Harry Mitchell’s Special Favors Pay Off

Harry Mitchell Watch  has uncovered some interesting quid pro quo’s taking place between Harry Mitchell and Defense and Technical Contractors.

Apparently, Mitchell was rewarded with $48,700 in donations from a variety of contractors after he voted on two earmarks totalling $4,000,000.

Both earmark recipients are based here in Arizona but their $4 Million in receipts affected a multitude of subcontractors who in turn, rewarded Harry Mitchell with political contributions.

So much for looking out for us taxpayers. Harry Mitchell is too concerned about watching out for himself and getting re-elected.


Comments

  1. kralmajales says

    Oh darn, we got some federal tax dollars that actually created jobs.

    Apparently you like your tax dollars going to California instead?

    We have the saddest federal delegation of GOP that we have ever seen.

    How on earth can any here believe that the small percentage of the budget known as earmarks is dangerous and the $100 million a month in Iraq is not.

    OUr state is bleeding…we need jobs…we need some of tax dollars BACK HERE.

  2. This is one of the worst arguments I have ever heard… All Congressman get contributions based on how they vote…. Even if they are not seeking it!

    Sometimes they donate even before the vote because they assume how you are going vote… Attacking Mitchell for this is not going to resonate with the people of Cd-5.

    Talk about Mitchell’s votes on TAXES and the state of the ECONOMY!

  3. Sure – let’s talk about his numerous votes against tax cuts and his pet project of solar panels out there in Gila Bend…Abongoa is a SPANISH owned company and will be making profits on behalf of Spanish shareholders while using APS to further stick increasing rates up our collective rear-ends. That’s not Anmerica first, but it is America getting a fist.

    Then let’s talk about his vote on the bailout wherein we just socialized economic risk to the tune of 1 trillion dollars. Thanks for bankrupting my daughter Harry. Shame on you.

    And yes, this kind of thing is EXACTLY what is resonating with CD5 voters because they, like eveyone else, are tired of the soft corruption that puts Washington up for sale to the highest bidder. But then again, what do you expect from some doddering old fool who claims to be independent and then votes with Nancy Pelosi 90% of the time?

  4. k,

    California?

    Check out Palin’s Alaska – they are numero uno on the list for earmarks…

  5. I hate to say it popeye most people do not care about small pet projects. If it was a massive amount of money like the “bridge to now where” i would say go for it. But looking petty like this is not going to get us anywhere with 3 WEEKS LEFT.

    The bailout yes attack that vote, and the tax hikes, are the key! People are worried about their money, implying Mitchell would raise taxes is what should be talked about.

    No one gives a rats ass about solar panels. People will start hearing you talk about it and tune you out.

  6. If you want to go after his quid pro quo, look at his vote on Union card check and the incredible amount of Union financing his campaign has received.

  7. George of the Desert says

    Just one more bit of information showing that – unlike his public persona – Harry is little more than a dime-a-dozen typical politician.

    You can make the argument that we should be getting some of this money back, since it is our tax money. But earmarks are a dishonest way of doing it. Politicians are rewarding businesses or other entitities because of political considerations.

    What congress ought to do, and honest members do this – is work with the administration to convince the federal agencies to request funding for worthy projects so that funding can be fully considered through the appropriations process. Tacking taxpayer dollars on to a bill at the END of that process is an invitation to corruption.

    And as for the poster who remarked about Palin’s Alaska being number one. SHE is the Alaska politician who has opposed those earmarks. It’s corrupt GOPers like Don Young and Ted Stevens who’ve slopped at the federal trough. Blame them, not her.

  8. It is not about getting tax dollars back to AZ. It is about soft corruption. Trading earmarks for campaign contributions is corrupt. I am all for getting tax dollars back to AZ but not through the earmark process but rather through appropriations. There needs to be committee hearings and votes if a member wants to take money back to their state. It needs to be an open process and it would force the requested money to stand on its own merits.

  9. George lets be real, Palin may have been opposed to some earmarks but in the end she TOOK the $400 million for the bridge to now where to use on other pet projects, she just did not build the bridge because it was ridiculous.

  10. George of the Desert says

    Rachael:

    Please back up your assertion with a source.

  11. here you go George…

    In the transportation spending bill that included money for the Ketchikan bridge, Congress deleted the wording that would have directed money for the project, though it left the money in place so Alaska officials could decide which transportation projects to spend it on.

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/680/

  12. so much for thanks but no thanks huh George… If she really said no to the pork money then give it back…

  13. Roger Maris says

    So let me get this straight Rachel… Its kinda the Bill Clinton approach to earmarks… The gravity of his transgression wasn’t that bad… some consider it cheating others do not… So since Mitchell’s payoffs don’t rise to the level of a Bridge to Nowhere… He’s not really “screwing” us?

    Your argument is flawed… when will American’s rise up against the process that is corrupting the system… After all… it only took Freddie and Fannie a couple of hundreds of thousands in lobbying dollars to potential devastate our economy for decades…

  14. First off Roger my name is RACHAEL not RACHEL so please spell it right…

    Second all I am saying is talking about a couple of small earmarks a freshman congressman got is NOT the way to get traction against a candidate. It is a waste of time! Schweikert has 3 weeks to start getting some traction on Mitchell. As of right now he has done NOTHING significant. My mother who lives in North Scottsdale and and has time to watch a lot of tv told me if it wasn’t for me she would never have heard of Schweikert.

    Most of the people on this site are caught up in a bubble. He is not reaching regular voters in Cd-5! He needs to be talking about things people care about like the bailout and taxes.

    People do not care about $100 million in earmarks when we just passed a $750 Billion bailout. It just seems trivial

  15. Queen of Hearts says

    Rachael, (not Rachel)!
    Are you kidding me? Your mother lives in a bubble! You must also! What the heck are you reading? The East Valley Tribune hosted a debate with Mitchell and Schweikert last Friday. Of course they talked about the bailout. Schweikert opposes the bailout in the form it was written! He would never have voted for it! The Arizona Repugnant has had several articles about the CD5 candidates… the most recent had a full page comparison of the 2 regarding many of their views! “Regular voters” are being reached. You should stop reading this blog of people “caught up in a bubble” and branch out!

  16. I would love for you to take a poll of cd-5 and see what percentage of the people knew the east valley tribune had a debate. I would be willing to bet it was no more than 5%!

    And yes they did talk about the bailout but what I am saying is sights like Harry Mitchell Watch are wasting their time focusing on a few earmarks, hammer the bailout and taxes!!

    Also newspapers are not as relevant as they once were, people are losing their jobs at at print media outlets all over AZ because circulation is at an all time low!

    Blogs like this are becoming more and more popular as a source for news, they need to focus on core issues not just a few things that the base think are important.

  17. kralmajales says

    Earmarks are not at all dishonest. It is called logrolling and it is the very deal making that has been going on in the house since it was established. How on earth can good projects in one state get approved if they are hundreds of votes that must be swayed to reach one district?

    It is an important part of being a legislator. Anyone that DOESN’T take earmarks is totally worthless as a rep.

    All of them.

Leave a Reply