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.

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.

FOLLOWING MONEY FOLLOW-UP: Horne Fails In Suit Against Natl Democratic Group; However, AG Goddard Must Now Decide What To Do With The Group That He Belongs To

The New Times has a complete update on the attack ads which Arizona's Politics has reported on extensively.  The ads attack GOP AG nominee Tom Horne.  The ads are apparently illegal because the group airing the ad - listed as the Committee for Justice and Fairness ("CFJF") - is not registered with Arizona to conduct an independent expenditure campaign in a statewide race - and has not filed notices of the expenditures.  Further, the CFJF is a front group for the Democratic Attorneys General Association, placing both current (Democratic) AG Terry Goddard and would-be AG Felecia Rotellini in difficult positions.

The alleged violations have now moved from the Secretary of State's Office to the Attorney General's Office.  Pursuant to Arizona law, the AG's office now has the discretion to send the CFJF/DAGA a notice to comply within 20 days.  Of course, the AG has a conflict-of-interest and should likely (immediately) transfer it to an independent prosecutor.


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: Republican Ad Hammers Back At Rotellini

(Hat tip to the Yellow Sheet Report for posting this video.)

Last night, for the first time, we saw an independent expenditure ad from the Republicans, hammering back at AG candidate Felecia Rotellini.  (We have previously discussed the apparently-illegal independent expenditure ad from the Democratic Attorneys General Assoication.)

This new ad is paid for by the "Business Leaders For Arizona".  It identifies the Republican State Leadership Committee as its major funder.

The ad fast-switches between a picture of Rotellini and one of President Obama.  It hits her for opposing SB1070 and taking money from unions who supported a boycott of Arizona.  "She sold Arizona out," the announcer intones.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siPmUBjS7cI

WATCH: Apparently-Illegal Ad By "Committee for Justice and Fairness" Against Tom Horne

Here is the ad that we - here at Arizona's Politics, as well as at the Arizona Guardian and the Phoenix New Times - have been discussing since late last week.  It was airing last night on at least one Phoenix television program last night.  And, as of this a.m., neither the "Committee for Justice and Fairness" nor its parent organization, the Democratic Attorneys General Association, has filed the required registration and notification documents with the Arizona Secretary of State's office.

FACT CHECK (from New Times): The Democratic Attorneys General Association's anti-Tom Horne Ad

Thanks to the New Times for addressing the anti-Tom Horne ad being run by a front group for the Democratic Attorneys General Association.  Arizona's Politics started discussing that ad last week, and learned that the DAGA was using a front group called the "Committee for Justice and Fairness" to run the ad in violation of Arizona's election laws.  Neither DAGA nor CFJF have registered to expend any monies in Arizona elections, in violation.  Further, the ad does not present who the major contributors to CFJF are - another violation.

Last night, Stephen Lemons, of the New Times, has posted a piece presenting the ad, doing some good fact checking of it, and acquiring comments from both Horne and Rotellini.  (The New Times obviously has more clout than this tiny ol' blog. ;-) )



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: Felecia Rotellini Ad Hammering Tom Horne In AZ AG Race

A few days ago, we noted seeing an ad for Democratic AG candidate Felecia Rotellini, which also attacked her opponent Tom Horne.  Here it is:

If There's Justice & Fairness, There Will Also Be Irony; Democratic AGs' Group Could Be Hit Hard, Too

Earlier post regarding the apparently-illegal anti-Tom Horne ads being run by the Democratic Attorneys General Association, through their front group known as the Committee For Justice and Fairness ("CFJF")..

Soooo, if you are like me, you were thinking about what the penalty is for running an independent expenditure campaign and what the procedure is.  Well, the penalty and the irony are both rich.

A.R.S. Sec. 16-924 sets forth the procedures for dealing with apparent violations, and 16-912 sets forth the amount of the penalty for violating the independent expenditure restrictions.  The penalty would be "up to three times the cost of producing and distributing the literature or advertisement."  We do not yet know how much the DAGA/CFJF paid for the ad, although their budget (see previous post) and other experience indicates that a maximum penalty could easily run into six figures.

FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS: Anti-Tom Horne Ads In Apparent Violation Of AZ Laws

(((Update: The Rotellini campaign on Monday afternoon declined to comment further on this report.  However, the Phoenix New Times did get a (surprised) comment from her, posted the ad and discussed its substance.)))

The Democratic Attorney Generals Association is behind a television advertisement attacking Republican candidate for Attorney General Tom Horne.  Neither the Washington-based group nor the committee name given at the end of the commercial have registered with the Arizona Secretary of State, making the independent expenditures illegal under Arizona law.

The 30-second attack ad is running on at least one Phoenix-area television station (as of yesterday), and identifies the "Committee For Justice and Fairness" ("CFJF") as paying for the ad.  The CFJF has registered with the Internal Revenue Service as a 527 organization, and they apparently spent more than one million dollars in the first two weeks of October.

Arizona law requires a political committee to file with the Secretary of State (for statewide races) BEFORE spending any money.  It is also required to file its previous finance reports (filed elsewhere) if it uses money raised before filing its statement of organization in Arizona.  The Secretary of State's office confirmed to Arizona's Politics this afternoon that it has received no filings from either the CFJF or the Democratic Attorney Generals Association.

An internet search on Google for CFJF reveals little about its Arizona efforts, other than that it has filed something (unavailable) with the Kansas state government.  Its website focuses on the Kansas race and does not mention Arizona. 

BEYOND HYPER-PARTISANSHIP... NOT!: GOP Party Officials Ready To Punish Grant Woods For Endorsing Rotellini

A couple of weeks ago, former Arizona Attorney General Grant Woods (Republican) endorsed Democratic candidate Felecia Rotellini to be the next AG.  Tonight, the Maricopa County Republican Party is ready to strip Woods' vote from county GOP business.  Woods is a Republican Precinct Committeeperson.

Woods lashed back with his response and went public with the party's move.  Both the Arizona Republic and the East Valley Tribune feature different parts of his response.

Some of the more fun lines:
--"According to you, if there were a hypothetical race between Thomas Jefferson, Democrat, and Lindsay Lohan, Republican, I could not endorse Jefferson over Lohan,''
--"Since I am the only Republican elected to the position of Arizona Attorney General in the last twenty years and since I led all candidates on the ballot in 1990 and 1994 and served eight years at AG, it seemed to me that I might be in a position to independently assess who would be the best person to be our next Attorney General. In this year’s election, in my judgment, it is not even close. Felicia Rotellini would be an outstanding Attorney General.


“Many Republicans spent the better part of this year arguing that Mr. Horne is unfit to hold the office of Attorney General and that people should vote for Andrew Thomas. Then, like Mr. Thomas, on the day after he lost they endorsed Mr. Horne. I found their arguments unconvincing before and after the election. But their lack of logic is reflected in your ‘rule.' ”
--"I am disappointed that I won't be able to vote on your important resolutions on 'issues' such as secession from the union and the never-ending pursuit of the president's birth certificate, but I will get over it,''

Outgoing Republican State Sen. Carolyn Allen also endorsed Rotellini at the news conference in September.  No word if the party will move to kick her out of the caucus in the event of a special session.

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.

SUCCESS For "Fact Check Follow-up": Rotellini Campaign Removes Primary-Only Endorsements

It is nice to see a campaign acknowledge and correct its mistakes.  And, nice to see one of our "Fact Check Follow-Ups" prove to be a success.

Yesterday, we posted and publicized a piece noting that the Rotellini campaign was still using primary-only endorsements on its website and Facebook page.  Two weeks earlier, our Fact Check had first brought attention to the endorsement abuse, including the active use of the Republic's endorsement in an e-mail.

Within hours of making e-mail contact, the site and Facebook page were scrubbed clean.  Evan Brown, Communications Director, reported: "Thanks for bringing it to our attention - much of our new media effort is run by volunteers, and this was just something that got overlooked."

Overlooking that the September 15 e-mail was not likely "run by volunteers", Arizona's Politics is glad to see the responsiveness and accountability. 




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.

FACT CHECK FOLLOW-UP: AG Candidate Rotellini Continues To Misuse Endorsements

UPDATE (9/30): Within 5 hours of e-mailing a link to this post to the Rotellini campaign, both the website's "Supporters" page and the Facebook page were scrubbed to eliminate the two primary-only endorsements.  More details: http://bit.ly/beJwsf


One of the things that bothers me even as Fact Checking has - thankfully - become more prevalent over the past few years is when campaigns/candidates IGNORE the fact checkers publicly calling them out on their falsehoods or misrepresentations. If anything, it got worse in the last election cycle and the trend is showing signs of continuing.


So, Arizona's Politics is going to try to do its part to continue holding false-tellers' feet to the fire. We will try to follow-up on the most egregious misrepresentations to see if and how they have been remedied. If you have any suggestions for this series, please comment below or e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com.

Two weeks ago, Arizona's Politics posted a Fact Check on AG candidate Felecia Rotellini's active mis-use of an endorsement by the Arizona Republic.  The Republic endorsed her AND Tom Horne in the Democratic and Republican primaries, respectively.  The Rotellini campaign used the Republic endorsement in a post-primary e-mail touting her as the "Community's Choice For Arizona".  Her website's endorsement page also noted that she was endorsed by the Tucson Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce - even though that, too, was for the primary only.  She received a grade of "F" for the false and misleading active mis-use of the primary-only endorsement of the state's largest newspaper.

It was time to follow-up on the subject.  Lo and behold, the endorsements page* does still list the Tucson Chamber's endorsement - interviews with the Chamber for a general election endorsement were scheduled for last week and no general election endorsement has been made.  But, worse than that, the Rotellini Facebook page is actively touting the Republic's endorsement. Her "Donate" page comes up as the default, and boasts "Along with the Professional Firefighters of Arizona, Felecia has over 40 endorsements including the Arizona Republic...."

Another "F" grade, for failing to remove the misleading endorsements.

As is our practice, Arizona's Politics will contact the Rotellini campaign and request that they correct all campaign materials which contain primary-only endorsements.  We will be happy to publish information indicating that the Facebook page and the website have been cleaned up.





*On September 15, the "supporters" page was NOT linked on the home page of the site - though it was linked in the e-mail at issue; on September 29, the "supporters" tab is front-and-center on the home page.

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: AG Candidate Rotellini's AZ Republic Endorsement Abuse, etc.

(Correction: This report has been corrected to properly reflect that the Tucson Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce did NOT endorse a candidate for the Republican nomination for Attorney General.  The gist is correct, however - that there is still no guarantee that Ms. Rotellini will receive the Chamber's endorsement for the general election.)

While Republican candidate Tom Horne earned double fact-checking attention yesterday for his efforts "... Trying To Make Lemonade In the AG's Race" - an interesting effort to use the Republic's (negative) fact check on Horne to (re-)shed negative light on his opponent - today, the spotlight turns to Democratic candidate Felecia Rotellini.

In an e-mail sent out this morning, with a subject line of "Sneak Peak – Arizonans for Rotellini!" and a not-quite-matching headline of "Felecia Rotellini is your Community’s Choice for Arizona!", the campaign boasts of Rotellini's endorsements: 

"Felecia has over 40 endorsements including the Arizona Republic, Arizona Correctional Peace Officers, Arizona Fraternal Order of Police, the Professional Firefighters of Arizona, and the Arizona Association of REALTORS."

The problem with that claim is that the Arizona Republic only endorsed Ms. Rotellini for the Democratic primary election.  Not the general election.  In fact, the Republic - which has apparently not yet noted this claim - also endorsed opponent Tom Horne for the Aug. 24 primary. (Republic: "Republicans - In a race featuring two flawed candidates, The Republic recommends Tom Horne for his record of progress as state schools' chief. Democrats - She has more experience than her opponents. She is ferociously smart and likely to be formidable in the fall if she wins the Democratic nod. The Republic recommends Felecia Rotellini.")



The other endorsements listed in today's e-mail all appear to be exclusively for Rotellini.  However, the above-quoted sentence links to her website's endorsement page, which still contains at least one primary-only endorsement.  The influential Tucson Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce endorsed Rotellini - but not Horne - for their party's nominations; however, Chamber VP Paul Parisi confirms that they are conducting a new round of endorsement interviews next week before determining who they will urge their members to vote for in November.

Both the Republic and the Tucson Chamber made it clear to the candidates (and the public) that the endorsement was for the Aug. 24 primary election only.  Further, most political insiders know that the newspapers tend to endorse candidates for their party's nominations in the primary, and that that does not reflect who will be endorsed for the general election.

To inadvertently leave a primary-only endorsement up on the website is one thing.  But, there is no excuse for a campaign to actively publicize a primary-only endorsement during the general election campaign.

Minor point: The e-mail claims "over 40 endorsements"; the endorsement page on the website lists 16 organizations (and does not include the Republic or other newspaper endorsements).  The only way the campaign gets to more than 40 is by counting the individual endorsements (mainly from fellow Democrats) or by including a lot of new endorsements that are not yet up on the website (unlikely).  It is hard to see the benefit in pumping up the number of endorsements in this manner.

CONCLUSION:  Campaigns brag about endorsements because they help make the case to potential supporters that newspapers, organizations, etcetera have already vetted the candidate and support her (or him).  So, endorsements lie at the union of organizational support (money, volunteers, etc.) and potential voters. Abuse of endorsements is pretty common (fires flared up in both Democratic and Republican primary battles).  And, while it seems minor, it is necessary to police the use and abuse of them precisely because they mean something.

Rotellini's active mis-use of the Arizona Republic primary-only endorsement is false and misleading.  Her claim deserves a grade of  "F".



We welcome your feedback about this post. If you know of other endorsement abuse, or have something else on your mind, please comment here or e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.

FACT CHECK: Fact Checking the Spin On a Fact Checker; Or, Trying To Make Lemonade In the AG's Race

This is an interesting one.  Just received this news release from the Tom Horne campaign, strongly implying Felecia Rotellini of lying to the Arizona Republic after stone-walling on Horne's claim in last week's AG debate that she exaggerated her prosecutorial experience.

Tracking down the Republic's Fact Check (which isn't as easy as it should be) shows that the Republic actually concludes that Horne's statement in the debate was more false than true, and does not show that Rotellini mislead.

LATER: 

The Republic gave Horne two stars (more false than true) on his comment in the debate.  That is a pretty fair grade.

Horne then puts out his news release titled: "HORNE: ROTELLINI HAS NEVER TRIED A CASE IN HER ENTIRE LIFE."  He claims that Rotellini "touts herself as a "veteran prosecutor," has in fact never tried a case in her entire life."  The use of the phrase "in fact" connotes that only attorneys who have "tried cases" can be considered "veteran prosecutors".  It is unlikely that Horne could support that claim.

He then implies that Rotellini gave the Republic a list of eight cases as proof that she had tried them.  (He notes that he researched them and, "it turned out that Rotellini did not proceed to trial on any of the eight cases.")  A review of the Republic Fact Check shows that she gave them the list of eight as proof that she prosecuted them before a grand jury, spent time arguing the cases in Superior Court, and/or briefed/argued them in the Court of Appeals.

CONCLUSION: An "A" for effort on trying to turn around the two-star scolding by the Republic's Fact Check, but a "B-" for continuing misleading on his claim that only attorneys who actually try the case before a jury can be considered "veteran prosecutors."

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.

Tom Horne's Morning After Update and Analysis: Unlikely I'll Lose Lead From Uncounted Precincts

From his Twitter, Tom Horne links to his analysis of where the rest of the counting (of precincts, not of yet-uncounted early ballots) is headed.  Take-away quote:  "It seems not impossible but unlikely that I will lose the 373 vote in the remaining 7 precincts. Most current uncertainty would seem to come from the questioned ballots."  He does seem to acknowledge that he will not get out of required recount territory - at least not from the uncounted precincts.  I am unsure why he does not mention the many early ballots that were mailed/dropped late and have not yet been counted - those are distinct from "questioned ballots."



Noting his Maricopa and Pima County tallies-to-date, he notes that 5 precincts are uncounted in the former (where he trailed Thomas) and only 2 are uncounted in Pima (where he won a majority).

Horne's full analysis:

Friends-



Thank all of you for your support!


Here's what I have figured out this morning:


My lead is 373, just short of what is needed to avoid a recount.


There are 5 precincts out of 1142 left to report in Maricopa County. There are 2 precincts out of 417 to report in Pima County. My overall loss in Maricopa County was 48.86% to 50.56%. My overall win in Pima County was 52.97% to 46.59%. Last night when there were still 34 precincts to report in Maricopa County, and 14 in Pima, and it shrank to 5 and 2 precincts, my lead only shrank by 50 votes. It seems not impossible but unlikely that I will lose the 373 vote in the remaining 7 precincts. Most current uncertainty would seem to come from the questioned ballots.


Sincerely,
Tom