikert’s tax policy.”
In the strongest terms, David Schweikert does not support eliminating the home mortgage tax deduction. Schweikert stated, “That assertion is totally and completely false. I support the home mortgage tax deduction and understand the importance of real tax relief. Voters have made that abundantly clear – I’ve heard that message – apparently, Harry has not. That is why I recently proposed adding a home mortgage tax credit to help homeowners and stimulate our housing market,” he added.
Unlike Harry Mitchell, David Schweikert has experience managing billions of dollars as the Maricopa County Treasurer and supports comprehensive tax reform.
Barnett added, “Perhaps we find ourselves in the current financial crisis because people like Harry Mitchell are satisfied with status quo. In his patently false press release, Mitchell implied America’s tax code doesn’t need reform. How out-of-touch is Harry Mitchell to think our tax system doesn’t need reform? Do Mitchell and Charlie Rangel share a tax adviser?” Barnett asked.
“This doesn’t distract voters from the fact that Harry Mitchell is a serial tax hiker and in 2005, even voted against property tax relief,” Barnett concluded.
On his tax policy, Schweikert said, “We need to seriously study and investigate options to reform our tax system and provide tax relief to the American family. In Congress, I will work to make all existing tax cuts permanent. I will push to reduce capital gains taxes so that people are encouraged to save and invest. I will work to eliminate the incredibly unfair alternative minimum tax that is hitting far too many middle class families in our district. In addition, I will work hard to eliminate the death tax in order to save small family businesses, farms and ranches.”
Gabby Spikes Ethics Inquiry
September 22, 2008 By 1 Comment
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 22, 2008
Contact: Paula Maxwell
Gabby Votes to Spike Inquiry on Rangel’s Tax Dodge, Pockets Campaign Cash: Pima County GOP calls on Gabby to give back tainted dough
TUCSON, Ariz. – Gabby Giffords last week voted to quash an inquiry into disgraced New York Congressman Charlie Rangel’s ethical lapses, which include his failure to pay taxes on rental income from a vacation getaway in the Dominican Republic. (ABC News Report)
Gabby has also been the beneficiary of Rangel’s desire to see his liberal colleague retain her seat in Arizona’s 8th Congressional District. In February of this year, Giffords received $4,000 from Rangel’s campaign committee. [fec.gov]
“Giffords’ refusal to investigate Charlie Rangel’s failure to pay his taxes while he’s in charge of the committee that writes tax policy, makes a mockery of her party’s claims that they’re presiding over an ethical Congress,” Pima County Republican Party Chair Judi White said. “Giffords should do the right thing and give back the tainted Rangel dough.”
Obama ad attacks Gianna Jessen
September 22, 2008 By 4 Comments
Abortion survivor Gianna Jessen appeared in an ad about Barack Obama’s record from Illinois. Obama now has an ad criticizing Jessen’s ad. Is this the topic Obama really wants to discuss just days before early voting begins? Visit BornAliveTruth.org for more information.
Here is Gianna Jessen telling her story on Hannity and Colmes.
