Rep Kelly Townsend Releases Open Email to District PC’s

Sonoran Alliance obtained a copy of an email that is currently circulating among Maricopa County Republican Precinct Committeemen. The email is a personal and heartfelt defense and revelation of the difficulty she has had working with the President of the State Senate, Andy Biggs.

Sonoran Alliance has redacted certain personal information from the email.

================

It is with a heavy heart that I write this email to you this morning.  There is so much I could say to you but I will choose to keep everything to just facts to keep it as short as possible. If there is anything you need clarification on, please send me a message and I can expound on the fact in question.
Last night, Andy Biggs was a guest speaker at the LD meeting. Only a handful of you were there because most were home watching the convention and acceptance speech.  However, there were enough people in attendance that what was said about me by Mr. Biggs, and the chairman’s subsequent reaction, need to be addressed.  I was accused of “threatening Mr. Bigg’s family” and Dennis Brimhall, a supporter of Andy Biggs, refused to allow me to defend myself and threatened to have me forcibly removed.
At issue:
I recently was asked to go on Sunday Square off and describe why I regretted my vote to limit TANF to one year of lifetime eligibility for needy families.  To truly explain it, I would need a two hour show and I only had minutes.  What I did say was that I regret it and last year’s decision was in part because of how I had been “conditioned” by Andy Biggs to not oppose him or I would face the consequences.  Here is why:
  •     In 2013, I went on the radio to discuss the child bride situation in Colorado City, where the police would return a 12 year old runaway to her abuser rather than hold that abuser accountable.  I was asked on radio why people turn a blind eye to the situation, which I answered that although I couldn’t turn a blind I, I pledged to do everything I could to fight pedophilia wherever I could.  I hung up and cried due to the disturbing content of the conversation, and meanwhile the radio host subsequently began to bring up Andy Bigg’s blocking of a Michelle Ugenti bill that would have allowed for sanctioning of that police department. I knew that he might think I was participating in that part of the conversation, so I immediately began to reach out to him to explain I was only talking about child brides.  He didn’t answer so I left a phone message.  After no personal communication, I began asking for a meeting at work.  I sent several emails, as did my assistant, none of which were returned.  The rest of my bills died that session.  I finally asked him if he would speak to me at the end of session, and he agreed and admitted he was angry at me and said I should have never gone on the radio to discuss the issue in the first place.  I told him that I had thick skin and if there was something I did wrong, as Senate President he should sit me down and talk about it, not stonewall me.
  • Although it was very upsetting that Andy Biggs did not allow Rep. Ugenti’s bill to go forward, I had hoped that he would offer an alternative solution to the police scandal in Colorado City.  The following year I saw no such solution.  Instead, all of my bills that went out of the House were not assigned to committee for a great length of time.  I had to call the Speaker-Pro-tem and tell him I was “off the budget” meaning I would vote no on any budget bill until after my bills had been assigned.  I had learned from the previous year that the “stall to kill” tactic could be used to delay the bill from getting through the process in time before the budget was complete and we closed session.  We were in budget negotiations and would close session any day and my bills had yet to be assigned.  I knew at that point I was being punished once again. I wasn’t sure if it was because I spoke out against pedophilia or if this time it was to punish me for my Convention of States bill that he didn’t like.  He claimed last night to only have blocked 5 of my 60 bills.  Although that may be the hard fact, the sad fact is I had to resort to counter tactics each subsequent year to avoid being punished again.  Something I never thought I would have to do within my own party, with someone who was once my #1 political hero.
  • Later that year, his [REDACTED] began sending me Facebook messages asking for money over the course of 6 months, along with asking for advice about a suspected pregnancy.  I am a doula and we were Facebook friends so I suppose [REDACTED] thought I would be helpful.  It was Christmastime and I didn’t have extra funds.  I was asked for food money, for money to keep [REDACTED] phone on, money for various other needs.  I was confused because I thought [REDACTED] had won the publisher’s clearing house, and I also thought he believed that family should help the needy, not the government.  I was dismayed when [REDACTED] told me [REDACTED] had been on food stamps for two years because he wouldn’t help [REDACTED].  Not that I judged [REDACTED] for that, but because he would often scoff at people for “drinking from the public trough” as he always put it.
  • I began to see an incredible level of hypocrisy from a man who was punishing me for wanting to stop pedophiles.  I decided it was time to send him a text and tell him that it was inappropriate for his [REDACTED] to be asking me for money and that it should be he who was taking care of his pregnant [REDACTED]. He returned the email telling me to stay out of it.  Soon thereafter, I received a new message from his [REDACTED] excited that he was buying [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] new [REDACTED] a house.  Relieved, I agreed to see the photo of it.  I was shocked to find a photo of a garden shed with a porch on it.  No running water, one room. [REDACTED] was asking me if it was legal to put it on her mother-in-law’s back yard without a permit and I advised [REDACTED] that as a pregnant mom, she should be in a house with running water.
  • At this point, I was horrified and didn’t know what to think.  I stopped corresponding with [REDACTED] because I knew it would only lead to disaster, which it did.  Shortly thereafter we had to vote on the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF).  I was so appalled that there was the argument that families and church should be the ones taking care of their own, not government and all the while I was being asked by this person’s [REDACTED] to support [REDACTED] when he was the millionaire.  It was almost too much to bear at this point.  I took a long time deciding how to vote, and I chose to vote yes on his bill as a Conservative.  But it wasn’t without tears, it wasn’t without feeling horrible and full of questions about rhetoric that really isn’t meaningful when you don’t put your money where your mouth is.  And yes, I partly chose to vote yes because I didn’t want all my hard work going down the drain again next year due to the stall and kill tactic.
There is so much more I could tell you folks, but I will leave it at this to explain to you that I never once threatened his family.  I said that I would bring this to light because it was important for voters to know that things aren’t always as they seem.  As someone who has had to work with hundreds of molested mothers in childbirth and watch the anguish they go through as they deal with their past during that most vulnerable time, as someone who has had this issue strike too close to home, it has become impossible for me to remain quiet about these issues.  I have been told to keep my mouth shut and just take the high road.  Folks, this is too serious.  I was accused of many things last night, and our chairman refused to allow me to defend myself and was threatened.
I am angry.  I am angry at him for allowing the problem in Colorado City to continue, and I am angry that Rep. Ugenti and myself have suffered the consequences ever since for speaking out.  I am about the truth, and at this point, because Mr. Biggs brought it up at the LD meeting and I was not allowed to defend myself, I must send you this most unsavory email.  I have been quiet for four years.  That is long enough.  For the sake of sexually abused men and women everywhere, I tell you the truth this morning, and let the chips fall where they may.
Should you desire confirmation of any of this, I do have the screenshots of the Facebook confirmation. 
Brokenhearted and mad as heck,
Kelly Townsend

Has Andy Biggs Become A Globalist?

By East Valley Evan

Andy Biggs supported Ron Paul for President in 2008. His wife, Cindy, even donated to Paul’s campaign in 2008. He identified himself as an anti-establishment conservative but something changed. Andy Biggs was put into leadership and political power changed him. He started to get comfortable with lobbyists and the political establishment. He became cozy with interest groups like the Payday Loan industry and he opposed reforms to the lobbying process, such as bans on gifts to legislator’s.

To see how far Biggs has come, look at the compromises he’s already making in his run for congress.

Biggs supports the Export-Import Bank.

This bank is the pet project of the political elites and those with a globalist agenda. Biggs will tout his opposition to bringing money back to citizens in Arizona from the Feds, but has no problem spending tax dollars on a federal government bank to fund defense contractors, and businesses with large lobbying interests.

I think every conservative in CD-5 should know who Andy Biggs really is.

Here is what Andy Biggs said during the East Valley Chambers of Commerce Alliance debate when asked by Arizona Capitol Times reporter, Jim Small, if he supports renewal of the ExIM Bank:

 

The Thin Blue Line Between Gary Kiehne and Paul Babeu

Political analysts see Arizona’s CD-1 primary race tightening with rancher Gary Kiehne quickly closing in on Paul Babeu.

Kiehne has self-funded his current and former campaigns with over $750,000 of his own money. With so much of his personal wealth at stake, Kiehne began attacking Babeu last week.

Early Ballots will hit mailboxes on August 3 with the bulk of the votes taking place before Primary Election Day.

Pundits expect Babeu to fire back with both barrels. Why? Kiehne is highly vulnerable – especially now – because of his 2014 gaffe comparing Arizona law enforcement to Nazi SS agents. Not a winsome remark to have made considering law enforcement personnel are literally being attacked across the country.

If Babeu is to maintain his lead in the race, watch for him to remind voters that Keihne crossed the thin blue line when he showed callous disrespect toward the law enforcement community in 2014.

Andy Biggs Crony Capitalist Supports Export-Import Bank

By East Valley Evan

If you look up the definition of corporate cronyism in the dictionary, the Export-Import Bank will be its prime case study. Although the Ex-Im Bank was created to finance and bolster America’s exports, the taxpayer funded bank has not only not improved exports but has been by expert accounts a financial disaster.

In fact, the only group that has benefited is well connected global elites, many of which are foreign corporations with deep Washington, D.C. connections.

During the East Valley Chambers of Commerce Alliance debate, former Arizona Senator President Andy Biggs enthusiastically supported the re authorization and creation of the Ex-Im bank. Despite the Bank’s terrible financial record, Andy Biggs had no problem supporting an inefficient subsidized institution that benefits the few at the expense of the many.

Ex-Im Bank is an example of the corruption in Washington. Although clearly a fraud, well connected financiers and subsidized loan recipients have heaped money and influence on Congress to continue the authorization of the Bank’s corporate welfare gravy-train.

Academics and experts have criticized the bank for becoming nothing more than a welfare bank for globally connected elites. As experts have said:

“An increasing body of evidence shows that the Ex-Im Bank provides subsidized financing to big businesses at the expense of smaller businesses and taxpayers while doing little to promote exports, create jobs, or improve competitiveness of US firms. Removing this source of government-granted privilege can only help US exporters.”

This great video explains why it is such a huge welfare failure.

As a reminder, in 1986 the Ex-Im Bank was embroiled in a controversy for funneling money to communist Angola. Almost a year later, the Ex-Im Bank losses were so staggering that it had to receive an Obama-esque bailout out by Congress.

As a reminder, the Ex-Im Bank does not improve our American exports.

C3-Total-Jobs-Export-Value-large

 

Although there are not too many conservative free-market litmus tests left in the world, the Export-Import Bank is a shining example of cronyism at its worst.

If we cannot trust Andy Biggs to oppose something so obviously corrupt as the Ex-Im Bank, how can we trust him to rein in spending in Washington?

Guest Opinion: Recreational marijuana? The price is too high

Seth Leibsohn

Seth Leibsohn

Advocates say we need to regulate pot like alcohol in Arizona, but their measure doesn’t even do that.

If insanity is repeatedly doing the same thing and expecting different results, no word better describes the legalization of marijuana for recreational use in Arizona.

Colorado and Washington, the first states to do this, have seen increases in teen use of marijuana, traffic fatalities and emergency room visits (including of toddlers) — all tied to marijuana. In Denver, home of most of the pot shops, more than one in three 11th- and 12th-graders are now regular marijuana users, an increase of 20.5 percent from two years ago, according to the latest Colorado youth survey.

Big protections for pot industry

Sheila Polk

Sheila Polk

Arizona should expect similar results, especially since this 20-page initiative is chock full of protectionism for the marijuana industry. Written by out-of-state lobbyists and Arizona marijuana-business owners, it creates two new government agencies, including a seven-member commission with three members mandated to come from the marijuana industry so they can “regulate” themselves.

This initiative gives current medical-marijuana dispensaries a virtual monopoly on retail stores and cultivation. This is not simple legalization, but increased government protecting special interests to the detriment of everyone else.

The initiative would legalize hashish as well, opening the door to high-potency marijuana candies. The marijuana of the 1970s had potency levels of less than 1 percent. Colorado’s marijuana edibles have potency levels of 60 percent.

Stiffer penalties for alcohol than pot

The proponents’ claim that this initiative regulates marijuana like alcohol is disingenuous. The alcohol industry doesn’t dream of being treated as lightly as this initiative would treat marijuana. At every opportunity to advance public safety, the initiative protects marijuana use instead:

  • Using marijuana under the proposed initiative becomes a legal right. Someone who shows up for work drunk can be disciplined or fired based on an alcohol test. But under this initiative, showing up for work impaired by marijuana would be shielded from discipline until after the commission of an act of negligence or malpractice.
  • Any driver with a blood alcohol content over 0.08 percent is legally drunk. The Arizona law would prohibit a THC limit from ever being set.
  • Penalties for a minor using a fake ID to buy marijuana would be far lower than for his friend who uses a fake ID to buy alcohol. Same for someone selling marijuana to a minor using a fake ID.

The experiment in Washington and Colorado shows how disastrous this proposal is.

  • Fatal accidents involving drivers who recently used marijuana more than doubled in Washington in the year after legalization.
  • The rate of people going to Colorado emergency rooms with marijuana-related symptoms rose 44 percent from 2012 to 2014.
  • Employers there report having to hire out of state for a sober workforce.

No amount of cash can justify this

Just as in Arizona, marijuana’s apologists in Colorado and Washington said they wanted to keep marijuana away from children. It didn’t work out that way there and it won’t be different here.

And this is why that matters: Marijuana is “addicting, has adverse effects upon the adolescent brain, is a risk for both cardio-respiratory disease and testicular cancer, and is associated with both psychiatric illness and negative social outcomes,” according to the American College of Pediatricians.

At what cost? According to the Arizona legislative budget staff, expected revenue from legalizing marijuana could put $30 million into our education system, barely 0.33 percent of what Arizona now spends.

Now balance that minimal amount against the costs of treatment, tragic loss of life from traffic fatalities, workplace accidents, or the lost potential of young brains harmed by marijuana. No amount of money can justify that.

This law would contribute nothing positive to Arizona. Instead it exacts a tremendous cost, all to benefit a handful of marijuana-industry insiders. Arizonans do not need this and will not be able to afford it. The price is too high.

Seth Leibsohn chairs Arizonans for Responsible Drug Policy. Sheila Polk is the Yavapai County Attorney and vice chair of ARDP. Email them at info@ardp.org.

Arizona Catholic Conference: Bishops’ Statement Opposing the Legalization of Recreational Marijuana

Arizona Catholic Conference
ARIZONA CATHOLIC CONFERENCE BISHOPS’ STATEMENT OPPOSING THE LEGALIZATION OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA

The Bishops of the Arizona Catholic Conference oppose the campaign to legalize the recreational use of marijuana in Arizona because it is harmful to both children and families in Arizona.

Legalizing the recreational use of marijuana sends a message to children and young people that drug use is socially and morally acceptable. As people of faith, we must speak out against this effort and the damaging effects its passage would have on the children and families of Arizona.

Studies have shown that adolescents who use marijuana have significant differences in brain structure and cognitive functioning compared to those who do not use marijuana and experience up to an eight-point drop in IQ. Furthermore, based on what happened in just two years after Colorado legalized marijuana, it is estimated that if Arizona passes this measure, tens of thousands of additional 8th graders here will smoke marijuana for the first time.

Marijuana-related traffic accidents and other problems are also likely to dramatically increase if recreational marijuana use is legalized. In Colorado for example, marijuana-related traffic deaths dramatically increased after recreational marijuana was legalized. Additionally, Colorado witnessed similar dramatic increases in hospitalizations and emergency room visits related to marijuana usage after recreational use was legalized.

In states that have legalized marijuana, there has also been an increase in the use of harder drugs like cocaine and heroin since marijuana was legalized, which only further increased societal costs.

For the reasons mentioned above, and others, it is anticipated that legalizing the recreational use of marijuana in Arizona will lead to more abuse by teens, more emergency room visits, more traffic deaths, and more societal costs. Accordingly, due to the detrimental effect it would have on children, families, and all of society, we strongly oppose this dangerous proposal.

Most Rev. Eduardo A. Nevares
Auxiliary Bishop of Phoenix

Most Rev. Thomas J. Olmsted
Bishop of Phoenix

Most Rev. Gerald F. Kicanas
Bishop of Tucson

Most Rev. James S. Wall
Bishop of Gallup

What some Arizonas are saying about legalizing Marijuana

Arizonans for Responsible Drug Policy

What They Are Saying

Legalizing recreational marijuana would be detrimental to Arizonans’ lifestyle, safety and productivity. Four states and the District of Columbia have already legalized the drug and are seeing disastrous repercussions in their youth, work places and communities. Read below to see what experts, Arizonans and those already effected by legal marijuana have to say.

Linda ValdezArizona Republic Reporter Linda Valdez
“Arizona doesn’t have to release the cat now. We can wait and see how things play out in Colorado and other states that are trying the legalization experiment.”

The Arizona Republic | June 21

Congressman Matt SalmonMatt Salmon
“I am against this initiative legalizing marijuana in Arizona,” said Congressman Matt Salmon. “At a time when government should be shrinking and we should be having less government in our lives, the last thing I want to see is one more initiative that creates other levels of government.”

ARDP.org | June 20

Seth LeibsohnARDP Chairman Seth Leibsohn
“Leave it to the marijuana industry to take a holiday of joy and family bonding to promote the expanded sale and use of a drug better known by medical and scientific research to be the opposite of those very things. We are just now learning about increased traffic fatalities due to marijuana impaired drivers in states that have legalized marijuana for social and recreational use. We are just now learning about more and more childhood hospitalizations due to marijuana ingestion by our youth due to marijuana candies and edibles.”

ARDP.org | June 16

Roy BinghamHead of Pot-Industry Tracking Firm BDS Analytics Roy Bingham*
On an initiative to package marijuana with warnings that marijuana carries a risk of “permanent loss of brain abilities”:

“The initiative could devastate Colorado’s fastest-growing industry.”

CBS Denver | June 16

APS spokesman Jim McDonald
“Our concern emanates from the employment law language in the proposal, especially considering the public safety aspects involved in supplying reliable electric service to APS customers,” said McDonald. “The initiative simply does not support the kind of workplace required to operate the electric grid, make repairs to the system after a monsoon storm or operate the nation’s largest nuclear power plant.”

Phoenix New Times | June 14

===================

  • Roy Bingham is not a resident of Arizona.

Frank Schmuck: Fly Your Flag And Show Your Patriotism In The Face of Terrorism

Frank SchmuckISIS now admits responsibility for the massacre in Orlando, Florida. A Radical Islamic Terrorist did this.  He could have used a sword.  He chose to use a gun.  A terrorist used fertilizer in Oklahoma City. Radical Islamic Terrorists used box cutters and airplanes in New York City, Pennsylvania and the Pentagon.  Banning implements is not the answer.

Americans need to be able to defend themselves, not have radicalized terrorists or the mentally unstable hold them hostage.  When governments make gun free zones the criminal does NOT suffer, the law-abiding citizen suffers.

ISIS does not and will not conform to a well-regulated militia. Hard working Americans can and will.

John Stuart Mill spoke this centuries ago. “War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing is worth a war, is worse. . . . A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.”

War is in America – New York City, San Bernardino, and now Orlando. Who’s next? Let’s stand up and defend this great nation and ALL classes of people who live here against radicalism. Don’t let “political correctness” cause the loss of life again.  Speak up. This act of terror awoke an American sleeping giant spirit. Let us not forget freedom isn’t free. When you exercise your right to vote think about those who have experience with defending your freedoms. Without safety, rules don’t matter. This enemy doesn’t play by the same rules we do. Be vigilant. Be strong. Protect one another.

Today is Flag Day. Hang your flag proudly to show your patriotism.

Frank Schmuck, Captain
Persian Gulf War Veteran
Conservative Republican Candidate
AZ State Senate LD18

Arizona Free Enterprise Club: Minimum Wage Initiative a Ploy to Unionize Workers

Free Enterprise Club

Reposted from The Arizona Free Enterprise Club.

Currently there is a massive effort underway to get several “California-style” initiatives on the ballot in November. The Club encourages anyone approached on the street by one of these petition carriers to “decline to sign.” One of the initiatives likely to get the signatures necessary to qualify jacks up the minimum wage and mandates minimum state-wide paid sick time.

Specifically, the measure increases Arizona’s minimum wage from the current $8.05, to $10 starting January 1st, 2017 – and tops out at a whopping $12 an hour in 2020, then defaulting back to increases based upon the cost of living index. Additionally, if passed, it would mandate businesses with more than 15 employees provide 40 hours of paid sick time and 24 hours of annual paid sick time for businesses with less than 15 employees.

This voter protected act would have a devastating effect on Arizona’s economy. Minimum wage schemes set an arbitrary floor on every industry, every business, and every job – and divorces wages from the actual economic value a position creates. As a result, minimum wages do not heed any more buying power for the people they purport to help, but instead increase costs and therefore create an eventual pressure to increase prices. Mandatory paid sick leave is another invention of the left which seeks to create policies in a vacuum outside any economic realities.

However the real intent of these “worker welfare” movements is more and more obvious. The campaign “Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families” is being pushed by the union-backed organization LUCHA (Living United for Change in Arizona) who since 2013 has advocated the “Fight for $15” for fast food workers and other out-of-state union groups. The battles are for minimum wage and paid sick leave; the war is unionization of the total workforce. This is evidenced by the fact that this very initiative exempts workers under a collective bargaining agreement. In other words, we have hit a new level of hypocrisy. If this was about creating the workers’ paradise, and not about incentivizing unionization, there would be no exceptions.

As if this all wasn’t damaging enough, the initiative has another kicker, which allows cities and towns to pass more generous wage and benefit mandates. With cities such as Tempe, Flagstaff, Phoenix, and Tucson – Arizona can expect to have a patchwork of employment laws – making doing business across city borders an arduous endeavor.

Arizonans should be wary this election season. Union groups and leftist interests are out in full force – trying to make the Grand Canyon State look more like an increasingly bankrupt California. If voters are wise, they will reject destructive ballot initiatives such as this one.

Follow Arizona Free Enterprise Club on Facebook and Twitter.

Olson, Biggs, Stapley – Career Politicians Seeking Arizona’s CD-5

There’s no doubt for Republicans that 2016 will be a year that favors outsiders running for office. Career politicians are out, conservative non-politicians are in.

That certainly is the situation in several Arizona political races and especially in the East Valley.

With the exception of one candidate, Arizona’s 5th Congressional District is crowded with career politicians – though you would never know it based on the rhetoric of the candidates.  In reality, this club of career politicians has a combined total of 38 years in politics!

Let’s look at the messaging of each of these candidates.

Posted all over Justin Olson’s campaign website is the theme that Washington politicians are the problem and he is not one of them. He even claims not to be a career politician and qualifies the statement by stating he hasn’t spent 10, 12 or 14 years in office (a comparison to two of his Primary opponents). Here’s what he doesn’t tell you. Justin Olson was first elected to the Arizona House of Representatives in 2010. By the end of this year, he will have been in office a total of six years. Instead of pursuing a fourth term (Arizona’s Constitution limits legislative office to four terms or eight years per chamber), Olson has decided to jump for the open congressional seat of retiring Matt Salmon. This ambitious and risky move to pursue a federal office has career politician written all over it and it’s why we label him as a career politician. One other note. Olson also takes on lobbyists on his website but fails to disclose that he received almost $27,000 in campaign contributions from PAC’s and special interest groups during his 2014 campaign.

[pullquote align=”right” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]This ambitious and risky move to pursue a federal office has career politician written all over it[/pullquote]

Andy Biggs is also running on the anti-establishment theme. On his website, Facebook page and Twitter feed , he tries to make the case he’s a political outsider taking on ‘the establishment.’ One of his press releases even touted an endorsement by Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan who stated Biggs would “challenge the Washington establishment.” His website is littered with endorsements from Arizona politicians, Washington insiders and unions.

Andy Biggs has also been working the Arizona political system for almost 14 years. Even before he was elected to the Arizona Legislature, Biggs was part of Matt Salmon’s inner circle during Salmon’s unsuccessful gubernatorial bid in 2002. That same year, he also ran for political office and was elected to the Arizona House. He was term limited out of the Arizona House in 2010 but jumped over to the State Senate in 2011. He’s been there for almost six years. Total time as a career politician -14 years.

[pullquote align=”left” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]Don Stapley has embraced his inner politician and has no problem expressing public displays of that form of affection.[/pullquote]

Then there’s Don Stapley. Throughout Stapley’s messaging, he is proud of being a career politician. His campaign ad boasts about coming from a family of politicians. And of course, he dotes over his 18 years as a Maricopa County Supervisor. Stapley does rail against regulations by the federal government but unlike the other two aforementioned candidates, Don Stapley has embraced his inner politician and has no problem expressing public displays of that form of affection.

Given the current political times, it’s doubtful that Stapley’s strategy will be a path to victory for the nomination but what else will work for a man who dodged seven felony charges because the judge believed political motivations tainted the case?

Altogether, Olson, Biggs and Stapley bring a total of almost four decades of politics to the CD-5 race.

Even with all the unpredictability of the 2016 elections, there is one constant. Voters will no longer tolerate or elect career politicians – a problem that Justin Olson, Andy Biggs or Don Stapley cannot seem to hide or evade.