Arizona's Own Espresso Pundit

What's Going to Happen in District 9?

Multiple sources tell me that Ben Quayle is planning to move to District 6 and run against Schweikert*.

So it’s looking like District 9 is going to be an open seat in a swing district—talk about a bloggers dream.  These things are difficult to predict, but here are my thoughts on the key players.

On the Democratic side, it’s going to be Schapira verses Sinema.  I was sitting next to Kyrsten on the set of Sunday Square Off when she said that she “loved Russell Pearce.”  In Democratic circles, she’s taking a lot of grief for that remark, but give me a break.  Haven’t we been talking about civility for the last year?  Don’t we harkin back to the day when Legislators could disagree on the issues, but remain friends?  Don’t you think that Barry Goldwater would say that he loved Mo Udall? 

I think Sinema wins the primary. 

On the Republican side, we are going to see a replay of the 2010 race but without Quayle.  I think you  will see Steve Moak and Vernon Parker plus Chandler city Councilman Martin Sepulveda.  One interesting twist is that County Supervisor Don Stapley has been conducting a poll in the district. 

Stapley is likely to jump into the race, not because he can win it, but because he has a better chance of winning a Congressional Race than he does getting re-elected.  I’m a bit sympathetic to Stapley--the way that Andrew Thomas abused him was truly pathetic.  However, I believe that there was at least some fire under all that smoke.   And I think that Stapley ended his career as a Supervisor when he endorsed Jerry Lewis. (Plus, it seems like he votes with Mary Rose more than he votes with the Republicans.)

Stapley has already drawn a strong opponent in Steve Chucri.  Chucri is well connected, well financed and well organized.  I don’t see any way that Stapley can keep his seat.   Of course, I don’t see any way that he can win the primary in District 9 either. 

It looks to me like Steve Moak—who has significant residual name recognition and the ability to self fund—will take win that race. 

So it looks to me like Sinema verses Moak in the General.  That’s a great race.  I think it will be a Republican wave year, so I have to call the race for Moak.

(Take these predictions for what they are worth.  Last week I thought that Paton and Newman would face off in Tucson.  I still think that Newman will run, but Paton has announced for the eastern Arizona Seat.)

 Footnote:

Obviously I'm friends with Schweikert, so consider the source, but I have some thoughts on Quayle's move.  I think it's being viewed in Washington as a totally selfish act.  Quayle is by far the best candidate the Repblicans can run in District 9.  He's an incumbent with a strong name and a proven ability to raise money.  But instead of competing in a swing district, he's chosing to challenge another conservative Republican.  If Republicans lose District 9, it will be because Quayle chose to play it safe.

Who will win? Those of you who have lived in Scottsdale for most of your life will remember where you were in 1978 when Bob Crane was killed.  Schweikert was washing dishes at the Windmill Theatre where Crane performed... Quayle was still in diapers and was being shuttled between Washington DC and Indiana.

Schweikert has been running for Congress since high school.  He first ran for the legislature in 1988--when Quayle was eleven--and was first elected in 1990.  He ran for Congress in 1994, ran for Treasurer in 2004, Congress in 2008 and then won 1n 2010.  That's a lot of built in name recognition. 

How about money?  I'd guess that Quayle will ultimately raise more money.  But campaign money--like most everything else--has diminishing marginal utility.  If Schweikert spends $ 2 million in a primary and Quayle spends $3 million, they will both have his a saturation point.

So I say that based on personal connections in the district, name recognition and political experience, the District goes to Schweikert.  I concede that Quayle will probably have a monitary advantage, but will probably run a high overhead campain, so the dollars per voter amount will probably be the same and both will candidates will reach a full saturation point.

One thing is clear.  If Schweikert defeats Quayle in 2012, there's nothing standing between Schweikert and McCain's seat in 2016. (Except possibly McCain)  Frankly, since Schweikert and Quayle were destined to go head to head for the Senate in 2016, it would be better for Schweikert if the contest were soon and confined to Scottsdale instead of 4 years from now and state wide.

Those are my thoughts.  I respect the Quayle family but Schweikert is my friend and my loyalties are clear.  If you disagree with my analysis there's plenty of room in the comment section.

Who Checks the Fact Checkers?

 Here's a paragraph from the Republic's latest Gabby Giffords update.  Can you find the obvious error?

She was elected to the state House in 2000 and ran for the state Senate in 2002 after the death of Tucson Sen. Andy Nichols, becoming at 32 the youngest state senator in Arizona history. She resigned from that position in December 2005 to run for the congressional seat being vacated by retiring Rep. Jim Kolbe, a Republican.

Youngest in history?  Give me a break.  Anyone who has any experience with history knows that there have been plenty of young people in both the House and Senate.  When I served in the House, we had an "under 30 caucus".   Keith Bee was a member of that caucus and was was elected to the House at 24 and then elected to the Senate at 26.  That's just one obvious example of a Senator who was younger than Gabby.

Does is matter?  Yes.  The Republic has been running a series called "Arizona Fact Check" in which the goal is to "Keep Arizona Honest."   There's only two problems with this approach...politicians are more accurate than journalists, and the Republic uses these "fact checks" to ding people the reporters don't like. 

For example, check out how many twists and turns reporters Stephanie Russo and Alia Beard Rau had to go through in order to declare Senator Al Melvin's statement about the Republican Caucus "false."

Or how about this labryinth that Dennis Wagner has to create in order to claim that David Schweikert's assertion that stimulus money was used to fund Fast and Furious is somehow false.

This from the same crew that never bothered to cover Fast and Furious when it was unfolding and who often botch even the most basic facts.

In case you forgot how much trouble Glendale is in....

Check out this Wall Street Journal story.

Glendale, Ariz., is selling about $136 million in debt in the municipal-bond market this week, just days after Moody's Investors Service cut its bond rating because of the desert city's obligations to cover losses on a National Hockey League franchise.

Investors Business Daily: Brewer Was Right.

I've been pointing out how badly the media botched their coverage of spillover Mexican violence by ignoring the underlying story and criticizing Brewer for her comments.  Now the national press is starting to take notice as well.  (This is  great example of how local blogs influence national stories.)

Eighteen months ago, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer was excoriated for warning of spillover from Mexico's war reaching our soil. Well, beheadings are becoming common now. Yet that war is still ignored.

Leading the charge in the summer of 2010, Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank blasted Republican Gov. Brewer for claiming that Arizona's "law enforcement agencies have found bodies in the desert either buried or just lying out there that have been beheaded."

Brewer did admit she was in error at the time, but that's not what really interested Milbank and his fellow media minions.

In his column, Milbank cast Brewer's claim as misinformation intended to scare people into thinking violence from illegal immigration is worse than it actually is.

"Border violence on the rise? Phoenix becoming the world's No. 2 kidnapping capital? Illegal immigrants responsible for most police killings? The majority of those crossing the border are drug mules? All wrong," Milbank wrote.

He wasn't the only one to pile on — CBS and the Guardian also jumped in.

Just one problem, though. Brewer may have jumped the gun months ago, but cartel beheadings have become a reality in Arizona — and are now jumping to other states.

Four months after the Arizona governor spoke, the first grisly cartel beheading occurred — in Arizona. Martin Alejandro Cota-Monroy's body was found Oct. 10, 2010 in Chandler, in what police believed had been a revenge attack for stealing cartel drugs.

A year later and 600 miles north in Oklahoma, the victim was not a person involved in the drug trade, but a 19-year-old human trafficking victim, Carina Saunders, who was killed by suspected cartel members to frighten another teenager into joining the cartel.

Three months later, in Tucson, another headless body was found on a desolate stretch of road.

Just this month, in Hollywood, Calif., the same sort of headless body was found in a canyon by some dog walkers. Police are saying they think the last two may be linked.

If so, it looks like the work of Mexico's cartels, says former Drug Enforcement Administration supervisor Phil Jordan. "It would lead me to believe the message wanted to be sent," he told KRGV television in Texas.

What's seen here is the very swift regularization of crime that, until recently, was thought to be Mexico's problem.

Brewer made her then-errant call for more vigilant border enforcement and was blasted by the media as if there wasn't an underlying problem.

What's Next For Gabby's District?

Now that Gabby has said that she will resign Tuesday, we need to dust off the rules for Special Elections.  I don't remember the exact dates, but these things go fast--like 90 days. 

But that's not the focus of this post...the question is who wins and who loses.  Here are some random thoughts.  First, the resign to run law doesn't come into play.  Everyone interested in the office will be in the last year of his or her term.

Sitting Legislators can't raise money during session, but I'm not sure it that applies to federal races...did Tim Bee raise money during session while he was running for Congress?  What is Schapira doing now?  Raising money for a federal office while serving in a position where you can't raise state money would look bad, but I'm not sure it it's illegal. 

However, I would argue that any serious congressional candidate who is currently in the Legislature would have to resign.  He or she can't work full time in Phoenix and expect to win a truncated race in Tucson. 

The big winner on the Democratic side is Corporation Commissioner Paul Newman.  He lives in the district, has great name recognition and isn't restricted from raising money.  Moreover, he can run for Congress and if he loses, he can still run for re-election on at the ACC. 

My guess is that Newman will announce immediately and that the other Dems won't want to resign from the legislature and will give him a free ride.

The big winner on the Republican side is Jonathan Paton.  Paton raised nearly a million dollars in his last run and has plenty of residual name ID.  He lost to Kelly, because Kelly's ground game was better.  But it's going to be hard for Kelly to recreate that network on short notice. 

So my initial reaction that the race will be Paton v. Newman. 

Patrick Cunningham to Take the Fifth in Fast and Furious.

Wow, this is huge.  And since it's being featured in the banner on Drudge, the entire planet knows about it.

The chief of the Criminal Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Arizona is refusing to testify before Congress regarding Operation Fast and Furious, the federal gun-running scandal that sent U.S. weapons to Mexico.

Patrick J. Cunningham informed the House Oversight Committee late Thursday through his attorney that he will use the Fifth Amendment protection.

Cunningham was ordered Wednesday to appear before Chairman Darrell Issa and the House Oversight Committee regarding his role in the operation that sent more than 2,000 guns to the Sinaloa Cartel. Guns from the failed operation were found at the murder scene of Border Agent Brian Terry.

 If you are looking for additional analysis, you should start here.

Textbook Case of Bias

The fastest way to expose media bias is to compare how the papers cover identical events performed by two different people.   Governor Brewer just delivered her State of the State address and it was panned by the media.  Governor Napolitano delivered seven State of the State addresses...and was met with media adulation.  Check out the headlines and first couple paragraphs of the Arizona Republic's coverage of each speech.

Here's Brewer's speech from last week.

Brewer's address light on policy, fund details

 Gov. Jan Brewer on Monday unveiled a policy agenda that aims to build on plans to enhance Arizona's economic competitiveness, improve its education system and make it easier to hire and fire state workers.

The Republican governor also vowed to continue to push back against the federal government on issues such as health-care mandates and illegal immigration.

 

Here's the coverage of Napolitano's first State of the State Address in 2003. (No link because it's only available in the Republic archive.)

GOVERNOR: 'LET'S BE HONEST' NAPOLITANO SAYS STATE IN SORRY SHAPE, VOWS TO PROTECT KIDS, TAXPAYERS

Gov. Janet Napolitano challenged lawmakers Monday to dig out of the state's worst fiscal crisis without raising taxes or balancing the budget on "the backs of children."

  Here's 2004.

'INVESTMENT IN THE FUTURE' AMBITIOUS PLAN WOULD BOOST EARLY-CHILDHOOD EDUCATION

Full-day kindergarten for 250 of the state's poorest schools within a year. A new system for rating the quality of preschools. And, once again, a new book for every first-grader in Arizona.

In her second act, Gov. Janet Napolitano wants to be known as the Education Governor, specifically, the Early Childhood Education Governor.

During her 40-minute State of the State speech Monday, Napolitano laid out an ambitious and pricey plan to stop dropouts, increase literacy and bolster the economy by improving education at its earliest levels. After the speech, the governor, a big sports fan, used a football analogy to describe her strategy.

 Here's 2005

INVEST 'IN WHAT MATTERS': GOVERNOR'S ADDRESS URGES UNITY FOR STATE AGENDA

Facing re-election next year, Gov. Janet Napolitano reached out Monday to create a common ground with a more conservative Republican Legislature, calling for business tax breaks and talking tough on illegal immigration.

In her State of the State address, the Democrat once again staked her claim as the education governor when she pushed to expand all-day kindergarten to 100 more low-income schools.

But she also offered conservative-friendly plans to spur the economy with tax relief and urged the U.S. and Mexican governments to crack down on illegal immigration. She promised that her new budget will embrace fiscal discipline.

 Here's 2006

NAPOLITANO VOWS TO SECURE BORDER: SPEECH ALSO TOUTS TEACHER PAY RAISES, TAX CUTS

As 4,000 people rallied for immigrants rights Monday on the Capitol lawn, Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano vowed to beef up border security and punish companies that intentionally hire undocumented workers.

Riding a booming economy, Napolitano also called for tax cuts for small businesses and vehicle owners, and pay hikes for state employees and teachers.

Her fourth State of the State address featured ideas that could affect just about everyone in Arizona, from battling crime by cracking down on the distribution of methamphetamine to boosting education by improving the base pay for teachers.

 Here's 2007

NAPOLITANO ACTS FAST TO PUSH PLANS FOR ARIZONA

Gov. Janet Napolitano signed six executive orders on the first day of her second term, toughening air-pollution regulations, creating a plan to improve long-term care facilities and adding a financing scheme for water projects.

Later, she used her State of the State address to call for fundamental change in the way Arizona grows, educates its children and prepares for the new economy.

 Here's the 2008 speech

Napolitano puts focus on state's future

Gov. Janet Napolitano focused on the future Monday with a State of the State address that called for increased use of renewable and clean energy in the decades ahead and a doubling in the number of bachelor's degrees issued by state universities by 2020.

She proposed a Centennial Scholars program that would guarantee free tuition in Arizona for any student who stayed out of trouble and maintained at least a "B" average during high school. And, as she did last year, she proposed raising the high-school dropout age to 18.

 And finally, with a one-way ticket to Washington D.C. in her pocket, Gov. Napolitano gives one last speech.  Here's 2009

EXHORTING ARIZ. TO KEEP INVESTING IN THE FUTURE

Gov. Janet Napolitano's State of the State address Monday was really a farewell as chief executive of Arizona. With her confirmation as secretary of Homeland Security apparently a slam-dunk, her boxes are already packed for Washington, D.C.

Napolitano has spent her six years in office as a strong advocate for investment in the future. On Monday, she had her last big platform as governor to try to inspire Arizonans. 

At Least SOMEBODY is covering the Headless Bodies

I've been  working on some "Best of/Worst of" posts and my award for Most Shameless Display of Media Herd Mentality goes to the mocking that the local media provided in response to Governor Brewer's discussion of headless bodies. 

You will recall that when Governor Brewer expressed concerns about the level of violence in Mexico and the possible spillover into the United States she mentioned "headless bodies in the desert".  Unfortunatly, she  misspoke and implied that some of the headless bodies had been found in the Arizona desert.  Rather than ignore the gaffe and focus on the story, the media ignored the story and focused on the gaffe. 

Of course, now Mexican cartel violence is escallating in Arizona and authorities are finding the cartel trademark headless bodies in the desert.  Still no local coverage.  But here's an interesting story from a TV Station in Texas that has gone national becuase it is linked on Drudge.

Part of the herd mentality of the media is to ignore major stories simply because no other local reporters are covering them.  The other side of the same coin is the reporters' tendency to continue to ignore stories that they missed originally and then got much bigger.  That's why the Republic waited months to cover the Tea Party or Fast and Furius.

Here's the link to the story out of Texas. (Notice that it's dateline is Tucson.)

Three beheadings in two different states and they happened here in the United States, not Mexico.

Former DEA supervisor Phil Jordan says all three beheadings have cartel written all over them. They happened in Arizona and Oklahoma in the past year.

A murder mystery is now unraveling on a stretch of North Reservation Road in Tucson, Ariz. County workers found a headless man lying on the side of the road Jan. 6. The man's hands and feet were reportedly missing, too.

"It would lead me to believe the message wanted to be sent. This is one of the ways they do it in Mexico, Colombia and other places," says Jordan.

Jordan says the cartels are getting bolder in carrying out their beheadings across the border. He says we only used to see these crimes in Mexico.

"They don't have any borders," says Jordan.

 

 

So Much for Civility

Here's Pima County Democratic Party Chairman Jeff Rogers' reaction to the TUSD Board's decision to scrap its ethnic studies program.

 

The Silence of the Left is Now Complete

If you follow current events at all, you will know that President Obama has adopted and expanded all of the so called, cowboy, "shred the Constitution" policies of the Bush Administration--signing statements, drone attacks (now against an American Citizen) Gitmo, invading Libya.

The left was apoplectic over Bush and completely ignores Obama.  Frankly, this show of hypocrisy is what I enjoy most about the Obama administration. 

Now it appears that the US and Israel are killing Iranian Scientists.   Here's an interesting article about the killings and about the silence of the left. 

What’s most remarkable here is to compare the boisterous, furious denunciations of the mere suggestion by a blogger on the Internet that Iranian scientists be killed, versus the relative silence in the face of its actually being done in real life, now that the corpses of murdered Iranian scientists are beginning to pile up. Does anyone doubt that some combination of the two nations completely obsessed with Iran’s nuclear program — Israel and the U.S. — are responsible?