ARIZONA SUPREME COURT: Affirms Death Sentence For Armed-Robber-Turned-Executioner

The Arizona Supreme Court today unanimously affirmed the conviction and death sentence of Mike Peter Gallardo.  Gallardo was attempting to rob a Phoenix house on a December afternoon in 2005, was surprised to find 20-year old Rudy Gallardo there, and proceeded to execute him.

Gallardo was convicted and sentenced to death in June 2009, and the mandatory appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court was argued earlier this month in front of law students at the University of Arizona.  The opinion makes it apparent that further federal appeals are likely to occur before any execution of the 53-year old Gallardo will take place.


We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

WATCH: Clinton's Statement Re: Wikileaks

Following up on my earlier, off-topic tidbits re: Wikileaks, here's the 16-minute statement from U.S. Secy of State Hillary Clinton:



We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

OFF-TOPIC: Interesting Tidbits On Fringe Of Latest Wikileaks Hubbub

I am NOT going to wade into the latest Wikileaks document dump about U.S. diplomatic cables.  However, I will note that I am very interested in many of the angles of this news event.  And, I wanted to quickly share these two items that you may not have seen yet.

1) The Wikileaks Editor-in-Chief Julian Assange has apparently been in communication with the U.S. State Department over the past several days, apparently through the U.S. Embassy in London.  Assange apparently asked what additional specific redactions the U.S. thought necessary to protect individuals.  After the U.S. said it would "not engage in a negotiation", Assange responded with this yesterday:

"You have chosen to respond in a manner which leads me to conclude that the supposed risks are entirely fanciful and you are instead concerned to suppress evidence of human rights abuse and other criminal behaviour."

I have not (yet) seen anything that would justify the comment that the U.S. was (attempting) to suppress human rights abuses and/or criminal behavior.  Not even hints that such was on  the way.

2) Likely related, I found this appeal today to Assange from the U.S.-based human rights group Human Rights First.  HRF President/CEO Elisa Massimino believes the released documents may identify human rights activists and organizations that have received assistance from the U.S., and that that may put those persons/organizations at risk.  She appeals that such information be redacted.

Concluding thought: Wikileaks certainly sees itself as exposing and preventing human rights abuses.  It will be interesting to see what documents come out over the next several days.  Especially as the New York Times has already noted that it received the documents NOT from Wikileaks, but from the Guardian (U.K.) - and that it does not consider itself constrained by Assange/Wikileaks.  Several different, interesting scenarios could play out.  Stay tuned.


We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS: SCOTUS To Decide What AZ Case; Clean Elections Money Went Where; Stanton Campaign Fund Drained By Who

Work certainly piled up over the holiday weekend, yet there is some interesting news that has surfaced during it.  Three stories worth note (and reading):

1) The U.S. Supreme Court announced today it will determine the constitutionality of the matching funds provision in Arizona's Clean Elections laws.  AP's Paul Davenport reports.

2) Monica Alonzo from Phoenix New Times reports today on the apparent draining of possible Phoenix mayoral hopeful Greg Stanton's city council campaign fund. 

3) Alyssa Newcomb from Cronkite News Service reported yesterday (in the Arizona Republic) on some of the things that legislative candidates spent their Clean Elections monies on.  My thought while reading the first part of the article: all items with value after election should be donated to non-profits (started brainstorming processes); turns out Clean Elections Commission is considering such a solution (with state being the non-profit).

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Whether you are gladdened or saddened by this year's elections whether this year was a difficult one or an easy one, I think it is safe to say that anyone reading this blog has plenty to be thankful for.  I certainly do.

So, I would like to wish everyone - family, friends, readers whom have expressed appreciation  and support for what I have tried to do here, and readers who just stumbled here from Google/etc. - a very happy Thanksgiving.  May you have even more to be thankful for one year from now.

Thank you!


We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

"GRAY BLIND": Sen. Jon Kyl Tries The Nuance Dance Along the Blurry Line Of Earmarks

A fun week for Arizona's junior Senator Jon Kyl.  First, came the attention regarding his line-drawing (in the sand) regarding the START treaty.  Now, the apparently-blurry line between an earmark and a settlement has drawn him to the forefront of the political debate.  The timeline:

1) Last Friday, the Senate unanimously passed a bill that settles claims against the federal government by Black farmers, and American Indians.  The Democrats introduced offsetting spending cuts, and the Republicans - by Jon Kyl - added amendments extending temporary benefits for poor families and for a program for the White Mountain Apache Tribe as part of a water rights claim settlement.

2) The same day, Kyl put out a carefully-worded  news release trumpeting his role in getting the water rights claim settlement passed.  Interestingly, he did not specify the $200 Million figure.  He does note that the legal case was mainly settled in 2004 and that he first introduced the provision for the $200M Miner Flat Dam and Reservoir in 2008.

3) The next business day (11/22), Kyl released his feelings about earmarks and the latest pushes to ban them.  "...Important to stop the practice altogether," vs. "Of course, an earmark ban is not a single solution... and not all earmarks are wasteful."

4) The following day (11/23), colleague Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) took to the floor to blast Kyl's move: "I do know an earmark when I see it. And this, my friends, is an earmark."  The Associated Press published a report that night concluding that Leahy is correct and that Kyl is guilty of hypocrisy. (Lede: "Senate Republicans' ban on earmarks - money included in a bill by a lawmaker to benefit a home-state project or interest - was short-lived.")

FACT CHECK: AZ Rep. Trent Franks' Comments Blasting Obama Administration As "Failure"

Arizona Rep. Trent Franks (R-CD2)today issued one of the most scathing denunciations of the Obama Administration's policy of trying certain alleged terrorists in civilian courts, following the acquittal of Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani on all but one of 277 counts.  The one conspiracy conviction does have a maximum sentence of life in prison without parole, which prosecutors indicated they will seek.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/18/nyregion/18ghailani.html?scp=1&sq=ghailani&st=cse
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-ghailani-verdict-20101118,0,2966491.story
http://franks.house.gov/press_releases/497
http://franks.house.gov/press_releases/384





We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

HONEST QUESTIONS: Arizona Denying Liver Transplant Vis-a-Vis GOP Claims About Healthcare "Death Panels", More

I was intrigued yesterday by the report of the young man with Hepatitis C who was unable to receive a liver that a dying family friend wished to donate to him.  He could not come up with the $200,000 to pay for the transplant operation, and Arizona's Medicaid program (AHCCS) stopped covering such operations (for such patients) in October.

This morning, I saw that Democrats in the State Legislature are calling for a special session to change that decision.  I also noticed that - to this day - conservatives around the nation are still trying to equate the new healthcare reform laws with "death panels".

How do Republicans distinguish between the false allegation of "death panels" in a relatively-mild provision of the Democratic HCR proposal and the very true, very direct determination (purse strings) of who may receive a life-saving transplant and who may not which was witnessed in Arizona yesterday?  How can you express outrage and whip voters into a froth about the former and then defend the latter?

And, while we are pondering, how do Democrats stress the importance of making healthcare reform at the federal level "deficit neutral" (i.e. "fiscally responsible") and then not be mindful of that in Arizona (when the state is in budget crisis mode)?


We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

OFF-TOPIC: Share Some Of That "Canned Food Gratitude"; Also, "Take A Turkey To Tempe Temple"

While working on that last post about the recount, one of my kids brought up something that really counts: the school food drive.  And, we relived how the teacher's talk about having a "can do attitude" has now morphed into exhorting the class to have a "canned food attitude". 

We further morphed it into having that "Canned Food Gratitude".  I hope that we can ALL show gratitude for all that we have by helping the growing number of our fellow Arizonans who are relying on our wonderful food banks in these difficult times.

Along those same lines, if you happen to be in the East Valley this coming Sunday, grab a turkey (or five) - the fowl kind, not the foul spouse/in-law/co-worker/whatever kind - and bring it over to Temple Emanuel of Tempe between 9&10:30a.m.  The official name of the drive is "Turkey Toss", but in the spirit of this wordplay post, I am preferring the alliterative title in the heading of this post.


We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

RECOUNT: Prop. 112 Recount Will Start Post-Thanksgiving

As reported in the Republic this a.m., Recorder's Offices around the state will begin recounting the votes on Proposition 112.  While most (bloodshot) eyes were (un)focused on the Prop. 203 nail-biter, Prop. 112 remained closer for most of the post-election counting.

Prop. 112 will move up the deadline for filing petitions for ballot initiatives, from July 1 to May 1. (Interesting trivia: Prop. 203 - the only measure to get on the ballot through the citizen petition process - actually filed their signatures on April 29 and would NOT have been effected by the earlier date.)

Some valid questions raised in the comments to the Republic article.  I am seeking answers, and will let you know when I get them.

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

WATCH: Jimmy Fallon Ties Together Arizona's Top Two Issues (;-) )

In checking out late night TV show host Jimmy Fallon's website in preparation for tonight's hour-long interview/performance with Bruc Springsteen, I saw his monologue from last night.

Knowing his audience, Arizona's passage of Prop. 203 was joke number two.  Check out for yourself how he tied it to the issue that has brought Arizona most of its widespread attention this year:




We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

Did The Pope Read New Times' Cover Article On "Grinding Justice"?; Listen to NPR, Perhaps?; Vatican Calls For Suspension Of "Operation Streamline" At U.N. Forum

Earlier this afternoon, we reported on the draft report on the U.S.'s Universal Periodic Review (on human rights), and the recommendation that Arizona's S.B. 1070 anti-illegal immigration law be repealed or not enforced.  In preparing that story, we came across the following item of interest to Arizonans.

Hot on the heels of an extensive cover article by the Phoenix New Times and a three-part report on NPR about "Operation Streamline", the Vatican has used a United Nations forum to ask the United States government to suspend the program which tags captured illegal immigrants with criminal convictions.

Award-winning journalists have been reporting on the U.S. Border Patrol's "Operation Streamline" in the last several weeks.  Ted Robbins aired a three-part report on NPR's "Morning Edition" in September.  Stephen Lemons then published an extensive investigation on October 21 into how "Operation Streamline" was operating to push many illegal immigrants through the justice system. 

Fifteen days later, the United States was fielding compliments and complaints - questions and suggestions - about the status of human rights in the U.S. from the world community.  (Arizona's S.B. 1070 anti-illegal immigration law was one of the subjects brought up more than once.)

In the third segment of Friday's "interactive" session, a representative from the Catholic Church took the microphone to raise concerns about the U.S. program.  As the (draft) report - which came out today - states, "The Holy See noted that 'Operation Streamline' against irregular migrants should be suspended" while the U.S. debate about immigrants and their rights continues.

(Here is a link to watch the Vatican's statement and recommendations.)


We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

FACT CHECK FOLLOW-UP: U.S. Urged To "Repeal" Arizona's SB 1070; Human Rights Review Process Nearing End

On Friday, the world had a chance to compliment and criticize the United States' human rights practices.  Ecuador recommended that Arizona's anti-illegal immigration law SB 1070 should be "repeal(ed)".  The U.S. delegation noted that it is already in the courts and re-expressed "the commitment to advancing comprehensive immigration reform."

In August, the United States State Department filed its self-survey of the status of human rights in the U.S.  Near the end of that mostly-positive report, it noted the ongoing legal action surrounding Arizona's anti-illegal immigration law.  This upset Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, who accused the Obama Administration of "trying to make an international human rights case" of SB 1070, and that it was "unconstitutional" and "internationalism run amok."  The State Department responded by noting that the federal court case (now before the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals) is a positive example of how a country should use the rule of law to deal with issues.

Arizona and SB 1070 did end up being discussed at the Working Group session on Friday, and thus being included in the (draft) report issued today.  The 228 recommendations and conclusions submitted by a large number of nations may be further responded to by the U.S. and will be forwarded to the U.N. Human Rights Council for rubber-stamping.  The U.S. will then act on some of the recommendations, reject others, and ignore the rest.  End of story.  There is no enforcement and there are no penalties.

Basically, the Universal Periodic Review ("UPR") is an opportunity to shine a light on every nation's human rights efforts and to give every nation and every NGO (non-governmental organization) a chance to sound off about each other.  For example, the United States made a number of recommendations when Iran was reviewed earlier this year; Iran rejected nearly all of them.

What happened on Friday? According to the draft report, "Mexico recognized the robust institutional infrastructure for the protection of human rights." (para. 19) There must have been some mention of Arizona in the first round of nation's statements, because the U.S. delegation virtually repeated its report word-for-word about SB 1070. (para. 37)

Discussion about racial profiling and immigration continued.  Later, the U.S. "assured delegations that it condemns racial and ethnic profiling in all of its forms, and is conducting a thorough review of policies and procedures to ensure that none of its law enforcement practices improperly target individuals based on race or ethnicity." (para. 72)  Regarding immigration, the U.S. stated that "it is committed to improving its immigration system", while noting that more than 9.4 million people have either become permanent residents (5.5M), naturalized citizens (3.5M) or resettled/granted asylum (nearly 425,000) in the U.S. in the past five years. (para. 73).

The draft report then turns to the recommendations and/or conclusions noted by the different nations.  Haiti urged the U.S. to ratify the 1990 "International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families". (para. 15).  A number of countries joined in on that suggestion, mainly from Central and South America.

Four countries then made recommendations which appeared to be referencing SB 1070.  Guatemala, Bolivia, Mexico, Uruguay urged the U.S. to attempt to restrain state initiatives which encourage racial profiling. (paras. 79, 101, 105, 108)  Finally, Ecuador came right out and urged the U.S. to "repeal and do not enforce discriminatory and racial laws such as Law SB 1070 of the State of Arizona." (para. 110)

Likely, the U.S. will respond to that entreaty by noting that the federal government can neither repeal nor prevent Arizona from enforcing the state law if the federal courts do not find in favor of the U.S. in the pending legal action. 

_____
Arizona's Politics wishes to commend the ACLU for posting the draft report and for quickly responding to its media inquiry.




We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

Maricopa County Dems Election Day Palm Cards Run With Anti-Horne Claims Re: Teacher-Porn Case, Statutory Rape Vote; Slime Came From Apparently-Illegal Dem AG's Assoc. Ads

Democrats campaigning at the polls yesterday in parts of Maricopa County were handing out literature repeating the claims initially made in an apparently-illegal TV ad run the last two weeks of the campaign by the self-titled "Committee For Justice and Fairness" ("CFJF").  The CFJF receives all of its funding from the Democratic Attorneys General Association ("DAGA").

The election day palm cards had positive blurbs about Democratic AG nominee Felecia Rotellini (on the white half.  However, on the black half, it noted that GOP nominee Tom Horne was banned for life by the SEC, voted against tougher penalties for statutory rape, and certified a teacher who had viewed porn while in his classroom.  The latter two claims were from the CFJF/DAGA ad which portrayed Horne as putting our children at risk.  The New Times did some fact checking on those claims - they were misleading and slimy, at best. (later:  the Arizona Republic did a subsequent fact check, finding "technically true" but lacking needed context)

The CFJF/DAGA ad apparently violated several provisions of Arizona election law (failure to register group, failure to report independent expenditures, failure to identify major contributors at end of ad), and the CFJF/DAGA has declined to return reporters' calls.

Besides bad taste, the Dems picking up the allegations - likely with the input from the Rotellini campaign - could have ramifications if the Horne complaint is later pursued.  While there had been no overlap between the Rotellini campaigns attack points and those of the apparently-independent expenditure by CFJF/DAGA,
there is now an example of co-opting.

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

RACES STILL VERY CLOSE: Maricopa County Edition

All the precincts are counted in Maricopa County, but there are thousands of early ballots to be counted, and provisional ballots to be checked and counted.  As of 8:00am (not "pm" as the page indicates), here are some of the local races that are still very close: 


JP - KYRENE

100% (62 of 62) precincts reporting
Vote for 1 EV VOTES TOTAL VOTES % VOTES
DEM - ROGERS, ELIZABETH* 9621 16271 50.45
REP - CALENDER, DON 9441 15978 49.55

***
PEORIA USD #11 QUESTION

100% (64 of 64) precincts reporting
Vote for 1 EV VOTES TOTAL VOTES % VOTES

- YES 10511 18322 49.56
- NO* 11655 18646 50.44

***

KYRENE ELEM NO. 28 GOV BRD - 4 YR (vote for 2)

100% (56 of 56) precincts reporting
Vote for 2 EV VOTES TOTAL VOTES % VOTES

- BENEDICT, BEN D. 6962 11365 31.1
- BRIZEL, BETH* 7029 11498 31.46
- COGGINS, BERNADETTE* 8450 13681 37.44

***
 
LAVEEN ELEM NO. 59 GOV BRD - 4 YR (vote for 2)

100% (7 of 7) precincts reporting
Vote for 2 EV VOTES TOTAL VOTES % VOTES

- ADAME, DAVID 793 1352 22.63
- GUSTAFSON, SHARI J.* 985 1895 31.72
- REIFSCHNEIDER, CLAUDINE M. 791 1356 22.69
- SERNA, ISAAC L.* 777 1372 22.96

***
 
DYSART UNIF NO. 89 GOV BRD - 4 YR (vote for 2)

100% (40 of 40) precincts reporting
Vote for 2 EV VOTES TOTAL VOTES % VOTES

- EYNON, JERRY 6961 9858 28.55
- PRITCHARD, CHRISTINE A. K.* 10221 14696 42.56
- SAWYER-SINKBEIL, TRACI L.* 7000 9975 28.89

***
DEER VALLEY USD #97 QUESTION

100% (67 of 67) precincts reporting
Vote for 1 EV VOTES TOTAL VOTES % VOTES

- YES 10443 19643 49.45
- NO* 12204 20083 50.55

***
 
CITY OF GLENDALE COUNCILMEMBER - OCOTILLO DISTRICT

100% (9 of 9) precincts reporting
Vote for 1 EV VOTES TOTAL VOTES % VOTES

- ALVAREZ, NORMA S. 691 1291 49.83
- GOULET, DAVID* 720 1300 50.17

***
 

RACES STILL VERY CLOSE: Arizona Edition

With just three precincts in the state uncounted, as well as the early ballots dropped off at the polls yesterday and the provisional ballots, most statewide and legislative races are decided as of 7:42am.  Here are the ones that are still close:

U.S. REP. IN CONGRESS - DIST. 7
260 of 261 Precincts Reporting


GRIJALVA, RAUL M. (DEM) 48.57% 61,598
MCCLUNG, RUTH (REP) 45.74% 58,012
KEANE, GEORGE (LBT) 2.69% 3,412
MEYER, HARLEY (I-N) 2.86% 3,628
Write-in 0.14% 173
126,823

***

U.S. REP. IN CONGRESS - DIST. 8 351 of 352 Precincts Reporting
Percent Votes

GIFFORDS, GABRIELLE (DEM) 48.51% 119,616
KELLY, JESSE (REP) 47.52% 117,169
STOLTZ, STEVEN (LBT) 3.85% 9,485
WRITE-IN 0.13% 319
246,589

***

STATE REPRESENTATIVE - DIST. 11 (Vote For 2)
83 of 83 Precincts Reporting
Percent Votes

MEYER, ERIC (DEM) 32.53% 21,689
BROPHY MCGEE, KATE (REP) 35.92% 23,949
WEST, ERIC (REP) 31.34% 20,899
Write-in 0.21% 139
66,676

***

STATE REPRESENTATIVE - DIST. 26 (Vote For 2)
89 of 90 Precincts Reporting

Percent Votes

YOUNG WRIGHT, NANCY (DEM) 32.12% 32,284
PROUD, TERRI (REP) 34.71% 34,891
WILLIAMS, VIC (REP) 32.99% 33,160
Write-in 0.19% 190
100,525

***

PROPOSITION 110
2236 of 2239 Precincts Reporting
Percent Votes

YES 49.81% 623,771
NO 50.19% 628,550
1,252,321

***


PROPOSITION 112
2236 of 2239 Precincts Reporting
Percent Votes

YES 49.93% 621,387
NO 50.07% 623,059
1,244,446

***


PROPOSITION 203
2236 of 2239 Precincts Reporting
Percent Votes

YES 49.75% 655,285
NO 50.25% 661,988
1,317,273

***
We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS: U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Conservative Group's Appeal To Limit Disclosure Requirements

There is little doubt that conservative groups are feeling pretty cocky about their chances before the current Supreme Court.  How else to explain this appeal to (further) limit what groups have to disclose; the Supreme Court declined to accept the appeal yesterday.

On second thought, maybe it is not much of an indicator.  The appellant, SpeechNow.org, is a conservative group that is dedicated to fighting any restrictions on electioneering - including McCain-Feingold and the currently-shelved DISCLOSE Act.


We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS: McCain Makes Last Minute Robo-Calls Across Southern Arizona

Out of habit, I checked the FEC's database this a.m.  Not many 24-hour reports being filed today.  One of the few is that the Friends of John McCain spent several thousand dollars yesterday for robo-calls (aka "message phone calls") on behalf of GOP challengers Ruth McClung (CD7) and Jesse Kelly (CD8). Spent $3,292.40 and $3,923.58, respectively.

This brings McCain's totals on behalf of the two challenging Reps. Raul Grijalva and Gabrielle Giffords to $102,963.21 and $97,447.62, respectively.



We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

WATCH: Terry Goddard's Election Day Ad; How Feds Can Learn

Here is the positive ad that Goddard has been running - and is running today.  It focuses on what he has done as Attorney General to fight illegal immigration.

WATCH: Jan Brewer's Ad Running On Election Day

WATCH: John McCain's Ad Running On Election Day

The gentle, soft John McCain!

FACT CHECK: Ducey Running Ad Heavy On Election Day; "Desperate"

I rarely see any morning TV, but I made it a point to turn it on this a.m. in order to see what ads were still running.  Between the gym at 5:00 and now, I have seen Doug Ducey's ad titled "Andrei Cherny: Desperate" four times.  While it was put up on YouTube nearly a month ago (Oct. 7), this was the first time I had logged it.

The hybrid negative/positive ad starts with "Andrei Cherny launches a desperate and false attack." Also, on the screen, is featured a still of the Cherny ad with the Arizona Republic headline clearly visible.  The headline states: "Treasurer candidate Ducey didn't pay '08, '09 tax." 

The ad goes on to state "the truth" about Ducey: that he is an "honored businessman" who created hundreds of Arizona jobs.  That he is endorsed by the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and the Arizona Republic.

It then turns on Cherny: alleging that he was a California political insider who authored Obama's failed economic plan.  Finally, that Cherny's investment plans for Arizona are "risky" and "possibly illegal".

Claim (1) Cherny's desperate and false attack: Ducey is obviously referring to Cherny's ad which has been running for several weeks (though I have not - yet - seen it today).  Arizona's Politics Fact Checked that ad a month ago, and gave it a grade of "C-"; it was not false, although I challenged its methodology to come up with its estimate of the "cost to taxpayers" of defaulted Cold Stone Creamery franchises and placing all of the liability in Ducey's column.  Not quite the "false attack" Ducey's ad boldly claims.

Ducey's claim is made even worse by the combination of the narration and the visual: the only part of the Cherny ad that Ducey shows is the TRUE claim that Ducey had not paid his property taxes.  Ducey has even admitted that that happened, and was a mistake.  By using that still from the Cherny ad (rather than the "cost taxpayers $53 million" image), Ducey is making a false (and desperate?) attack.
       GRADE: "F"

Claim (2) Honored businessman who created hundreds of jobs, endorsements: He has been honored and he has helped create jobs.  He has received those endorsements.
       GRADE: "A"

Claim (3) Cherny is California political insider who authored Obama's failed economic plan:  I could find no evidence to support that Cherny is a "California political insider";  in fact, he lost a race for the California Assembly before moving here to marry and raise a family.  He has claimed to have co-authored Obama's plan, while asserting that the ideas were obviously Obama's.
       GRADE: "C"

Claim (4) Cherny's plans are "risky" and "possibly illegal":  Ducey's ad uses his Arizona Republic endorsement for these terms for Cherny's suggestion to safely invest some of state government's monies in companies that benefit the state economy.  The Republic's editorial writers are certainly not qualified to make such legal judgments, but Ducey is free to use them in his ads.  (Interestingly, in that same endorsement, the Republic does note that Ducey failed to pay his taxes - see claim #1.)  Nevertheless, it is somewhat misleading to make the suggestion that Cherny would be able to make an illegal shift in investment policy.
       GRADE: "B"

OVERALL GRADE:  Because the negative attacks are much more heavily weighted in this ad - especially Claim (1) - overall, this ad grades out at about a "D+".


We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

AS SEEN ON TV: Which Ads Are Running On Election Day?

Somewhat traditionally, in this generation of negative advertising, consultants suggest that you go positive on election day and just before.  This a.m., we're almost - but not quite - seeing that.  Spotted so far today:

--SuperPAC for America's "The Arizona Three", 2X, Watch it here.
--Doug Ducey, hybrid, 5X, watch it here.
--Ben Quayle's team-choosing ad, 2X, watch it here.
--CFJF/Democratic Attorneys General Association still-illegal ad vs. Tom Horne, 3X, watch it here, (check out our other, extensive coverage by clicking on the tag "Tom Horne").
--BLFA/Republican State Leadership Comm. ad vs. Felecia Rotellini
--John McCain, positive, watch it here.
--Terry Goddard, positive, watch it here.
--Jan Brewer, positive, watch it here.




We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

WATCH: Doug Ducey Ad Running This a.m.

While Ducey titles this ad "Andrei Cherny: Desperate", Cherny and his wife had their 2nd baby yesterday - the day before the election.  Talk about timing!

SIGNS, SIGNS, EVERYWHERE ARE SIGNS: Blocking Exit Ramps, Polluting Our Minds; LD20 Counter-Sign Attack Reaches New, Apparently-Illegal "Heights"

The anti-Rae Waters campaign in LD20 took a couple of interesting twists and turns on election eve.  Hired sign holders were present at at least two freeway exits this afternoon, with signs attacking first-term Rep. Waters (Dem., SE Valley).  The signs did not disclose who paid for them, which is a violation of Arizona election law.  Additionally, the signs were being held on freeway right of way, which is also a violation.

The sign at I-10 and Ray (no relation) Road attacked Waters' "Horrible Attendence (sic)" and cited five votes which she did not participate in.  They also accused her of "Union Run Smear Campaigns", an accusation that Arizona's Politics previously found to be unfounded. Full text below.*

The sign holder was hired by Jet Media, which is owned by former legislative candidate Jim Torgeson.  There are three plausible alternatives:
1) Jet Media paid for the signs on its own.  This would be a violation of Arizona election law, because there are no records with the Secretary of State for either Jet Media or Torgeson. (Not to mention the lack of acknowledgment.)
2) Friends of Jeff Dial paid for them.  The controversial 8' X 8' signs placed at intersections last week (without a "paid for by" marking) directed readers to a web page that was paid for by Jeff Dial's official candidate committee.  However, as of October 13, Friends of Jeff Dial (Jeff Dial, Treasurer) had only $1,758.63 cash on hand.  Dial is a Clean Elections candidate and has not received additional funds since the 13th.  Several possible violations.
3) The AZ Republican Party paid for them.  As noted earlier, the GOP - led by Dial roomie (or ex-roomie) Brett Mecum - has spent $42,000 on this single legislative seat in the past week alone.  The Party's disclosure statements have all indicated that they paid for mailings. 

The signs being held at freeway exits on election eve are just the latest in violations.  Ahwatukee and Chandler have been blanketed with the 8' X 8' 's and smaller anti-Waters signs - also without "paid for by" acknowledgments.  Certainly, the culprit or culprits may not be discovered before the election is complete; however, due to the magnitude of these apparent violations, it is likely that an investigation will continue post-election.

* Text of sign held at I-10, Ray Road exit ramp: "Rae Waters/Horrible Attendence/Runs From Tough Votes/For Example SB1070 HB2400 HB2564 HB2250 SB1025/Union Run Smear Campaigns

We welcome your comments about this post. If you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS: Arizona's Most Expensive State Legislative Race, Proxy (i.e. IE) Version; Coincidence That Candidate Is/Was Roommate of AZ GOP Exec. Director?

Well, the campaign is almost finished, and it is almost assured that more independent expenditure ("IE")money will be put into one State House race than into any other legislative contest.  Nearly $150,000 from outside groups - evenly split between the Republicans and the Democrat.

 

The Republicans are attempting to defeat first-term Democratic Rep. Rae Waters in LD20 (SE Valley).  The two Republicans vying for the two House seats are former Rep. Bob Robson and third-time candidate Jeff Dial.

 

The Arizona Republican Party has jumped into this race in a BIG way during the past week, spending approximately $42,000 in the past week alone.  Interestingly, in the BIG SIGN kerfuffle that blew up last week, it was alleged that Dial is/was roommates with the Executive Director for the Arizona GOP Party, Brett Mecum.

 

Here is how the IE money has come down:

Against Waters:
Arizona Business Development Coalition approx. $8,600
Arizonans for a Sound Economy (Yuma Republicans) "" $12,000
AZ Republican Party "" $42,500
For Dial/Robson:
AZ Republican Party "" $5,400
United Dairymen & AZ Farm Bureau "" $7,200
TOTAL: $75,700


For Waters:
Voters for Jobs and Education (AEA) "" $5,600
East Valley Education Council (Arizona List) "" $24,800
Against Dial/Robson:
East Valley Education Council "" $43,700
TOTAL: $74,100

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS: "Independent Women's Voice" Calling Three Arizona CD's; Conservative Group Reaching Out To Women and Independents

A conservative group that some have connected with Lynne Cheney (Republican who also is married to former Vice-President Dick Cheney), calling itself "Independent Women's Voice" is making last minute phone calls on behalf of Republican nominees Ben Quayle (CD3), Ruth McClung (CD7) and David Schweikert (CD5).  Its filing with the Federal Elections Commission indicates that it is spending $2,443.07, $1,413.76 and $2,563.61, respectively.

The group describes itself thusly: IWV maintains itself as a credible message delivery group that espouses conservative ideals in a way that resonates with Independents and women.



We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS: Summary of DCCC and NRCC Arizona Spending Over Last Week

Here is a recap of the spending by the National Republican Congressional Committee ("NRCC") and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee ("DCCC") in Arizona during the past week.  (As my search mode on the FEC's website is freezing up this a.m., this data is gathered from the Center for Responsive Politics' website.

District 1: The NRCC has spent about $56,000 on "survey research" and "media" in the past week opposing Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick.  The DCCC made a $270,805 ad buy on the 26th opposing challenger Paul Gosar.  (Not counting the $35,000 ad buy by the DCCC that we reported on earlier.)

District 5:  The DCCC produced and aired a new ad against challenger David Schweikert, totaling $281,000.  The NRCC spent $81,827 on airtime against Rep. Harry Mitchell.

District 7:  The DCCC made a $82,971.00 ad buy opposing challenger Ruth McClung (supporting Rep. Raul Grijalva).  The NRCC did not make any new expenditures.

District 8:  The DCCC spent $140,000 producing and airing a new ad in Tucson against challenger Jesse Kelly (supporting Rep. Gabrielle Giffords).  The NRCC did not make any new expenditures.



We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

WATCH: Club For Growth Ad vs. Rep. Mitchell

The Club For Growth has spent about $150,000 for this last minute ad against Democratic Rep. Harry Mitchell.  It repeats much of the Republican mantra across the nation this Fall: record spending, big government healthcare, Wall Street bonuses.  It suggests that Mitchell has already been in Washington too long (4 years).

FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS: Club For Growth Spends Big For Schweikert

On Friday, the Club For Growth PAC put its final foot forward in CD5 to give Democratic Rep. Harry Mitchell the boot. (supporting GOP nominee David Schweikert)

They purchased $150,800 (less a few thousand for production costs) for the last-minute ad. Also spent $80.89 on a press release. 




We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

WATCH: Day Before Election, Goddard "Mad As Hell"

Not sure if this is web-only or up on the air.  Nevertheless, we are posting it here because it is fascinating to see Democratic gubernatorial nominee (and current AG) Terry Goddard "mad as hell" on the day before the election. (If Gov. Jan Brewer is "mad as hell" after the oral arguments on SB1070 this a.m., we will post those, as well!)

FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS: Last Weekend Expenditures In the Federal Races; DCCC Unveils New Ad Vs. Gosar

There were a LOT of independent expenditure reports filed with the Federal Election Commission this weekend.  But, next to none reflected last minute money coming to Arizona races.

The big Arizona buy was the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee ("DCCC") plunking down $3,440.44 for production of an ad against GOP challenger Paul Gosar, and a media buy of $34,725.70.  The DCCC would appear to still be interested in protecting first-term Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick.

In other (small) news:
--The League of Conservation Voters and the SEIU each spent about $10,000 on GOTV phone calls for Rep. Raul Grijalva (Dem., CD7).
--On the other side of the aisle, Freedomworks PAC spent $20,103.17 for signs and $439.83 for door hangers to support GOP challenger Ruth McClung (CD7).
--And, Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund has continued to devote a portion of four staffers' time to defending Grijalva, for a total of about $2,200.00.

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

WATCH: Current Hybrid (Negative/Positive) Mitchell Ad Vs. Schweikert

This current ad is running in heavy rotation against GOP nominee David Schweikert and for Democratic incumbent Harry Mitchell (CD5).  It starts by attacking Schweikert for audits of the Maricopa County Treasurer's Office and his purchasing of foreclosed-upon home.  It ends with Mitchell talking about his actions in Congress (stopping pay raise, etc.)

WATCH: NRCC Ad Vs. Rep. Harry Mitchell (Debt Ticker)

Here's the ad that the NRCC is running in heavy rotation against Rep. Harry Mitchell in CD5, on behalf of their nominee David Schweikert.  It features several of the same, stock challengeable claims about the stimulus and healthcare reform bills that FactCheck and Politifact have refuted elsewhere.

WATCH: Horne's 15-Second Ad Attacking Rotellini's Union Support

Here is a 15-second ad that Tom Horne (Repub.) is running in the final days of the campaign for Attorney General.  It accuses Democratic nominee Felecia Rotellini of being supported by the "liberal union bosses" who are advocating "open borders" and a boycott of Arizona, and saying that the apparently-illegal CFJF/DAGA ads are funded by those unions.

WATCH: Hulburd Ad For Final Days Of Campaign, Suggesting Quayle Belongs In Frat House - Not House of Congress

Here's the ad that Jon Hulburd (Dem.) is running against GOP nominee Ben Quayle in the battle for the CD3 seat being vacated by John Shadegg.  It raises several of the character-related issues that Hulburd has been hammering on:

WATCH: Goddard Ad - Schooling the Federal Government

Here's the Goddard commercial on air in the final days of the campaign:

AS SEEN ON TV: Which Ads Are In Heavy Rotation On Election Eve?

Here are the ads I have seen Sunday/Monday a.m.:

--The Republican State Leadership Committee, through the Business Leaders For Arizona group, is running their anti-Rotellini (AG) ad heavy in the final days.  I saw it aired at least three times in the past 24 hours. 
--The apparently-illegal ad by the Committee For Justice and Fairness/Democratic Attorneys General Association against Horne (AG) is still running.  View it here, and read our coverage elsewhere on this blog.
--Goddard for Governor/. View it here.
--Hulburd vs. Quayle, frat house. View it here.
--Horne vs. Rotellini (2X). View the 15-second spot here.
--NRCC vs. Mitchell (debt clock) (2X).  View it here.
--Mitchell vs. Schweikert (3X).  View it here.
--Quayle, choosing teams (2X).  View it here.
--SuperPAC for America, The Arizona Three.  View it here.
--Cherny vs. Ducey, franchisees.  View it here, fact check here.


We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.