Thursday, October 30, 2014

QUICK HITS: "Arizonans For Jobs" Sends Out Last Minute $18K Mailer Attacking Sinema (FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS)

Quick hits: Arizona's Politics has more pressing news items than it can report on as fully as it typically does (and wants to).  Therefore, we will be presenting some items in abbreviated form, calling them - in the nature of many negative ads saturating our airwaves - "quick hits".  (If you would like to assist in providing unbiased coverage of Arizona political news items in the remaining days before the election, please email me at Mitch @ ArizonasPolitics .com. We will be happy to recognize your contribution.)

Arizonans for Jobs - a Republican-friendly group - is sending out an $18,000 last minute mailer attacking Rep. Kyrsten Sinema (D-CD9).

The group filed its disclosure this afternoon.  It is the first appearance in this year's election for Arizonans for Jobs.  In 2012, AFJ was largely financed by Lincoln Heritage Life Insurance, a locally-based company that was founded by Jack and Dodie Londen (and remains in the family).  AFJ supported Jeff Flake in his successful 2012 campaign for the U.S. Senate.

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.

TONIGHT: "Universe Shattering" KPHO Report Into Obama Birth Certificate Investigation By Sheriff Arpaio's Cold Case Posse

"Universe shattering." That is what tonight's report by Phoenix TV station KPHO will be, according to a whistleblower.  Channel 5 is airing its investigation  into Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's investigators.

Arpaio's well-kinown Cold Case Posse has been raising funds and investigating President Barack Obama's birth certificate for more than two years, and former Posse member Brian Reilly told Arizona's Politics today that the so-called "Birthers" - who have been promised universe-shattering results from the MCSO CCP investigation - will have their universe shattered tonight.



Arizona's Politics has periodically reported on Arpaio's birth certificate investigation, and the subject of fundraising, County funds, and how expenses are handled has been raised repeatedly.  Brian Reilly - who helped convince Arpaio to take on the subject of the President's birth certificate by spearheading a petition, and then became involved in the Cold Case Posse - began speaking out against the MCSO CCP's never-ending investigation earlier this year.

Tonight's report (10pm) by Morgan Loew and the KPHO investigative reporting team promises to be an interesting one. "Universe shattering", as Reilly quipped.


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.

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

QUICK HITS: Right To Life Airs Last-Minute Radio Ad Supporting Tobin, Rogers, McSally (FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS)

Quick hits: Arizona's Politics has more pressing news items than it can report on as fully as it typically does (and wants to).  Therefore, we will be presenting some items in abbreviated form, calling them - in the nature of many negative ads saturating our airwaves - "quick hits".  (If you would like to assist in providing unbiased coverage of Arizona political news items in the remaining days before the election, please email me at Mitch @ ArizonasPolitics .com. We will be happy to recognize your contribution.)

(UPDATED 5:10pm: The original version of this article only focused on one ad benefiting McSally; the updated version includes ad buys for Tobin and Rogers, and updates the figures.)

The National Right To Life PAC ("NRL-PAC") and the National Right To Life Victory Fund are airing new radio ads supporting Republican Congressional challengers Martha McSally (#AZ02), Wendy Rogers (#AZ09) and Andy Tobin (#AZ01)

The expenditures are on two separate filings this afternoon indicating that the ad will cost between $2,554 (Rogers) and $6,021 (Tobin).  $5,132 will be spent supporting McSally.

The three Republicans are attempting to unseat Democratic Reps. Ann Kirkpatrick (CD1), Ron Barber (CD2) and Kyrsten Sinema (CD9).

Arizona's Politics was unable to find copies of the ads on the internet; if you spot it or are able to make a recording, please forward it to the address below.  You will be entered in a prize drawing for your assistance.

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.

NEWS ANALYSIS: Reagan Campaign Tries To Re-Write Dark Money History (and Definition), To Avoid Denouncing Dark Money Present Benefitting Her (#50ShadesOfDarkMoney)

(Arizona's Politics is an independent, non-partisan political news blog. When we engage in analysis or commentary, we attempt to label it as such. This article may be classified as "news analysis" because it attempts to "provid(e) interpretations that add to a reader's understanding of a subject.")

The Arizona Republic's Mary Jo Pitzl has a good article up tonight, "Reagan sets conditions on renouncing 'dark money'". GOP Secretary of State nominee Michele Reagan is trying to avoid denouncing a $304,000 dark money ad benefiting her candidacy.

Reagan (and/or her campaign manager) are now saying "after you", and trying to make her renunciation of the Sean Noble-linked 60 Plus Association come only after Democratic nominee Terry Goddard denounces a 2010 ad campaign.

However, there are several misleading and incorrect aspects to Reagan's new condition. Arizona's Politics was the first to report on the 2010 campaign shenanigans that Reagan is raising tonight, and is in a good position to add some history and some context, as well as to point out the distinctions between then and now.

According to the Pitzl article, Reagan's campaign manager believes that the 2010 "Committee for Justice and Fairness" expenditure in the Attorney General's race was dark money and that "Goddard needs to explain his inaction."

BACKGROUND

The 2010 expenditure in question was in the Attorney General's race between Felecia Rotellini and Tom Horne. It was a particularly nasty - and misleading - ad attacking Horne (who was Superintendent of Public Instruction at the time).

The ads were only identified as being from the "Committee For Justice and Fairness", and did not identify major contributors. On October 22, Arizona's Politics published an article noting that "CJF" was wholly funded by the Democratic Attorneys General Association, and that the ads appeared to violate Arizona election laws.

A follow-up article, "If There's Justice & Fairness, There Will Also Be Irony; Democratic AGs' Group Could Be Hit Hard, Too", detailed how a complaint from Horne would first go to the Secretary of State, before being referred to then-AG Goddard. We noted that Goddard would have a conflict of interest because he was a member of DAGA, and would refer it to an independent prosecutor.

The final pre-election article of note was the Thursday before Election Day, October 28. We noted that the ball was hit into Goddard's court that afternoon, and that he had 20 days to make a determination. The article added that he should "immediately" transfer it to an independent prosecutor. (If he had transferred it that day or the next day, there would be even less of a story today.)

Arizona's Politics continued - and, continues - to cover CJF/DAGA's apparent blatant disregard of Arizona's (already-lax) election law. On the 2010 election day, for example, Arizona's Politics reported that the Arizona Democrats had "co-opted" the CJF/DAGA claims and that that could play into legal action. Horne did claim coordination between Rotellini and CJF/DAGA, but that went nowhere and it was Horne who has been found to have illegally coordinated with an independent expenditure group.

PRESENT DAY

Reagan, through Campaign Manager Kyle Moyer, made a couple of very key misrepresentations. Whether innocently or purposefully, they need to be addressed:

1) The money used to fund the CJF ad against Horne was NOT "dark money", even if CJF violated Arizona law. As evidenced by the articles cited above, the source of the funds for the ad were identifiable. Any CJF filing in Arizona would not have shown the source of the funds, it simply would have listed its contact information. Arizona's Politics easily located the IRS filings of both CJF and DAGA, and was able to identify contributors. (The amount CJF/DAGA sunk into the Arizona ads was NOT clear from the filings - changes making FCC filings available online would now make that task much simpler.)

Reagan's efforts to equate CJF/DAGA with the 60 Plus ad attacking Goddard and benefiting her thus falls far short of the mark. The only thing in common is that both are attack ads and both are independent expenditures. DAGA's funding is open (while questionable for its potentially-corruptible influence), while 60 Plus is the very definition of a dark money operation that also has been a conduit and recipient of other dark money (the washing machine of dark money laundering, if you will).

Over the last few years, 60 Plus has received at least $16.6M from American Encore (formerly known as the Center To Protect Patient Rights), a 501(c )(4) run by Arizona-based political consultant Sean Noble. 60 Plus has used some of that money to run ads against candidates - sometimes having little to do with the seniors' issues it is supposedly focused on - and has passed some of that on to similar organizations*.

2) Moyer dings Goddard for his "inaction". Goddard had no obligation - and, probably no inclination - to take action before the election. His office received it less than three business days before the election, and he had 20 days before action had to be taken. He should have transferred it to a non-conflicted prosecutor immediately, or within the 20 days. However, that did not prevent the complaint from being forwarded to the MCAO in January. (Neither Goddard's nor Horne's office responded to repeated efforts by Arizona's Politics to ascertain the disposition, and the latter did not announce the transfer; Arizona's Politics was later surprised when the case popped up in court in 2012.)

BOTTOM LINE

Whether or not Michele Reagan takes the significant step of denouncing the 60 Plus commercial benefitting her candidacy for Secretary of State is her decision; asking that it be pulled would seem to have a potential political payoff exceeding the value of yet another negative ad on TV - especially if 60 Plus complied with her demand.

But, for Reagan to avoid a denunciation by hiding behind a false equivalency claim that her opponent denounce an expenditure that did not benefit him four years ago is wrong.



* Such inter-organization "grants" are more likely designed to help entities reach their 51% "social welfare" mission than to hide already-hidden donors' identities.

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.

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

READ: Rep. Grijalva One Of 32 House Dems To Tell Obama of Concerns Re: Undocumented Central American Families

Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-CD3) is one of 32 House Democrats to send a letter to President Obama today about concerns that the U.S. is planning to house more undocumented Central American women and children for longer periods and without bond.

The letter was led by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), and comes as a new detention center in Dilley, Texas may be opening within a few weeks, and could house 2,400 undocumented immigrants next year.  It also expresses concerns about the no bond (or high bond) policy that is keeping Central Americans in detention even after there has been an initial determination that they have legitimate fear if sent back to their country of origin.

Grijalva was the only Arizona Representative to sign the letter.



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.

LAST MINUTE TOBIN SUPPORT: Fellow Insurance Agents, GOP Environmental Group Send Out Last Minute Mailers In #AZ01 (FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS)

At least two more mailers supporting Arizona House Speaker Andy Tobin will hit CD1 mailboxes later this week.  Insurance agents and a GOP environmental group are disclosing last-minute expenditures in the toss-up race.

Tobin is getting a boost from fellow insurance agents and brokers, who are spending $16,151 on its 2nd mailer in the campaign.  The postcard promises that Tobin "will fight Obamacare" (and presumably, that Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick loves Obamacare).

And, the Arizona-based longtime pro-GOP/pro-environment group "Conserv America Building a Brighter Future Together" is putting a $14,263 mailer out.  This adds to the $50,000 it has already spent on Tobin's behalf.

The Kirkpatrick/Tobin campaign has been closely-watched nationally, and it is rated as a "toss-up" contest.

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.

DARK MONEY BONANZA: Approx $15M Dark Money Spent On Arizona Campaigns... So Far (#50ShadesOfDarkMoney)

Approximately $15,000,000 of dark money has been spent to influence Arizona voters in the past year.  As election day (mercifully) approaches, the number of TV/radio/online/postal/etc ads is reaching a crescendo; on many of those, it is impossible to identify which individuals, corporations or groups put up the money.

Arizona's Politics has attempted to shine as much light as possible on these dark ads, as they have become a bigger story than ever.  The state's largest utility, APS, has apparently contributed mightily to such groups in races for the Corporation Commission, Secretary of State, and Attorney General; that has become a major driver of the news.

Because of a wide range of disclosure laws for the great variety of types of independent expenditure spenders, it is not always clear whether an ad should be considered as a "dark money" ad.  Arizona's Politics is using a "#50ShadesOfDarkMoney" spectrum to rank the various groups. (Explanations are provided; Google the term for a list of articles.)

What the individual articles have not done is keep a running total of the dark money expenditures. So, with help from Paul Weich, we went through our articles, Arizona Secretary of State reports, Federal Election Commission reports, and checked in with the Center for Responsive Politics
(where the good people there do great work).  Here is the snapshot provided from looking through those various lenses.

To date, approximately $14,675,103 has been spent in Arizona in the past year by groups judged to not disclose donors for all or the majority of their funds.

The caveats are:
(1) Americans for Prosperity - a group believed to be partly funded by the now-infamous Koch brothers - began running ads against Democratic Reps. Ron Barber and Ann Kirkpatrick in early 2014. The amounts put into broadcasting those ads are not entirely clear.
(2) Dark money independent expenditures in all of the Arizona legislative primaries were not totaled.  The largest IEs were reviewed, and the amount spent in other races were approximated.
(3) Reasonable people can differ as to whether certain groups should be considered "dark money". Arizona's Politics did not include several groups that appear unlikely to receive/spend money from outside individuals/entities, even if they do not disclose their donors. Examples of this are the Arizona Cattle Feeders' Association and labor unions.  However, the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and the Center for Arizona Policy Action Committee are examples of groups that Arizona's Politics did consider to be "dark money." (A complete list of IE groups and their spots on the #50ShadesOfDarkMoney spectrum will be released on Wednesday.)

Although an astonishing $5M+ was spent during battles for party nominations (the August 26 primary election), most of the dark money has been spent between August 27 and the present.

For statewide offices, there has been $5,750,197 in dark money expenditures.  The Republican Attorneys General Association ("RAGA") is responsible for nearly $2M ($1,962,453, to be exact) of that, all spent attacking Democratic nominee Felecia Rotellini.  As discovered by Arizona's Politics last week, APS contributed at least $175,000 to that group. RAGA receives more than half of its monies from dark money sources.

Nationally-known dark money wizard Sean Noble (based here in Arizona) has made his presence felt in this year's elections.  His American Encore group alone has spent $1,445,000 in the Governor's race (supporting long-term client/ally Doug Ducey).  He also has ties with some of the other dark money entities.

State legislative races have also seen approximately $1.6M in dark money expenditures.  However, the overwhelming amounts were spent in the hotly-contested Republican primaries. (Approx $1.3M in the primaries vs. $335K so far in the general.)

An interesting aspect of the legislative races is that good chunks of that dark money comes from two education-focused national groups.  Stand for Children, Inc. and the American Federation for Children, Inc. have spent heavily in both primaries and general campaigns.  A third education-related group, Arizona Democrats for Educational Equity, apparently receives a majority of its funds from the dark Education Reform Now Advocacy group; ADEE has not spent much to date.

Arizona has been in the national eye for two toss-up Congressional races, and the dark outside money has flooded in.  Including a little bit spent in the GOP primary battle in CD1 - and NOT including the early ads purchased by Americans for Prosperity - a total of $3,565,315 in non-disclosed money has flooded the Phoenix (CD1) and Tucson (CD2 and CD1) markets.

CD1, with a battle between Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick and Arizona House Speaker Andy Tobin, has seen $2.0M, all supporting the GOP challenger.  American Action Network ($840,670), YG Network ($734,867) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce ($300,000) are the biggest spenders.

In southern Arizona's CD2, Rep. Ron Barber is facing a rematch with Martha McSally. $1.4M has been spent there, with the same three groups leading the charge (in a different order: the U.S. Chamber has spent $600,424, AAN $503,742 and YGNet $233,559).  A centrist group leaning Democratic - Center Forward - spent $147,864 attacking McSally.

***
The Arizona Star's Joe Ferguson has a very good article up this morning regarding dark money in Arizona, and Secretary of State candidate Terry Goddard's plans to address the mushrooming problem of mushroom money.

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.

Monday, October 27, 2014

Arizona Supreme Court Decides Sexual Abuse of Minor Case: Parent Can Continue Refusing Interview Even After Child Turns 18 (READ)

This article contributed by Tempe attorney Paul Weich.

In a case that could have been part of a "Law & Order: SVU" episode, the Arizona Supreme Court unanimously decided that a parent* cannot be compelled to sit for a defense interview about her daughter's alleged sexual abuse even after the daughter becomes an adult. The opinion clarifies an unclear portion of Arizona's Victims Bill of Rights.

In this case, a 16-year old girl alleged that her stepfather had sexually abused her. The girl's mother asserted the girl's victims' rights on her behalf, but after the teenager turned 18, the stepfather tried to force the mother to be interviewed about the circumstances.

Arizona's two Court of Appeals divisions had come up with different answers** on whether the parent's right to refuse an interview extended after the child reached 18.  In 2006, then-Sen. John Huppenthal had added the parent's right but the amended statute did not make it clear whether the right expired at the child's adulthood or through the end of the case.  (In fact, as the Justices point out, the Legislature had rejected an amendment that would have allowed defense interviews of parents who are also witnesses.)

The key quote from Chief Justice Scott Bales' opinion:  
"The goals of respecting victims, protecting their rights, and aiding in their healing, however are better served by construing A.R.S. §13-4433(G) as preserving the parent's right to refuse a defense interview through the conclusion of the case.  Even though a child has turned eighteen, a compelled interview of the parent who exercised the minor victim's rights could further traumatize the victim and subject the victim, although vicariously, to unwanted pretrial contact with the defendant or questioning by the defense." ¶ 19

 

* or legal guardian
** in this case and one other case

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.