News/info regarding Arizona's politics. U.S. Senate, Congress, Governor, statewide offices, initiatives, and - where we can - county and local.
We aim to present objective information (unless labeled as "commentary") and do original reporting.
Drop us an e-mail with tips/comments/questions/etc - info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Twitter: @AZs_Politics, phone:602-799-7025.
Operated by co-founder Paul Weich. Sister site/program is ArizonasLaw.org.
Want to join our team? Inquire within.
Arizona's Senators split this afternoon on a proposal that would have restricted the President's abilities to begin hostilities with Iran before getting Congressional approval. The bipartisan amendment needed 60 votes to pass; the vote was 50-40.
Kyrsten Sinema sided with all voting Democrats to add the check to President Donald Trump's ability to launch an attack. Four Republicans (Paul, Lee, Collins, Moran) also voted "aye"; Arizona's Martha McSally voted "nay".
The short proposed amendment would have been attached to the National Defense Authorization Act. It would have provided an exception for "defend(ing)" against an Iranian attack.
Here is the entire text:
If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. 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 or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.
2:30pm: As reported on sister site "AZ Law", a U.S. District Court Judge today threw out a case challenging the constitutionality of the Arizona law that has delayed a special election to replace the late Senator John McCain for more than two years. Plaintiffs were calling for the special election to be held as soon as practicable and said that the law that has permitted Arizona Governor Doug Ducey to appoint first Jon Kyl and then Martha McSally to the seat for a period of September 2018 until January 2021 violates the 17th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Judge Diane Humetewa found Ducey's arguments defending Arizona's law convincing and scolded the plaintiffs several times. The decision is already - somewhat - under appeal to the Ninth Circuit. But, as it now stands, the likely match-up between appointee McSally and Democrat Mark Kelly is still scheduled for November 2020.
Chandler attorney Tom Ryan notes that the law changed mere weeks before McCain's passing and "effectively deprived Arizona voters". For more details on the dismissal and the already-pending appeal - including , please visit ArizonasLaw.org. "AZ Law" is a new program on Sun Sounds of Arizona, covering Arizona court cases. If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. 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 or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.
Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar attacked the head of the Office of Special Counsel for his "questionable ethics" in a hearing today, using a discredited theory that the late Senator John McCain wanted to punish Tea Party groups. When confronted by the witness, Gosar tried to back away.
Confused? That is understandable. This video from today's House Oversight Committee will clarify. And, here are the basics.
The witness is Henry Kerner. He is chief of the Office of Special Counsel, and was testifying about his recommendation that White House Special Advisor Kellyanne Conway be removed from her job for repeated Hatch Act violations. Earlier in his career, Kerner worked for the late-Arizona Senator John McCain. In that capacity, Kerner met with the IRS in 2013, before the controversy about whether the IRS was targeting the applications of Tea Party organizations burst into the public sphere. Gosar today accused Kerner of recommending that the IRS "harassing non-profit groups until they are unable to continue operating."
"You yourself have a history of questionable ethics," stated Gosar. Kerner used the transcript of that meeting to show that the discussion was about "sham groups" and that there was no mention of conservative or Tea Party groups.
"I would NEVER target conservative groups. I'm here because of the Tea Party victory...in 2010." (Republican former Rep. Darrell Issa hired Kerner for the same Oversight Committee he was testifying in front of today.) "It's just a smear."
Gosar then tried to weave in McCain's enmity towards the Tea Party, to demonstrate that the attack on Kerner makes sense. Kerner explained that McCain was furious that the IRS may have targeted conservative groups and instructed Kerner to go "all out" to show that such behavior from the IRS would be unacceptable.
In full retreat, Gosar responded with "I just wanted to clear it up." He moved on.
(Article has been corrected to fix Special Counsel's name. An unfortunate misspelling, indeed.)
Ironically-related article from earlier this month: "The Ghost of Holiday Bonuses Past: FEC Follows-Up On Rep. Gosar's Questionable Staff Bonuses" If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. 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 or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.
Update, 7/2 at 12:45: Without fanfare or noting it on the White House website, President Donald Trump signed the $4.6B aid package yesterday. It became law today.
Here are both the House-passed and Senate-passed versions of a $4.6B spending package for the crisis on the southern border. The House approved it yesterday on a party-line vote.
However, that would now appear to be dead on arrival, as the Senate voted today in an overwhelmingly bi-partisan fashion to substitute the Senate's package for a vote. The Senate passed their version, and that will head back over to the House. Arizona's Senators Kyrsten Sinema and Martha McSally both voted "aye". (Last night, Arizona's four Republican Representatives voted "nay" on the House version.)
Arizona's Politics has compared the money parts of the two versions, and can point out some of the key similarities and differences. (We have not (yet) compared the "guard rails" that were reportedly placed on the spending by the House bill.)
1) DIFFERENCE: The House version would make $615M in assistance available to the three Central American nations responsible for most of the asylum seekers (El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras) and to other nations in the area. The Senate version does not mention this.
2) DIFFERENCE: The Senate version routes $145M of the funds through the Army, Army National Guard, Air Force and Marines. The amounts are listed as "Operations and Maintenance." It is not clear whether this is done as a result of earlier budget transfers from the Administration's earlier emergency declaration. The House version does not reference the military.
3) SIMILARITY: Both provide $155M to the U.S. Marshalls for prisoners in custody. Both provide monies for the "Legal Orientation Program". (House=$15M, Senate=$10M).
4) DIFFERENCE: The Senate adds $55M for immigration judges, facilities and supplies.
5) SIMILARITY: The House allocated $1.2B to Customs and Border Protection; the Senate $1.0B. The Senate budgets $112M for "consumables and medical care" for the minors (House = $92M). The Senate's has $708M for migrant care and processing facilities and $35M for transportation.
6) SIMILARITY: Both have $85M for CBP facilities.
7) DIFFERENCE: The House provides twice as much to FEMA ($60M vs $30M), while the Senate bill gives nearly twice as much to ICE ($209M vs $128M).
8) SIMILARITY: Both propose spending $2.9B through the Department of Health and Human Services for "Refugee and Entrant Assistance".
If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. 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 or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.
(Originally published at "AZ Law")
An appeal was filed tonight in the constitutional challenge to Arizona Governor Doug Ducey's ability to control the late Senator John McCain's seat until November 2020. There has not been a decision by Judge Diane Humetewa, but plaintiffs call it an "effective denial" of their challenge.
Oral arguments were held on April 12, and was taken under advisement at that time. Today's appeal notice follows an unusual round of letters and responses filed last week, as the plaintiffs have grown impatient.
AZ Law and Arizona's Politics have previously reported on the constitutional challenge to the Arizona vacancy law. At that point, Sen. Jon Kyl was serving at the Governor's request. Kyl then resigned, permitting Ducey to appoint Martha McSally to the seat until a special election would be held in 2020 to fill the last two years. Sen. McCain passed away on August 25, 2018.
. . .
(For the rest of this article and the linked documents, please visit our new sister site, ArizonasLaw.org. "AZ Law" is a new program broadcast on the non-profit Sun Sounds of Arizona, servicing Arizonans who cannot read or hold printed material due to a disability.) If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. 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 or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.
"Give Me a Break - This Place Has Enough Creepy Old Men!" --McSally (aka No Country For Creepy Old Men) 1:50pm: "Give me a break. This place has enough creepy old men!" That is the priceless reaction from Arizona Senator Martha McSally when asked today about former Sheriff Roy Moore announcing that he would again run for the U.S. Senate seat from Alabama. Her quote is in a Politico article about Republicans "vowing to crush" the GOP candidae. Senator McSally has not yet listed the creepy old men already in the Senate. Arizona's Politics will update as warranted. OFF-TOPIC: 4 Tickets Available For Tomorrow's Dbacks Game Vs. Giants
1:10pm: We'll be down south visiting family tomorrow and can't make the game. If you're interested in our (great) season seats, at cost, please text Paul at 602 908 9132. If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. http://bit.ly/AZpDonate 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 or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.
Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar responded immediately to the FEC's letter seeking more information about his holiday bonuses for his Congressional staff. However, that response may raise further concerns about House Ethics rules violations and/or campaign finance reporting.
The campaign committee filed an amended report yesterday. It now says that most of his Congressional staff were actually paid out of the campaign committee's checkbook for doing "administrative services." (amended report published below)
This may raise further questions from authorities. The amended report now contradicts the committee's second amended post-general report, as to the purpose of the holiday disbursements. Both reports now do indicate that the monies were first owed to the Congressional staff during the post-general election period - which actually includes a few weeks before election day (October 18- November 26); could the Congressional staff members actually have performed $44,000 worth of "administrative services" during that period in a not-very-intense general election campaign. (Gosar won with more than 68% of the CD4 vote.)
The questions and concerns raised by experts in Arizona's Politics' first article exposing the bonuses still remain, as well. Having Congressional staff perform campaign tasks is permissible; however, the House Ethics Committee recommends that accurate records be maintained and that they perform the work on their own time and without office resources.
If $44,000 worth of campaign work was not performed by the staff members, election laws and House Ethics rules were violated. If the work was done and properly documented, then any inquiries by the FEC or the House Ethics Committee would clear the actions. However, the Congressman's office has declined to respond to repeated requests for a statement and/or documentation.
* Although the FEC has made it public that it is examining the bonuses/administrative services, it is not clear whether there has been a complaint or referral to either the House Ethics Committee or the Office of Congressional Ethics (that initiated the ethics investigation into Rep. David Schweikert (R-CD6)).
If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. 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 or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.
Fox News Town Hall With Julian Castro Today In Tempe
1:25pm:TODAY: If you're attending the @JulianCastro / @FoxNews Town Hall at the Tempe Center for the Arts this afternoon, PLEASE let us know (DMs or emails OK)!
Arizona's Senators Vote Against Blocking $3B Of Arms Sales To Bahrain and Qatar 10:30a.m.: Arizona's Senators joined most Republicans today in blocking two resolutions to block $3B in announced arms sales to Bahrain and Qatar. The resolutions failed, 43-56 and 42-57, respectively.
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) joined seven other Democrats in voting against the measures. The resolutions were proposed by Republican Senator Rand Paul (KY), and he was joined by a few GOP Senators in moving to block the Administration's arms sales amid concerns about Saudi Arabia and its allies, and the ongoing war in Yemen. Neither Sinema nor Sen. Martha McSally (R-AZ) has yet made any public comments on today's votes. If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. 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 or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.
Convicted Watergate figure John Dean suggested that Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs "take it up with the (Arizona) Regents if you have these kinds of problems with me". The challenge came after Biggs spent most of his allotted time blasting Dean as an "incredible, biased" witness at today's House Judiciary Committee hearing on "Lessons From the Mueller Report."
Biggs (R-CD5) was not the only Republican to attack the former White House Counsel's credentials, but he did put the most gusto and spent the most time on it. In fact, Biggs called the hearing a "farce" and did not allow any of the panel of witnesses to speak during his allotted five minutes; Chairman Jerrold Nadler then permitted Dean to respond to the attacks on his character.
After defending his actions during the Nixon era, Dean noted that ASU had appointed him to be the "Barry Goldwater Chair of American Institutions" in 2015 (for one year). As C-Span showed Biggs listening stone-faced, Dean told him "I guarantee you I tried to educate those students on the facts. So you might want to take it up with the (Arizona) Regents if you have these kinds of problems with me."
Reps. Debbie Lesko (R-CD8) and Greg Stanton (D-CD9) also had their chances to state their thoughts and question the witnesses; however, neither was as dramatic.
www.c-span.org/video/?c4801887/rep-biggs-jud-comm-re-mueller-report
www.c-span.org/video/?c4801883/rep-lesko-jud-comm-hrg-mueller-report
www.c-span.org/video/?c4801884/rep-stanton-jud-comm-mueller-report If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. http://bit.ly/AZpDonate 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 or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.
Two weeks ago, Arizona's Politics reported that $44,000 of holiday bonuses that Rep. Paul Gosar paid to his Congressional staff could ruin his year. Today, the Federal Election Commission ("FEC") sent a letter to the Congressman's committee, asking for more information on those - and, other - "incorrectly reported disbursements."
The article noted that paying the bonuses to his Congressional staff from his campaign committee COULD be within the rules of both the House Ethics Committee and the FEC, but that there would need to be careful documentation of the campaign work done in order to justify the bonuses. Arizona's Politics spoke with ethics experts who pointed out the possible issues for the Congressman.
The first letter questions why the committee did not file the required 48-hour notices when reeiving sizable contributions within the last three weeks of election day. Only after the election did the campaign disclose the $16,900 in contributions from seven people, received on October 29.
The second letter is the one that states that the 10 items listing "bonus for campaign staff" and the largest bonus to his former Chief of Staff Thomas van Flein (which simply says "campaign bonus") are "incorrectly reported". (The FEC questioned a few other reimbursements and an item labeled "Tele Townhalls".
The FEC is giving the Gosar for Congress committee until July 11 to amend their reports "to clarify the attached descriptions."
If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. 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 or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.
3:30pm: Here was the roll call in the House this week on the disaster aid package. Arizona's Democratic Representatives all voted "aye" - the entire Democratic caucus did. Arizona's four Republicans all voted "nay", though 2 out of 3 Republicans voted in favor of the package. Before the Memorial Day recess, Arizona Senator Martha McSally was among the 8 Senators to vote against the measure.
President Donald Trump signed the bill this afternoon, while taking credit for Puerto Rico aid being included in the measure.
Just signed Disaster Aid Bill to help Americans who have been hit by recent catastrophic storms. So important for our GREAT American farmers and ranchers. Help for GA, FL, IA, NE, NC, and CA. Puerto Rico should love President Trump. Without me, they would have been shut out! pic.twitter.com/HXvYYdcNW5
If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. 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 or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.
