City of Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton Expands Efforts for LGBT Agenda
An article appears in the Arizona Republic this morning describing Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton’s latest drive to expand city authority in the area of ”sexual orientation” discrimination.
Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton’s aides and a group of attorneys are working to draft ordinances that could outlaw discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender residents.
The aides and attorneys believe that if rewritten, city laws would also give victims of such discrimination in restaurants and other businesses an opportunity to file complaints with the city’s Equal Opportunity Department for investigation — an option they currently do not have.
The effort comes as the Sheraton Phoenix Downtown Hotel near Van Buren and Third streets tries to recover from threats of boycott by the gay community over a decision by the manager of the hotel’s District American Kitchen & Wine Bar to expel a lesbian couple in late February.
The hotel is owned by the city and managed under the Sheraton brand through a contract with Starwood Hotels and Resorts.
Despite the incident at the hotel restaurant, the city’s Equal Opportunity Department, tasked with investigating discrimination complaints by workers or customers at businesses, has received no complaints of discrimination over sexual orientation or gender identity at downtown hotels.
The department cannot investigate or respond to such complaints anyway because the city has not outlawed discrimination against lesbians, gays, bisexuals or transgenders. Such protections exist for the disabled and for ethnic minorities in areas such as employment, housing and public accommodations like hotels and restaurants.
Stanton’s policy adviser, Brendan Mahoney is leading the mayor’s charge to address any gaps in the city’s human-rights protections.
He has convened a group of attorneys — some from gay-rights organizations — who are analyzing the city code to determine how the laws could be amended to ensure equal rights for anyone, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.
Mahoney said that, while the incident at the hotel restaurant “certainly brought the issue to the forefront,” the timing of the city effort is coincidental.
“This issue was on the mayor’s agenda,” he said.
“This issue was on the mayor’s agenda,” he said. (read entire article)
A few items for discussion here:
Should this even be considered an issue, let alone, a high priority issue for the City of Phoenix and Mayor Stanton? Is this even a serious problem for the City of Phoenix or will it be perceived as an effort to promote LGBT issues?
Was the Arizona Republic article fair or even necessary?
Any sound minded critical thinking person can argue the position that any property or asset the city owns is controlled by the City Council. (He who pays the piper, calls the tune.) But should this effort extend to non-governmental stakeholders or private property owners?
Would these efforts extend to segments of the faith-based community such as Evangelical churches, orthodox Jewish or Muslim mosques? For example, would these faith-based communities be prohibited from using city parking or other assets unless they adopt policies that codify sexual orientation into their bylaws?
Don’t get me wrong. I am sensitive to this issue (family members) and actually prefer that the government stay entirely out of this arena, but is this issue forcing itself to center stage unnecessarily? Is the LGBT community overextending their efforts on this? It’s no secret that Equality Arizona invested itself into the Phoenix Mayor’s election in 2011. Was that on purpose in order to use the City of Phoenix as a platform to push its agenda?
Would love to hear everyone’s thoughts on this. Please be respectful.
Marco Rubio Endorses Mitt Romney
Update on Arizona’s 9th Congressional District
It’s been awhile since I’ve written some original content so I’m gonna throw a quick overview on Arizona’s CD-9 – the crescent-shaped district located in Phoenix.
So who’s in?
On the Democrat side, Kyrsten Sinema, Andrei Cherny and David Schapira have all announced. Schapira won’t get very far. He’s got the excitement of Bradypus variegatus (everybody’s scrambling to Wikipedia) and no money raising skills. On the contrary, Kyrsten has made the contacts and trips to DC having rubbed elbows with DNC mukety-mucks and Obamatons. Andrei “I-can’t-wait-to-get-the-hell-outa-here” Cherny recently abandoned his chairmanship at the Arizona Democratic Party taking his mediocre fundraising skills with him. This leaves the ADP in a frantic scramble to replace him from among a rapidly diminishing talent pool. My assessment: Cherny and Sinema battle for the heart of Arizona leftists while it remains on life support. Close call in the August Primary but I’d have to guess Sinema eeks out a win. Cherny heads back to Califormia.
Now let’s talk about Republicans. Republicans actually have some great talent to put up. Some have ooodles of money, some are damn hard workers and others are simply looking for a career change to make a bigger difference. First to enter the race was Travis Grantham, a Gilbert resident, businessman and Air National Guard pilot. Grantham originally staked out a shot east of the new CD-9 but reoriented his trajectory not wanting to get caught in the crossfire of Adams vs. Salmon. Smart move but Grantham doesn’t live in the new CD-9 (although there’s nothing illegal with that.) He has a chance and is sitting on almost $120K.
Next to file is my personal favorite (sorry gents, I always gravitate to the lady candidates), Wendy Rogers. Wendy actually lives in the district and has done so with her family for many years. She’s a retired USAF Lieutenant Colonel who works harder than anyone I know when it comes to anything she sets her heart on. Wendy has a loyal following of supporters not only here in Arizona but across the country who can be counted on to raise the money needed in a lickety-split second for this race. Wendy is a perfect match for the district.
In the wings waiting are Steve Moak, Vernon Parker, Gary Pierce and Martin Sepulveda. Maricopa County Supervisor Don Stapley has also been mentioned but with such high negatives and an already announced re-election campaign underway, his political days are numbered.
Steve Moak ran in 2010 finishing 2nd in a 10-way primary. He’s likely got the cash but many question if he’s far more risk averse this time hesitant to charge up his 2012 campaign coffers.
Paradise Valley councilman Vernon Parker is also eyeing the race. Parker also ran in the crowded 10-way 2010 primary finishing 4th place. Parker is also seeking re-election to the Paradise Valley Council leaving many to question his motivations in seeking any public office. He is expected to decide any day.
Arizona Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce also wants in on the action but he’s just settled into another term on the ACC. He’d have to step down under Arizona’s resign to run law given his term expires in 2014. Pierce has obviously run statewide but financed his ACC race using “Clean Elections” money. His ability to raise money for a federal campaign is probably one of the biggest factors he would have to weigh.
That leaves former Chandler City Councilman Martin Sepulveda as the last candidate considering. Sepulveda is a fiery US Navy combat veteran who have a great deal of respect for (we even had our own little political brush-up during the 2010 US Senate primary. What is it with us US Navy guys?) Given a sizeable number of Republicans reside in this portion of the district, Sepulveda would be competitive. He also served as a surrogate for our senior senator during the 2010 Republican primary. That kind of help could come in handy with the fundraising if the door is open.
That’s my assessment. I really can’t say who I’d like to see win the Republican primary but I do know that this will be a very competitive race with plenty of political drama. I can’t wait for the field to be set.
Alcohol and Substance Abuse Prevention and Early Intervention Health Initiative files for 2012 Ballot
This was just filed with the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office. Supporters of this ballot initiative would like to see it appear on the 2012 November ballot:
ALCOHOL AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND EARLY INTERVENTION HEALTH INITIATIVE, proposes an alcohol tax of 25 cents on a gallon of spirituous liquor, and one dollar each on a gallon of beer and wine, the equivalent of less than ten cents per drink. Proceeds will fund prevention and early intervention services for any entity that affiliates with a community based prevention coalition. The initiative establishes an eighteen member commission which sets policy. Only the thirteen members, including three tribal representatives are voting members. The non voting members are directors or deputy directors of the Arizona’s governmental departments.
Should this pass it would require the taxpayers of Arizona to create another new tax on a “sin” and get the State of Arizona involved and investing in keeping yet another source of revenue.
One would think that the solution to alcohol and substance abuse prevention would be parents, family, friends, neighbors and the faith-based community and perhaps an ounce of discipline.
My Legislative Wishlist
I can’t recall ever putting out a legislature/legislative wishlist on Sonoran Alliance so this is a first. I know that legislators read Sonoran Alliance so I’ll announce these to the public and see where these go:
- Require that every Arizona County Recorder provides the latest voter registration to the Secretary of State’s Office on a weekly basis. This will allow the political parties to have fresh data in order to improve get out the vote campaigns.
- Change Arizona’s campaign finance laws to require a reporting period deadline to occur 10 days before early ballots are issued. This will allow the public to see who is giving to which campaigns and how that money is being spent. This is an issue of transparency. If the media and new media is doing its job, it will report this information to the public. This will include municipal and recall elections.
- Refer to the 2012 ballot a repeal of Proposition 106. This created the Arizona “Independent” Redistricting Commission in 2000 which gave us the 2011 fiasco. I would rather have our jurisdictional lines drawn by 90 elected accountable office holders than 5 unelected unaccountable office holders. It’s absolutely more “democratic.”
- If a repeal of Proposition cannot take place, than refer to the ballot an amendment to Proposition 106 that requires the AIRC to draft the lines of EVERY political jurisdiction in the State of Arizona effective the year after passage. This would include school board districts, city council districts, you name it.
- Finally, I call upon the House Ethics Committee to immediately begin ethics hearings on State Representative Daniel Patterson. Patterson has been in legal trouble for some time (and we have the documents to prove it!) Even members of his own party would like him to resign. As we learned from the recent hearings in the Senate, any member of the public can file a complaint with the House Ethics Committee.
Now feel free to discuss and even add your own suggestions!
Jeff Flake in Iowa, Campaigning for Mitt Romney
2012 Predictions Anyone?
Happy New Years!
It’s that time again for political predictions!
This year, I’m self-limiting myself on predictions due to my unique position and the likelihood that whatever I say will probably anger several of my Republican friends.
Instead, I’m opening up predictions to our readers.
If you’d like to submit your safe predictions or an out-on-a-limb prediction and have it appear in the body of this post (with your name), email it to me at sonoranalliance@gmail.com. Otherwise, feel free to post it in the comments.
For starters, I’ll throw a few questions out to get things going:
- Who will win the US Senate race? Who will win the Republican and Democrat nominations?
- Who will win the Arizona Presidential Preference Election on February 28th?
- Who will win each of the Congressional Districts?
- Will Republicans retain a supermajority in both Houses of the Legislature?
- Will Sheriff Joe Arpaio be re-elected?
- Will Arizona media outlets survive another year?
- What will be the biggest political story for 2012?
- What will be the biggest political shock of 2012?
Have fun gesticulating, speculating, prognosticating and pontificating!
NYT: Democrat Ed Pastor Makes the Elite Capitol Hill Millionaire’s Club
Over the last 20 years I’ve worked or volunteered on several campaigns (Don Shooter, Jim Buster, Jonathan Barnert and Janet Contreras) to unseat Democrat Ed Pastor. One of the message that has been used is that Ed Pastor does not represent the values of the people who reside in his district. Although he was born in a small mining town, he’s adopted the left’s position on policy and class warfare. In essence, he’s become an elitist.
Now comes confirmation that what we’ve been preaching as populist pronouncements all these years is actually true.
Today’s article in The New York Times backs that assertion up.
According to writer Eric Lichtblau:
Today, Mr. Pastor, a miner’s son and a former high school teacher, is a member of a not-so-exclusive club: Capitol Hill millionaires. That group has grown in recent years to include nearly half of all members of Congress — 250 in all — and the wealth gap between lawmakers and their constituents appears to be growing quickly, even as Congress debates unemployment benefits, possible cuts in food stamps and a “millionaire’s tax.”
Mr. Pastor buys a Powerball lottery ticket every weekend and says he does not consider himself rich. Indeed, within the halls of Congress, where the median net worth is $913,000 and climbing, he is not. He is a rank-and-file millionaire. But compared with the country at large, where the median net worth is $100,000 and has dropped significantly since 2004, he and most of his fellow lawmakers are true aristocrats.
Largely insulated from the country’s economic downturn since 2008, members of Congress — many of them among the “1 percenters” denounced by Occupy Wall Street protesters — have gotten much richer even as most of the country has become much poorer in the last six years, according to an analysis by The New York Times based on data from the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit research group.
We decided to pull Pastor’s personal financial disclosure reports from Legistorm, a DC-based non-partisan data resource entity, to see exactly what the congressman from Arizona’s 4th congressional district claimed on his 2011 disclosures. This included earned income, assets and unearned income, liabilities and travel payments and reimbursements. You can view them as well: [2011 Disclosure] [2011_Disclosure Amended].
We also took a look at information revealed by Open Secrets which shows the political side of Ed Pastor’s congressional lifestyle. It’s not hard to see that Ed Pastor has taken a lot of money from unions and trial lawyers.
How will the so-called 99% react to this new revelation? You won’t see them protesting outside his office or shouting him down at his next public appearance (if he ever has one). No, all you’ll hear from the Occupy folks is the sound of silent sanction as Mr. Pastor readies for his next campaign for congress.
Merry Christmas!
And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Cæsar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.
(And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)
And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.
And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judæa, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:)
To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.
And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered.
And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.
And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.
And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.
And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known unto us.
And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger.
And when they had seen it, they made known abroad the saying which was told them concerning this child.
And all they that heard it wondered at those things which were told them by the shepherds.
But Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart.
And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things that they had heard and seen, as it was told unto them.
~ Luke 2:1-20 (KJV)
On behalf of all our writers, I want to wish you all a very Merry Christmas!
GOP Iowa Voters Sending a Message Using Ron Paul?
I love posing these questions on Sonoran Alliance because some readers fail to process the point of the post and get themselves in a tizzy.
Here’s the question (and I know our Ron Paul readers are going to love this):
The latest poll out of Iowa shows Ron Paul now leading the pack 23% to Romney at 20% and Gingrich at 14% (link). Are the voters of Iowa trying to send a message to the other nominees? What is that message? And if the premise is true nationally, when will they pull back from this game of political chicken and give Mitt Romney the official nod?

Or, will all this lead to a brokered convention?
Finally, does anyone doubt that the official GOP ticket will be Romney/Rubio?
Stephen Viramontes for 2nd Vice Chair, Arizona Republican Party
Letter of intent to run for 2nd Vice Chair of the Arizona Republican Party
As a husband, father and entrepreneur, I’m concerned for my posterity as they inherit this great nation. Many in my generation have failed to pick-up the baton of American Exceptionalism and move it forward. I feel it is my duty to leave this Country and State a better position than was left for me. Like many of you, I am not willing to sit on the sideline to watch ‘hope and change’ reverse our original constitutional course. We are at a pivotal point in our Nation and State. I’ve decided to run for the 2nd Vice-Chairman position to promote our Party platform and secure a victory in 2012.
My goals as 2nd Vice Chairman will be to:
- Improve the unity of our great Party
- Get Conservatives elected at all levels of Government
- Define roles of state officers to add accountability and transparency to their duties
- Increase Party efficiency and effectiveness
- Advance the Party brand amongst the business community
My experience consists of, but not limited to:
- Precinct and State Committeeman in LD22
- Successful business owner and entrepreneur
- Fund-raised more than a million dollars for organizations, candidates and causes
- Employed & volunteered on city, state and federal campaigns to get Republicans elected
- Served in many leadership positions of non-profit boards and civic service groups
I look forward to discussing my plans on how I will work to accomplish the goals I have set. As always, your input and ideas are welcomed and appreciated. I respectfully ask for your support and vote at the Annual State Republican Committeemen Mandatory Meeting on January 28, 2012.
For Prosperity, (Stephen) Viramontes
Ron Paul’s Big Dog!
Guest Opinion: Winner of Arizona Senate Recall: Immigration Law Not the Issue
Very interesting perspective on the election of Jerry Lewis in the recent recall election. The article, appearing in Human Events, was written by Political Editor, John Gizzi, who explains that liberals are all wrong about the conclusion of Lewis’ win.
There are plenty of new revelations in the article that I certainly missed during the campaign leading up to the election. In fact, Mr. Lewis’ comments in this article completely validate my earlier points that the recall was overwhelmingly about style over substance. Given Lewis’ comments in this article, I have to wonder if Randy Parraz and fellow recallers now regret their decision to help Jerry Lewis get elected?
Here is that article:
Since the nationally watched recall election last month that resulted in the ouster of the architect of Arizona’s controversial illegal immigration law, the liberal media has been claiming a major victory. Because former State Senate President Russell Pearce was a conservative Republican, goes the crowing from the Left, his defeat was a blow to the Right and to SB 1070, the Pearce-crafted measure signed into law by Republican Gov. Jan Brewer last year that permits police to ask for immigration papers if they have “reasonable suspicion” someone is in the U.S. illegally.
But that analysis and conclusion over what happened in Pearce’s Mesa district Nov. 8 is pure moonshine.
Veteran state legislator Pearce was ousted by a fellow conservative stalwart named Jerry Lewis. When we got done repeating all the quips about his being mistaken for the world-famous comedian, and how he met up with the former Arizona state treasurer named Dean Martin (“Arizona’s own Martin and Lewis team”), the 55-year-old Lewis told HUMAN EVENTS last week about his own conservative philosophy, and what led him to finally run in the race after initially saying, “No way.”
“When [Pearce] was exploring a bid for Congress for the seat of Jeff Flake [who is running for the U.S. Senate], a number of people urged me to run for his state senate district,” said Lewis, a nine-year stake president in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and superintendent of the Sequoia Choice Arizona Distance Learning charter school. “I said, ‘No, thank you,’ that I wasn’t a politician and wasn’t interested in running.”
Earlier this year, Pearce opted against a congressional race. But a movement known as Citizens for a Better Arizona secured thousands of signatures from voters, surpassing 25% of those who voted in the last election, as Arizona law requires for a recall, and thus placed question of his continued tenure in the senate on the November ballot.
Regarding the recall movement, Lewis told us: “I never supported it and would not sign the petition. I felt that whatever people thought of the incumbent, he had not violated any laws, and you knew where he stood.”
Lewis decided to run, he told us, “Because I saw too much time and money spent by politicians attacking one another, and too little attacking issues voters cared about.” He added that his much-voiced distaste for career politicians finally convinced him “to step up to the plate and do something about them.” Pearce, a former deputy sheriff, has served in the state house and senate, and was once state motor vehicles commissioner.
In campaigning for Pearce’s seat, Lewis emphasized the themes of the economy and employment, calling for lower taxes—the legislature’s vote to reduce taxes on corporations was “a step in the right direction,” he said—and eliminating regulations that keep businesses from creating jobs in the state. In addition, the longtime charter school leader called for greater choice for parents in education.
Did he oppose the immigration law that is Pearce’s signature cause? Lewis replied without hesitation: “No, not at all. [SB 1070] certainly raised the specter of awareness on this issue among voters, and it was a proper response to the problem, considering that no one else—no one at the federal or state level—is doing anything about the problem.”
But, he added, “I still believe it wasn’t a balanced approach. Before taking a step like this, I would have said, ‘Secure the borders first.’ And then our congressional delegation has to force the issue and engage the federal government in stopping illegal immigration.”
Lewis said that as much as voters agreed with 1070, many also felt that Pearce was focusing too much on illegal immigration and not enough on jobs and the economy. Last month, Lewis unseated Pearce with 54% of the vote. When he was sworn in days ago, Lewis formally declined to participate in the pension program for state legislators, saying that voters should not be burdened with paying for his retirement.
The inevitable final question from us was whether, with such a recognizable and well-liked name, would Jerry Lewis consider a bid for higher office?
“No way,” he shot back. “I’m not a career politician, remember?”
UPDATED: Newt Gingrich on Sean Hannity – Full Interview
Update: The full interview of Newt Gingrich on Sean Hannity is now available for viewing via Newt’s Youtube channel:
Two great clips from Sean Hannity’s interview with former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. Newt addresses several hot questions everyone is asking as part of the national vetting process. Here is clip one from that interview:
Rasmussen also released a new poll today showing Newt Gingrich leading Barack Obama by two points, 45-43%. Read the poll here.
















