Blog For Arizona

(Update) Experts: GOP economics will hurt the economy, increase unemployment

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I already told you about the report by the investment company Goldman Sachs analysts that said the proposed GOP budget cuts would reduce the country's economic growth by 1.5 to 2 percentage points for the year, essentially cutting in half the nation's projected economic growth for 2011. Experts: GOP economics will hurt the economy, increase unemployment.

Now Moody's Analytics chief economist Mark Zandi offers a second report projecting the loss of 700,000 jobs in the next two years if the GOP gets its way. Greg Sargent reports at the Plum Line, Report: House GOP budget cuts would destroy 700,000 jobs:

Lori Montgomery scoops:

A Republican plan to sharply cut federal spending this year would destroy 700,000 jobs through 2012, according to an independent economic analysis set for release Monday.

The report, by Moody's Analytics chief economist Mark Zandi, offers fresh ammunition to Democrats seeking block the Republican plan, which would terminate dozens of programs and slash federal appropriations by $61 billion over the next seven months.

Zandi, an architect of the 2009 stimulus package who has advised both political parties, predicts that the GOP package would reduce economic growth by 0.5 percentage points this year, and by 0.2 percentage points in 2012, resulting in 700,000 fewer jobs by the end of next year.

Here's a copy of the full report.

[T]his is the second outside analysis to reach this conclusion. Last week Goldman Sachs, in a confidential report to clients, concluded that House GOP budget cuts would be a drag on the economy and cut economic growth by rougly two percent of GDP.

* * *

Even if you disagree with these analyses, you'd think the fact that there are now two of them reaching similar conclusions would be newsworthy enough to break through the din of Beltway deficit-reduction fetishizing. The argument about budet cuts is too often framed solely as an argument between so-called deficit "hawks" and "doves," as a dispute between those who say steep cuts are necessary and those who say they're cruel and extreme. The fact that outside analysts think that budget cuts could actively hamper the recovery deserves to be part of the discussion.

The media villagers and Beltway bloviators are in bed with the Pete Peterson Group, Pete Peterson's war on social security - and his media enablers, and members of the failed Catfood Commission bent upon the destruction of social security. These media whores have a different narrative to sell, as Greg Sargent points out. You can be certain that the right-wing billionaire funded think tanks will turn out their own reports slanted to produce the desired conclusions to "refute" these independent Wall Street analyst reports that investors rely upon.

The GOP wil do anything to hold onto its disproved and discredited faith based supply-side "trickle down" GOP economics. They have built a cottage industry around perpetuating this fraud. Their livelihoods and careers depend upon pereptuating this fraud.

UPDATE: See also the Economics Policy Institute report Republican proposal to ‘right our fiscal ship’ throws more workers overboard:

Cuts of this magnitude will undermine gross domestic product performance at a time when the economy is seeing anemic post-recession growth. Cuts in the range of $74 billion will lead to the loss of roughly 700,000 jobs. The domestic discretionary reduction of $58 billion will result in the loss of around 590,000 jobs, as we demonstrate in this briefing paper.

UPDATE: The true "job killers" are the Republican Party and their failed economic policies.

The party that gave us "zero net job growth" in the first decade of the new millenium (2000-2009) The Bush Years Were a Lost Decade, followed by millions more Americans thrown out of work during the Bush Great Recession, the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, somehow unbelievably were returned to power by voters on the promise of "jobs, jobs, jobs" in 2010 based upon the same disproved and discredited faith based supply-side "trickle down" GOP economic policies that produced these catastrophic results in the first place.

David Safier likes to compare this to the "abused spouse syndrome." Americans keep coming back for more abuse at the hands of their abuser. This is an unhealthy and dysfunctional relationship. If America is to live a normal healthy life, it must leave its abuser.

Now that Tea-Publicans have control of the Congress after their false and malicious promise of "jobs, jobs, jobs" to get elected in 2010 ("Honey, please take me back, I promise I'll never hit you again"), it has already come to this:

"If some of those jobs are lost in this, so be it." Weeper of the House John "Crybaby" Boehner. Smack upside your head!

Wake up, America. It's time to leave these abusers behind. The life you save will be your own.

Rachel Maddow had an excellent rundown on this on Monday night.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

IOKTLIYAR

by David Safier

I've added a few letters to the well known IOKIYAR. My version is IOKTLIYAR: It's OK To Lie If You're A Republican. Especially if the person you're talking to doesn't know enough to catch you at it.

It's SOP for Republicans to make stuff up when they're backed into a corner. All too often, they get away with it, because, who knows if it's true?

Latest example. Chris Matthews had Texas State Sen. Jeff Wentworth on Hardball, asking him about his legislation to allow guns on campus. When Matthews brought up the problem of "booze and guns" on campus, Wentworth said, "We don’t have bars on campus in Texas . . . No alcohol allowed."

Good answer -- except that it's absolutely wrong. Media Matters did some careful investigation about the sale of alcohol on Texas campuses and awarded Wentworth a "Pants on Fire."

• University of Texas at Austin has two establishments in its Texas Union building with liquor licenses, and contractors in other areas can sell alcohol.
• Texas Tech University sells alcohol "in suites and club areas where university donors often sit in the football stadium and basketball arena."
• Texas A&M's University Club has a "Social Hour" Wednesday through Friday, advertised on its website, where it sells cheap drinks.
• Texas State University San Marcos serves beer in the student center.

No fault to Chris Matthews for not calling Wentworth for his misstatement. First, how could Matthews know? And second, what kind of responsible person just outright lies like that, without hesitation? The answer, of course, is IOKTLIYAR.

Dr. Word says: A person cannot be "an illegal"

by David Safier

I decided I was an illegal at one point last night, at least by the current, rightwing definition which has been picked up by the public and the media. I was driving 42mph down a road and saw the speed limit was posted at 35. I was committing an illegal act. I guess that made me an illegal.

Or did it? Is a speeder an illegal? How about a thief or a murderer? Are they illegals? Or are they people who have committed illegal acts?

I checked a few online dictionaries for a definition of "illegal." It is primarily an adjective, used in a phrase like "an illegal act." The only definition for "illegal" as a noun is "illegal immigrant."

Welcome to the right wing world where, of the many illegal acts a human being can commit, the only act that equates personhood with being "an illegal" is entering this country without the required documentation.

It is dehumanizing to define a person as "an illegal," as if that is the essence of his or her being. It is harmful to the person being defined, and it is harmful to those who relegate someone to a narrowly defined, lower class of human.

I learned as a teacher that you should never use a form of the verb "to be" to describe negative behavior by a student. For instance, when an authority figure says to a young person, "You are a liar," that defines that student's state of being -- You=Liar. If the young person is confronted instead by saying, "You are not telling me the truth" or "You are lying to me," that makes it a momentary, changable thing. You may be lying to me now, it says, but you are also capable of telling the truth. I am not branding you with a permanent Scarlet L.

Ralph Waldo Emerson objected to any kind of labeling of a person by a trait or profession rather than by his or her personhood. Someone is not a farmer, Emerson said. She is a person who farms. Someone is not a lawyer. He is a person who practices law. And so on.

Emerson was trying to help people acknowledge they are part of the greater human community rather than walling themselves off into smaller categories. It was a noble idea to make us better people, more in touch with our overriding humanity.

As a teacher, I tried not to stigmatize students by giving them a negative label as a state of being. I tried to respect my students as people at the same time I asked them, "So what have you done lately?" referring both to changing negative behavior (though you may have cheated on a test or not turned in your homework, your next action can be better) and continuing positive behavior (though you got an "A" on the last paper, you need to continue the same kind of effort if you want to earn a good grade on the next one). [Note: The crossed out paragraph is distracting and self indulgent, but I crossed it out rather than getting rid of it, in keeping with standard blogging practice.]

To call a person "illegal" is wrong, both from the perspective of language and basic humanity. True, I was speeding a bit last night, but that didn't make me "an illegal." Some people are committing an illegal act, a misdemeanor, by being in this country without the proper credentials (that's all it is, right? A misdemeanor?), but that doesn't make them "illegals."

Let the right wing continue to use the term "illegal" as a noun if they want, but the rest of us shouldn't pick it up, and the media, mainstream as well as sane alternative, should  remove it from their vocabulary as surely as they have removed more obvious racial and  personal slurs.

Pearce-and-pals put the "AZ" in "CRAZY"

by David Safier

I had to say it. I just saw the cartoon AZ Blue Meanie included in his post about the nullification bill. I'm rerunning the cartoon below.

Yes, Pearce and his traitorous cronies have put the "AZ" in "CRAZY."

Baja, my friend, is blowin' in the wind

by David Safier

I went to Drinking Liberally last night to hear Paul Eckerstrom talk about the Southern Arizona separation/secession movement. [Note: Though AZ Blue Meanie is right, "separation" is the more correct term, I still like "secession," so I'm using it.] Eckerstrom and his fellow secessionistas have thought this out carefully, complete with historical precedent. For instance, did you know Maine was part of Massachussetts until it decided to separate? Neither did I.

The story has legs. It got front page coverage in the Star, and apparently the Wall Street Journal is picking it up. I expect more national outlets to follow.

You may have seen a Howie Fischer article in today's Star about the progress of the nullification bill in the legislature, which Eckerstrom said was the tipping point. With that bill, Russell Pearce and his followers declared themselves traitors to the U.S. who are not bound by the federal rule of law. The push for Baja Arizona, from that standpoint, is an assertion of loyalty to our country.

The article mentions that Sen. Paula Aboud offered an amendment to the bill saying, once it takes effect, Pima County should begin actions toward secession.

Sen. Paula Aboud, D-Tucson, chose not to try to block SB 1433, which has strong Republican support, including that of Senate President Russell Pearce.

Instead, she sought to amend it to say the moment this law takes effect, the Pima County Board of Supervisors "may act to have the county secede from the jurisdiction of this state."

Aboud said Pima County residents really do want to remain part of Arizona.

"But we don't want to be part of this state that continues to embarrass Arizona," she said. "The point is, our business community is hurting because of the reactions brought upon by this body.

When I heard about this a few days ago, I was sure it was a coordinated effort. Eckerstrom says no, that Aboud's move was independent of his. It sounds like this is one of those ideas that has been in the air for a long time, and its moment has arrived.

TV, photo coverage of Tucson's Rally to Save the American Dream

by David Safier

Three local TV news programs covered the Saturday rally of about 600 people on the corners of Speedway and Campbell. Two are online: KOLD and KGUN. Both have good coverage with interviews of participants. Apparently Fox News, Channel 11, covered it as well, but it may not be online.

You can find a large album of photos from the Tucson rally on Facebook, and a collection of pics from rallies across the nation on Flickr.

Arizona a fantAZy island: Secession bills in the Arizona Legislature

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I want to give kudos to Luige del Puerto at the Arizona Capitol Times for the best analysis to date of the Neoconfederate insurrectionist Tea-Publican package of secession bills moving through the Arizona legislature (and an appropriately snarky caption). Unfortunately, this is a subscriber firewalled article. Arizona Capitol Times » FantAZy Island: Secession-laced bills barging through the Legislature may fail, but they express state's legacy of rage. H/t to Cap Times for their cool graphic (right) as well.

Snippets:

SB1433, one of more than a dozen pending anti-Washington, D.C., measures known colloquially as Arizona’s secession bills, would create a “Joint Legislative Committee on Nullification of Federal Laws” composed of lawmakers.

The group’s task would be to review federal laws and recommend their nullification if they fell outside the scope of the enumerated powers delegated to the federal government. Once nullification is recommended, the Legislature would have to vote on the proposal within 60 days.

And once a majority of lawmakers voted “yes,” Arizona citizens would no longer be obligated to follow the federal law, rule or executive order.

In short, just because the Arizona Legislature declared so, a federal law would be [nullified].

“The bill also says that the nullification committee must see to it that only the U.S. Supreme Court is the arbiter of any dispute that may arise between Arizona and the federal government over a state’s decision to declare a federal law null.”

Wait, that's not true -- our de facto governor and self-appointed decider-in-chief of all that is or is not law in Arizona, "King" Russell Pearce, declared last week that "It's not the law of the land when a Supreme Court issues a bad decision, ... "It's to be challenged and overturned." Arizona bills a test of federal government authority.

This is really a right-wing think tank lawyer full employment bill to subsidize organizations like the Goldwater Insitute with legal fees paid by the Arizona legislature. The Arizona legislature can't find money for organ donor transplant patients who will die without a transplant, but they can find money to subsidize right-wing organizations like the Goldwater Institute for frivolous "junk" lawsuits. It shows you where their priorities are.

Although defiance of the national government is as old as Arizona statehood... what is new this year is the sheer number of anti-fed bills that thus far have advanced, a reflection of the new political reality at the Capitol after last year’s election gave Republicans complete control of the state government.

Indeed, most of the secession bills have been approved in committee, and a few have already made it out of the Senate, including a measure that enters Arizona into a compact [i.e., a confederacy] with other states that have also enacted laws saying their residents cannot be penalized for not participating in any health care plan.

* * *

The measures that create a multistate compact in various policy areas hinge on another state’s joining Arizona, and ultimately, on congressional consent. Finding a partner-state is possible; getting Congress’ approval for such defiant acts is like punching someone in the nose, then asking him for aspirin because your fist hurts.

* * *

James Weinstein, the Amelia Lewis professor of constitutional law at the Sandra Day O’Connor School of Law at Arizona State University, said the chances of the U.S. Supreme Court’s saying it’s all right for individual states to “decide what’s within the federal power and to nullify federal law … is zero.”

“It’s just not in the mainstream understanding of constitutional conversation. And it wouldn’t work either. It’s impractical. Each state can’t decide for itself. It goes against our understanding that it’s the U.S. Supreme Court that’s the final arbiter of the meaning of the Constitution, not each state legislature,” he said.

Nick Dranias, a constitutional attorney for Goldwater Institute, said to use the term nullification is “terrible marketing” on the part of states’ rightists... If it is used as a vehicle of protest by a state, then Dranias said there’s nothing wrong with SB1433.

I told you this is a right-wing think tank lawyer full employment bill to subsidize organizations like the Goldwater Insitute with legal fees paid by the Arizona legislature. Goldwater Institute wants its attorneys fees for frivolous "junk" lawsuits, damnit!

The tension is inevitable because America is unique in its system of dual sovereignty.

That is, its citizens have representations in two simultaneous governments that have, in their respective ways, attributes of sovereignty. However, some scholars have pointed out that if sovereign means the highest authority in the land [see the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution], then states cannot claim it. That’s because states cannot declare war, cannot create a navy, and cannot coin their own currency — some of the defining characteristics of an independent country.

* * *

Some Arizona lawmakers, however, aren’t satisfied with the status quo.

This lament from Sen. Sylvia Allen, R-Snowflake, is typical among states’ rightists: “It’s absolutely out of our hands when the (federal) government controls the air, the water, animals, light bulbs, toilets, washing machines, guns, homes — how you build them, the dust in your state — how to control the dust. The federal government controls every single aspect of our lives, and it costs us money.”

Keep in mind this is the same woman who believes the Earth is only 6,000 years old and that The Flintstones is an animated documentary history of early man. And you wonder where these "crAZy" ideas come from.

And so carrying on a defiant stance, Arizona senators on Feb. 17 approved legislation declaring all goods made or grown in Arizona that don’t cross state lines are not subject to congressional authority to regulate commerce among states.

But what sets SB1178 apart from previous efforts is it goes after public employees who enforce federal regulations here in violation of its provisions.

If the bill becomes law, federal agents who violate it will face a Class 6 felony and a fine that may not exceed $2,000, while state employees will face a Class 1 misdemeanor and a fine of up $500.

The bill’s penalties and fines show that the state is serious about its intention, said Allen, the bill’s author.

What this bill and other provisions actually require is that federal regulatory authorities must notify local law enforcement of their presence and intentions so that local law enforcement can give businesses a heads-up that the federal regulators are coming for a "surprise" inspection -- hide your violations! -- making local law enforcement agencies an accessory to violations of federal law committed by these businesses. And the federal government will have to pay Arizona counties fees for the privilege of the state helping businesses evade (violate) federal law.

And you thought that Sen. Allen had your health, safety and welfare at heart. Now that's just "crAZy"!

See the Arizona Republic editorial today explaining just how "crAZy" Sen. Allen's bill is. Federal rules aid our economy.

h/t Benson

Two problematic voting bills

by David Safier

An Elections Integrity friend alerted me to two bills that would change the way people vote in Arizona. One is horrendous. The other could be bad if it was misused.

SB1330 would take away the ease, and therefore the advantages, of using mail-in ballots. It requires that mail-in ballots be notarized, unless an "inkless fingerprint recording system" is on the envelope, whatever that is. Getting a ballot notarized involves driving to a notary, standing around until the process is completed and probably paying for the service. In other words, it means low income, low efficacy voters would find mail-in ballots a costly inconvenience instead of an easy way to vote. Someone doesn't like the fact that Democrats are trying to encourage voting by getting people to sign up for vote-by-mail. The one and only sponsor: Frank Antenori.

HB2303 looks more benign, but it could be another way to discourage "the wrong kind of voters" -- meaning Democrats. It would allow counties to create "voting centers" either in addition to or in place of the usual polling places. The advantage is, anyone in the county can use the voting centers regardless of precinct, so that makes things easy. The problem is, if a county cuts back on the neighborhood polling places and strategically locates the voting centers, some voters could be disenfranchised simply because they would have to travel so far to vote. My Elections Integrity friend also pointed out that the post election hand counting of ballots could be rendered almost useless because ballots from a number of precincts would be mixed together.

Requiring notarization of mail-in ballots is clearly a partisan maneuver to stop Democrats from expanding their voting base. The creation of voting centers, however, has a Democratic sponsor (along with six Republicans) and was passed unanimously in the House and Senate committees, so Democrats may know something I don't. Then again, they may not have considered how the locations of voting centers could be used against them.

Bundgaard case: And the spin begins

by Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings

By now, most observers of the Arizona political scene are aware of the fact that state Sen. Scott Bundgaard was involved in a domestic violence incident Friday and invoked his immunity from arrest as a serving legislator to avoid incarceration.

The Arizona Republic has coverage here, written by Connie Cone Sexton, with contributions from Mary K. Reinhart and Kristena Hansen.

The Arizona Capitol Times has AP coverage here.

My intent here isn't to rehash the story - I don't have any facts in this matter other than those in the Republic article.

Nor is it to bash Bundgaard in a partisan manner - Democrats aren't perfect in this regard...though if any had similarly invoked legislative immunity from arrest, I have absolutely no doubt that they'd have been raked over the coals in the RW blogosphere and by the columnists at the Arizona Republic and the Arizona Daily Star for doing so.

In addition, in the interests of fairness to all involved, I am going to wait until more facts come to light before passing judgement, and urge all other observers to do the same.

However, it is evident that all observers aren't of a similar mind.

KTAR.com has Bundgaard's rather self-serving press release on the incident here.  Note to Bundgaard:  "name dropping" isn't a viable defense.

Republican blog Seeing Red AZ isn't holding back, rising to Bundgaard's defense by attacking the integrity and professionalism of the reporters of the Republic story.  The comments section of their post show a similar ideologically-based disregard for the law (no matter if they aren't living together, violence between a boyfriend and girlfriend *is* "domestic violence") or for waiting for more facts to come to light.  They've blindly accepted the word of Bundgaard, given through his flack Jason Rose.

Republican blog Sonoran Alliance has a much briefer (and better) press release from Rose over the names of Bundgaard and the woman in the incident, Aubry Ballard.  In it, they apologize to everyone, announce that they are going their "separate ways," and ask for privacy.  It's still self-serving, but in a lower-key manner.

To be sure, some of the uninformed angst is coming from the other side - the comments on the Facebook posting from 12News on the story are mostly divided into two categories.

1.  "If it is a domestic violence case, the man must be 100% at fault."  Until we know all of the facts, we don't know *who* is at fault.  My initial reading of the story is that both were dishing out the violence, and both should have been arrested.  And that the police who responded to the situation *wanted* to arrest both, but couldn't arrest Bundgaard due to his immunity from arrest under the provisions of the Arizona Constitution.  Which brings us to...

2.  "How did the legislature pass a law granting themselves immunity for their crimes?!?"  Actually, they didn't.  It's in Article Four, Section Six, of the Arizona Constitution, approved by the voters of Arizona.  And even there, it's only immunity from arrest, during the legislative session, except for treason, felony, or "breach of the peace."  It isn't immunity from prosecution.

Also, many people are now calling for a change in that section based on this one incident.  It shouldn't be. 

Such provisions have a valid purpose - they prevent the use of incarceration to harass political adversaries.  Given last week's arrest of Sal Reza, a loud critic of Senate President Russell Pearce, at the behest of Pearce, it wouldn't be a stretch to imagine Pearce using that tool against recalcitrant legislators if the tool was available to him.


In short, while there are many emotional reasons to jump to conclusions one way or another, this is a situation where rationality should reign - wait until all of the facts are in, and *then* make an evaluation of the situation.

Of course, a rational person won't ignore the fact that Bundgaard has been in and out of court a multitude of times (30+) over the last two decades, ranging from civil cases (both as plaintiff and defendant), traffic cases* (all defendant, some guilty, some dismissed, but he must be paying a fortune for car insurance :) ), and family court (a lengthy divorce that included at least one order of protection).  In his favor:  nothing popped up on a search of criminal cases using "Bundgaard" as a search term.  Also, there doesn't seem to be any indication of violence in his past, with the caveat that I don't know the nature of the order of protection in his divorce.

Stay tuned on this one.  I'm betting that the story has legs...


* - His traffic cases show a pattern - he's got a lead foot all over the Valley and extending up to Yavapai County (Payson).  Speed was the most frequent reason given for one of his citations, though far from the only reason (unregistered/uninsured, failure to yield, stop sign violation, obscured plate).

And he's probably *really* happy that photo enforcement has been discontinued on Arizona's freeways.  They kept nailing him, which probably led to the license plate violation.  :)

 

Has Tucson Tea cooled from boiling to tepid?

by David Safier

PDA (Progressive Democrats of America) had its first Tucson chapter meeting and overflowed a 150 seat room with 300 participants. The Tucson Tea Party responded with a plan to create a crowd on the corner of Speedway and Tucson Friday to show what real people power looks like. It even got a publicity boost from the Star in Friday's Political Briefs.

The result was, maybe a hundred people. Here are the Tucson Tea Party's own pics of the event.

The next day, about 600 people gathered at Speedway and Campbell to support union workers in Wisconsin. You can see pictures if you follow the link.

To paraphrase Mark Twain, any reports of the death of the Tea Party would be an exaggeration. But they're in a bit of a slump right now, a malaise, if you will. After their triumphant "We Won! We Won! We Won!" in November, their street-corner energy has dwindled, while their legislative muscle has increased. Meanwhile, Democrats/progressives who feel themselves under attack, are gathering with renewed vigor.

This is normal ebb and flow. The big question will be, what will 2012 look like? It's much too soon for predictions, but it looks like some of the energy Democrats showed in 2008 could return.

"Start Our State" (Baja Arizona) has a Facebook page. Learn more at Drinking Liberally tonight

by David Safier

The Baja Arizona separation movement is, if nothing else, capturing the imagination of the state and the country. While most progressive proposals tend to be "sane" and long-winded -- read, too boring for the media to consider them worthy of coverage -- creating Baja Arizona is bold and catchy. Hence its front page coverage in the Star.

Now there's a Facebook page, Start Our State. And tonight -- Sunday, 6-10pm -- Paul Eckerstrom, co-chair of SOS, will be the featured guest at Drinking Liberally. It's at the Shanty, 401 E. 9th St. No charge. Drinking optional.

Opponents of 'guns on campus' omnibus gun bill to hold forums

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Opponents of a legislative effort to allow guns on Arizona university and community-college campuses are taking their message across the state this week, and they're getting help from a survivor of the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre. Opponents of guns on campuses to host forums:

Senate Bill 1467, sponsored by Sen. Ron Gould, R-Lake Havasu City, would forbid universities and community colleges from prohibiting anyone with a valid permit from possessing a concealed weapon. The Senate Judiciary Committee passed the bill, and it now goes to a vote of the full Senate.

In opposition to the bill, Sen. Steve Gallardo, D-Phoenix, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Arizonans for Gun Safety and shooting survivor Colin Goddard are hosting several forums.

The forums will include a screening of Living for 32, a 45-minute documentary recounting Goddard's experiences during and after the shooting.

"It's a very powerful video," Gallardo said.

Participants will host a discussion about gun safety.

The four forums are free and open to the public.

- 11:30 a.m. Tuesday at the state Capitol in Senate Hearing Room 1, 1700 W. Washington St., Phoenix.

- 7 p.m. Tuesday at the University of Arizona Gallagher Theater in the lower level of the Student Union Memorial Center, 1303 E. University Blvd., Tucson.

- 2 p.m. Wednesday at the Glendale Community College Performing Arts Center, 6000 W. Olive Ave., Glendale.

- 7 p.m. Wednesday at the Arizona State University Carson Ballroom in Old Main, 400 E. Tyler Mall, Tempe.

Experts: GOP economics will hurt the economy, increase unemployment

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

This week will mark the end of two full months since Republicans assumed control of Congress. They have spent their time trying to repeal -- but not replace -- the Affordable Care Act, and waging a culture war against women and women's reproductive health. They have been proposing cuts in federal spending to federal programs they have been ideologically opposed to for years (like NPR and PBS). But they have not proposed a single bill to create any jobs in this country.

"Mr. Boehner, where are the jobs?"

The simple answer is, Republicans have no interest in creating jobs. It is becoming increasingly clear that Republicans are intent upon destroying what is left of the American economy and to turn this country into a Banana Republic controlled by a corporatocracy "of the über-rich plutocrats, by the über-rich plutocrats, and for the über-rich plutocrats." This is the danger of an aristocracy of great wealth that our Founding Fathers warned us would be a threat to the survival of our democratic Republic.

Experts agree. Report: GOP budget cuts would hit U.S. economy - Los Angeles Times:

The spending cuts approved by House Republicans would act as a drag on the economy, according to a Wall Street analysis that added new pressure to a raging political debate in Washington.

The report by the investment company Goldman Sachs said the cuts would reduce the growth in gross domestic product by up to 2 percentage points this year, essentially cutting in half the nation's projected economic growth for 2011.

The report, prepared for the company's clients, represents the first independent economic assessment of a congressional budget fight that could lead to a government shutdown as early as [this] week.

* * *

Democrats quickly seized on the report as a validation of their arguments against the Republican cuts.

"Just as the economy is beginning to pick up a little steam, the Republican budget would snuff out any chance of recovery," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.

* * *

The Goldman Sachs analysis said the cuts would reduce the country's economic growth by 1.5 to 2 percentage points for the year.

A smaller budget reduction of $25 billion, if approved as a compromise, would have a lesser effect, reducing GDP by 1 percentage point. The effects would fade over time, the report said.

"Fiscal drag is quickly emerging as a focus," the Goldman report said. The report said the spending cuts are "the most important near-term risk."

* * *

While politicians reacted quickly to the findings, the view among economists was mixed.

"It would be a meaningful hit to GDP this spring and summer," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, who has advised Republicans and Democrats.

Zandi said he would prefer spending cuts next year, as the economy shows further improvement. "I just wouldn't do anything that would forestall that kind of job creation that we need," he said.

But Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office who has advised Republicans, said the projections were excessive.

"It's way too high," he said. He estimated the drag on economic growth from the House-approved cuts at no more than 0.2 percentage point.

It's not just at the Congressional level, there are a slew of ideological Republican governors and Republican statehouses after November's election that are intent upon destroying the American economy at the state level as well. Arizona is but one example.

More fiscally responsible governors are asking the federal government not to short-circuit the fragile recovery. Govs to feds: Don't short-circuit recovery (Warning: AP analysis by Liz "Sprinkles" Sidoti):

Their states on the brink of financial catastrophe, governors pleaded Saturday for the divided federal government to avoid doing anything that would hamper the tenuous economic recovery back home.

Their message to Washington: prevent a government shutdown, abstain from spending cuts that dramatically will affect states and end even preliminary discussions about allowing states to declare bankruptcy. [Some congressional Republicans, conservative groups, and potential GOP presidential candidates such as former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty have floated the idea.]

Ah, there it is. The Republican plan to use default and bankruptcy to liquidate public employee pension plans and to end any further pension obligations into the future. Republicans want to steal your retirement so that they do not have to raise taxes on the über-rich plutocrats. Liz "Sprinkles" Sidoti just gives this a passing mention.

Political Calendar: Week of February 27, 2011

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Political Calendar is posted on Sundays. Please send us notice of your political events prior to the Sunday before your event (7 days would be most helpful). See the calendar icon in the right-hand column of the blog page for easy access to the calendar.

Friday, March 4th is "D-Day" -- Will the Tea-Publican wrecking crew in Congress force a shut down of the federal government by throwing a Tea Party temper-tantrum over raising the federal debt ceiling and default on the U.S. national debt -- a debt incurred by three Republican presidents (Reagan, Bush I and Bush II National Debt by President) to pay for tax cuts to their über-rich friends and global corporations, and for excessive military spending including George W. Bush's two wars of choice he put on the national credit card without paying for it -- for the first time in our history? (In violation of the "full faith and credit" clause of the U.S. Constitution).

This is a dangerous game these fiscally irresponsible and reckless ideological Tea-Publicans are playing. An actual default on the U.S. debt will set off a financial and economic tsunami that will make the recent Bush Great Recession look like a day in the park. If any of you are still wondering, yes, they really are crazy enough to do this.

Political Calendar For The Week of February 27, 2011

Sundays, 6:00 p.m.: Drinking Liberally, at The Shanty, 401 E. 9th Street (at 4th Avenue). An informal, inclusive progressive social group, and lively discussion. Contact: www.livingliberallytucson.org.

Sunday, February 27, 1:30 p.m.: Saguaro Eastside Democrats' Annual "I Love Liberty" Party (Potluck), at the home of Mark Stegeman, 85 N. Sierra Vista Drive (located between Campbell Ave. and Tucson Blvd., North of Elm Street http://mapq.st/eVkZXC). Come and join us for our Annual “I Love Liberty” Party as we celebrate Presidents’ Day and Statehood Day! We will invite all the Democratic candidates running for Mayor and City Council and all elected officials. Bring your friends and find out what the candidates have to say. Bring your favorite dish and we will supply soft drinks, coffee, tea and hot chocolate. For more information and to RSVP please contact Pat Wiedhopf at patw1234@comcast.net or (520) 850-6755.

Monday, February 28, 11:30 a.m.: Rally to Restore Transplant Funding sponsored by Democracy for America, at the Arizona State Capitol grounds (Phoenix). Featured speakers include Rep. Anna Tovar, a transplant recipient, and the sister of one of the current transplant patients, as well as, Dr. Jonathan Weisbuch, Former Maricopa County Health Officer and Director, County Department of Public Health, Phoenix; and and Dr. Mike Newcomb of KPHX radio, 1480AM. Because of budget cuts, Gov. Jan Brewer ended Medicaid funding for end-of-life transplants, leaving 98 people without a way to get transplants vital to their survival. We are circulating a petition which will be presented to Arizona legislators to let our lawmakers know we support saving lives. YOU CAN HELP by signing this petition today! You may bring your signed petitions to the rally, or drop them by the Arizona Democratic Party office at 2910 N. Central Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85012.

Monday, February 28, Noon: Democrats of Greater Tucson luncheon, Dragon's View Restaurant (400 N. Bonita, South of St. Mary's Road between the Freeway and Grande Avenue, turn South at Furr's Cafeteria), buffet lunch costs $8.50. Featured speaker is David Fitzsimmons, editorial cartoonist for the Arizona Daily Star. Visit DGT's web site at www.tucsondemocrats.org. Next Week: Tucson City Council Member Paul Cunningham, and Barbara Tellman on Women in Arizona Political History.

Monday, February 28, 6:00 p.m.: Legislative District 27 meeting, at the Main Library, 101 N. Stone Avenue (parking in basement under library). For more information please contact Greg Wagner, (520) 784-8355 or gregory.m.wagner@gmail.com.

Tuesday, March 1, 9:30 a.m. - 2:00 p.m.: Day of Action With the AFL-CIO, at the Capitol in Phoenix. You'll have a chance to speak to your legislators about anti-worker bills and tell them of your commitment to holding them accountable. We'll also be introducing and using our new "1 and 5" and "1 and 10" initiatives to spur more union brothers and sisters to take action. Training and lunch will be provided, and free transportation from Tucson is available. Please RSVP by email or call our offices at (602) 631-4488.

Wednesday, March 2, 7:00 p.m.: Legislative District 28 meeting, at the Pima County Democratic Party HQ, 4639 E. 1st Street (one block South of Speedway, West of Swan). Featured speaker is Ward 2 City Council Member Paul Cunningham. For more information please contact Ted Prezelski at (520) 326-3716 (leave message) or prezelski@aol.com.

Friday, March 4, 5:00 p.m.: University of Arizona Young Democrats meeting, in the Tubac Room, University of Arizona Student Union (every Friday). For more information please contact Erik Lundstrom at (520) 609-3636 or ejl@email.arizona.edu.

Saturday, March 5, 10:00 a.m.: Legislative District 30 meeting, at the Pima County Democratic Party HQ, 4639 E. 1st Street (one block South of Speedway, West of Swan). For more information please contact Andre Mixon remix8@yahoo.com.

Saturday, March 5: The Tucson Urban League 40th Annual Gala & Silent Auction, at the Westin La Paloma Resort and Spa. We will celebrate our 40th Anniversary and the launch of our I AM EMPOWERED Tucson campaign. The I AM EMPOWERED Tucson Campaign will give individuals the power to join in on the collective action to bring change to the Tucson Community! We invite you to be a part of the celebration of our 40 year legacy of empowering the community and changing lives! Mistress of Ceremony is Deanna Morgan, Keynote Speaker is Rev. Al Sharpton. For more information and to purchase sponsorship opportunities please visit the web site at TUL Events.

Note: for additional Democratic Party events around the state see http://azdem.org/events/Calendar/

Special Announcements:

Monday, March 7, 6:30 p.m.: Pima County Democratic Party Executive Committee meeting.

Thursday, March 10, 5:30 p.m.: Pima County Nucleus Club meeting, at the Viscount Suite Hotel, 4855 E. Broadway. Featured speaker is Richard Gilman, former City Editor, Tucson Daily Citizen; Vice President,New York Times; Publisher, Boston Globe. Topic: A look at Arizona's place in the scope of things, its right and its left (and never the twain shall meet). For more information and to RSVP please contact Martin Bacal at (520) 326-3716.

Friday, March 11, 11:00 a.m.: Democratic Women in Action Annual Spring Luncheon, at the Grill on the Green Restaurant, Canoa Ranch Golf Club, 5800 Camino Del Sol (Green Valley). Celebrate Women's History Month with featured guest Kathy Watson, Arizona historian, speaking about "Famous Women in Arizona History." A salad buffet will be served. Send your $22 check to reserve your seat to DEWA, P.O. Box 114, Green Valley, AZ 85622.

DCSRA - "Planet Earth Spinning Out of Control" Recurring Lecture Series

Four consecutive Tuesdays - February 8th, 15th, 22nd and March 1st, 1:00-3:00 p.m.: Democratic Club of the Santa Rita Area reprises the Spring 2010 "OLLI" course, prepared and presented by Bill and Miriam Sacks. The format is a power point presentation followed by Q & A's and discussion. Topics include: Earth's formation and it's constitution, Climate history and its causes, Global Warming and its causes, Nature of energy and its sources, Fossil fuels and their problems, Nuclear energy and its promise. New Location: Amado Territory Ranch, northernmost building - next to Kristofer's Bisto (Amado). The cost is $25 for all four sessions. Pay in advance or at the first session on February 8th. This fee covers expenses only and the remainder goes towards Democratic Headquarters - Green Valley operations. Make checks payable to DCSRA, or cash accepted. Please RSVP to Marla Daugherty at (520) 648-0890 or at mardenaz@cox.net.

DCSRA - Current Events Discussion Group

Wednesdays, 10:30 a.m.: Democratic Club of the Santa Rita Area hosts a Current Events Discussion Group at Democratic Headquarters - Green Valley, Continental Shopping Plaza, 240 Continental Road (Green Valley). Join us at the weekly meeting of the Democratic Headquarters Current Events Discussion Group. We'll talk about some of the major events of the previous week, including but not limited to political topics, and try and go behind the news for a deeper understanding. For more information please contact Kathy at thekilleens@gmail.com.

1st Annual Working Women's Award Celebration in Honor of International Women's Day

Tuesday, March 8, 7:00 p.m.: CWA Local 7000 presents the 1st Annual Working Women’s Award Celebration in honor of International Women’s Day, at the IBEW Hall, 750 S. Tucson Boulevard. The celebration theme is, “Our Voices at Work, Union Women as Catalysts for Change.” Our celebration will highlight the accomplishments of union elected officials, stewards, organizers and active members. Without the leadership of these women, hard fought union victories would not have been possible. Our Keynote speaker will be Rebekah Friend, Executive Director of Arizona AFL-CIO. The festivities will feature scrumptuous desserts,delicious drinks, door prizes,and a special raffle! Tickets are $35. To purchase your tickets in advance please mail checks to CWA Local 7000, 877 S. Alvernon Way Ste. 100, Tucson, AZ 85711. Make checks payable to CWA Local 7000. For more information and to RSVP please contact Maritza at (520) 245-7867 or maritza@cwa7000.org.

A Salute to Don Bivens

Friday, March 11, 5:30 p.m.: Please join us for a Salute to Don Bivens at the home of Ann Wallack. For more information and to RSVP, please contact Jamie Patton at jpatton@azdem.org.

Center for Inquiry of Southern Arizona Lecture on Separation of Church and State

Saturday, March 12, 10:00 a.m.: Center for Inquiry of Southern Arizona will hold a day long lecture, 10:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., on the separation of church and state, at the DuVal Auditorium at the university Medical Center, 1501 N. Campbell Avenue (Tucson). Speakers will discuss the importance of secularism and the legal and legislative efforts to oppose religious interference in government. For more information see www.centerforinquiry.net/saz.

Legislative District 28 Annual St. Patrick's Day Fundraiser

Sunday, March 13, 2:00 p.m.: Legislative District 28 Annual St. Patrick Day Fundraiser, at the home of George and Margie Cunningham (Tucson). The LD 28 St. Patrick's Day Annual Fundraiser is the unofficial campaign kick-off event in Pima County. Anyone who is anyone running for political office in Arizona wants to be seen at the home of George and Margie Cunningham celebrating St. Patty's day and giving a short stump speech. Traditional corned beef and cabbage and pot luck side dishes and desserts. Tickets can be purchased in advance for $20, $25 at the door. For more information please contact Ted Prezelski at (520) 326-3716 (leave message) or prezelski@aol.com.

Pinal County Fair

March 16 - 20: Pinal County Fair, at the Pinal County Fairgrounds, just 7 miles east of Casa Grande at Eleven Mile Corner Road. Don't miss the premier Pinal County Fair family event. Entertainment, nightly concerts, exhibits, Shopping, Fair Food, Carnival, Livestock shows, 4H Exhibits and more. For more information call (520) 866-7653 or see Pinal County Fairgrounds.

Arizona List 7th Annual Luncheon Celebrations

Friday, March 18, 11:00 a.m.: Arizona List 7th Annual Celebration, at the Wyndham Hotel, 50 E. Adams Street (Phoenix).

Saturday, March 19, 11:00 a.m.: Arizona List 7th Annual Celebration, at the Marriott University Park Hotel, 880 E. Second Street (Tucson).

Theme: "How did we go from girl power to girls gone wild?" Guest speaker is Susan Douglas, one of America’s most entertaining and insightful cultural critics, blends humor with insight and offers an empathetic and sisterly guide to the images so many women love and hate with equal measure. In her most recent book, Enlightened Sexism, Douglas provides a sharp and irreverent look at our pop-culture icons, revealing the unfinished business of the women’s movement. For more information and to RSVP please contact (520) 327-0520 or info@arizonalist.org.

MCDP Night Out With Los Suns

Friday, March 18, 7:00 p.m.: Maricopa County Democratic Party Night Out with Los Suns (Phoenix Suns), at the US Airways Center. Phoenix Suns vs. Golden State Warriors. Purchase your tickets for as low as $25 and get: free light rail ride to the arena with your ticket, a group photo with a Suns personality, a Suns player retro jersey bag, and a MCDP welcome on the jumbotron! These tickets are deeply discounted for members of our group. Get lower levels seats for $60 - $75 and get upper level seats for only $25!! March 16th is the deadline to purchase tickets. For more information and to participate please contact Bernie Bergman with the MCDP at bernardbergmann@gmail.com.

Mohave County St. Patrick's Day Dinner

Saturday, March 19, 5:00 p.m.: Mohave County St. Patrick's Day Dinner, at Pebble Lake Clubhouse, 5071 Stony Drive (Fort Mohave). Come for a home cooked Irish dinner and stay to enjoy our guest speaker, Felecia Rotellini! Tickets are $25.00, For more information please call Mary McLaughlin at (928) 753-0006 or Dave Hamilton at (928) 754-4441.

Legislative District 29 3rd Annual Wine & Cheese Potluck

Sunday, March 20, 2:00 p.m.: District 29 Democrats' 3rd Annual Wine & Cheese Potluck, at the home of Matt Heinz, 840 S. Meyer Avenue (Tucson). Please bring your choice of: Wine (or non-alcoholic beverage), Cheese (all kinds welcome), Fruit or Crackers, and a tiny $10 donation for LD 29. For more information please contact Matt Kopec at (520) 400-3020 or LD29Chair@gmail.com.

4th Annual District 17 Democrats Chili Cook-off

Saturday, March 26, 4:00 p.m.: Legislative District 17 Democrats' 4th Annual Chili Cook-off, at the Barnes House, 1104 S. Ash Avenue, Tempe (free parking on Saturdays). We expect many Democratic elected officials (and future candidates) to attend. Prizes awarded in 3 categories: chili, salsa, and guacamole. Also featuring Mexican beers and the Turning-Arizona-Blue Martini! Proceeds to benefit the Maricopa County Democratic Party. Tickets are $25 ($15 for Young Democrats and $10 for kids). Buy your ticket at: www.actblue.com/page/chili_cook-off. For more information and to submit an entry please contact Angie Crouse at angie_crouse@hotmail.com.

Coconino County Democratic Party - Save the Date for Howard Dean!

Sunday, March 27: Save the date for a pair of Coconino County Democratic Party events featuring Howard Dean! Mark your calendar for the big day and look for more details to come!

Yuma County Fair - Good Old Fashioned Fun

March 29 - April 3: Yuma County Fair, at Yuma County Fairgrounds, 2520 E. 32nd Street (Yuma). This year the theme is "good Old Fashioned Fun." Admission: Tuesday - Dollar Day - $1.00; Wednesday - Sunday - $5.00 Adults - $3.00 Children 6 -12; Children Age 5 and under FREE. Parking: FREE. For more information call (928) 726-4420 or see Yuma County Fair.

Southern Arizona LULAC 22nd Annual Youth Leadership Conference and Educators' Banquet

Thursday, March 31, 5:30 p.m.: Southern Arizona LULAC hosts its 22nd Annual Youth Leadership Conference, and its Educators' Banquet at the Copper Ballroom, Tucson Convention Center, 260 S. Church Avenue (Tucson). No host cocktails at 5:30, dinner at 6:30. We will be honoring outstanding community leaders and will present them with LULAC's most prestigious award, the National Presidential Community Service Award. Our Student Art and Writing Contest winners and their parents will also be our guests at the Banquet.Tickets are $75 per person or $750 for a table of ten. For more information about the Youth Leadership Conference and to RSVP for the Educators' Banquet please call (520) 903-2838 and visit the web site at Southern AZ LULAC Youth Leadership Education Banquet. (http://www.sazlulacylc.org/Documents/2011%20Proposal.pdf)

Maricopa County Fair

April 13 - 17: Maricopa County Fair, at the State Fair Grounds, 1826 W. McDowell Road (Phoenix). Admission: General $8, kids under eight FREE. Weds. is Free Seniors Day (55+). Gates open 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Weds, Thurs & Sun; !:00 a.m. to Midnight Fri. & Sat. Parking: $10 per car. For more information call (602) 252-0717 or see Maricopa-County-Fair.

Pima County Fair - Centennial Celebration

April 14 - 24: Pima County Fair, at the Pima County Fair Grounds, 11300 S. Houghton Road one mile South of I-10 (Tucson). This year the theme is "Centennial Celebration." Admission: General $8, children 6-10 $2, children under 5 FREE. Parking: $5 per car. Gates open weekdays at Noon, weekends at 10:00 a.m. Carnival midway opens weekdays at 3:00 p.m., weekends at 11:00 a.m. Details regarding entertainment and concerts TBA. For more information call (520) 762-9100 or see Home of Pima County Fair.

Arizona Democratic Party Spring State Committee Meeting

Saturday, April 16, 9:00 a.m.: Arizona Democratic Party Spring State Committee Meeting in Tucson, details TBA. Followed at 6:00 p.m. by a Pima County Democratic Party fundraising dinner honoring Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, details TBA.

Verde Valley Fair - Cowboy Boots and Country Roots

April 27 - May 1: Verde Valley Fair, at 800 E. Cherry Street (Cottonwood). This year the theme is "Cowboy Boots and Country Roots." For more information call (928) 634-3290 or see Verde Valley Fair.

Coconino County Democratic Party's Annual Roosevelt-Kennedy Dinner

Saturday, April 30: Coconino County Democratic Party's Annual Roosevelt-Kennedy Dinner fundraiser, at the High Country Conference Center, 201 E. Butler Avenue (Flagstaff). For more information please contact Kelsey Blakley at (928) 214-0393 or kelseyb@ccdem.org.

Cartoon of The Week

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

 

 

The coming week: Legislative edition

by Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings

As usual, all info gathered from online sources, mostly the website of the Arizona Legislature, and subject to change without notice. 

While there are more active committee agendas than last week, they're still short enough for both the Senate's and the House's work to be combined into one post.

Most committees in each chamber, other than the respective chambers' Rules committees, are now considering bills that have passed the other chamber.

Note:  an "SHR" prefix indicates that a room is a Senate Hearing Room;  "HHR" indicates a House Hearing Room.

All legislative calendars (1st Read, 2nd Read, 3rd Read, COW, and Caucus) can be found here.

House committee agendas can be found here.

Senate committee agendas can be found here.

All legislative bill proposals can be found here.

Capitol events for the week can be found here (courtesy the lege's website) and here (courtesy Arizona Capitol Times).

On the Senate side of the Capitol -

- Rules will meet on Monday in Caucus Room 1 at 1 p.m.  Lots of bad bills to be rubberstamped for floor consideration later in the week.  However, SB1611, Russell Pearce's latest anti-immigrant measure isn't on this particular agenda, even though many of the other bills that were on the same Appropriations agenda last week *are.*  Not sure why not, but it could be related to the hubbub over Pearce's "blacklisting" of certain critics from the Senate building.  Or maybe he is getting some flak from his own caucus over breaking his promise not to push his nativist agenda before the state has a balanced budget.

Of course, SB1611 could pop up on a Rules agenda later in the week.  Rules is a gatekeeper for the legislative leadership, and all bills must be considered by the committee prior to floor consideration.  If a Senate President/House Speaker doesn't want a particular bill to reach the floor, he can just ensure that it never sees a Rules agenda.

At this point in the legislative session, it isn't unusual for the Rules committees in each chamber to meet two or more times each week.    Right now, only Monday's agendas are posted.

- Natural Resources and Transportation will meet on Monday in SHR109 at 2 p.m.  Relatively quiet.  Of possible interest:  HB2360, relating to the membership of the Game and Fish Commission Appointment Recommendation Board.  Legislative summary here.

- Judiciary will meet on Monday in SHR1 at 2 p.m.  Looks quiet thus far, but this committee is chaired by Ron "fly a confederate flag on the Fourth of July" Gould, so that could change at any time.

- Education will meet on Monday in SHR3 at 2 p.m.  Looks relatively quiet, but there could be some fireworks over HB2197, barring the establishment or operation of charter schools in "an age restricted community in unorganized territory."  Better known as a "keep children out of Sun City" bill.  Also: a presentation from AZ Superintendent of Public Instruction John Huppenthal.

- Banking and Insurance will meet on Tuesday in SHR3 at 2 p.m.  Looks quiet so far.

- Government Reform will meet on Wednesday in SHR1 at 9 a.m.  On the agenda:  HB2005, loosening the rules regarding subdivisions "acting in concert."  Looks like the real estate equivalent of weakening antitrust laws.  Legislative summary here.  All House Democrats opposed this one.

- Commerce and Energy will meet on Wednesday in SHR109 at 9 a.m.  On the agenda:  HB2558, giving landlords the ability to collect larger, utility-related, deposits from tenants.  All House Democrats opposed this one.

- Public Safety and Human Services will meet on Wednesday in SHR3 at 2 p.m.  Quiet so far.

- Water, Land Use, and Rural Development will meet on Wednesday in SHR3 at 2 p.m.  One presentation and no bills on the agenda thus far.

- Healthcare and Medical Liability Reform will meet on Wednesday in SHR1 at 2 p.m.  On the agenda:  HB2443, banning abortions whose purpose is race or gender selection.

- Finance will meet on Thursday at 9 a.m. in SHR1.  Looks quiet so far.

- Border Security, Federalism, and States Security will meet on Thursday at 9 a.m. in SHR109.  No bills on the agenda, so this *should* be a quiet one, but leave it to Sylvia Allen to come up with this agenda item -

4. Presentations

Attorney General Tom Horne -- Update on the Arizona Lawsuit
David & Donna Lamoreaux -- Drug & Human Smuggling Route Affecting Farmers
Richard Valdemar -- The Unholy Trinity: American Street Gangs, Mexican Drug Cartels, & Radical Islamic
Terrorists

After the meeting, collectibile Burning Cross keychains will be available in the lobby.

On Monday's Third Read (final passage) Calendar:

SB1334, allowing hunting within city limits, and forbidding a municipality from regulating same

SB1388, barring Maricopa County from regulating the sale of consumer fireworks in unincorporated areas of the county

SB1546, declaring that the state can use eminent domain to acquire federally-owned land.

SB1466, giving a justice of the peace control over the prosecution of a case in his/her court, specifically requiring a county attorney to gain a JP's approval before diverting or defering prosecution of an offender.  The JP pushing for this, Lester Pearce of the North Mesa Justice Court in Maricopa County and brother of Senate President Russell Pearce, is noted for his belief that the Maricopa County Attorney's Office is too lenient.  And that the amendment to the U.S. Constitution granting the right to vote to women is a violation of states' rights.

SB1174, barring the establishment or operation of a charter school in an age-restricted community.

SB1231, decreasing the state's revenue expenditure limit

SB1403, barring conditioning the award of public works projects on the use of union labor

SB1406, allowing the governor to enter into interstate compacts/New Confederacy treaties regarding the creation of a fence along the border with Mexico

SB1465, barring the acceptance of consular-issued identification cards as legally valid identification

SB1525, restricting a municipality's ability to assess development fees

SB1530, creating the most important appointed position in the state, that of "Poet Laureate."

SCR1024, asserting state sovereignty over "intrastate water resources."  A "federal government GO AWAY!" postcard to D.C.

SCR1025, a proposed amendment to the Arizona Constitution to eliminate public funding for candidates for public office (aka - end Clean Elections)


...On the House side of the Capitol -

- Rules will meet on Monday in HHR4 at 1 p.m.  Long agenda, lots of bad bills, rubber stamp.

- Energy and Natural Resources will meet on Monday in HHR4 at 2 p.m.  Looks quiet so far.

- Education will meet on Monday in HHR3 at 2 p.m. or upon adjournment of the House floor session.  Looks quiet so far, but sometime bills are "sneaky bad."

- Banking and Insurance will meet on Monday in HHR5 at 2 p.m.  On the agenda:  SB1094, "requires a legislative committee of reference to examine data from multiple sources and evaluate effectiveness when considering a legislative proposal regarding mandated health coverage"; SB1122, exempting faith-based "health care sharing ministries" from insurance regulations.

- Government will meet on Tuesday in HHR4 at 2 p.m.  Looks quiet so far.

- Employment and Regulatory Affairs will meet on Tuesday in HHR3 at 2 p.m.  Looks quiet so far.

- Military Affairs and Public Safety will meet on Wednesday in HHR3 at 9 a.m.  Looks quiet so far.

- Health and Human Services will meet on Wednesday in HHR4 at 9:30 a.m.  Looks quiet so far. 

- Commerce will meet on Wednesday in HHR5 at 10 a.m.  Looks quiet so far. 

- Technology and Infrastructure will meet on Thursday in HHR1 at 9 a.m.  On the agenda (possibly):  SB1171, allowing a municipality to force a county to transfer a wastewater treatment facility to the municipality.

- Judiciary will meet on Thursday in HHR4 at 9 a.m.  Looks quiet so far.

- Agriculture and Water will meet on Thursday in HHR5 at 9 a.m.  Looks quiet so far.

Monday's Third Read calendar hasn't been posted for the House yet, but the calendar (agenda) for the Committee of the Whole, or COW session has been.  COW is the last chance to debate or amend bills on the floor of a chamber of the legislature.

There are fourteen bills on the House COW calendar, but two are certain to grab most of the attention, both at the Capitol and in the media.

HB2384 and HB2416, both attacking women's reproductive rights.

From the legislative summary of HB2384: "HB 2384 prohibits the use of public funds for abortion procedures to any person or entity that provides, pays for, promotes, provides coverage of or referrals for abortion and training related to abortion procedures that are paid by tuition or fees for students at an Arizona university or community college.

From the legislative summary of HB2416: "HB 2416 specifies an abortion shall not be performed without voluntary and informed consent by the woman receiving an abortion and prohibits the use of telemedicine to perform an abortion.


Note:  Given the length of the floor calendars for Monday, both Third Read and COW, no one should expect Monday's (non-Rules) committee meetings to start on time.

Gunrunning from the U.S. to Mexico

by David Safier

I don't know where to start in this Media Matters article about gunrunning from the U.S. to Mexico, there's so much important stuff to write about. But this seems like a good entry point: the story of Uriel Patino, who bought 232 weapons in 18 visits to the same store, saying they were for his personal use.

According to the indictment, Uriel Patino, a legal resident of the U.S., paid cash last Nov. 3 for two AK-47 rifles from Lone Wolf Trading Co., a Glendale, Ariz. strip mall gun store. A week later, he came back and bought 10 more AK-47s. Two days later, he purchased five more AKs. A month after that, he bought 20 more. In all, he bought 232 weapons -- 42 handguns and 190 assault rifles -- all from the same store, in 18 visits. With each purchase, Patino passed an instant background check and signed a form attesting the firearms were for his personal use.

Why is this possible? Because there is no law saying gun stores have to report the sale of multiple assault rifles to the same person.

Since 1993, it's been the law that gun stores have to notify authorities when a person buys two or more handguns in the same week. Assault weapons? No such law.

The article makes an obvious, yet overlooked point. Conservative lawmakers want to secure the border with a longer fence and more guards, and they cite threats of violence as one of their main arguments, yet they refuse to do anything to limit the flow of guns across the border, even though reporting multiple purchases won't hamper the rights of people to buy guns for their personal use. Quite a disconnect.

According to Alonzo Peña, the former Deputy Director of ICE, speaking at the fifth annual Border Security Expo in Phoenix recently, we're not taking our share of the responsibility for the bloodshed in Mexico or the potential for violence spilling across the border.

"We are the consumers of the drugs and we are the suppliers of the weapons," said Peña. "The drugs come to America, the money and the guns go back. U.S. weapons are giving these cartels the firepower they need. Much more needs to be done. There is a huge gap between what we are capable of doing to stop illegal gun trafficking to Mexico and what is actually being done."

I won't give you all the stats in the article, though they are horrific. But here is a photo of "Weapons seized in March 2010 by Mexican military police from La Familia Michoacana Cartel, more commonly known as La Familia, a Mexican drug trafficking organization and criminal syndicate."

There is no reason why one person should be allowed to buy 232 weapons like these without anyone asking, Why so many?

"I'm-the-Law-Pearce" vs. "I-Won't-Clamp-Down-Adams"

by David Safier

I've been told House Speaker Kirk Adams and Senate Pres. Russell Pearce are not the best of friends. I don't know if there's any personal animus, but I know neither wants to help the other move up to the next political rung. Maybe it's because both of them covet one particular rung.

I posted this morning about "I'm-the-Law Pearce" saying Sal Reza, a political activist, is banned from the Senate building. Pearce has no authority for the ban based on state law or the Constitution (Bye-bye "Rule-of-Law Russell"). He figures it's enough that he's Senate Pres. What he says, goes.

According to Howie Fischer, Pearce has gone even further in his desire to clamp down on everything he dislikes. He's thinking about banning bullhorns on the mall.

Pearce also told Capitol Media Services he is weighing whether to ban bullhorns and other amplifiers that have become commonplace at rallies on the lawn.

"We're just going to make it more respectful down there," he said. "They have a right to protest, bring signs and all that. But I'm not going to tolerate where they're loud and rude, disrupt other press conferences, disrupt other people."

The problem is, Adams doesn't agree.

It's going to quite a scene, isn't it? People standing an inch behind the line Pearce draws in the grass, their bullhorns turned up to eleven, pointed at the Senate building. When they don't have a specific cause to shout about, they'll just yell about their free speech rights.

QUESTION: What if someone tried Pearce's stunt when Tea Party members were protesting? Can't you just hear the Nazis/Hates-Freedom/1st-Amendment sound bites flying like spittle from Russell's lips?

Breaking: Sen. Scott Bundgaard involved in a domestic violence incident

By Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings

From the Arizona Republic -

Scott Bundgaard, R-Peoria, the majority leader of the Arizona state Senate, was briefly taken into custody with marks on his body Saturday, indicating he had been involved in a fight, an act of domestic violence, Phoenix police officers said.

Sgt. Tommy Thompson said police responded to a call of a man pulling a woman out of a gold vehicle, which was stopped northbound next to the median on Arizona 51, just south of Cactus Road.

Bundgaard invoked his legislative immunity to avoid arrest and incarceration,  However the woman in the car, who also had marks on her body indicating involvement in a fight, Aubry Ballard, was arrested on an assault charge.

More details as they become available...

 

Corners of Speedway and Campbell in support of Wisconsin unions and The American Dream

by David Safier

The crowd supporting Wisconsin union workers was already substantial at 11:30, a half hour before the noontime event was to begin. By noon the rally dominated all four corners of Speedway and Campbell. By 1:00, my estimate is that there were a total of 600 people -- 500 minimum -- on the corners, heaviest on the northeast corner.

Horn honking was continuous -- lots of support from passing drivers. The best honking, of course, came from the basso blasts of the eighteen wheelers.

Here are partial views of all four corners.

Methinks the Republican Party miscalculated when it decided to play a game of cave-or-else with the public workers of Wisconsin. Right about now, I bet they're trying to figure out a way to shove the genie back in the bottle, but it may be too late.

Save the American Dream!

Ronald Reagan: one of the most elemental human rights is the right to belong to a free trade union

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I really resent the fact how extremists on the right today invoke a revisionist and fictitious false idol of Ronald Reagan as their justification for doing the most outrageous and most extreme things in his name. This false idol they worship (they may want to recheck the Second Commandment) is nothing at all like the complex and often contradictory man Ronald Reagan was.

Conservatives are currently citing Ronald Reagan's confrontation with the Professional Air Traffic Controlers Organization (PATCO) strike in 1981. "Ronald Reagan, union buster!" Nothing is ever as simple as it is in the simple minds of the conservative right. They tend to suffer from amnesia to forget inconvenient facts.

Conservatives would be shocked -- shocked I tell ya! -- to learn that Ronald Reagan was a union supporter, the politically convenient PATCO strike aside. FLASHBACK: Ronald Reagan Called Union Membership ‘One Of The Most Elemental Human Rights’:

Reagan was the only president in American history to have belonged to a union, the AFL-CIO affiliated Screen Actors Guild. And he even served six terms as president of the organized labor group. Additionally, Reagan was a staunch advocate for the collective bargaining rights of one of the world’s most famous and most influential trade unions, Poland’s Solidarity movement.

Founded in September 1980, Solidarity was formed in Soviet-occupied Poland as the USSR’s first free and independent trade union. By 1981, the union had grown to 10 million people and became a powerful force for demanding economic and political reforms within the Soviet Union. Solidarity began to use strikes to demand these reforms, and the Soviets responded by jailing their leaders and cracking down on their right to organize. During his Christmas address to the nation on December 23, 1981, President Reagan condemned the Soviet-backed Polish crackdowns on labor unions, promoting the “basic right of free trade unions and to strike”:

REAGAN: The Polish government has trampled underfoot to the UN Charter and Helsinki accords. It has even broken the Gdańsk Agreement of 1980 by which the Polish government recognized the basic right of free trade unions and to strike.

Watch it:

In a radio address given the following October, the former president escalated his rhetoric. Reagan condemned the Polish government’s outlawing of Solidarity, and attacked it for making it “clear they never had any intention of restoring one of the most elemental human rights — the right to belong to a free trade union”:

REAGAN: Ever since martial law was brutally imposed last December, Polish authorities have been assuring the world that they’re interested in a genuine reconciliation with the Polish people. But the Polish regime’s action yesterday reveals the hollowness of its promises. By outlawing Solidarity, a free trade organization to which an overwhelming majority of Polish workers and farmers belong, they have made it clear that they never had any intention of restoring one of the most elemental human rights—the right to belong to a free trade union.

Although Solidarity was not an American union, it is important to understand that much of its political program at the time was much farther to the left than any comparable U.S.-based unions. Solidarity’s economic platform in 1981 called for worker-owned businesses, social control of the food supply so as to ensure that everyone was fed, and for workers to decide what days of the week businesses would be able to declare holidays, among other things.

Ronald Reagan, lefty union activist and union supporter... admittedly when it was convenient to him.

Nonpartisan organization 'US Uncut' to demand corporations pay taxes

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

One of the favorite talking points of the right is that we have to lower corporate tax rates to make our state or country more economically competitive in the World. In fact, the Arizona legislature just approved lowering corporate tax rates in Arizona based upon this theory.

Corporate tax rates are largely irrelevant when more than two-thirds of U.S. corporations pay no taxes at all because of special interest deductions, tax exemptions, tax credits and tax subsidies. Two-thirds of US corporations didn't pay so much as a dime in taxes between 1998 and 2005, exploiting a multitude of loopholes, according to a Congressional report.

When corporations own the Congress, they write their own rules. The same is true at the Arizona legislature which is overrun by corporate lobbyists. Corporate tax evasion is a major industry.

Targeting corporations who evade taxes turned out to be quite the anti-austerity rallying cry in England recently where a new prime minister is pushing painful budget cuts for working people. Exclusive: Non-partisan ‘US Uncut’ group demands corporations pay taxes | The Raw Story:

Now, that same rallying cry is going out across the United States, where the anti-spending tea party movement has in recent years overshadowed the voices of those who want government to be more active on behalf of the middle class.

A new non-partisan group called US Uncut -- named after UK Uncut -- aims in part to challenge the tea party's push for lower corporate taxes. They instead want Congress stop letting wealthy corporations dodge their taxes.

"This is an issue that has been ignored for way too long," Carl Gibson, a US Uncut spokesman, told Raw Story. "Congress has been chipping away and chipping away at corporate responsibility to pay taxes."

"And now it's gotten to the point where the middle class is being sacrificed on the altar of deficit reduction, while big corporations are getting away with not paying any taxes at all."

US Uncut boasts "no central leadership," and appears to be as organic as grassroots movements get. Gibson, 23, of Jacksonville, Mississippi, founded the first chapter. He works a few part-time jobs and confesses to having no prior experience in organizing or in politics. He was inspired by the vibrancy of UK Uncut, and spurred into action after reading an article in The Nation magazine about replicating such a movement in the US.

Is US Uncut a "liberal" or "progressive" movement? "Absolutely not," Gibson said. "This is nonpartisan. We don't endorse any specific political ideology or candidate or party."

The movement will hold its first day of organizing on Saturday, February 26, with demonstrations mainly outside banks in 50 cities. It's expecting crowds in the dozens in the smaller cities and hundreds in some bigger cities.

"This is our first national day of action," Gibson said. "And all of us are coming together to say: before you take away housing subsidies, raise college tuition and fire teachers, just make sure that corporations are paying their fair share in taxes like the rest of us."

The broader goal is to "reshape the national debate" and challenge the tea party's narrative that "government can't do good things for people, and that we can't raise taxes, we can only cut."

"Maybe there isn't a spending problem. Maybe it's a revenue problem," Gibson said. "And it's not that the money's not there. The money is there. It's with these corporations who aren't paying taxes."

Well, Mr. Gibson, you are absolutely correct, on all points. However, this US Uncut grassroots movement -- unlike the corporate sponsored and billionaire funded Tea Party Astroturf -- will not be able to compete financially with these corporate front groups to get your message out. In the era of Citizens United v. FEC, all the money is on the side of the sheeple for the new corporatocracy. But keep up the good fight.

Gov. Scott Walker's Wisconsin Lie Exposed

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

NOTE: The following report should cause public employee pension fund managers and trustees, Arizona legislators, and knowledgable financial reporters to reexamine the facts and numbers asserted in the multi-part investigative report on Arizona's public employee pensions by The Arizona Republic from several weeks ago that relied heavily upon research and liberal use of quotations from the anti-union Goldwater Institute, a conservative think tank with a history of producing ideologically-biased studies of questionable scientific value. The Arizona Republic itself has a long and sordid history of anti-union bias in Arizona.

Rick Ungar blogs at Forbes magazine The Wisconsin Lie Exposed – Taxpayers Actually Contribute Nothing To Public Employee Pensions:

Pulitzer Prize winning tax reporter, David Cay Johnston, has written a brilliant piece for tax.com exposing the truth about who really pays for the pension and benefits for public employees in Wisconsin.

Gov. Scott Walker says he wants state workers covered by collective bargaining agreements to “contribute more” to their pension and health insurance plans. Accepting Gov. Walker’ s assertions as fact, and failing to check, creates the impression that somehow the workers are getting something extra, a gift from taxpayers. They are not. Out of every dollar that funds Wisconsin’ s pension and health insurance plans for state workers, 100 cents comes from the state workers.

Via tax.com

How can this be possible?

Simple. The pension plan is the direct result of deferred compensation- money that employees would have been paid as cash salary but choose, instead, to have placed in the state operated pension fund where the money can be professionally invested (at a lower cost of management) for the future.

Many of us are familiar with the concept of deferred compensation from reading about the latest multi-million dollar deal with some professional athlete. As a means of allowing their ball club to have enough money to operate, lowering their own tax obligations and for other benefits, ball players often defer payment of  money they are to be paid to a later date. In the meantime, that money is invested for the ball player’s benefit and then paid over at the time and in the manner agreed to in the contract between the parties.

Does anyone believe that, in the case of the ball player, the deferred money belongs to the club owner rather than the ball player? Is the owner simply providing this money to the athlete as some sort of gift? Of course not. The money is salary to be paid to the ball player, deferred for receipt at a later date.

* * *

Johnston goes on to point out that Governor Walker has gotten away with this false narrative because journalists have failed to look closely at how employee pension plans work and have simply accepted the Governor’s word for it. Because of this, those who wish the unions ill have been able to seize on that narrative to score points by running ads and spreading the word that state employees pay next to nothing for their pensions and that it is all a big taxpayer give-away.

* * *

If the Wisconsin governor and state legislature were to be honest, they would correctly frame this issue. They are not, in fact, asking state employees to make a larger contribution to their pension and benefits programs as that would not be possible - the employees are already paying 100% of the contributions.

What they are actually asking is that the employees take a pay cut.

That may or may not be an appropriate request depending on your point of view – but the argument that the taxpayers are providing state workers with some gift is as false as the argument that state workers are paid better than employees with comparable education and skills in private industry.

Maybe state workers need to take pay cut along with so many of their fellow Americans. But let’s, at the least, recognize this sacrifice for what it is rather than pretending they’ve been getting away with some sweet deal that now must be brought to an end.

UPDATE: Since this post was published earlier today, many commenters have made the point that, while it is true that it is state employees’ own money that funds the pension plan, when the pension plan comes up short it is up to the taxpayer to make up the difference.

There is some truth in this – but not as much as many seem to think. Because the pension plan is a defined benefit plan – requiring the state to pay the agreed benefit for however long the employee may live in retirement- if the employee lives longer than the actuarial plan anticipated, the taxpayer is on the hook for the pay-outs during the longer life.

But is this the fault of the state employees? The pension agreements are the result of collective bargaining. That means that the state has every opportunity to properly calculate the anticipated lifespan and then add on some margin for error. What’s more, the losses taken by the pension funds over the past few years can hardly be blamed on the employees.

Take a look at what Sue Urahn, an expert on the subject at the Pew Center on the States, has to say about this when describing the $1 trillion gap that existed between the $2.35 trillion states had set aside to pay for employees’ retirement benefits and the $3.35 trillion price tag of those promises at the end of 2008-

To a significant degree, the $1 trillion reflects states’ own policy choices and lack of discipline:

• • failing to make annual payments for pension systems at the levels recommended by their own actuaries;
• • expanding benefits and offering cost-of-living increases without fully considering their long-term price tag or determining how to pay for them; and
• • providing retiree health care without adequately funding it

Via Pew Center on the States

That is the point. While the governor of Wisconsin is busy trying to shift the blame to the workers in an effort to put an end to collective bargaining, the reality is that it was the state who punted on this – not the employees.

Further, by the state employee unions agreeing to the deal proposed by Walker on their benefits (as they have despite Walker’s refusal to accept it) they are taking on much - and possibly all – of the obligation out of their own pockets.

As a result, the taxpayers do not contribute to the public employee pension programs so much as serve as insurers. If their elected officials have been sloppy , the taxpayers must stand behind it. But if the market continues to perform as it has been performing this past year, don’t be surprised if the funding crisis begins to recede. If it does, what will you say then?

And I would add that public employee's are also taxpayers, something that too often gets overlooked in the media narrative to attack unions and their membership.

Update: Tea-Publican Tyranny in Wisconsin

Posted by AzBlue Meanie:

I didn't have a good video of the proceedings for the earlier post, but now I do.

After Democratic Rep. Gary Hebl finishes his debate time and yields the floor, there's a "flash vote" and the Republican majority passes the so-called "budget repair bill" (union busting bill). The vote was held open for only a few seconds, and most Democrats were not given the usual courtesy of time to push the button to vote from their desk. This was clearly a prearranged stunt. I have never seen this occur at any level of government.

Al Pacino's memorable line from "And Justice For All" immediately pops to mind: "You're out of order! You're out of order! The whole trial is out of order!"

The Speaker of the Assembly adjourns the Assembly and the authoritarian Tea-Publicans file out of the room to chants of "Shame! Shame! Shame!" from their Democratic colleagues whom they just disenfranchised of their right as duly elected Representatives to vote on the bill, and by extension, disenfranchised the voters of their districts whom they represent.

Rep. Hebl's closing remarks are a bitter irony to what occured immediately after.

This is how democracy dies. This is what tyranny looks like.

Notes on the Star

by David Safier

I have given the Star a heaping serving of praise lately -- especially considering the source: someone who scours the paper daily and often criticizes it for its lacks and excesses. My only criticism of late was more about its owner Lee Enterprises and the corporation's virulently anti-union stance.

That being said, today's editorial cartoon is right on the money when it comes to Wisconsin, unions, Gov. Walker and the Koch Brothers.

The cartoon is from RJ Matson of the St. Louis Post Dispatch. The Dispatch is a union paper Lee Enterprises bought in 2005, so this is an in-house cartoon from an off-the-anti-union-reservation paper. Kudos to the Star for running it.

I'll end with some highlights from Fitz's column today. But first: I've been more pleased with the Star's national coverage lately than I usually am. It seems fairer. It seems to be covering the kind of stories it often ignores. I've found its headlines to be anywhere from acceptable to good -- or at worst, nontoxic.

I hope this is a sign the paper is trying to do a better job of objectivity in its reporting of issues, local and national. I will withhold judgement, however, until I see its coverage when we get closer to elections, when it really matters.

Now, for some Fitz excerpts. It's so tough to choose just a few!

State Sen. Russell Pearce will be competing in the Tucson Rodeo. He will be riding illegal immigrants all the way to Congress.

[snip]

Needing lifesaving transplants, Tucsonans Courtney Parham, 23, and Benny Miranda, 39, have been sentenced to die by Arizona's Republican lawmakers. Former student Parham and former Target employee Miranda were both found guilty of being "poor while ill" and thus eligible for the death penalty and "death by disease." So far their appeals have been denied. As a legislator noted, "We have to focus on important things like designating the state gun and giving tax breaks to corporations." [T'ain't funny, Fitz. But all too true. All too true.]

[snip]

State Sen. Al Melvin and his colleagues are moving to kill AHCCCS. It's a health-care safety net that covers more than 1 million working poor and nearly half a million children. Said Melvin, "Billions in federal funds will vanish, hospitals will close, thousands of jobs will be lost, people will die and a health-care network will be destroyed. But I don't know anybody in SaddleBrooke who needs AHCCCS."

"Rule o' Law Russell" becomes "I'm the Law Pearce"

by David Safier

Rule o' Law Russell can find neither the rule nor the law saying he can ban someone from the state Senate Building. Yet he says he has banned Sal Reza, and when Reza, who claims he hadn't heard of the ban, entered the building Thursday, he was arrested for misdemeanor tresspass.

Under what authority did Pearce ban Reza? You won't find it in the state constitution or any laws on the books.

In Pearce’s statement, he claims the state Constitution gives the president control over the Senate building.

So, according to Pearce, Presidential control means he can make any rules he damn well pleases. Because he's the law. Can he also banish Democratic lawmakers he disagrees with? Given his claim to presidential control over the Senate building, I can't see what would stop him.

Welcome to Russell Pearce's I'm-the-law Arizona.

ANYONE WANT TO CHOOSE THE DATE? It's prediction time. On what date will a law be passed by the legislature and signed by Brewer giving the Senate president the authority to ban people from the building? Anyone?

UPDATE: For a thorough discussion of Reza's ban and arrest, as well as Pearce's fact-challenged assertions about its causes, read the Phoenix New Times' Russell Pearce, Bald-Faced Liar? You Decide.

A rift in the space-time continuum today ...

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

From the department of things you just can't make up. A Google search on the Arizona Republic web site for an article turned up this fascinating result:

Even "the Google" at the Arizona Republic combines the tin foil hat conspiracy theorists of UFO ufologists with Tea Party birthers. I would love to see the venn diagram of the intersection between these conspiracy theorists.

This much crazy should never be allowed to congregate together in one community -- it could cause a rift in the space-time continuum.

I understand that stores in the Phoenix metropolitan area have had a run on tin foil and are experiencing shortages.

h/t The Tin Foil Hat Party, http://www.tfhp.org/

Arizona Legislature: week in review

By Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings

...and a sneak peek at next week...

- Signed into law this week: HB2167, banning "Spice," a dangerous synthetic version of marijuana.  Passed both chambers and all commitees in those chambers unanimously.  Because of an "emergency" clause, this law goes into effect immediately.

- Controversial bills that passed one or the other chamber this week -

...HB2558, allowing landlords to require larger, utility-related, deposits from tenants.  Passed committee and the entire House on party line votes.  Slated for Senate committee consideration on Wednesday.

...HB2443, banning abortions intended for race or gender selection.  Passed by a mostly party line vote.  Scheduled for Senate committee consideration on Wednesday.  Arizona Capitol Times coverage here.

...SB1225, makes forgery in connection with the purchase, lease or renting of a dwelling that is used as a drop house as a class 3 felony.  All Republicans and approximately 1/2 of the Democrats in the Senate voted for this.  Not assigned to a House committee as yet.

...SB1306, relating to landlords; tenants; bedbud control.  Passed the Senate by a truly split vote - of the twelve who voted against it, six were Democrats and six were Republicans.  Not assigned to a House committee as yet.

...SB1470, the dissolution of the Mohave County Water Authority.  Barely passed the Senate (16 - 14).  All Democrats and five Republicans voted against the measure.  Not assigned to a House Committee as yet.

- Bills passing committee this week, and thus are still alive: 

...Senate Appropriations held a marathon meeting starting Tuesday afternoon and continuing into the wee hours of Wednesday morning.  They passed a number of bad bills, relating to immigration, birthright citizenship, dissolving the Arizona Board of Regents, implementing drug testing for welfare recipients and, oh year, ending AHCCCS.  Full summary of the meeting here.  One of the many lowlights was the passage of SB1611, Russell Pearce's latest anti-immigrant bill.  Summary here.

...SB1609, making extensive changes to the state''s public employee pension plans.  Passed Senate Finance 3 - 1, 3 not voting.  Scheduled for Rules Committee consideration on Monday; probable floor consideration later in the week.

...SB1167, another bill to make extensive changes to the state's public employee pension plans.  Passed House Employment and Regulatory Affairs by a 5 - 4 vote.  Next up: Rules Committee, but not scheduled as yet.

...HB2070, establishing the "state guard," an armed force outside of the National Guard that is only answerable to the governor, and funded by monies redirected from the National Guard, passed House Appropriations on a party line vote.  Next up: Rules Committee, not yet scheduled.

...HB2301, requiring school districts to spend at least 50% of their Maintenance and Operations budgets on teacher salaries, and lift the restriction on "soft capital" (books and desks and so on) money that required that such money be expended on soft capital, passed House Appropriations on a mostly party line vote.  Next up: Rules Committee on Monday.


- Other news at the legislature:

...Senate President has evidently created a "blacklist," barring from the Senate building certain critics.  This resulted in the arrest of Latino activist Sal Reza on Thursday.  He went to the Senate to meet with his Senator, Sen. Steve Gallardo.  Upon entering the building, Reza was asked to leave.  When he refused to do so, he was arrested, even after Gallardo informed the police that Reza was there to meet him.

Pearce has denied the existence of such a list, but Senate Democratic Leader David Schapira (D-LD17) tweets otherwise.

Prediction: Lots of lawsuits, most/all of which the state will lose, and all of which will be paid for by taxpayer funds.

...The four members of the new Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) met Thursday to interview candidates and select the fifth member of the AIRC.  They conducted the interviews, but delayed the selection of the fifth member, who will also serve as chair of the AIRC, until Tuesday.


Sneak peek at next week:  The agenda for Thursday's meeting of the Senate Border Security, Federalism, and States Sovereignty Committee (9 a.m., SHR109) includes the following -

4. Presentations

Attorney General Tom Horne -- Update on the Arizona Lawsuit
David & Donna Lamoreaux -- Drug & Human Smuggling Route Affecting Farmers
Richard Valdemar -- The Unholy Trinity: American Street Gangs, Mexican Drug Cartels, & Radical Islamic Terrorists

What?  David Duke wasn't available??

- New bill introduced this week: SCR1059, declaring the legislature's support for the governor of Wisconsin in his Koch-fueled quest to roll back collective bargaining rights for public employees in his state.  Not on an agenda as yet, but sure to be fast-tracked.  It'll probably pass the Senate by the end of the week.

Later...

Gates: I'm looking at you, Rummy

by David Safier

SecDef Robert Gates thinks any future SecDef who recommends anything similar to the invasion of Iraq should "have his head examined."

And he was talking to cadets at West Point when he said it.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates bluntly told an audience of West Point cadets on Friday that it would be unwise for the United States to ever fight another war like Iraq or Afghanistan, and that the chances of carrying out a change of regime in that fashion again were slim.

“In my opinion, any future defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should ‘have his head examined,’ as General MacArthur so delicately put it,” Mr. Gates told an assembly of Army cadets here.

Current power speaking truth to past power. And in Gates' case, I don't think he's scoring political points. He's saying what he thinks.

A significant, and long needed, change in Teachers Union policy

by David Safier

As a teacher and good union man for my 30-plus year tenure, the one thing that always made me wince was when the union went to the mat to save the jobs of teachers who were, in a word, lousy. The union always said it was protecting those teachers so the rest of us kept our rights. I swallowed hard and went on with my teaching.

Now Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, is looking at changing the worst trait of teachers' unions: defending the teacher who should not be in the classroom.

Responding to criticism that tenure gives even poor teachers a job for life, Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, announced a plan Thursday to overhaul how teachers are evaluated and dismissed.

It would give tenured teachers who are rated unsatisfactory by their principals a maximum of one school year to improve. If they did not, they could be fired within 100 days.

This is not capitulation to the union bashers. To the contrary, it takes away one of their most effective ways to say teachers' unions don't care about our children.

Threading this needle -- preserving vital teacher protections while making it possible to get rid of bad teachers -- is more difficult than it sounds and will lead to all kinds of problems, but it's a move in the right direction. Protect teacher tenure? Yes. Use it to shield bad teachers? No.

My estimate is that somewhere in the neighborhood of 10% of teachers just don't have what it takes. Another 10-25% are gifted teachers. The rest are on the continuum from more-or-less-adequate to quite good. If we can get rid of some of those bottom 10%-ers, that's great. To raise the rest of the teacher population to higher levels of excellence, we need to attract more gifted people into the profession, not put a boot on the neck of those who are doing their damndest. To do that, we need better wages, better teaching conditions and a greater national respect for the often selfless, always difficult, ever important job teachers do for our children every day they walk into the classroom.

Time to lace up your 'comfortable pair of shoes,' Mr. President - we're walking on Saturday

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

"If American workers are being denied their right to organize when I'm in the White House, I will put on a comfortable pair of shoes and I will walk on that picket line with you as president of the United States."

-- Barack Obama, while making a campaign speech in Spartanburg, SC on November 3, 2007.

"Rally to Save the American Dream" in Tucson Saturday

by David Safier

Rallies will be held nationwide Saturday to support the people fighting for their collective bargaining rights in Wisconsin. In Tucson, the gathering will be at noon at the corner of Speedway and Campbell. You can get all the information, sign up if you wish and find out who is sponsoring the national rallies here.

A better segment on Wisconsin on Fox than any article in the Star?

by David Safier

This took me by surpise. I know Shepherd Smith, who has a midday show on Fox News, is a reasonably honest broker. I occasionally watch him for a few minutes when I'm channel surfing and find myself impressed by his rationality and grasp of the issues. But this four minute segment in which he says the Wisconsin showdown is purely political union busting is amazing, in a good way. I haven't watched enough CNN to know if they've nailed it as well as Shep does here, but I certainly don't remember reading anything this clear in the Star.

It's worth a watch just to realize the Fox monolith isn't completely monolithic, though you gotta wonder if Smith's Fox days are numbered. It's also worth wathcing to see Juan Williams substantially agree with Smith, then take a few baby steps to the right toward the end of the segment.

 

What did Rule o' Law Russell say?

by David Safier

Much as I trust AZ Blue Meanie to get his facts and quotes straight, this time I did a double take and had to check the source. Is it possible Rule o' Law Russell Pearce said,

"It's not the law of the land when a Supreme Court issues a bad decision."

Yep. The Meanie got it right, if we can trust the Republic reporter to quote Pearce correctly, which I assume we can.

Let me try to wrap my mind around this. Whenever anyone objects to something Pearce agrees with that has been signed into law and/or approved by the courts, Pearce repeats over and over again, "It's the law." "It's the rule of law." "It's the law."

But according to Pearce, a Supreme Court decision he disagrees with is not the law of the land, because he disagrees with it.

Here's my understanding of basic civics. A federal law which has passed or a decision by the Supreme Court is the law of the land until another law or another decision changes things. It's not the law of the land simply because Pearce happens to agree with it.

It may be time to change the most-powerful-political-person-in-Arizona's title from "Rule o' Law Russell" to "I Am the Law Pearce."

Arizona's Tea-Publican Senate Votes to Secede From The United States

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Is there a Confederate battle jack flag flying over the Arizona capitol building this morning?

Because last night the Neoconfederate insurrectionist Tea-Publicans in the Senate followed the inglorious precedent set by South Carolina in 1832 and again in 1860 by passing a "nullification act," which asserts that Arizona can nullify and refuse to abide by any federal laws with which it does not want to comply. State Senate approves bill letting lawmakers nullify federal mandates.

Or, more accurately, any federal laws that our de facto governor, "King" Russell Pearce, deems not to like. I kid you not. "King" Russell Pearce was quoted in the Arizona Republic on Thursday Arizona bills a test of federal government authority making this amazing statement:

Some Arizona lawmakers are tired of the federal government telling the state what to do.

They don't believe federal requirements, Supreme Court rulings or decades of precedent are good reasons to require state taxpayers to pay to educate illegal immigrants or provide them with health care. And, this year, they're doing something about it.

* * *

Pearce said Plyler's 5-4 decision is ripe for reconsideration.

"It's not the law of the land when a Supreme Court issues a bad decision," Pearce said. "It's to be challenged and overturned."

You mean like Bush v. Gore (5-4) and Citizens United v. FEC (5-4)? Oh, you meant only those decisions with which you disagree based upon your own revisionist and entirley incorrect interpretation of the Constitution. And you will be the "decider-in-chief" for the state of Arizona. Who the hell died and made him king? This demagogue has to go now.

This is not how a democratic Republic works. As Paul Bender, professor of law and dean emeritus at Arizona State University's Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, explained:

"You can't have a country if the component parts of the country feel that they can disregard the central law when they don't like it," Bender said. "Being part of the system means that while you are going to disagree with things that the central government says, that doesn't mean you're free to disregard them. Because if every state felt free to disregard federal law, we wouldn't have a country anymore."

But these Neoconfederate insurrectionist Tea-Publicans want no part of the United States government. They really do want to secede from the United States. Keep in mind that "nullification" is synonymous with "secession," State Senate approves bill letting lawmakers nullify federal mandates:

State senators voted Thursday to let lawmakers nullify federal laws[.]

The measure, given preliminary approval on a voice vote, would set up a committee empowered to review all past and future federal actions to determine whether they are constitutional. That panel's recommendations of unconstitutionality would go to the full Legislature.

It would take only a simple majority of lawmakers to declare the action null and void. And if that happens, "this state and its citizens shall not recognize or be obligated to live under the statute, mandate or executive order.''

* * *

A final roll-call vote on SB 1433 will send it to the House.

President Andrew Jackson was prepared to go to war with the state of South Carolina over the "Nullification Crisis," or "Secession Crisis," of 1828 – 1832 (see how these terms are used synonymously?) before South Carolina backed down and Congress amended the Tariff Acts.

President Abraham Lincoln -- the father of the Republican Party who is now rejected by the Neoconfederate insurrectionist Tea-Publicans who have hijacked the brand name of this dead political party -- fought a Civil War to preserve federal authority and the Union against the very same discredited "nullification" theory and secession.

This vote by the Arizona Senate dishonors the memory of millions of Americans who have fought and died to preserve the Union and the Constitution since the nation's founding. They should be publicly shamed and removed from elected office for violating their oath of office. They are beneath contempt.

Sen. Paula Aboud, D-Tucson, mocked the Tea-Publican "nullification act" by proposing an amendment that Pima County should be allowed to "separate" from the state of Arizona should the state vote to secede from the United States by enacting SB 1433, what I will label the "West Virginia amendment" (I insist upon using the correct legal terminology; unfortunately, Sen. Aboud did incorrectly use "secession" in making her amendment). The Senate, on a voice vote, killed her amendment.

Sen. Aboud said her amendment was intended to be as ridiculous as she believed the underlying bill to be. Secession [Separation] from Arizona pushed:

"But while this is tongue-in-cheek, I can't tell you the overwhelming support I'm getting from southern Arizona to secede [separate]," Aboud said. "We don't want to be part of a state that continues to embarrass Arizona."

I'm sorry, Senator. These Neoconfederate insurrectionist Tea-Publicans really are serious about secession from the United States government. This is no longer a laughing matter to be mocked.

The fools in our political media in this state who continue to treat this as a side-show for their amusement and entertainment rather than the serious threat to our democratic Republican form of government that it is had better wake up to what is occurring here and start reporting responsibly.

Tea-Publican Tyranny in Wisconsin

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Laws and rules are for everyone else to follow. For authoritarian Republicans, anything goes. "Laws? We don't follow no stinkin' laws." IOKIYAR.

This played out early this morning in Wisconsin. Talking Points Memo reports WI Assembly GOP Passes Walker Budget In Surprise Vote -- Dems Chant "Shame!":

The Wisconsin State Assembly has just passed Gov. Scott Walker's budget repair bill, including its controversial provisions to eliminate almost all collective bargaining rights for public employee unions as well as many other provisions to weaken union organizing.

After much buildup in the 61-hour debate -- of Republicans wanting things to be over, and Democrats railing against Republicans who they said would cut off debate -- at about 1 AM Speaker Pro Tempore Bill Kramer (R) announced that he would hear a voice vote for a roll call on final passage. Immediately, the majority Republicans shouted their ayes, and the Democrats were booing, as they tried to be recognized to demand a separate motion to cut off debate.

Then Kramer called the vote. Within seconds, the digital vote system on the wall announced 51 ayes and 17 nays, and voting was suddenly closed. With a total of 96 members, that got to a majority for the bill but left 28 members who hadn't had a chance yet to vote.

At that point, the Democrats got up, chanting "Shame! Shame! Shame!" and similar exclamations, as the Republicans filed out of the room.

There were many Democrats I spoke to and overheard in the chamber, who said they didn't get a chance to vote, or that they were pushing the "No" button at their desks as hard as they could -- keep in mind that a majority of their 38-member caucus was recorded as casting no votes at all. (Interesting to note there were also four Republicans who voted no -- after having joined every party-line vote against Democratic amendments. Some Dems speculated that the GOP leadership had allowed some Assembly Republicans in marginal districts to skip the vote or vote 'no' on the final tally.)

Some of the Democrats I spoke to, such as state Rep. Kelda Roys, maintained that the vote was illegal.

* * *

Afterwards, the Dems filed out into the rotunda, to cheers of "Thank you! Thank you!" from the protesters who have filled the halls of the Capitol for over a week. An interesting question has been whether the day and night Capitol building protests would end after this vote. But as I write this in the Capitol's press room, it's up in the air to me whether the protesters will even clear out at all. I can still hear them chanting and singing songs out in the halls -- including at least one round of "Hell no, we won't go!"

Keep in mind that this is not the end of the issue -- far from it. The 14 state Senate Democrats remain in exile in Illinois, preventing the state Senate from having the three-fifths quorum required to take a vote on the budget. For now, Wisconsin has become ground zero in an unexpected but pitched battle over the political future of the labor movement and the question of whether the Tea Party-fueled GOP resurgence of 2010 will trigger a backlash all its own.

Russell Pearce bringing Senate Judiciary to heel

By Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings

Over the last couple of weeks, Senate President Russell Pearce and his "associates" have been thoroughly embarrassed by the failure of his Sen. Ron Gould's anti-birthright citizenship and other anti-immigrant bills to pass the Senate's Judiciary Committee.

In successive weeks, SB1308, SB1309 (anti-14th Amendment/birthright citizenship) and SB1405 (turning hospitals into immigration checkpoints) had to be pulled from the committee because it was evident that the measures didn't have enough support on the committee to pass.

Specifically, Republican Sens. Adam Driggs and John McComish joined the Democratic members of the committee, Sens. Kyrsten Sinema and Steve Gallardo, in questioning the legality of the measures.

As a result, all three bills were removed from Judiciary and given to the Appropriations Committee, which is a larger committee (13 instead of 8 members) and has only one Republican with a conscience (Sen. Rich Crandall of East Mesa).  Those bills, and more, were passed by Appropriations after a marathon system

Given that the committee had eight members, that meant the best possible outcome for the measures was failure on a 4 - 4 tie vote.  A measure needs five out of eight members to support it in order for it to go forward.

Note the use of the past tense "had" in the last sentence.

Pearce could have simply removed Driggs or McComish, or both, from the committee.  That's his privilege as Senate President.

However, internal politics make such a peremptory move problematical - McComish and Driggs are both incredibly conservative and cannot be attacked as "RINOs".  In addition, McComish was Pearce's chief rival for the Senate presidency, and arbitrarily removing him from a committee could smack of unwarranted retribution.  Pearce's position atop the Senate pecking order, while not exactly "tenuous," is based in no small part on a promise to complete the budget before pushing through his pet anti-immigrant bills.

A promise that he has thoroughly broken.

So he has now done the next best thing - he has simply added another, more pliable, member to the committee, bringing its membership count to nine.

Wednesday, he added Sen. Scott Bundgaard to the committee without removing anyone else.  

By handling things in this manner, Pearce kept the number of votes necessary to pass a bill at "five" but also was able to add a fifth reliable vote to the committee.  He also was able to bring the committee back under control without appearing to be vindictive (he may, in fact, *be* vindictive, but this doesn't make him *look* that way).

With Judiciary (presumably) back with the program, look for more "bad" bills to be assigned to Judiciary and to actually gain the committee's approval.

 

Redistricting update: not much to update

By Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings

Today, the four partisan members of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) met to interview the five Independent candidates for the final, and chair's, spot on the AIRC, but after the interviews, they chose to delay the selection until Tuesday.

The meeting start a few minutes late, at approximately 2:35 p.m. (the time listed on the agenda was 2:30 p.m.)

After a brief explanation of the history of the room - it used to be the meeting room of the Arizona Supreme Court and was the home of many decisions, including the famous Miranda decision.  Not relevant, but OK...until he went on with a somewhat odd recounting of that decision and the future activities of the principals), Bennett proceeded to swear in the four AIRC members who have been appointed by the legislative leadership.

Richard Stertz, Scott Freeman, Secretary of State Ken Bennett, Jose Herrera, and Linda McNulty









Things proceeded a little faster than expected - because the published agenda indicated that the first interview would start at 3 p.m., they had to recess the meeting for a few minutes.  After that, however, the interview part of the meeting proceeded efficiently.

As should have been expected for a group of applicants who have already been thoroughly researched, interviewed, and screened, they all did a good job at their interviews.  While each exhibited a couple of "weak" answers to the questions posed by the panel, each them was thoughtful and polished and appeared to be eminently qualified.  Even without the political pressures on the current AIRC foursome, they'll have a tough time making their choice.

And have no doubt, they're already feeling some *heavy* pressure. 

A member of the public, Norris Nordvold, speaking on behalf of candidate Ray Bladine, issued a not-too-thinly veiled threat to the AIRC. 

Some concerns over the AIRC's budget cropped up during the afternoon.  The original AIRC had approximately $6 million to use; the new AIRC currently has $500K. 

Nordvold mentioned the possibility of the Legislature appropriating significantly less money for the next fiscal year if they don't like the choice for chair.

Call it a "don't you dare pick Paul Bender" moment.

Nordvold addressing the panel









The next speaker, Jim Huntwork, a Republican member of the original AIRC, spent his entire time railing about native tribes, in an attempt to influence the members of the new AIRC to nullify the recent decision of the Arizona Supreme Court to allow Professor Bender's candidacy to continue in spite of the same objections from Russell Pearce and Kirk Adams, the Senate President and Speaker of the House, respectively.

Other than that, however, things seemed pretty straightforward today.

We'll see what the next meeting, as well as the next few months, look like.

I hope this isn't jinxing things, but I predict the next lawsuit will be rooted in today's discussions - if the current members of the AIRC surrender to Pearce and Adams on the selection of the chair, they'll be opening themselves up to litigation from the other candidates as well as others.  If they don't surrender and the lege tries to use its budgetary powers to retaliate, interfering with the redistricting process, court actions from the feds and from other groups who are affected by redistricting.

And that doesn't even begin to address what the U.S. Department of Justice could do to Arizona if they believe that Pearce and Adams are trying to corrupt the process.

I'll let attorneys speak more on this; they know far more than I do.

Anyway, candidates under consideration are:

Kimber Lanning

Colleen Mathis

Ray Bladine

Paul Bender

Margarita Silva

The next meeting, at which the selection will presumably be made, will be Tuesday at 1 p.m. in the conference room of the Arizona State Library (the same location as today's meeting.)

Steve Muratore of the blog The Arizona Eagletarian has coverage here.


Some pics from the meeting:

The members of the AIRC and Ken Bennett speaking during the first recess of the committee.  On the far left: Jim Barton of the Arizona Attorney General's Office, present to provide legal advice, when necessary.

Professor Paul Bender thanking the members of the panel after his interview.

candidate Ray Bladine during his interview

candidate Colleen Mathis during her interview

candidate Kimber Lanning during her interview

candidate Margarita Silva during her interview

Talking during a break in the meeting: Bladine, Rep. Chad Campbell (House Democratic leader), Mathis, Sen. David Schapira (Senate Democratic leader)

During Kimber Lanning's interview, from left to right:  Bennett, Herrera, McNulty, and Lanning.  I'm not sure who the man in the corner is; he was photographing the proceeding for an MSM outlet, I think.

 

Lee Enterprises, Star's owner, fiercely anti-union. Caveat emptor.

by David Safier

This is a connect-the-dots post based on a number of items I pulled up on the web. If I made any errors, I apologize in advance and hope others will correct me. One of the luxuries I have as a blogger is the freedom to put tentative information out there, then write further posts when/if I receive more information.

The Daily Star is owned by Lee Enterprises. Lee isn't just non union. It is fiercely anti-union. And though some of the corporation's papers are unionized because Lee bought papers whose reporters already belonged to the Newspaper Guild, the Star is not unionized according to Inside Tucson Business.

The LeeUnionFree.net website, is, so far as I can tell, an official website of Lee Enterprises, though not its primary site. Its sole purpose is to discourage reporters and other employees from organizing. Here is the intro to LeeUnionFree.net:

Welcome to LeeUnionFree.net, a resource for sharing information about the workplace philosophy of Lee Enterprises and why we believe that unions are not in the best interest of our employees or our mission of serving our communities.

This site is also intended as a resource for facts about The Newspaper Guild and its organizing attempts.

[snip]

As a result of acquisitions in recent years, Lee has gained many fine employees who are represented by a bargaining agent, and we’re glad to have them in Lee.

Where union representation exists, we intend to honor agreements and negotiate in good faith. Elsewhere across our company, we hope you will join us in continuing to resist the introduction of unions as an unnecessary impediment to maintaining a creative, rewarding and successful workplace.

Though Lee says it honors union agreements and negotiates in good faith, at Lee's largest paper, the St. Louis Dispatch, a unionized paper it bought in 2005, Lee got rid of health care benefits for 80 of the paper's retirees. The union fought the cuts. I don't know if the case has been settled.

The whole LeeUnionFree.net site is devoted to fighting the "Employee Free Choice Act" which would make it easier to join unions. The Protect Your Voice page has one heading that reads, "Beware of signing a card," and another heading, "EFCA myths."

The Facts About Unions page has no facts about unions. It links to the Center for Union Facts. According to SourceWatch,

The Center for Union Facts is a secretive front group for individuals and industries opposed to union activities. It is part of lobbyist Rick Berman's family of front groups including the Employment Policies Institute. The domain name www.unionfacts.com was registered to Berman & Co. in May 2005.

Berman is a one man astroturf machine who has created phony groups for the Tobacco industry, the Pro-Alcohol industry ("Beverage Retailers Against Drunk Driving" is a pro-social drinking group), the anti-ACORN movement, the Food Industry (Center for Consumer Freedom), and on and on.

In Arizona, Lee Enterprises owns the Star and Flagstaff's Daily Sun. In Wisconsin, where the reporting on Gov. Walker's union busting is especially important, Lee owns seven newspapers, including the Wisconsin State Journal in Madison.

Businesses are in the business of making money, and they make more money when they can pay their workers lower salaries and provide fewer benefits. When businesses that hate unions run newspapers, television stations and radio stations and they are reporting about the union busting going on in Wisconsin and elsewhere, they have a dog -- many dogs -- in the anti-union hunt. Undoubtedly, that affects their coverage.

How much is the choice of articles the Star runs about union busting in Wisconsin and elsewhere tainted by Lee Enterprises' anti-union stance?

Best headline of the day

by David Safier

Phoenix New Times' Feathered Bastard has the day's best headline:

Russell Pearce's Day of Bigotry, Barbarism and Triumph

Steve Lemons' nom de plume, Feathered Bastard, is pretty good as well, I have to say.

And this line isn't bad either. I actually read it earlier in another article about the discussion of the bill. Pearce admitted his omnibus immigration bill, which, if passed and signed by Brewer, will change the face of this state from merely SB1070-racist to illegal, renegade and racist beyond belief, was something Pearce just kind of threw together.

[Kyrsten Sinema] got Pearce to admit that the bill had been slapped together at the last minute.

What gall! He admits he wasn't even careful when he created his House of Horrors bill.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker punk'd by Bart Simpson, er, Ian Murphy

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

This prank was as good as Bart Simpson's Calls To Moe's.

Ian Murphy, editor-in-chief of BuffaloBeast.com, decided to find out whether it was true or not that Tea-Publican Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin was simply "too busy" to take calls to negotiate with the "Wisconsin 14" Democratic senators on the lam in Illinois. So he studied and practiced his best David Koch voice impression and then called the governor's office to ask to speak to the Gov.

What happened next was pure gold. What a tool.

"Looks like Scott Walker's prank phone call may end up getting him in some trouble with [Wisconsin's] Government Accountability Board and his remarks about bringing in agent provocateurs to cause trouble at the rallies isn't sitting too well with the voters." Former Wisconsin AG to Recommend Walker be Investigated for Ethics Violations to Accountability Board. Former Attorney General of Wisconsin, Peg Lautenschlager, reviewed the transcript of the conversation and found what she determined to be multiple ethics, election law and labor law violations. And she will suggest that the state Government Accountability Board begin to review those ethics violations.

Part 1

Part 2

Ian Murphy posted an annotated transcript at BuffaloBeast.com. Koch Whore | The Beast.

Ian Murphy was interviewed by Lawrence O'Donnell on The Last Word on Wednesday night's program.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Karoli at crooksandliars.com wrote about the "Kochtopus" in this post, Tea Party, Inc: The Illustrated Guide:

 

AlterNet and The Nation Institute's Investigative Fund teamed up to put together this fabulous report on Tea Party, Inc. Click here for the larger size -- this picture is worth about 10,000 words, but the report is well worth the read, too.

Petition Drive to Recall Sen. Russell Pearce - Saturday, March 5, 2011

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

A message from the Committee to Recall Russell Pearce:

We are gearing up for a caravan from Tucson to Mesa, Arizona. Our next walk will begin on Saturday, March 5th at 10:00 AM at the Mesa public library. Our goal is to recruit at least 50 volunteers to canvass District 18. Please bring your family, your friends and help us to blanket the district with canvassers. This is a way for YOU to make a difference for Arizona!

Click Here to Sign Up!

I realize that Tucson and Pima County Democrats are the best at getting this type of job done, but what about our brothers and sisters in Maricopa County? There are a lot more Democrats in Maricopa County, and you live right next door to Mesa. What are you doing to recall Arizona's de facto governor and hate-monger-in-chief? Can't you give up a Saturday to send a message that Arizonans have had enough?

Dear Volunteers,

On Saturday March 5th we will have a rally of our petition gatherers starting at the Mesa Public Library at 10:00 AM. We need you in attendance as we plan to send a message to Russell Pearce and the rest of the state legislature that we have had enough. If the state legislature can stay up all night degrading the living standard of working Arizonans and soiling the human rights that are the fabric of our spirit then I can be up at three in the morning working to get this organized and we will get over 1,000 signatures against Russell Pearce in a single day. No longer will we say yes we can, but from now on we will say yes we will. Arizonans have been bullied by a tyrannical state legislature for too long now and it is time to send a message. Thank you for helping us with this effort, thank you for your time, sweat, and tears, and thank you for taking a stand against the destructive actions of Senator Pearce. You will all be my hero on Saturday, March 5th.

Sincerely,

Bill Moran

Volunteer Coordinator
(623) 533-1544

P.S. - We will still be collecting signatures and organizing in front of the Mesa Public Library this Saturday. They won't rest, as we've seen from the destructive all night state legislative session. Therefore, neither will we. We will continue to collect signatures every day until we have enough. I thank you for any time you can contribute towards this.

UPDATE: You can volunteer your time this Saturday as well:

Given all that has happened this week at the Capitol, it is time for us to ramp up our efforts to Recall Russell Pearce. Please forward this information to your family, friends and colleagues and ask them to visit http://recallpearce.com and/or our fb page at Citizens for a Better AZ.

Some of you indicated that you are willing to staff a table and/or walk neighborhoods to help us collect signatures. We are asking all of our volunteers to meet at the Mesa Public Library (64 E. 1st Street. Mesa) this Saturday, February 26th for two events:

1. 10:00 AM - neighborhood walk (you will be partnered with another volunteer and given a list of registered voters to visit and ask them to sign the petition); and
2. 1:00 PM - Special Meeting with all Volunteers to review our strategy and to share with you our needs over the next 6-8 weeks.

Please let us know if you in both or just one of the events this Saturday. The meeting at 1:00 PM will last 45 minutes. All those who walk in the morning will return by 12:45 PM so they can be part of the 1:00 PM meeting. Thank you all for your support! See you on Saturday.

Randy Parraz
602-284-9745

National Day of Solidarity Rallies in Support of Wisconsin Workers This Saturday

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Message from Congressman Raúl Grijalva, Co-Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus:

I want to take a moment to update you on our fight against the Republican Party’s war on working families.

Yesterday, I was on a conference call with my colleague, Congressional Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Representative Keith Ellison, and Wisconsin Senate Democratic Leader Mark Miller to let our nation know that we Progressives stand united for our working families in the face of Republican intimidation.

What we are witnessing in Wisconsin and other states is a struggle that speaks to the broader hardships confronting America’s working families.  Unemployment is near 10%, banks are foreclosing on families left and right, and irresponsible Republican policies are bankrupting our governments.  Rather than promoting true fiscal responsibility and enacting sound economic policies that curtail excess spending and rein in outrageous tax cuts for big corporations and the ultra wealthy, the GOP continues to do the bidding of the rich and big business.

Right now, our progressive brothers and sisters throughout America face a defining moment as the Right Wing pushes its assault on working families to new heights. Under the guise of “fiscal responsibility”, the GOP is once again putting corporate power ahead of people power.  Their fraudulent claims are merely a cynical cover for their true intention: to destroy the American people’s right to organize and advocate for their rights as workers.

This is about much more than workers versus management.

This is about fundamental decency.

This is about the integrity of the relationship and the covenant that we, as a society, have with the people who teach our children, care for us when we get sick, and perform essential services that keep our communities functioning.  

This is about ensuring we have a robust middle class and prevent our nation from dissolving into a few wealthy folks at the top resting on the hard work of the people who made them rich.

This is about Progressives standing united against the Republicans’ assault on workers’ fundamental rights.

From Wisconsin to Indiana and Ohio, Republican leaders have shown their cards. They will stop at nothing to strip workers of their right to organize and negotiate a fair wage and give corporations and radical Republican governors the upper hand in breaking the back of the working man.

This Saturday, February 26th, at state capitols and cities across America, join your fellow Progressives in a show of solidarity for the Wisconsin workers and declare that the Republican war on working families must stop.

To find a rally near you, click here.

When the working man cannot speak up for his rights and fair wages in a strong, unified voice, the rich get richer and working families suffer.

Together, we must fight back against the Republicans’ attempts to strip workers of their rights, their decency, and their humanity.

Peace,

Raúl

For more information about Labor rallies this Saturday and next Tuesday in Phoenix, see earlier post Day of Action With the AFL-CIO - March 1, 2011 (updated).

UPDATE: MoveOn.org is sponsoring a Rally to Save The American Dream in Tucson this Saturday:

Speedway and Campbell
Saturday, 26 Feb 2011, 12:00 PM

In Wisconsin, Arizona and around our country, the American Dream is under fierce attack. Instead of creating jobs, Republicans are giving tax breaks to corporations and the very rich and then cutting funding for education, police, emergency response and vital human services. The right to organize is on the chopping block. The American Dream is slipping out of reach for more and more Americans, and we have to fight for what's RIGHT... PEOPLE!!! Some incited anger and fear, while we fought for truth, while we fought for equality, we will continue to do this! Let's show them, that as they organize to have MORE people than us at Grijalva's office on Friday, that we can have even MORE supporters at one of the busiest intersections on Saturday! Join us, we must stand together!!! Share this event on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=148975078495022

Status: Public, open for RSVP, 250 attendees (max. 1000)
Address:
N. Campbell E Speedway (Map) 
Tucson, AZ 85719
Directions: All four corners of Speedway and Campbell - all the way to UofA's front gate on Campbell to University Medical Center, where Gabby and others fought for their lives.
Best way to contact host: e-mail

The correct terminology is 'separation,' not 'secession' - get it right Arizona Daily Star

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Arizona Daily Star today published a front page story above the fold about the "Start Our State" Committee, Could Baja Arizona be 51st state in US?

The sub-headline reads "Idea of Pima secession from state isn't new, but this time it's for real, new panel insists." This isn't just the fault of the dreaded creative headline copy editor at the Star this time.

The body of the story consistently misuses the word "secession" in the reporting by Rhonda Bodfield and Andrea Kelly.

Oh God, they make my head hurt.

With my apologies to "Dr. Word" (David Safier), using the correct terminology matters here. The correct terminology is "separation," not "secession." If you knew your American history or had done more than a cursory Google search you would know this.

First, the great state of Maine. Freeport’s Role In Maine’s Statehood : Freeport Historical Society:

In the spring of 1819, 125 out of 130 towns in the District of Maine petitioned the Massachusetts Legislature (the “General Court”) for another vote on the question of separation to be taken in the District. This was done and then approved by the Governor on June 19, 1819. On July 26, the vote of the citizens of the District took place, with every county voting in favor of separation. A constitutional convention then met in Portland in October 1819. The bill making Maine a separate state was signed by President Monroe on March 3, 1820, and on March 15, 1820, all ties with Massachusetts were severed.

The great state of West Virginia is more complex because of a little historical event known as the America Civil War. Maybe you heard of it. The state of Virginia passed an Ordinance of Secession from the United States and joined the Confederate States of America -- the correct usage of the term "secession," by the way. Technically, West Virginia then "seceded" from Virginia as part of the Confederate States of America, in order to remain in the United State of America. West Virginia Statehood: 

On April 17, 1861, days after Lincoln's order to seize Fort Sumter in South Carolina, a convention of Virginians voted to submit a secession bill to the people. Led by Clarksburg's John S. Carlile, western delegates marched out of the Secession Convention, vowing to form a state government loyal to the Union. Many of these delegates gathered in Clarksburg on April 22, calling for a pro-Union convention, which met in Wheeling from May 13 to 15. On May 23, a majority of Virginia voters approved the Ordinance of Secession. It is not possible to determine accurately the vote total from present-day West Virginia due to vote tampering and the destruction of records. Some argue that secessionists were in the majority in western Virginia, while others feel Unionists had greater support.

Following a Union victory at the Battle of Philippi and the subsequent occupation of northwestern Virginia by General George B. McClellan, the Second Wheeling Convention met between June 11 and June 25, 1861. Delegates formed the Restored, or Reorganized, Government of Virginia, and chose Francis H. Pierpont as governor. President Lincoln recognized the Restored Government as the legitimate government of Virginia. John Carlile and Waitman T. Willey became United States Senators and Jacob B. Blair, William G. Brown, and Kellian V. Whaley became Congressmen representing pro-Union Virginia.

Here in Arizona, counties have sought "separation" from other counties. Santa Cruz County was established in 1899, separating from what was then Pima County.

La Paz County was established in 1983 after voters approved separating the northern portion of Yuma County, making it the first and only county to be established after Arizona became a state in 1912.

Fun fact: there is also one defunct Arizona county, Pah-Ute County, which was formed in 1865 from Mohave County but later returned in 1871.

Now that we are all clear about the proper usage of the correct terminology, let's turn to the substance of the story:

A political committee made up of attorneys, including the former chairman of the Pima County Democratic Party, has been formed to try to get Southern Arizona to [separate] from the rest of the state.

Start Our State, which is asking other like-minded counties to join the effort, hopes to put the question before Pima County voters in 2012.

The historical comparison parallels the history of the state of West Virginia:

Paul Eckerstrom, co-chair of Save Our State, said it's not a ploy and not merely a political statement. He said the state Legislature has gone too far to the right.

In particular, a round of legislative measures challenging federal supremacy "really does border on them saying they don't want to be part of the Union any longer," he said.

"Well, I want to be part of the United States," Eckerstrom said.

As we have been reporting here, the Neoconfederate insurrectionist Tea-Publicans in the Arizona legislature have been passing one bill after another based upon the long-discredited "nullification" theory, asserting that Arizona can simply nullify any federal law with which it does not want to comply.

Sen. Al Melvin (R-LD 26) has gone so far as to assert that Arizona can seize federal property under eminent domain (like South Carolina seized Fort Sumter, starting the American Civil War). 

Funny how the Arizona Daily Star never describes these legislative actions as "nullification" or "secession" in its reporting. Nullification is secession by another name, it is used synonymously. Check your American history -- or read the posts we do here to educate you on American history.

The idea of Baja Arizona has been around for as long as I have lived in Southern Arizona. In previous "separation" movements Baja Arizona refered to the Gadsden Purchase under the Guadalupe-Hidalgo Treaty of 1853. This area encompasses everything South of the Gila River, not just Pima County. The Official Web Site of the Gadsden Purchase:

When the inhabitants of Arizona asked Congress for a Territorial government in 1854, one of the names suggested for the new Territory was Gadsonia, a Latin adaptation of the surname of James Gadsden.

Not a good idea today. You see, James Gadsden championed the theory of nullification developed by his fellow South Carolinian, then Vice President John C. Calhoun, in the South Carolina Exposition and Protest of 1828, and he lost the patronage of President Jackson over the "Nullification Crisis", or "secession crisis," of 1828 – 1832. (See how these terms are used synonymously?)

James Gadsden would fit right in with the Neoconfederate insurrectionist Tea-Publicans in the Arizona legislature today.

¡Viva Baja Arizona! Long live the United States of America!

UPDATE: The Arizona Daily Star continues to misuse the legally incorrect term "secession" today in this front page side-bar. Poll finds secession sentiment strong here. As Forrest Gump said, "stupid is as stupid does."

Major federal gun legislation announced

by David Safier

Sen. Chuck Schumer has announced legislation that will:

1. Get all the names of people who should be prohibited from buying guns into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
2. Require a background check for every gun sale in America.

This is very similar to the kind of gun policies advocated in the Star editorials over the past few days.

You can sign a Prevent More Senseless Shootings petition on the "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" website.

On recess in schools

by David Safier

From Steve Gall:

The TUSD Governing Board passed an elementary school recess mandate starting in the Fall, 2011 at their Special Meeting last night with an unanimous vote, 5-0.  It's for a minimum of 60 minutes /week and 3 days/week of structured physical activity.  We wanted more minutes/week but it's a  start and very sigificant because it's the only Arizona large school district to pass any type of  recess mandate so far.  We are still working with the Sunnyside School District and on the State level.

Summary of Tuesday's Senate Appropriations Committee meeting...

By Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings

In case you missed it, and given that they were going strong well into the wee hours of the morning, you probably did.

Note:  when a bill description is in quotes, it's quoted from the summary of that bill crafted by legislative staff.

Note2 - I didn't see the discussion for most of the bills because of the late hour, so for the most part, I am not including any of those here.

- SB1611, Russell Pearce's latest attack on people with brown skin.  Passed 7 - 6.  The four Democratis on the committee opposing, as did Republicans Rich Crandell and Sylvia Allen.  Crandall suffers from occasional bouts of decency, so his vote wasn't entirely surprising.  Allen, however, is a close friend and ally of Pearce, and usually is completely on board the nativist train.  Senior moment?

- SB1308 and SB1309, the anti-14th Amendment bills, passed by identical 8 - 5 votes (1308 and 1309).  All four Democrats on the committee, as did Republican Crandall.

- SB1405, turning Arizona's hospitals into immigration checkpoints, passed 8 - 5.  Same voting pattern as above.

- SB1407, requiring school districts to collect data on students who cannot prove lawful residency in the U.S. and district, and requires districts to forward the info to the state.  Passed 8 - 5.  Same voting pattern as above.

- SB1519, completely repealing AHCCCS, Arizona's Medicaid program.  Passed 8 - 5.  Same voting pattern as above.

- SB1380, mandating drug testing for welfare recipients, passed 9 - 3, 1 not voting.  Three Democrats opposed, and one (David Schapira) was out of the room when the vote was taken.

- SB1115, ending the Arizona Board of Regents, who oversee the state's universities, and replacing the Board with Boards of Trustees for each individual campus, passed 9 - 4.  Party line vote.

- SCR1014, related to SB1115, removing from the Arizona Constitution language regarding the Board of Regents.  Passed 9 - 4.  Party line vote.

- SCR1045, completely policizing the selection of Arizona judges by removing language in the AZ Constitution requiring professional evaluations and screening by the Arizona Bar Association for the attorney candidates for the various judicial selection commissions in Arizona.  Passed 9 - 4.  Party line vote.

SB1141, "Requires parents, or persons who have custody, of a child who will attend a public, private or charter school to provide verifiable documentation of Arizona residency, and requires school districts and charter schools to maintain the documentation", passed by a 9 - 4 vote.  Party line vote.

- SB1497, gives "Arizona Constitutional and statutory rights of public agencies to the legal entities created through intergovernmental agreements."  Passed 9 - 4.  Party line vote.

- SB1589, further privatizing the operations of MVD.  Passed 9 - 3, one not voting.  Three Democrats opposed, Kyrsten Sinema out of the room when the vote was taken.

- SB1540, "Establishes the removal or defacing of political mailers, handouts and flyers as a class 2 misdemeanor and requires a condominium and planned community to allow door to door political activity."  Passed 11 - 2, Aboud and Cajero Bedford dissenting.

- HB2016, updating language regarding budget reports.  Passed 12 - 1, Aboud dissenting.

- SB1013, tranferring the Arizona Capitol Police, currently a part of the AZ Department of Administration, to the Department of Public Safety.  Passed 11 - 0, 2 not voting.  Schapira and Cajero Bedford were out of the room when the vote was taken.

- SB1113, barring "existing licensed facilities operated by the state or contracted with the Department of Economic Security (DES) to provide intermediate care facilities for mental retardation services for developmental disability members", passed 13 - 0.

- SB1353, "Repeals state photo enforcement and adds an assessment of $10 on every civil penalty or fine resulting from a citation issued by a peace officer for a traffic offense. Requires a municipality to use monies to supplement funds available for the purchase of protective armor, electronic stun devices and other safety equipment." Passed 13 - 0.

- SB1583, updating the membership of the state nursing board.  Passed 13 - 0.

- SB1039, creating a "home certificate program" relating to trust deeds and housing finance.  Complete legislative summary here.  Passed 13 - 0.

Of course, one should not forget the passage of the most vital bill of the entire legislative session, one that is key to the future success of the entire state.

SB1610, declaring that the Colt Single Action Army Revolver is the state's official firearm.  Passed 9 - 4.  Party line vote.  I saw the debate on this one.  The Democrats didn't actually object to the content of the bill, just the fact that is was being considered while the Republican majority refuses to address the real problems facing the state.


...Whew!!

Seriously, we should all thank the four Democratic members of the committee, Senators Aboud, Cajero Bedford, Schapira, and Sinema, as well as the committee and facility staffers who stayed throughout the entire proceeding.  Contrary to some of the evidence, there are still a few dedicated public servants in Arizona.

 

Simply jaw dropping

by David Safier

The South Arizona will rise again!

The Arizona Senate on Wednesday is scheduled to consider a bill to give the state legal authority to go to court to take ownership of land owned by the federal government.

The bill sponsored for Republican Sen. Al Melvin of Tucson is 1 of many states' rights measures being considered by the Legislature.

Under the bill, the state could use the power of eminent domain to acquire federal property unless it was acquired by the federal government with the Legislature's consent.

The land taken through eminent domain would have to be used for a public use that increases the state's ability to generate revenue or helps the state's trust land system.

When Melvin steps through the looking glass, he sees southern belles wearing antebellum hoop skirts and hears Scarlett O'Hara pining for Tara.

Today's gun policy editorial in the Star

by David Safier

Today's Star editorial addresses the system designed to keep guns out of the hands of people who [almost] everyone agrees should not have guns. You know, criminals, the mentally ill, people like that.

The three main problems the editorial said need to be fixed: 1) the "gunshow loophole"; 2) the lack of complete information in the hands of the NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System); and 3) the lack of a higher threshhold to prohibit the mentally ill from buying guns.

Excerpts from the editorial:

1. Federal law only requires that background checks be made by federally licensed gun sellers. That means an estimated 40 percent of "secondary market" (garage sales, flea markets, co-workers, shooting range pals) gun purchases aren't subject to any background check. [snip]
2. The FBI runs the computerized [NICS] system but relies heavily on states to feed in accurate, complete information. That's not working.
   According to a 2007 study by Third Way, which Politico.com describes as a moderate think tank, one-quarter of all felony convictions weren't then in the NICS computer. Worse, 90 percent of disqualifying mental health records were not either; the U.S. Justice Department reported that 28 states - including Arizona - were providing either few or no mental health records to NICS. [snip]
3. [Jared Lee Loughner] passed an NICS check when he bought his semi-automatic Glock at a Tucson store in November. The bizarre behaviors that prompted his college to ban him until he produced a mental health evaluation weren't enough to prevent the purchase. The fact that Loughner had been arrested on misdemeanor drug charges wasn't either.

Once again, kudos to the Star for taking a strong stand on this important issue.

GUN POLICY OP ED: The Star also ran an op ed, Other nations' restrictive gun laws cut down on shooting deaths, comparing our gun laws to those of other nations. The author, David Hemenway, is "Professor of Health Policy Director, Harvard Injury Control Research Center Harvard School of Public Health."

Who is supposed to share in the "shared sacrifice"?

by David Safier

Shared sacrifice? I keep hearing that's why union members should give up pay and benefits to share the sacrifice everyone else is making.

Shared sacrifice? The richest Americans screamed as if someone were threatening to cut off their right arms when people talked about returning their tax levels to what they were during the Clinton years. In a real sense, most workers have sacrificed a significant amount of their earning power in a redistribution scheme which transfered the lion's share of the nation's growing wealth from 95% of Americans to the top 5%. It's the simplest kind of math, though it's not usually part of the discussion. If there is a given amount of money in this country for compensation and an ever-greater proportion of it flows to the top, everyone else gets a lesser share. A reasonable sense of fairness dictates that a rise in the country's productivity and wealth should be shared among all who contributed to it.

If we broaden the meaning of the word "taxation" just a bit, you can say most Americans are being taxed, in the form of lowered incomes, to pay for the skyrocketing wealth of the richest among us.

To relate this to the situation in Wisconsin: government workers are being "taxed" by asking them to shoulder the economic burden of running government by returning some of their compensation -- their salary and benefits -- in the form of salary cuts.

Shared sacrifice? Start with the top earners who are now raking in robber baron-level incomes. Have them give some of their recent economic gains back in the form of a return to Clinton-era tax levels so government services don't have to be cut and the rest of the country can share in what has been, until 2008, our growing prosperity. Hell, that's not even sacrifice on their part. That will just make them merely "filthy rich" instead of "rich beyond anyone's wildest dreams of avarice."

We can see if restoring an earlier tax rate to the rich does enough to dig us out of our current mess and reestablish some kind of economic balance in this country. If not, we can look at other measures as well.