Arizona's Own Espresso Pundit

The Star Finally Implodes

The Arizona Daily Star has lost over 50% of its value in the two years since Lee enterprise purchased it.

If you think the morning Arizona Daily Star is worth less these days than it used to be, you’re not alone - so do the people who publish it. Lee Enterprises last week said it is reducing by $90.4 million the value of its Tucson operations.

The Tucson markdown was part of $722 million Lee took as non-cash impairments to its financial statements for the first three months of this year. The company announced the charges in a filing May 14 with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Play Ball!

Last week I mentioned that the Tribune had discontinued printing the baseball box scores.  Well, in the tradition of great customer service, the Tribune has reinstated the box scores with apologies to its readership.  Hmm, there may be hope for the Mainstream Media yet. 

Your Tax Dollars Hard at Work

Congressmen are allowed to send mail to their constituents for free.  In the old days, that meant that they sent, you know like "letters" to the people they represent.  The constituents could then read the congressman's update in order to learn about what he's doing in Washington. 

The days of the simple letter are gone.  Congressmen have learned that they can now send fancy campaign pieces with your tax dollars, and as elections approach, those pieces get more glossy and more frequent. The picture at the left is just one panel of a campaign brochure that Congressman Harry Mitchell sent to his district.  He spent $75,000 of federal money on the piece.

Here's a copy of the entire brochure.

Incidental Takings

Republic Editor John D'Anna has posted a funny blog entry that takes a light-hearted jab at the recent Gannett layoffs.   D'Anna considers the current state of journalism and points out the "diminishing numbers, hostile environmental elements, including dangerous predators and inability to adapt to shifting landscape" and concludes that journalists actually meet the definition of "Endangered Species."   He concludes that if listing is good enough for polar bears, by golly it should be good enough for journalists.

Wow, if journalists were protected by the Endangered Species Act, Espresso Pundit would be shut down.  After all, the ESA makes is illegal to "take" a member of a listed species.  The definition of “take” includes to harass, harm, hunt, shoot, wound, kill,trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.  Icouldn't even harass journalists if they wander on to my property.  Dang.

Fortunately section 10 "Incidental Takings" lets me file for an exemption. 

Going Back to High School.

Gene Weingarten tells us why he won't be attending his 40th year reunion.  In addition to being really funny, it shows how teen angst is both universal and permanent. 

REASON 2: If my goal was to feel like a complete failure, it would be cheaper and easier to go to a bad neighborhood, consume a half-gallon of fortified ed wine from a bottle in a bag and pass out in the gutter. When I went there, Bronx Science was the most intellectually exclusive, snobbiest public high school in the country. Actual true fact: If it were a country, Bronx Science would rank 23rd in the world in the number of Nobel laureates it has produced, tied with Spain. I have not kept track of the achievements of my particular class, but I have no doubt that you have among you brain surgeons, rocket scientists, stars of stage and screen, financiers, tycoons, moguls, magnates and the king of Sweden.

I've Predicted 7 of the last 4 Layoffs, but..UPDATED

I must admit that I'm hit or miss.  I was the first to report that the Tribune was going to be free, and I was the first to speculate that La Voz was shutting down.  Well, one for two isn't bad. 

Now, sources are telling me that there are some major changes in the works at the Republic...talks of buyouts and etc.  We'll see what unfolds in the next day or so.  Will I be 8 for 4, or 7 for 5?

Let me know what you hear. 

UPDATE

Gannett Blog is reporting that there are layoffs and buyouts Gannett wide today. 

On the heels of reported job cuts at TV stations, a reader just told me pink slips also were given today to employees in Gannett accounting departments. My quick take: It appears GCI is now rolling out another unannounced round of work consolidation amid the ongoing restructuring. Previous steps included establishing regional customer service call centers, plus central photo toning operations.

Today's moves, the reader's note shows, suggest the company is now targeting more-senior positions, such as controllers. These cuts would follow Friday's buyout offer to 166 staffers at five New Jersey papers.

Dude, Where's My Box Scores?

What's Mother's Day without Mom?  What's the Fourth of July without lemonade?  What's America without Apple Pie? Unthinkable, that's what they are.   What's a Newspaper without Baseball Box Scores?  Same answer. 

I was at a breakfast meeting this morning and a friend came up to me with an ashen look on his face and said:  "The Tribune quit printing the box scores...that's the only reason that I still subscribe."

Newspapers are in a tough spot.  It's surprising how many people who are otherwise indifferent to their local newspaper, continue to subscribe because there's one little thing that they don't want to miss.  My dad subscribes to the Tucson Citizen for the golf coupons.  My wife sends me out to buy the Republic so that she doesn't miss a Dillard's sale.  Naturally newspapers aren't going to eliminate the golf coupons or the Dillard's ads...those things generate revenue. 

However, the movie listings, stock quotes and yes, the box scores all take up valuable newsprint but they don't generate revenue.  Newspapers gradually eliminate these features and with each elimination, they give readers one more reason not to renew their subscriptions. 

It's a downward spiral.  A declining subscription base forces papers to cut costs and many of those cost-cutting measures lead to cancelled descriptions. 

Pretty soon the newspapers will be narrowly tailored for a specific constitutency.  You know, like a blog. 

Bitter-Smith Announces for CD 5

Susan Bitter-Smith has announced her candidacy for CD 5.

Susan Bitter Smith officially entered the race for the Republican nomination in Arizona's Fifth Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives on Friday, May 9 at her home in Scottsdale. More than 100 supporters were on hand to celebrate the announcement and Susan's conservative agenda on taxes and economic policy, law enforcement and Arizona values.

Here's the full announcement.

Incentives Matter

I enjoy a blog called Newmark's Door; it's filled with random musings from an economics professor at Duke. His wife suggested that he ask his students a question, but he decided it was too easy even for an Economics 101 course.  Here's the question: "What happens to the price of corn when Congress passes a law mandating increased usage of it?"

The Republic joined the debate on Sunday.  "Food producers and politicians have begun blaming rising ethanol production for tipping food prices too far and even helping cause world hunger, but the ethanol industry disputes that."

Politicians decided that a huge chunk of the food supply should be converted into fuel and now people are starving.  Is that a big shock?  Dude, incentives matter and if you screw them up, people get hurt.  I don't usually blog about the energy industry because I have energy clients, but the topic of energy incentives have become the latest rage.

It won't surprise you to know that I'm pretty libertarian on the incentive front.  If the mohair industry can't survive without being propped up by the government then it shouldn't survive.  The family farm is a myth so most of the farming subsidies go to big corporations.  Those subsidies also drive up the cost of food and make third world farms less viable. 

However, when properly structured, incentives can do a lot of good.  Here's a great example from the Arizona Corporation Commission. 

The University of Arizona just won an award for a program that shifts almost all of its air conditioning load to the nighttime.  They run a special cooling system at night and freeze huge banks of ice.  The next day, they turn the compressors off and the melting ice cools the 176 building on campus--including the University Medical Center down the street.  The system uses almost no electricity during peak hours. 

What's so important about peak power?

Peak power is really expensive because the utility not only has to pay for the cost of generating the electricity, but they also have to BUILD a plant to generate the peak power.  That new power plant may only run a FEW HOURS a year.  That means that the plant has to recover an entire year's worth of fixed costs in a few hours.  Consumers pay dearly to have that plant available for the peak.

That's where incentives come in.  The ACC didn't subsidize the ice plant; the ACC charges customers more for peak power.  Those higer charges reflect the fact that peak power is much more expensive.  The UA ice system is a great example of the market responding to price signlas.  The government didn't build the ice system, Trane built it. And UA didn't build it out of the kindness of their heart, they built it to save money.  In fact, the system saves the University $560,000 a year. 

More importantly, Tucson Electric Power doesn't have to build a plant to meet the increase in peak demand associated with that massive air conditioning load, so the ice plant saves money for Tucson's other utility customers.

Unlike the ethanol fad, The ACC established the right price signals, and the market responded in creative ways that will lower the costs for everyone. 

Ironically, it's unlikely that any of the Corporation Commissioners will be at the ribbon cutting ceremony.  That's because the dedication and tour is scheduled for Wednesday morning, May 14th at 10:00...the same day and time that the Commissioners will be deciding the latest TEP rate case.

It's too late for UA's new ice plant to be reflected in the current case, but the next rate increase will be smaller because UA has managed to shift all of its cooling to night.

Incentives matter.  When they are done well, people benefit.  When they are done badly, people suffer.  Too bad some of the folks in Congress haven't learned that lesson. 

 

Chicago Style

Imagine what would happen if State Representative Russell Pearce was working on an employer sanctions initiative and a business group, say, the Arizona Association of Landscapers complained that the law would devastate their industry and Pearce responds that he would exempt them from the initiative...in exchange for their contributing $100,000 to the campaign?

Could that possibly be legal?   If the agreement became public wouldn't it be a huge scandal?

The Tribune is reporting that Governor Napolitano entered into just such an arrangement. 

Gov. Janet Napolitano eliminated key elements of a major transportation initiative this week, agreeing not to tax home builders in exchange for their support and $100,000 to kickstart the campaign.

In a secret deal cut this week, developers agreed to back the plan for an ambitious statewide transportation initiative that will raise the state sales tax by 1 penny.

Napolitano eliminated key provisions of the proposed ballot measure that required developers to pay part of the $42 billion plan to finance freeways, trains, buses and other transportation needs across Arizona.

Don't Everyone Pile in at Once

Since I'm quick to point out that the print media is a sinking ship, I thought that the least I could do would be to point out the occasional lifeboat.  Here's an interesting postition and it actually has the word "journalist" in the requirements section.   

MANAGER, EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

Phoenix or Sun City – Job # 2447
$67,950 - $105,000

Responsible for supporting a comprehensive array of communication activities related to enhancing the image and brand positioning of Arizona American Water.  Also responsible for building visibility and enhancing corporate credibility and increasing market awareness of the Company and with key external stakeholders. BS in Journalism, Communications, Public Relations or related field and 7-10 years experience is required.  Must have progressively responsible expertise in public relations, media relations/corporate communications and public relations media placement.

We offer competitive salaries and excellent benefits and an exciting work environment in a growth-oriented industry.

Come join us as we continue to grow!

Visit www.amwater.com and apply on line. Click on CAREERS and search for Job #2447.

Real Pundits

This pretty much sums up the current campaign.  (Some language not appropriate for work or Sunday School.)

Missing a Key Detail...

Here's an article in the Republic.

Man suspected of impregnating 11-year-old

An 18-year-old man has been accused of having sex with a 11-year-old girl and getting her pregnant, authorities said Friday.

Here's the KPHO version

MCSO: Illegal Immigrant Rapes, Impregnates Girl, 11

An 18-year-old illegal immigrant has been arrested in connection with the rape of an 11-year-old girl, Maricopa County sheriff's deputies said.

Conspiracy Theories

Last week, the Republic criticized Senator Karen Johnson for questioning the official story of the 9-11 attacks. 

If Johnson truly maintains mere "questions" about the events surrounding the 9/11 attacks, she should have declined to vote. The likely truth of it, though, is that she really does believe her government capable of destruction of the highest order and is happy to express her delusions not just as a private citizen but as an elected official.

However, it seems that Republic editorial writers believe some conspiracies of their own.  Check out this editorial from today's Republic.

Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., the former pastor of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, clutches to a lot of conspiracy theories.

The U.S. government has plotted to murder African-Americans with AIDS, for one. And to import debilitating, community-destroying illegal drugs into the country, for another. And so on. As we have seen in recent televised events, Wright is not shy about ascribing evil intent to this nation's elected leaders. They are but al-Qaida under a different flag, he says.

Whether malevolence is truly responsible for our national tragedies - or whether neglect, incompetence, weaknesses of the flesh or, even, the unintended consequences of good intentions better explain most of them - people of good faith may differ.

Really?  Is the Republic really saying that  people of "good faith" can believe that the US Government created the AIDS virus to kill African Americans?  Can people of good faith believe that the CIA is importing crack cocaine into black neighborhoods?

That's crazy and the Republic needs to say it's crazy. 

Why would the paper lend credence to these two destructive conspiracy theories?  Is it possible that they didn't misspeak?  Is it possible that they weren't just being polite or politically correct?  Is it possible that they actually believed what they wrote?

Do some members of the editorial board of the state's paper of record "maintain questions" about the origins of AIDS and crack?  Do they believe that "their government is capable of destruction of the highest order?"  Are they "happy to express their delusions not just as a private citizen, but as editorial writers?"

If so, then the writer needs to follow the same advice that the Republic was so quick to offer to Johnson.  The writer needs to step down so he or she can express these destructive and crazy theories as a private person and not as an Editorial Board member of Arizona's largest newspaper. 

Burns Won't Seek Re-election

While it has been an extreme honor to serve in the Arizona House of Representatives, I am announcing that I will not run for re-election in 2008.  I sincerely thank my constituents for giving me this opportunity to work with them to give Arizona a brighter future. Together, we have made a difference and I look forward to future opportunities to continue serving the people of Arizona.

Hypocrisy flows Downhill

Governor Napolitano has written an Op Ed piece in the Wall Street Journal blasting the Bush administration for increasing the burden on State governments. 

Before anyone in Washington seriously contemplates a second "stimulus package" aimed at reviving the economy, I would offer two succinct pieces of advice: First, take a Hippocratic Oath to do no harm to state budgets. Second, ensure that Washington "pays its bills," just as we require of everyone else.

Hmm, before you take Napolitano's criticism seriously, consider one of her proposals to balance the Arizona budget.

One of Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano's proposals for reducing a state budget shortfall would put a financial hit on counties already facing lean financial times.

The idea is to shift the costs for incarcerating some prisoners from the state to the counties.

The move was intended to save the state a projected $60.8 million as it tries to erase a projected revenue shortfall that the governor pegs at $1.2 billion.

So she's blasting Bush for increasing the burden on the states while simultaneously proposing to shift the burden to the counties.  It takes a fine legal mind to argue both sides of an issue simultaneously. 

She finishes her Wall Street Journal piece with this admonition. 

The federal government should accept its responsibility, do no harm and pay its bills. Once it does, we can work together to improve the quality of life for those we are privileged to represent.

Great advice indeed Governor. 

WSJ on Napolitano's Tax Increase

Governor Napolitano's veto of the bill that would have repealed a currently suspended property tax is getting national attention. 

The Wall Street Journal is all over the tax revolt that's brewing in Arizona.  Here's Stephen Moore explaining that when voters are afraid of loosing their homes, it's not a good idea to, like, you know, raise their taxes. 

Texas Fold'em--updated

UPDATE:  I'm getting some comments from the Keven Willey fans.  Have I made too much of a leap here?  I don't think so. 

Morning News readers expressed widespread outrage at the decision to name the Illegal Immigrant "Texan of the Year."  Willey acknowledged that subscribers were calling to cancel their subscriptions, but she claimed that the cancellations weren't "material."  Now we learn that DMN circulation dropped nearly 11% in the last 6 months.  That's the largest drop in the nation and about 2.5 times the fall off  that the Republic experienced over the same period. 

My main point is stated in the third sentence of the post and I don't think it can be effectively rebutted.  "Obviously there are many factors in play here, but I think you can safely lay a significant portion of the blame at the feet of former Republic wunderkind Keven Ann Willey."

Here's the original post. 

The Audit Bureau on Circulations report came out today and it confirms something that I predicted months ago.  Circulation at the Dallas Morning News plummeted a stunning 10.6%.  Obviously there are many factors in play here, but I think you can safely lay a significant portion of the blame at the feet of former Republic wunderkind Keven Ann Willey. 

Let me explain.  A friend of mine moved to Texas and her co-workers asked her how she liked Texas.  She responded that it is a great place and that she's very happy to be a Texan.  She was met with dead silence.  After an awkward moment, someone said..."you're not a Texan."

Texans are very proud of their state and are very quick to point out that you don't become a Texan by simply moving to Texas.  Your Grandchildren may end up being Texans, but you aren't.

Enter Keven Ann Willey who left the Republic to be the editorial page editor and a vice president at the Dallas Morning News.  Texas readers would probably have forgiven her for not being from Texas--after all, no one is perfect.  Then she committed an unforgivable faux pas.

The Editorial Board of the Dallas Morning News declared that the Texan of the year was...the Illegal Immigrant.  Seriously, you can read about it here.  It never seemed to enter her mind that Texans--who question the credentials of people who have lived in Texas for nearly their entire lives--would be offended when she calls people who just swam across the border Texans.  Much less that she would name them "Texan of the Year".

Keven downplayed the fact that subscribers were canceling in droves. 

The newspaper would not say how many readers actually canceled their subscriptions as a result of the editorial.

"Against our customer base, it's just not a material number," said Keven Ann Willey, vice president and editorial page editor.

Well, my guess is that 10.6% is getting pretty close to "material."

Republic Circulation Falls...Yadda Yadda Yadda.

I mentioned in the previous post that the circulation numbers are out again.  Every six months the Audit Bureau of Circulations publishes its report and every six months I point out that the Republic's circulation has fallen another 3 or 4 percent.   Whatever.  I actually try to make Espresso Pundit reasonably interesting and reprinting the exact same story every six months is so...so...print media. 

There were however, a couple of interesting nuggets in today's story.  First, the Republic's circulation was down 4.7 percent, which is a little higher than I would expect considering that Arizona is the fastest growing state in the nation. 

However the real news was reported on one of the blogs that covers Gannett.  Gannett Blog serves the dual purpose of giving Gannett insiders a place to vent and giving Gannett watchers a place to learn.  Here's a comment that was posted earlier today.

"News flash -- don't believe anything you are told from Corporate about the Go4 websites. I can tell you we are hemorrhaging pageviews. There will be a lot of money going back to advertisers because pageviews are not delivering the impressions to advertisers."

I've often mentioned that the web will never replace the advertising dollars that are being lost due to reduced circulation.  That's because  advertisers are only willing to pay about 1/100 as much for a dedicated web reader as compared to an actual subscriber.  But I had at least assumed that traffic at the major media websites would continue to grow. 

Now we hear that web traffic is falling--possibly even faster than print circulation.  Golly, if you work at the paper that must, you know, really suck.

This Will Not Look Good on a Resume.

While the local legacy media remain predictable members of Governor Napolitano's Amen Chorus, the Wall Street Journal is pointing out that six years into the Napolitano administration, the state is in terrible fiscal shape and the Governor is raising your property taxes.

Arizona has been hit hard hit by the real-estate bust, with the average home value down 17% in a year and a record number of foreclosures. So Democratic Governor Janet Napolitano has devised a clever way to revive the housing market: Raise property taxes.

Higher property taxes impose a double whammy on those at risk of losing their homes. First, they act as a tax surcharge on homeownership. And second, when the tax hikes aren't tied to better public services, they reduce housing values, thus reducing owner equity.

Meanwhile, the Governor is tapping every accounting gimmick available in an effort to push the day of fiscal reckoning past the end of her term.  The next Governor will be saddled with a multi-billion dollar deficit, an empty rainy day fund and all other available funds "swept" and spent.  New revenue for the foreseeable future will be allocated to paying back accounting tricks like the school roll over and paying extra interest on the state's debt. 

Now that's what I call leadership.

Crazy Aunt Karen

OK, Stop laughing. 

This picture of Karen Johnson and me  was taken at the Capitol during Sine Die week in 1994.  I know it was 1994 because it was taken at the kick off of David Schweikert's first campaign for Congress.  I know it was taken during Sine Die week because we both look so awful.   I have valued Karen's friendship for many years.

Senator Johnson is a favorite punching bag for the local media.  She speaks her mind, carries a gun and gets re-elected year after year--all things that make the media nervous.  She has been in the news quite a bit lately because she cast the deciding vote that killed the bill to redesign Arizona's 9/11 memorial. 

Well, actually, she's not in the news because she cast the deciding vote to kill the bill...it's why she voted to kill the bill.  Johnson doubts that the official version of 9/11 is accurate...those buildings sure look like fell with the assistance of thermite explosives. 

Lobbyists have learned that if you want to talk to Senator Johnson about a bill, don't mention 9/11...or for that matter, the United Nations, or come to think of it vaccinations...or fluoride, NAFTA, One World Government, amalgam dental fillings or the North American Union.

When Montini wrote about Johnson's vote, he described her as "ultraconservative."    Most reporters are liberal, but they think of themselves as moderate, so they view anyone to the right of Olympia Snowe or Carolyn Allen as ultraconservative.  I'm usually all over them for showing their bias, but in Karen's case...well.  OK, maybe just this once. 

While many of Johnson's views may out of the mainstream, they are well within the overall flow of political thought.  Her ideas about, say, the Iraq war, 9/11, Corporate Power and the Federal Reserve board would get a welcome reception at both Republican and Democratic district meetings. 

The Senate needs members like Karen Johnson just like the house needs members like Kyrsten Sinema--with her "People's History of the United States" proudly displayed on her desk. 

Unfortunately the Republic Editorial board took things a bit far on Thursday. 

Johnson reportedly will not seek re-election this fall. After hearing her 9/11 fantasies, we heartily approve.

Naturally, the legacy media prefer to have their elected officials fit neatly into predictable little boxes--easy to categorize and manipulate.  They don't like legislators like Karen Johnson.  Fortunately, the voters disagree. 

I would say that the mainstream media want their candidates Pasteurized...but don't mention Pasteurization around Karen Johnson. 

L'Etat C'est Moi

Governor Napolitano's first official act was to establish her "Copper Card" by Executive Order.  She's made it clear since then that she views the legislature as an inconvenience instead of a separate branch of government and a check on her authority. 

Now she's decided she doesn't need the legislature at all.  The Governor has decided she can establish a Climate Control initiative by rule.  In order to justify her position, she provides this stunning quote.

Napolitano defended enacting restrictions by rule, saying it's equivalent to actually putting a bill through the Legislature.

Both of them involve stakeholders; both of them involve public comment, public review and all the rest," she said. And Napolitano said both processes are "very transparent."

My gosh, could she really be that arrogant?  It sounds so...French, or perhaps it's British.

The Governor has forgotten that there's one other thing that the legislature provides...elected representation.  Any king can hold stakeholder meetings and public comment sessions then establish processes that are "very transparent." 

Golly, if King George III had held a series of workshops the colonists wouldn't have thrown all that tea in the harbor.  That's why the slogan for the Revolutionary War resonates so powerfully.

"Taxation without stakeholder meetings, public comment and transparency is tyranny." 

There's a really good Separation of Powers course at ASU Law School.  It covers wide variety of topics--including the Unitary Executive Theory.  The course is really well taught and I think she would learn a lot about the structure of Government. 

It's too bad that I can't actually sign this blog entry.  If I could sign it, I would sign it really big so that The Governor could read it without her spectacles.

Never Mind...

I think it's funny when reporters spend a lot of time working on a story that doesn't pan out, but they have so much time invested... that they print the story anyway.  So then we are treated to a breathless story that boils down to "Our extensive investigation has revealed that no laws were broken."

The Star's Daniel Scarpinato treats us to a great example in his shocking story.

Nothing links Bee, school districts' ad

State Senate President Tim Bee and his congressional campaign did not collaborate in writing with the school districts that used tax dollars to fund a TV ad for him, according to a Star review of months worth of e-mails.

Scarpinato actually treats us to a double Never Mind in this article.  In fact, his investigation was doomed from the start because he's using the wrong law in his investigation.   

The Supreme Court has ruled that you can spend as much of your money as you want on a political ad for a candidate as long as you don't coordinate with that candidate.  If it's an independent expenditure then it's not subject to limitations. 

When Scarpinato conducted his extensive investigation to determine if there was any coordination between Bee and the folks who produced the ad, he obviously thought the ad was using the independent expenditure exception.  But that's not the case here.

The Supreme Court set a new standard in Wisconsin Right to Life.

a court should find that an ad is the functional equivalent of express advocacy only if the ad is susceptible of no reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate.

Now that conservatives have a voice on the court, the First Amendment actually means something. 

The ad for Bee is to thank him for his vote in the Senate.  The Senate is still in session and the election is a quite a ways off.  The Bee ad is not a campaign at at all.  It doesn't matter who spent money on it.  It doesn't matter if they coordinated with the Bee campaign.  Bee could have written the ad and used corporate money to fund it....just like the Democrats are doing with the Project for Arizona's Future. 

Not only did Scarpinato's investigation fail to yield any coordination...it wouldn't have mattered if he had found it.  We have the rare combination of the double never mind.

Emily Litella would be so proud.

I hope we are a better team.

Marc Spitzer--the former Arizona Corporation Commissioner turned big time FERC Commissioner--was in town last night to speak at a utility investors conference.  He and I have been friends since the early 1990s when we served in the legislature together so he invited me to attend last night's dinner. 

Every time that we were introduced as Spitzer and Patterson, someone would laugh and I had to admit that I didn't get it. 

Marc later reminded me that it was primarily a New York crowd, so they have been seeing subway posters like this one for the last couple years. 

I don't cover New York politics, but as I recall, the other Spitzer/Paterson team didn't turn out so hot. 

Montini Rewrites History

Here's a clever trick.   Arizona's 9/11 memorial has been mired in controversy since 2006 when Espresso Pundit broke the story that the monument contained phrases that were critical of the United States.  The Republic's Ed Montini wants to make it look like a purely partisan issue.  Check out this quote.

The commission itself finally decided to do some revisions, announcing that it would remove inscriptions reading "Erroneous U.S. air strike kills 46 Uruzgan civilians" and "Terrorist organization leader addresses American people," while adding six new phrases.

Still, that wasn't good enough for some Republican lawmakers, who proposed legislation to remove 12 others.

Not good enough for some Republican lawmakers?  There were a lot more than a handful of Republicans who "proposed" the bill.  In fact, HB 2700 had eighty sponsors!  This style of "journalism" has become so prevalent that it has its own special name. 

By the way, did I mention that Gannett stock hit yet another 10 year low today on the news of unusually weak ad sales?  Don't worry.  I'm sure the upcoming layoff will shore up the bottom line.

Here's the sponsor list.

 

Proudly Announcing A Patterson Triumph

I was recently invited to the second Annual Arizona Capital Times "Best of the Capitol" awards.  That's where we learn what the readers of the Capitol Times consider to be 2007's  best:  Dressed Lobbyist, Hair, Website, Place to take a client etc.  Espresso Pundit won the best political Website for 2006 and was nominated for 2007.

There was a great crowd at the reception--lots of Legislators and elected brass.  I made sure to say hi to Secretary of State Jan Brewer since there's a 50/50 chance that she's going to be Governor in 9 months.  I also wanted to hear Speaker Weiers speech, but I had to leave before the Speaker arrived. 

I left early because my youngest daughter had a project on display at her fifth grade science fair.  Those of you who don't have an 11 year old will not understand the amount of work, level of stress and ultimate triumph or heartbreak of learning which breads get moldy the fastest, which stain remover works best, which orange juice has the highest vitamin C content and thousands of other questions that have plagued mankind throughout the millennia.

Hannah worked really hard on her experiment and answered the critical question of which swimsuit colors fade the most in highly chlorinated water.  Much to our surprise, Hannah Patterson's Chlorine experiment WON the 5th grade science fair.  I keep expecting the call from MIT any day.  I also keep thinking how glad I am that I skipped Mr. Weier's speech. 

Espresso Pundit came in second this year--right behind John McCain's website and right in front of Real Clear Politics.  That's cool.  But it's nothing compared to actually wining the entire 5th grade science fair.  The nice folks at Capitol Times mailed me the certificate because I wasn't there to accept it--one of the best choices I've made this year. 

Tricks of the Trade

You will recall that just over a week ago, the Republic featured a lead story that claimed Betsey Bayless's credentials were being "scrutinized" in the wake of a nine month old audit.  As it turns out the only ones scrutinizing Bayless's credentials were the reporter and her editor, and that "scrutiny" appears to be in retaliation for Bayless's assertion that federal law prohibits her from releasing the full audit report.  I wrote about the story here.

New details about the reporter's tactics are emerging and I think it's important to follow up--not on the assumption that you care about a week-old Betsey Bayless story, but because this story is a great case study on the power of a motivated reporter and a willing editor to create and ultimately manipulate the news.

A common misconception is that reporters simply "report the news."  Sometimes that true.  Sports writers for example report the news, but political reporters often "create" the news.  Let me show you how it works.  The first trick is pretty common and not necessarily unethical.  It's simply more efficient.  The second two tricks are more problematic and they are on full display in the Bayless article. 

Quote Guiding

One of the best ways for a reporter to create news is to call a source and say for example. "I'm working on a story about the redistricting initiative.  It seems to me that the lack of competitive districts has made the legislature much more partisan.  What do you think?"

The source is often a lobbyist who is quite happy to show his clients that his name is in the paper.  I'm not saying that the source doesn't believe the quote, but I am saying that if the reporter had simply asked "what do you think of the redistricting initiative?" the answer might not have fit as neatly into the reporter's theme for the article.  Quote Guiding is a much more efficient way to write a story than asking half a dozen sources to simply provide their thoughts. 

Quote Shopping

Far more pernicious is the technique of Quote Shopping.  Sometimes the scope of the article is too narrow for the Reporter to use one of her usual sources, so she has to find a source with special knowledge about the story.  Then she has to keep asking questions until the source either stumbles on her theme or otherwise gives her something she can use.  The reporter has an advantage because if a source doesn't contribute to the theme, then the reporter isn't obligated to use any of the quotes. 

Quote shopping was one of the techniques used in the Bayless article.  We know that because one of the dumped sources wrote a letter to the Republic.  The paper printed the letter, but they buried it as a My Turn column...in the Central Phoenix Zone.  Even worse than the obscure placement is the fact that the My Turn columns don't get posted in AzCentral or the Archives.

The quote is from the MIHS Chairman of Pediatrics Kote Chundu.  Here's entire letter.

I am personally very disappointed that Yvonne Wingett wasted my time (time away from patients) to interview me for 40 minutes about the status of MIHS, and Bayless leadership, and did not include one word from our interview. When your reporter interviewed me for this story about Ms. Bayless, I had nothing but praise to say.  Predictably, none of my comments made into your paper.

Golly, Dr. Chundu is the Chairman of Pediatrics at the very hospital that Bayless runs.  It seems like his opinion about her qualifications would be an important part of a story on Bayless's qualifications.   But everything he said was positive...and none of the 40-minute conversation made it into the article.  Obviously the information he gave was relevant, but it simply didn't fit into the reporter's theme. 

Very few sources are as disciplined as Dr. Chundu.  He managed to remain positive for the entire 40 minutes--leaving Yvonne Wingett with nothing to use.  Most sources aren't that consistent; that's why the next trick is so powerful.

Quote Gaming

There are a lot of things a reporter can do in order to play games with the quote.  They can: use a partial quote, use a quote out of context, or combine a neutral quote with a negative introduction to leave the impression that the source is being critical. 

Here's a great example of quote gaming from the Bayless article. 

Typical candidates would have risen through the hospital ranks, possibly as an assistant administrator or a chief operating officer of a similar-size or larger hospital, they said. The candidates also would have good grounding in quality care and patient safety.

"The fact that they know the operation makes it easier to supervisor the people, said Larry Tyler, a recruiter of the executive health-care firm Tyler & Company. "You've got all kinds of regulations and requirements, unusual financing. You've got the relationship with the medical staff. It's not a trend, but it happens."

Notice that the Tyler quote is being used to reinforce the earlier paragraph that the reporter wrote?  Larry Tyler is unhappy with the juxtaposition.  I have a copy of a letter to the editor that he wrote in response to the article.  I can't find any indication that the Republic published the letter. 

With regard to your April 6, 2008 article on the Maricopa Integrated Health System, I am quoted as stating that it is unusual for a CEO of a health system to not have hospital operations experience. That quote is correct as far as it goes.  I went on to explain to your reporter that there are still exceptions to the rule and gave her at least six examples of successful hospital systems that have been led or are currently led by individuals without that type of experience.  I noted that most often these individuals previously served on the Board or had some connection with the organization and that their success was achieved by surrounding themselves with other executives who could complement them when they lacked either experience or skills.  Those clarifying remarks were omitted, therefore it left the reader with the impression that the current Maricopa CEO, Betsy Bayless, was somehow unqualified for the position. 

Ouch!  The Republic is totally busted.  Dr. Chundu was relentlessly positive and despite being interviewed for 40 minutes, wasn't quoted.  Larry Tyler was quoted correctly, but the positive side of the quote wasn't used and the placement made his neutral quote look critical.  And the Republic still can't point to anyone who is "scrutinizing" Bayless's credentials.

These techniques have been used since the days of William Randolph Hearst.  In the past, Dr. Chundu's letter would have remained buried.  Mr. Tyler's letter would never have been printed and the reader would have, understandably, been left with the impression that someone was actually questioning Bayless' qualifications. 

But it's a new world.  With the blogs, spurned sources have an outlet and readers have a source of alternative information.  Increasingly, they don't even bother with the legacy media. After all, why read the paper and then check to blogs to find the real story?  Why not just start with the blogs?  Increasingly that's what they are doing.

By the way.  Gannett's stock hit another 10 year low last week. 

Square Off

I'll be on Sunday Square of on Channel 12 right after Meet the Press.  That's Sunday morning at about 8:05.  We recorded it on Friday and this week's topics include the Pope's visit, US Airways plan to charge more for window and aisle seats, the Rock and Roll Theme Park in Eloy and the Suns chances against the Spurs.  Here's what I said for my "final thought."

There's a Classic Rock song that goes  "I've got dozens of friends and the fun never ends, that is, as long as I'm buying."   It's amazing how accurately those lyrics  describe the six years of the Napolitano administration.  We are told that the Governor is wildly popular, she won re-election by a wide margin and now her name is being floated as a Vice Presidential candidate.  Meanwhile back in Arizona, state spending has grown exponentially, the state has the highest deficit in the nation and is on the verge of bankruptcy.  Not only that, but your property taxes are rising.  Just last week, the legislature passed a bill that would have stopped an automatic 250 million dollar tax hike.  The Governor vetoed it.  Next time that a politician buys your friendship, make sure she's not using your Visa Card. 

Deja View

This looks like a good event, but I think I already saw the movie.

 

Are you sure it's a Jacket?

Former Republic Publisher Sue Clark-Johnson has left Gannett and is stepping down as Chair of the Newspaper Association of America.  She left with these words.

Departing NAA Chairwoman Sue Clark-Johnson, dressed in a beige snakeskin jacket, said, "It's a hellish time for newspapering for all the reasons we know." However, the former head of Gannett's newspaper division remains an optimist and nodded to this morning's release about newspapers growing readership.

She called upon the audience to "move faster and be more aggressive" in bringing about change and then added that the industry needs to "work with our own reporters for fair and balanced coverage of our industry."

In closing Clark-Johnson said: "What we do hasn't changed. What we stand for hasn't changed. And it is this, above all else that must be championed and preserved."

I'm especially intrigued with her point that newspapers need to provide "fair and balanced coverage of our industry."  Yeah, good luck with that. 

When the Republic Editorial Board has the guts to point out how badly the Republic News Division treated Betsey Bayless, then I'll start to believe that the industry can cover itself. 

Meanwhile Clark-Johnson has left the sinking Gannett ship and has been appointed to the Board of...Arizona Public Service.  I find that too poetic for words. 

I'm Shocked!

Golly, we are six years into the Napolitano administration, Arizona has the largest deficit in the nation, the state is nearly bankrupt and now our taxes are going up.  I'm shocked. 

Calling a legislative attempt to repeal a state property tax “untimely,” “untenable” and “unwise” in light of the state's ongoing budget woes, Gov. Janet Napolitano pledged to veto the proposal today and called out legislative leaders for the slow pace of budget talks.

Feeling Strongly Both Ways.

I thought this was an interesting story. 

One of Arizona's most rollicking political debates appeared to come to a close Tuesday with the defeat of a legislative effort to impose additional revisions on the state's 9/11 memorial.

The measure, House Bill 2700, failed on a 5-5 vote in the Senate Appropriations Committee. Bill sponsor Rep. John Kavanagh, a Fountain Hills Republican, said it's unlikely he'll attempt to revive the proposal this session.

Some of the audience members expressed surprise that the bill died.  That's understandable since three of the Senators who voted no--Aboud, Hale and Johnson--were, you know, like SPONSORS of the bill.

(Of course, I can't complain too much, I once attended a bill signing ceremony only to realize afterwords that I had voted against the bill.)

Speaking of Taxes...

So I'm sitting at work a couple weeks ago and I get this email from my wife.

From: Debbie Patterson
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 5:13 PM
To: Greg Patterson
Subject: taxes

I need our charitable contrib for 1996 and have no idea where to look for them.  This is required for the working poor contribution.  I hate this one!!  any idea where to look?

The IRS recommends that you keep your tax records for 3 to 5 years, but Arizona tax law has a glitch that requires some filers to refer to their 1996 federal tax return.  This glitch essentially guts a program designed to help charities that serve the poor, and it causes unwary Arizona taxpayers who try to participate in the program to face an administrative nightmare and unexpected financial cost. 

Why 1996?  Well, that's the year that the Arizona Legislature passed legislation to implement the bipartisan Federal Welfare Reform Act.  The theory at the time was that workers who no longer qualified for welfare benefits would flood local charities.  So House Human Services Committee Chairman Mark Anderson came up with a program that would benefit local charities and yet still appeal to conservatives who were concerned about increased spending. 

Anderson drafted a dollar-for-dollar tax credit (up to $400) for taxpayers who donated to charities that served the working poor.  But opponents raised an interesting objection.  What about taxpayers who already made contributions to charities that served the poor?  Wouldn't they get a windfall?  So Anderson was forced to accept a baseline contribution level.  To take advantage of the credit, the filer had to establish a baseline and could only deduct contributions that were in excess of that baseline.  Naturally, the base year was 1996.  Unfortunately, the baseline year is still 1996.

Using a 1996 baseline is completely unworkable.  When a taxpayer writes a check to a charity expecting to be reimbursed by a tax credit, he has no way of knowing that he needs a copy of his 1996 tax return in order to receive his refund. 

The 1996 baseline also eliminates the ability of many people--retirees for example--to participate in the program.  If the taxpayer made more money in 1996 and is now retired, he may give a higher percentage of his income, but he may not contribute the amount that he did when he was working. 

Anderson has a bill that fixes the problem.   HB 2693 passed the Ways and Means Committee by a 9-0 vote, but it's being held in the Rules Committee.  That's because the bill technically costs money.  That's true it does cost money, but where does that money go?  These are tough times for Arizona charities.  Demand for services is up, contributions from individuals are down and the state is out of money.  The Charitiable Credit bill empowers taxpayers to contribute part of their tax payments to the local charities that need it most.

The bill has wide support.  Democrats would like to find a way to maintain services at local charities and Republicans would like to offer meaningful tax relief.   Fixing the baseline provision does both.  Anderson's bill has the additional benefit of tightening up the definition of a charity in order to ensure the money is going where it's supposed to. 

The legislature needs to either fix the tax credit or eliminate it.  The worst option is for the credit to exist on the books, but remain unworkable.

Correction: 

Rep. Anderson sent me an email to inform me that Rep. Yarbrough is the prime sponsor HB 2693.  They have been trading off each year and this year is Steve's turn.

   

GPLETs and Gravy (again)

(I wrote this article last week and accidently deleted it.  People have been asking for it, so here's a copy from the archives.)

The cities have a great trick going.  They pretend to own a downtown property and then abate the property taxes.  It's a great way to hand out favors to special interests and it doesn't cost the cities a dime.  That's because property taxes are like a balloon.  It the city takes a property off the tax roles, everyone else's taxes rise a little bit to cover the cost--and if the shift is too dramatic, the State General Fund makes up the difference.

The trick is called a "Government Property Lease Excise Tax" or GPLET.  Senator Ken Cheuvront has led a courageous battle against the GPLETs but his efforts have been crushed by combined influence of the cities and developers. 

The Republic's Bob Robb had an excellent column last Sunday on the evils of GPLETs.  He calls them an "indefensible tax dodge, " and praises Cheuvront's efforts to end them.

Of course he fails to point out that the Republic's fancy new building is on a GPLET. D'oh.

Here's more from his column. 

Cheuvront was recently foiled in his efforts to get rid of one of the more egregious tax dodges cities and developers employ. In this con, cities pretend to own a building or a parking garage so that the developer doesn't have to pay property taxes on it.

It's mostly used for large office buildings. Phoenix has turned its downtown into nearly a tax-free zone through serial use of the mechanism. In fact, the city abandoned the quest for tax-increment financing in part because it discovered it didn't have enough taxable property left downtown to make it worthwhile.

A message from Michael Preston Green

As you know, Karen and I have adopted the Republic of Panama as our second home.  In the course of living there part-time, we have been fortunate to become good friends with a number of Panamanians and to appreciate the culture and innate goodness of the Panamanian people.

One of our best friends is an extraordinary person - a true Renaissance man.  Remy Swaab is a very successful international businessman who speaks a number of languages fluently, is a MENSA member, is the President of the Extreme Sports Association of Panama and, most importantly, truly cares about people, especially those less fortunate.

About six months ago he decided he wanted to raise money for one of the most worthwhile and revered charities in Panama City, namely Fundacíon Amigos del Niño con Leucemia y Cáncer (FANLYC).  The charity is similar to our Ronald McDonald Houses in that it provides accommodations and food to children suffering from cancer while staying at FANLYC with a family member between cancer treatments.

Click here to read the rest of the story.

Check out the pictures at www.vueloporlavida.org. 

Ouch!

Gannett Stock Hits New 52-Week Low as Entire Newspaper Sector Sinks

Stock of Gannett Co. Inc. scrapped a new 52-week low Friday as a slumping Dow dragged down nearly the entire newspaper sector.

On a day when many newspaper executives were leaving town for the joint convention of publishers, editors, and production managers in Washington, D.C., Wall Street gave media companies a rude shove to get going.

Gannett (NYSE: GCI) closed at $27.62, down 97 cents, or 3.9%. It had previously traded in a 52-week range of $27.77 to $61.68.

Read the whole thing.

What's Good for the Goose...

Poor Gabby Giffords.  In 2006, the Supreme Court decided that a political commercial or mailing:

is the functional equivalent of express advocacy only if the ad is susceptible of no reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate.

I've mentioned before that the Project for Arizona's Future has relied on this ruling to issue a series of hit piece educational brochures touting the inadequacies of, among others, Speaker Weiers, Rep. Stump and Rep. Murphy.  Democratic commenters have made it clear that they believe the ads are completely legal.

But now the DCCC has filed a complaint against Tim Bee for an ad that relies on the same ruling. 

National Democrats filed a federal complaint against state Senate President and Republican Congressional candidate Tim Bee, claiming an ad on his behalf was an illegal campaign contribution.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee filed the complaint with the Federal Elections Commission this week. It names a collection of school board members who paid for the ad but did not identify themselves as responsible for it.

The Education Finance Reform Group ran the ad last weekend, praising Bee for sponsoring legislation tying teacher pay to performance.

Hmm, we'll see if the same set of commenters rush to Bee's defense.

By the way, I'm still working on getting that PAF Donor List...should make for interesting reading. 

Adopted Admissions

There's a cool little trick in the rules of evidence; it goes something like this:  If someone makes a variety of charges against you and you have the opportunity to deny them, and a reasonable person would deny them, and you don't deny them...then you have admitted them--and that admission can be used against you.

In the previous post, I charged that:

1. The Republic is targeting Betsey Bayless in order to punish her for not releasing the MIHS report.

2. The reporter made up the key point of the article "Bayless's credentials have come under scrutiny..."

John D'Anna who edits the Valley and State section commented on the post.  Did he claim that I was wrong?  No. Did he deny that Bayless is being targeted because she hasn't released the report?  No.  Did he deny my claim that no one is scrutinizing Bayless's credentials except the reporter?  Nope.  Did he try in any way to dispute my claim that the article was used to punish Bayless for not releasing the report?  No. 

Then what did he say?  How did he use his opportunity to comment?  He said that the report isn't really private.  That's a classic admission.

John D'Anna and Yvonne Wingett's war on Betsey Bayless will continue until she gives up the report.  Look for more articles that dredge up months old problems with the county hospital.  This is going to become a clinic on Mainstream Media Intimidation tactics.  This is wh