Sal DiCiccio: How You Got Duped

SalDiCiccio

Vote YES 487/Stop Pension Abuse 

How (fire/police death and disability claims) became the most important issue in the 487 campaign-and how it’s not true. 

I am writing to show you how you were manipulated by the politicians (mayor & council), the opponents of pension reform and by the media covering this important issue. And, mostly because you need this information before you vote.

The issue of death/disability benefits being cut off are just not true and the media knew this was not true when they wrote their stories.

Here is the technique used to dupe you:

History and Technique

During my re-election campaign the unions filed a lawsuit in court against me, they then got the Media to write about the lawsuit. The unions then did mailers and TV to the public on the their lawsuit using the articles in the newspaper as the foundation.  Yes, the unions file their own lawsuit, get the media to write about it, then use the stories written in the paper in mailers and on TV. Even though the judge quickly threw out the case, the stories were written and used as fact in subsequent mailers and on TV.

Fast forward to The Pension reform (487) campaign:

The unions get their friends on the council to change the wording on the ballot description to add the words “Police Officer and Firefighter,” they then create the death and disability connection, then they get the media to write about it and create a story, then they do mailers and TV based on the confusion that they created using the published stories as the foundation. The unions rig the ballot description, get the media to write about it, then use the stories written in the paper in mailers and TV. The media knew this was not true.

The media can claim ignorance the first time, but a second time?

Hats off to the anti-pension reform campaign for being able to successfully use the media to make an issue that was never an issue as the highlight of the campaign.  Unfortunately, it creates confusion and suppresses voter turnout. The unions want to make sure you don’t vote.

And the media? Well, the same people that complain about low turnout are the same ones who knowingly help write the stories depressing turnout.

Fact: Death/disability claims are a LIFE INSURANCE plan and not a pension.  They’re not even close to being part of this initiative. 487 covers only the City of Phoenix pension plan. The police/fire are covered by the state pension plan not by the city plan. Phoenix cannot opt out of that plan. Police and Fire are clearly excluded.

I thought long and hard whether to write this column, but I believe strongly every vote matters.  Any delay in getting out the reality behind the politics would be doing you and disservice. The only way we will win is if the public gets the truth, please pass this on to your email list!

I am sorry that was to done to you, but you are the last ray of hope if we are going to change and reform our pension system.  Our city needs your help and we need you to vote.  Please don’t let them win by not voting.

Vote YES 487

Sal DiCiccio: Pension Reform Matters – Vote YES on 487

MillionaireFirefighter

$1.1 Million: Cash Payout to one Firefighter at Retirement and then STARTED his annual Pension of $149,420-for life. He retired at 54.

$955,000: Cash Payout for another Firefighter. He then started a $130,000 pension for life. He retired at 53.

See the list of Firefighter retirees below:

Average Cash payouts at Retirement: $679,672

Average Yearly Pension: $111,296

Average Age at Retirement: 53

24 Firefighters cashed out over $16 million in retirement and then started their pensions.

Every single city employee (Everyone) gets both a Cash Payout AND a Pension.

Vote YES 487/Stop Pension Abuse

We all love our firefighters and respect them for the hard work they give our city. You’re probably wondering why they’re coming in droves to our neighborhoods handing out misleading information on pension reform? Especially since they’re clearly excluded from the pension reform proposal. Why, because they’re concerned that they may be next for reform.

The numbers from above are from Budget and Research and from the state of Arizona Retirement plan (PSPRS).

Why does pension reform matter? Without reform you will see more:

New and higher taxes: Phoenix passed a new water tax on you to pay for  pension spiking.

Cuts in Service: Phoenix is short over 500 police, cuts were made to seniors, libraries, seniors and children.

The government unions are doing all they can to undermine your vote. They want to keep everything…the way it is. Their union and their spokesman are purposely using strong arm tactics to attack people who support pension reform.

Here are the numbers:

PensionNumbers

What does 487 do?

* It immediately stops pension spiking. This alone would save over $19 million per year
* Fixes the broken pension system saving over $400 million.
* Allows current employees to keep everything they have earned.
* Makes new employees get the same retirement benefits you get. Moving all newemployees to a 401(K).
*Police and Fire are clearly excluded from the proposal.

Vote YES 487

Yes487

My best to you and your family,

Sal DiCiccio
Phoenix City Councilman

Scott Smith Jeopardizes A Governor Brewer Endorsement

Those who attended the latest gubernatorial debate Tuesday night probably caught this damning revelation by former Mesa Mayor Scott Smith regarding the performance of the current chief executive, Jan Brewer. In this stunning revelation Mayor Scott Smith says he doesn’t believe that state government has really been reformed under Governor Brewer’s leadership.

YouTube Preview Image

At a time when each of the candidates are hoping for a coveted endorsement from Governor Brewer, comments like this deserve to put an endorsement out of play and out of reach for Mayor Smith.

 

Phoenix Earns High Marks From NFIB

City judged one of five best in nation for welcoming small business

In an e-newsletter to its more than 330,000 members nationwide today, including 7,000 in Arizona, the National Federation of Independent Business, America’s voice of small business, ranked Phoenix as one of the top five cities in the country “Opening Their Doors to Small Business.”

“Phoenix’s rebounding economy, favorable climate and entrepreneurial culture attracts many transplanted residents,” said the NFIB article. “Two years ago, the Phoenix City Council implemented reforms that shifted a significant portion of city permitting and inspection functions to the private sector and created 24-hour turnarounds for projects such as city and building permits that used to take four to six months. With quicker turnarounds, doing business in Phoenix has become faster and more convenient.”

Noted Farrell Quinlan, NFIB’s Arizona state director, “The majority of people starting small businesses and prospering here were born somewhere else. That kind of new blood and vitality means opportunities in Phoenix aren’t encumbered by an old-boys network.”

In a news release issued by Mayor Greg Stanton, he said, “This ranking is a testament to the actions we’re taking to lift small and local businesses. We’re moving in a new economic direction – one that creates real opportunity for business owners and entrepreneurs.”

sal diciccio council chambers

Phoenix City Councilman Sal DiCiccio

City Councilman Sal DiCiccio added, “This puts Phoenix in a position to compete in the global economy, making us faster, smarter and better than our competitor cities. Getting 24-hour permitting and the ability to submit plans online allows businesses to open today, not months from now. The Mayor and Council recognized that it grows our economy faster when we help businesses take off quickly.”

DiCiccio, a longtime NFIB member, led the 125-member Ad Hoc Development Task Force that produced the reform recommendations for how to streamline the city’s permit process.

Phoenix has also been helped by a better state climate, Quinlan pointed out. “The state has been a leader in low tax rates and regulatory reform. For instance, Arizona simplifies the process state agencies must follow when creating rules and regulations they impose on Arizona businesses. That leadership ensures government serves as a facilitator of economic dynamism rather than a frustrator of job creation.”

Other cities making the top five list were Caspar, Wyoming; Jackson, Mississippi; Las Vegas, Nevada; and Orlando, Florida.

For more than 70 years, the National Federation of Independent Business has been the Voice of Small Business, taking the message from Main Street to the halls of Congress and all 50 state legislatures. NFIB annually surveys its members on state and federal issues vital to their survival as America’s economic engine and biggest creator of jobs. NFIB’s educational mission is to remind policymakers that small businesses are not smaller versions of bigger businesses; they have very different challenges and priorities.

Martha McSally: Who does Ron Barber Really Stand With?

Martha McSally

TUCSON – Martha McSally, Congressional candidate for Arizona’s Second District, released the following statement today after the Obama Administration announced new energy regulations on states. The regulations are expected to increase energy prices on families and businesses while eliminating jobs across the country.

“At a time when both parties should be working together on bipartisan efforts to empower small businesses and get people back to work, President Obama appears to be pushing a hyper-partisan agenda to please his campaign donors over the needs of hardworking families. Plain and simple, this is a betrayal of middle class families who will be paying more in energy costs and will see many well-paying jobs disappear. What’s more, the poor and struggling who have the least ability to afford these higher costs will be hardest hit. I call on Congressman Barber to join bipartisan opposition to these harmful regulations and stand up for families of the Second District against his party’s job-destroying agenda.”

On Monday, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced draft rules that would require 30% reductions in CO2 emissions across the country over the next 15 years. Under the proposed rules, Arizona would be forced to cut emissions by 52%, the second-highest mandate for any state in the country.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce estimated last week the new regulations would cost the U.S. economy $50 billion and eliminate 224,000 jobs. The EPA also has admitted the new regulations will increase energy costs for American consumers.

LegisTraitors Drunk with Power Demand Increase in Deficit Spending

LegisTraitors(picture from Arizona Capitol Times)

Drunk with power, or simply dazed from visions of hundreds of thousands of campaign dollars dancing in their heads, Jeremy Duda from the Arizona Capitol Times, captures Heather Carter, Ethan Orr, Kate Brophy McGee, Doug Coleman, Rob Robson, and Jeff Dial leaving the House before the gavel to make their case to spend-increase-expand with money we lowly taxpayers have not even made yet.

Geez Louise Republicans! The budget you passed in the Senate only has a $400 million structural deficit. That is just not enough!  The Coalition of Corruption including these six and all the Democrats (again) want bigger government – more agencies – increased spending – and to expand on the expansion of last session.  If we are going to borrow money to pass a democrat budget then let’s go all the way!

No money into the rainy day fund. No money to buy back our buildings. No money to decrease our debt. Actually they are demanding that money is spent that does not exist.  In their power-induced-drunken-state the LegisTraitors are blind to the plight of Arizona taxpayers preferring to prioritize the interests of the crony capitalists who bankroll their campaign committees.

The amendments and increased spending requested by the Coalition of Corruption has been scored by the non-partisan JBLC to give Arizona a $1 Billion deficit by 2017. This is “recurring spending” meaning the spending will occur every single year.  

So another day and no budget for Arizona.  The taxpayers, small businessmen, and Principled Conservatives will have to wait and see who is offering what to whom before we will know what is being shoved down our throats this year.  Will there be a fundraiser with a gift-in-kind equal to the amount it takes to educate one child for half a year in a Charter School?

Will we see a new traitor or will the traitors have a traitor? And how much does a LegisTraitor vote go for?

The vote is tied at 30-30. It will be an interesting day.

Stay tuned.

Christine Bauserman
Chair, Alliance of Principled Conservatives

Phoenix to comply with court order, stop funding union activities with taxpayer monies

Great news for Phoenix taxpayers, Councilman Sal DiCiccio and the rule of law!

City of Phoenix Announces Today it Will Stop Using taxpayer monies to fund All Union Activities. Will Comply with Court Ruling

Last week, it was announced that the city of Phoenix will be forced to stop funding Phoenix Law Enforcement Association’s (PLEA) union activities, Today, the City’s administration has decided to apply the ruling to all City of Phoenix unions. (View Court Decision and City Manager’s memo below) 

“This is big news for the taxpayers of Phoenix. Instead of using taxpayers’ money to fund union activities, we can use this money on vital City services. This money should be used to end domestic violence, end human trafficking, and put more police on the street,” said Councilman Sal DiCiccio.

The following quote is from page 8 of the court ruling released on January 29: “This evidence supports the conclusion that the City Council abused their discretion in approving the release time at issue.” This was approved on a 5-4 vote with Mayor Stanton being the swing vote.

It is disappointing that the Mayor and Council were complicit in funding union activities which in turn supported their candidates and then, once those candidates were elected, continued to give millions of taxpayer dollars back to the unions. It was a vicious circle which has caused the large budget deficit we have seen this year.

Mayor Stanton was the swing vote to use taxpayer monies to fund union activity, the swing vote to keep pension spiking and presented a budget supporting the food tax (which was immediately proven to be false).

“It’s time for the Mayor and those council members to protect taxpayers and not the government unions,” said DiCiccio.

-30-

To view the court decision: http://phoenix.gov/webcms/groups/internet/@inter/@pcc/@dist6/documents/web_content/d6statementattachmentjan2914.pdf

To view the City Manager’s memo: http://phoenix.gov/webcms/groups/internet/@inter/@pcc/@dist6/documents/web_content/d6citymgrmemo.pdf

Mark Levin, Kelli Ward, Article V, and the Mt. Vernon Conference

LevinWardOn Mark Levin’s January 13 radio show, Levin spoke briefly to Dr. Kelli Ward, Arizona State Senator from LD5. Along with Arizona State Rep. Kelly Townsend (LD16), Ward was part of the Dec 7, 2013 Mt. Vernon Conference where the stage was set for a Convention of States (COS) to propose amendments to the US Constitution.

Convention of States and the Compact for America (CFA) project seek to use Article V of the US Constitution, as intended by the Framers, to rein in our runaway federal government. While they are separately run projects, COS and CFA are complementary and implicitly allied, as discussed here.

It is still a surprise to most Americans to learn that our own state legislatures can amend the Constitution without the permission or approval of Congress, the President, or the Supreme Court. Details may be found in the links at the bottom of this article.

COS, CFA, and other Article V initiatives got a big boost with the August 13 publication of Mark Levin’s book, The Liberty AmendmentsIt is one of the few books I read cover-to-cover last year, and I recommend it highly.

Godspeed to Arizona’s two “Kellies”, Ward and Townsend, and all other state legislators across our country who are awakening to the power of Article V to restore our republic.

See/hear Levin and Ward, and read the rest of the article at this link.

Representative Brenda Barton issues statement on recent Facebook post

As many are aware, some recent comments of mine on Facebook have touched a sensitive nerve with many people.  Additionally, many have simply taken my posting out of its contextual environment.  Had I chosen my words differently, or had the President offered to use the power of his office to lessen or mute the public impacts of this impasse in Washington, we might not be having this discussion.

Let me clarify that I never used the word or said that President Obama was “Hitler.”   That was a creative assumption of the Capitol Times reporter, who also reported that I referred to our government as a “Constitutional Democracy.”  I would never use that description because, we are in fact – through law and history – a Constitutional Republic.

What I did suggest, rather directly, was that the National Park Service enforcement personnel (referring to them as “thugs” for their reported behavior) were simply following orders of “their leader” – and I used the German phrase for emphasis, Der Fuhrer.  I am referencing the Presidents behavior as indicated by his actions. The Merriam-Webster New Collegiate Dictionary defines “Fuhrer” as “(2) a leader exercising tyrannical authority.”

Consider that the Affordable Care Act  (ACA) originated in the U.S. Senate.  The U.S. Constitution directly states that laws establishing new revenues must originate in the House of Representatives, so the House closest to the people can decide if they want to pay for the new spending.  The way the ACA was established was in direct contradiction to the Constitution.

President Obama has unilaterally changed the ACA several times, through waivers and exemptions, without returning it to Congress.  A president changing established law unilaterally?  Is that Constitutional or “exercising tyrannical authority”?

Consider the reports of the U.S. Park Service Supervisor in Washington, who spoke to the media and said that the Park Service was told to “make things as uncomfortable as possible.”  I ask you, who has the authority to give such a directive?

Please remember, that someone in the Administration directed the IRS to seek out and harass conservative groups and groups identifying themselves with the Tea Party.  Is that not “tyrannical authority” and did it not seem that IRS office personnel obeyed enthusiastically? What President of the people orders the NSA to spy on his citizens and sends the IRS against his enemies?  Is this not behavior in accord with tyrannical authority?

Arresting veterans for visiting their war memorials? Prohibiting Catholic priests from volunteering to perform the Mass for our Catholic men and women in uniform?  Closing businesses on federally leased land?  When did volunteering to minister to our armed forces become a bad thing in America?  How would you classify that; Constitutional authority or Tyrannical authority?

And tell me, how many times in eight years did the Progressive Left and the media depict President Bush with a funny little black mustache, or worse? Yet there was no indignant outrage shown by those who are today outraged at my choice of words. Actions speak louder than words; President Obama’s actions are what I have to base my observation of “tyrannical authority” on.

Nancy Pelosi has called conservatives “terrorists” and “legislative arsonists.” If I had simply said “the leader” in my Facebook post, would we be having this community discussion today?  My purpose was to bring to the public’s attention the actions and behaviors of our president and his administration since this government shut-down began.
For the record, I was suggesting that President Obama was behaving as a tyrant.  Didn’t the Founders of our country call their king a tyrant and worse?

The Declaration of Independence asserts that a government derives its powers and authority from the consent of the governed, and that governments are instituted among peoples to protect the people’s inherent rights endowed by their Creator. President Obama’s actions contradict these fundamental and foundational cornerstones of our Constitutional Republic.

Andrew Thomas receives standing ovations before and after speech

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona

Sunday, September 22, 2013

 

Leading candidate for Arizona governor discusses out-of-control activist judiciary
Text of speech given to the East Valley Action Alliance Pro-Life Conference on September 21, 2013 

Deserve Victory in 2014

By Andrew Thomas

How do we win in the 2014 elections? In the past, we have defined winning as electing a large crop of candidates who describe themselves as pro-life.

But we now know this not victory, properly defined. True victory means an end to abortion. In political terms, winning entails electing candidates who will move us decisively towards that goal. Given the stakes, and to paraphrase General Douglas MacArthur, there is no substitute for such victory.

Roe v. Wade was handed down forty years ago. The time has come to ask whether we are truly any closer to victory, properly defined, now than we were four decades ago. If not, what must we do differently?

The hard truth is this: We are not winning. This is not for lack of effort, as everyone here well knows. We have tried various strategies over the decades. But the statistics and reality tell a very sobering story that we must honestly confront.

Hitting a Wall

Since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, the number of abortions in the United States reached its peak of 1.6 million a year in 1990. Ten years later, that number had leveled off slightly to 1.3 million. Since then, for the last 13 years, that figure basically has not budged. Last year, there were just over 1.2 million abortions.

This number is the bottom line, and is now essentially static. Regardless of how many pro-life leaders we elect, the pro-life laws they pass, or the pro-life lawsuits they file, nothing has lowered that number. The goal of ending abortion, in turn, has become ever more elusive. In short, we have hit a wall.

Why are we not winning? The answer is simple and obvious for those who have eyes to see. Liberal elites control the judiciary. They have captured it lock, stock and barrel. Every time we pass a law or file a lawsuit to advance the pro-life cause, the ACLU and their allies simply go to court and enlist activist judges to block us.

It was not supposed to be this way. The founders of our nation intended for the judiciary to be, as Alexander Hamilton stated in the Federalist Papers, the “least dangerous” branch of government. Thomas Jefferson warned that a judiciary of unchecked power would grow into tyranny, an American oligarchy. Over the years, unelected judges have sought to make good on that prediction. They have amassed absolute power over our government and society.

Unelected judges can throw out any law they do not like. They do so typically without any regard to the text or original meaning of the Constitution. They do this for the purpose of advancing a liberal worldview that is popular among lawyers and elites but contrary to the will of the people.

Three recent examples in Arizona show us what we are up against. This year, the Arizona Legislature passed two important pro-life bills. One ended Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood. The other banned abortions after 20 weeks of gestation. Our leaders should be commended for these actions.

However, within weeks after passage of this legislation, federal judges struck down both measures. Today, neither is the law of the land.

Then there is the fate of Arizona’s parental-consent measure. Arizona first passed a law requiring parental consent for abortions for minors in 1989. Federal courts overturned the law. Ten years later, I lobbied for passage of a new version of this law as a lobbyist for Arizona Right to Life. Finally, after two decades of litigation, the parental-consent law was allowed to go into effect. That means we won, right?

No, we did not. Recently, Arizona news outlets have reported that in three out of four cases, judges simply allow minors to bypass the consent of their parents and obtain the abortions anyhow. In other words, this law is still being circumvented by activist judges. Even when we manage to win a case after decades of litigation before a hostile liberal judiciary, we lose in the end.

Consider also the cultural climate in which these events are unfolding. For fifty years, unelected judges have driven organized religion from public institutions while permitting every conceivable vulgarity in their place. We avert our eyes even as things worsen every year. Marriage is crumbling around us. Genuine fatherhood is mocked by Hollywood and becoming a relic of the past. Even the most dedicated parents can no longer preserve the innocence of their children amidst a constant barrage of smut and filth from the airwaves. Is it any wonder that more than one out of four teenage American girls, and almost half of African-American teenage girls, are infected with a sexually transmitted disease? Our children are crying out to us for help. Their cries are an indictment of the activist judges and cultural elites who have engendered this moral crisis.

Liberals realized decades ago that if they controlled the courts, they controlled the government. They systematically went about taking over the law schools, where conservative students are hissed and heckled if they dare speak out in class. They took over the bar associations and lawyer class, from which judges are drawn. The very few graduates of law schools who describe themselves as conservative and pro-life must keep their views to themselves, or they risk being professionally marginalized.

Judges have forbidden lawyers, at the risk of losing their law licenses, from publicly criticizing them or the judiciary. This gag order conveniently silences their most effective critics.

Kangaroos in Kansas

For decades, we’ve been told to campaign for Republican presidential candidates because they will appoint “strict constructionist” judges to the federal bench. What have we gained from this? On virtually every major case involving a significant cultural issue, the judges we fight to confirm flip to the other side. Though many of these judges surely tell themselves they would go to the gallows for their beliefs, the truth is that few of them are willing even to endure professional shunning by their self-righteous liberal colleagues. And so they defect, and we lose again and again.

We’ve been told to elect law-enforcement leaders who will enforce the legislation, pro-life and otherwise, we do manage to pass. But consider what happens to those officials who try.

As the elected Attorney General of Kansas, Phill Kline sought to investigate alleged crimes occurring in that state’s abortion clinics. In retaliation, the liberals who dominate the attorney disciplinary board of Kansas ginned up accusations of professional misconduct against him. They put him through a show trial they controlled, a process denounced by national conservative observers as a kangaroo court. Ultimately, a state judicial panel voted to suspend Kline indefinitely from the practice of law, which is disbarment by another name. Kline already has forfeited his law license by not paying his annual dues. Not content with that outcome, the disciplinary board now has urged formal disbarment by the Kansas Supreme Court; a decision is pending but obviously will not be positive for Kline. Sound familiar?

How do we begin to reform a legal profession and judiciary that are so openly hostile to conservatives and the pro-life cause in particular? Forty years after Roe, it is clear we cannot. These institutions are rotten and cannot be reformed from within. I believe I speak with some authority on the matter.

The only path to genuine reform is for the people to take direct control of these institutions and make judges accountable once again. In Arizona, voters must be given meaningful information so they can make informed decisions about whether to retain judges whose names appear on the ballot. Nationally, federal judges must be stripped of their jurisdiction over select areas of policy where they habitually abuse their powers. Nothing else will work. Be advised these will be very hard fights. The political and cultural left is without moral compass, has many powerful allies, and plays to win.

Our federal and state constitutions already authorize us to take such actions. We must find the courage to do so, so that we may start prevailing in this very difficult but most noble fight.

Jefferson’s Omen

If we fail, we will lose not only on the pro-life front. We will be forced to concede that Jefferson’s omen has proven true. We will have replaced the British crown with black-robed American oligarchs, swapping one unelected tyranny for another. Our democratic experiment will have failed. We cannot let this happen.

For attempting such changes, we will be savaged by the liberal media and legal establishment. We will be scorned and browbeaten in a manner familiar to the first Christians and anyone else throughout history who has advocated significant social reforms. But we must try. We can no longer accept repeated defeats in the culture wars simply because of reluctance to take on the liberal judiciary and their allies. Roe v. Wade was born in the courts, and it is there where it must be slain.

It is time for us to start taking ground again.

During the Second World War, the British put up posters throughout London featuring Prime Minister Winston Churchill flashing his familiar “V for victory” gesture. The slogan on the poster was: Deserve Victory.

We should follow the same standard. That starts with recognizing, in this next election cycle, what true victory requires of us all.

Thank you and God bless you.