And why would we re-elect these incompetents?

Arizona has been racing to the bottom on pretty much all nationwide statistics for years. Two notable exceptions are poverty and unemployment. For the #1 slot nationwide in poverty, we are officially #2, but in reality, we are in a statistical dead heat with Mississippi.

With the latest statewide budget news, Arizona should be able to easily overcome Mississippi for the #1 slot in poverty next year-- especially if Governor Jan Brewer, her lobbyist advisors, and her cronies in the Republican-controlled Legislature are re-elected.

According to the Arizona Republic:

"The deficit for the current budget year has grown to $825 million, up from $700 million, and the projected hole for the next fiscal year has deepened by $400 million, to $1.4 billion.

"It adds up to a $2.25 billion deficit that needs to be wiped out in the next 20 months."

The Republic article says that Arizona Republicans are not willing to raise taxes (AKA raise revenue) to fill the budget gap. Arizona has relatively low business taxes. The Legislature has set up these corporate give-aways to lure business to the state. The problems with scenario are: 1) trickle-down economics doesn't work; and 2) relocating businesses want more than lower taxes; they want an educated workfore, a viable infrastructure, good schools, good universities, etc.-- all of the amenities that Brewer and her cronies in the Legislature have worked to minimize or destroy. Add to this dismal list Brewer's lies about violence and beheadings in the desert, and it is easy to see why no major corporations or private citizens would want to re-locate here.

So, what are Brewer and the Republican-controlled Legislature going to do? Education, health care, and children/family services are their favorite sacrificial lambs when it's time to cut budgets, but I doubt there is enough left in these funds to fill the budget gap-- even if they wiped them out.

Remember Brewer's sales tax for education initiative that voters overwhelmingly approved last spring? Skeptics like LD28 Representative Steve Farley warned not to vote for that tax because he believed that the Arizona Legislature would spend the funds for something other than education-- or worst of all would give it away in tax cuts for businesses and the rich. Will they take those funds? Probably. They are already trying to trick voters into wiping out the land-conservation fund (Prop 301) and the First Things First voter-created child welfare program (Prop 301) which pays for itself. What kind of person votes repeatedly to hurt programs for children?

So, with these seriously dire predictions, why would the Republic endorse the Republican status quo?

Seriously, folks, in a much-ballyhoo'd "throw-the-bums-out" election year, isn't it time for Arizona to "throw the bums (ie, Brewer, Brewer's lobbyist advisors, the Republicans in the Arizona Legislature and statewide offices, and John McCain) out"?

No one but the corporatists and the rich (who receive regular give-aways from Arizona Republicans) are happy with these inept ideologues. Isn't it time for a change in Arizona politics? Vote the bums out-- and vote NO on all of the ballot initiatives that the Arizona Legislature put on the ballot (the 100s and 300s).

UPDATE, October 4: Blog for Arizona reported today that the Republican Governors' Association, who received a $1 million donation from FOX News in recent months, is investing $200,000 in Arizona races-- probably including Brewer's. They also reported that the Arizona Republican Party funds had dwindled down to $5000 before this donation. For the year, Arizona Democrats have raised $2.1 million compared to the GOP's $490,000. Now, who's fired up and who's "sitting this one out"?

The ramifications of wealth disparity: Robert Reich gets it

Robert Reich is one of my heroes. He gets it (unlike the delusional Tea Partiers who also were on National Public Radio [NPR] this morning, but more on those jokers later).

Here is a quote from his interview today on NPR. (Check out the link for the whole interview.)

"[The middle class] can't go deeper and deeper into debt. They can't work longer hours. They've exhausted all of their coping mechanisms," he says. "And people at the top are taking home so much that they are almost inevitably going to speculate in stocks or commodities or whatever the speculative vehicles are going to be. ... Unless we understand the relationship between the extraordinary concentration of income and wealth we have this in country and the failure of the economy to rebound, we are going to be destined for many, many years of high unemployment, anemic job recoveries and then periods of booms and busts that may even dwarf what we just had."

Tucson's downtown hotel: Historical context of a complicated project (Part 3)

The saga of Tucson's proposed downtown mega-hotel has been a continuing drama for a few years. To offer an historic context to the current pending decisions, here is a series of news articles.

The original Request for Proposals
Downtown Revitalization Development Opportunity, Convention Center Headquarters Hotel
July 2007-- three years ago! No wonder Tucsonans are frustrated!

Economic downturn in the west
Brookings report finds LV among hardest hit
Las Vegas Review-Journal, December 2009.

City Council starts to debate the wisdom of the hotel project
Dialogue is changing on downtown hotel project
Inside Tucson Business, February 2010.

Local businesses are pro-development
Downtown vision, future is in new hotel, TCC
Inside Tucson Business, February 2010.

Are convention centers and hotels the great investment that developers say they are? (AKA the $190 million question.)
Space Available: The Realities of Convention Centers as Economic Development Strategy
by Heywood Sanders for the Brookings Institution, 2005.
This reports reveals not-so-rosy statistics about many cities that have built new convention hotels and convention centers to boost economic development. Sanders, an academic, was interviewed by local media in the spring of 2010, but the City Council gave him minimal time to explain his findings. It's important to note that the Brookings report was published in 2005; the economy has only gotten worse since then. In his interview on the John C. Scott show, Sanders said many US cities have traveled the convention center hotel road that the City of Tucson is now on. Some put up the funds and built the hotels; others decided to be more prudent and not build. It is scary to ponder what this huge debt could do to these heavily-leveraged cities if the US economy, in general, and unemployment, in particular, do not pick up soon.

Hotel Industry Fights Back
The Rhetoric vs the Facts: What the Brookings Report Fails to Reveal
The International Association of Exhibition Management pushed back after the Brookings Report was published in 2005.

Another "debunking" of the Brookings' Report, 2005.

Local hotel owner/opportunist wants a piece of the action
Chamber backs city lease after hotel upgrade
Arizona Daily Star, June 2010.

OUR VIEW: 99-YEAR PROPOSAL FROM BUSINESSMAN LOPEZ NOT GOOD FOR TAXPAYERS
Using city bonds to upgrade hotel is a bad idea
Even the Arizona Daily Star doesn't go for Lopez's idea for lining his own pockets with Rio Nuevo funds. June 2010.

Desperate construction workers want jobs
'WE NEED THE JOBS,' RIO NUEVO BOARD IS TOLD AT TOWN HALL
Workers flock to back TCC hotel construction
Arizona Daily Star, June 2010.

More questions than answers
These questions need to be answered before we OK a convention hotel
In Inside Tucson Business, Councilman Steve Kozachik uses the media to push for answers from Garfield Traub (the hotel developer) and from the Mayor and Council, June 2010. This article is a thorough overview of the funding and the issues.

Phoenix convention hotel occupancy less than 50%
Downtown Hotel Hell
A dose of convention hotel reality from Phoenix, thanks to the Tucson Weekly, September 2010.

Hotel hell devolves as bloggers offer options to City Council
Give downtown hotel site to the Apache Indians
A View from Baja Arizona blog on the Tucson Citizen website, September 2010.

Sensing the fear of local politicians, the hotel's developer offers another funding plan
New hotel-finance plan unveiled
Sensing that local politicians lack the will to go hundreds of millions of dollars in debt to finance and build the hotel, Garfield Traub offers an alternative funding plan, according to Arizona Daily Star, September 2010. GT suggests the creation of a real estate investment trust (REIT) which would finance the hotel. The problem with this idea is that the city would own all of the risk if the hotel sits empty, but the REIT would reap the profits if all goes well. (This is a really bad idea for the City of Tucson!)

The City Council and the Rio Nuevo Board play hot potato with the project
To build or not to build-- who's decision is it anyway? Apparently, we don't know. When the Arizona Legislature created the Rio Nuevo Board to oversee expenditure of the RN funds, Kozachik and others (including me) thought that meant they would oversee and make decisions on projects like the downtown hotel, but the RN Board passed the buck back to the City Council last week. On Sunday, the Arizona Daily Star called for someone to make a decision.

Three years, many plans, and millions of dollars later, Tucson still doesn't have a downtown hotel. Now what? As I have said many times, I do believe that Tucson would benefit from a larger, updated downtown convention hotel, but after having heard multiple interviews with Sanders about his convention hotel research, I am convinced that now is not the time for Tucson to take on massive debt and that the GT proposal is not the right plan for Tucson in 2010.

Stay tuned for future developments.

Tucson's downtown hotel: To be or not to be? (Part 1)

Since he took office, City Councilman Steve Kozachik has been trying to hold the Mayor's and other council members' feet to the fire on the new downtown hotel deal.

The issue of whether or not to build a mega-hotel downtown has been complicated by Tucson's ongoing budget problems-- thanks to a downturn in the US economy, high unemployment and poverty in Arizona, cuts in funds from the state government and an over-reliance on tourism, sales tax, and the housing boon statewide.

All of this has been coming to a head since the City Council voted to send Prop 400, a 1/2 cent sales tax increase, to the voters this November. Labeled the "core tax", it theoretically will be spent on core services-- police, fire, and parks-- but, as I understand it, that is not an iron clad promise.

City Manager Mike Letcher proposed 2 plans to balance Tucson's budget-- Plan A being pass the sales tax and Plan B being across the board 15% cuts in all city departments (including police and fire). (Plan B, I think, is a particularly stupid idea because it plays into the hands of the people who tried to pass Prop 200 last fall. They contended that the City Council didn't value police and fire and would cut those services unless they were protected by the charter changed proposed in Prop 200, and here you go-- not even 1 year later, Letcher's Plan B proposes just that!)

As his answer songs, Kozachik has proposed Plan C and the hybrid, updated Plan D. I am not endorsing Kosachik's Plan D whole hog, but I do agree with him when he says that there are steps that the City Council can and should take now--regardless of whether or not the sales tax passes. For example, included in Plan D are items like eliminating cars and car allowances for city employees (check this link and scroll down to see who gets this now); a 2% decrease in pay for city employees making above $96,000; increased "cost recovery" related to Parks and Recreation programs (ie, increased fees); a sliding scale Sun Tran fare increase; and much more. The kicker at the end of Plan D is killing-- at least for now-- the hotel project:

"Because of the uncertain impact on the General Fund, advise Rio Nuevo Multipurpose Facilities District Board that the City will not entertain any further consideration of funding proposals associated with the Downtown Convention Hotel until the sales tax has sunsetted (see below.)

"In the event sales tax fails at the ballot box, City will not entertain funding proposals for the Hotel until State-shared sales tax receipts to the City exceed those identified in “sunset” provision cited below."

According to Kozachik (the sole Republican on the City Council), he presented Plans C and D as points of discussion and wants to discuss/debate the ideas with other members of the City Council. The problem is that the Democrats on the City Council didn't want to discuss the plans.

At the September 21, 2010 City Council meeting, Kozachik also made this motion to tell the Rio Nuevo Board that the city was washing its hands of the hotel project proposed by Garfield Traub.

Convention Center Hotel and the City of Tucson

What is the City of Tucson’s legal obligation to the design, development and building of the Convention Center Hotel? The Master Development Agreement identifies the Agreement is between the Rio Nuevo Multipurpose Facilities District (The Owner) and Garfield Traub (The Developer).

The signature page of the Master Development Agreement states that the Mayor signs “Solely in connection with the City’s obligation and agreements pursuant to Sections 2.2.2, 4.1.14 and 4.2 of this agreement”

Section 2.2.2 relates to the construction of the East entrance and states that the agreement “obligates the City to expeditiously pursue mutually agreeable methods for funding the CC East Entrance Construction Fund” The City complied with this obligation by issuing additional Certificates of Participation.

Section 4.1.14 relates to the City issuing permits during the design phase and states “City agrees to expedite to the fullest extent possible plan review and approvals as well as the issuance of all permits and consents required for the project.” The City has complied with this obligation.

Section 4.2 relates to the City issuing permits after completion of the Design Development Period and states “City agrees to expedite to the fullest extent possible plan review and approvals as well as the issuance of all permits and consents required for the project” The project has not been approved and therefore the permits will not yet be issued.

Clearly, The City of Tucson has no contractual obligation to fund the project. In light of the dire financial condition in which the City finds itself, the City should not risk one more dollar of the taxpayer’s money on this project.

I move that the City of Tucson advise Rio Nuevo Multipurpose Facilities District Board that 1) at this time we do not intend to backstop or issue any bonds to secure the completion of the Tucson Convention Center Hotel, Parking Garage and Convention Center Expansion and 2) The City will not approve any additional expenditures for the Convention Center Projects until RN has negotiated an acceptable GMP and funding plan for the project.

This declaration of intent will allow the RNMF Board to decide if the project is financially viable in its current form and to decide if alternative funding methods are available. That obligation is clearly delineated in the MDA under Sections 4.1.13 and 6.6.

Section 4.1.13 assigns to Garfield Traub the responsibility of securing a Design Build Contract with Turner/Sundt and to negotiate a GMP, advising Rio Nuevo as that is developed.

Section 6.6 assigns to Rio Nuevo the responsibility of obtaining funding for the Project. The City of Tucson is explicitly not mentioned in the development of a financing plan.

We, as the City of Tucson, cannot simultaneously tell our citizens that we need for them to pass a ½ cent sales tax because we are in dire financial straits and also tell them that we are obligating their money to a $225 million project that has significant risks and assumptions associated with it. The turn in the economy has dictated that this type of risky project should not be placed on the shoulders of the citizens of Tucson. (Emphasis added.)

The motion didn't go anywhere because no one seconded it. For Kozachik's Ward 6 update on the meeting, check this link. To watch the City Council meeting online, check out Channel 12.

I do believe that Tucson needs larger, updated hotel accommodations downtown, but I don't agree that the city should go hundreds of millions of dollars into hock for decades to build it. (Here's a hint: there is a reason why the bankers aren't financing this.)

Greg Krino: One scary guy

If you drive around midtown Tucson, you can't help but see Republican Greg Krino's smiling white face on hundreds of very expensive, 4-color, illegal signs (1,2).

Krino is an opportunistic, young Republican write-in candidate challenging Democrat Paula Aboud for her state senate seat in LD28. Aboud and Krino are in a four-way race with former state Representative Ted Downing and Green Party activist Dave Ewoldt.

Normally, Republicans don't bother with LD28 because it is overwhelmingly Democratic-- "about 36,000 Democrats, 22,000 Republicans and 24,000 others spread out across the political spectrum," according to the Tucson Weekly.

While Aboud, Downing, and Ewoldt duking it out from the center to the far left, Krino has the extreme far right all to himself. You know all those things that progressives don't like about the current legislature and Governor Jan Brewer? Let me refresh your memory, in case you have suppressed the last 2 legislative sessions: no support or core services for families, kids, or the poor; minimalist public health; privatization of everything including education, prisons, and parks; give-aways (AKA tax breaks) to the rich and to hell with everyone else; demonization of undocumented workers, etc.

Well, Krino marches in lock step with these Republican core ideas-- hence my headline. He's a scary guy.

I heard him on the John C. Scott show the other day. People-- like former Congressman Jim Kolbe-- are saying that Krino is a "rising star" in the Republican party. When Scott asked him about his stance on issues, Krino said that government should get back to basics-- police, fire, and roads... period.

Yikes! You'll note all of the government services that are not on that list: education, prisons, public health, providing a safety net or support for the poor.

I know this "back to basics" is popular rhetoric amongst the tea bag types this year, but I seriously don't think people realize how this would impact them if these wing-nuts get elected.

As an aside, those 4-color signs are expensive. Obviously, this guy has big money behind him. The corporatists really like having the Arizona Legislature in their pocket.

UPDATE, October 8: Most of Krino's illegally-placed 4-color signs are gone from city streets now. You'll note his new illegally-placed signs are the standard red/black type, no 4-color smiling photo, and still no indication that he is an extremist Republican.

Marijuana, the City Council, Goddard and aliens-- events abound this week

What's a politically active Tucsonan to do this week? Today and tomorrow (September 20-21) multiple meetings and events have been scheduled on top of each other.

Goddard
Today and tomorrow evening, beginning at 5:30 p.m., Women for Goddard is hosting phone-banking parties. We will be calling women voters and encouraging them to vote for Terry Goddard for Arizona governor. If you are a woman with a cell phone, contact Women for Goddard at 5000women.az@gmail.com for details.

Medical Marijuana
Also, tonight-- 5:15 p.m. at the Copper Room at Randolph Park-- Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall will tell us everything we ever wanted to know about marijuana-- or at least medical marijuana in Arizona. Arizona voters will get a chance to vote-- again-- on the decriminalization of medical marijuana. (Arizonans have approved medical marijuana at least twice before, but somehow the Legislature has been able to not enact the wishes of the voters.) Here is an excerpt from LaWall's promo:

Proposition 203 is a ballot initiative to be voted on during the general election on November 2, 2010. If approved by the voters, the initiative will enact a group of statutes titled the “Arizona Medical Marijuana Act,” to include a new Chapter 28.1 in Title 36 and amendment of Arizona Revised Statute (ARS) § 43-1201. If adopted, the new law would decriminalize possession, sale, and cultivation of marijuana for certain purposes under state law and would provide for the establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries and offsite cultivation locations.

Tucson City Council
Also, Tuesday is another one of those big days for the Tucson City Council. Beginning at noon with a study session and continuing through the evening with the regular meeting and call to the audience, beginning at 5:30 p.m. For weeks, Councilman Steve Kozachik has been trying to hold the other council members' feet to the fire regarding budget cuts and the downtown hotel boondoggle.

As usual, the City Manager's office is telling voters to vote for another sales tax increase to pay for core services (police, fire, parks) or face a 15% across the board cut in services-- Plans A and B-- as if these are our only 2 choices. Kosachik unveiled his Plan C in late August and a Plan D more recently. You can read his ideas here.

I agree with Kozachik that there are some budget cuts the city could make now-- like getting rid of city cars and car allowances for staff, trimming top salaries by 2%, increasing some fees, etc. I also agree with him that they should stop fiddling around with that overly expensive downtown hotel project. Having worked in PR for many years and having planned events in Tucson, I strongly believe that we need a better hotel in downtown, but the long-term financial risk of this project is too great. As we know, the city has gotten itself into several bad land deals (1,2); this one would hurt us greatly if it did not live up to it's rosy projections.

Since the city is overly reliant on sales tax and tourism-- and both are down-- we need to make tough choices.

Aliens
If you're sick of politics by the end of the week, check out The Glow in Oracle. Fifty local artists-- including moi-- will display lighted sculptures, while 20 musical acts provide the ambiance.

An Congress-- Not?

If you follow downtown politics and development/non-development, you know that it has been a rocky road littered with bad real estate deals, broken dreams, and random glimmers of hope.

Last fall there was a big hullabaloo when downtown landlord and developer Scott Stiteler evicted 3 businesses (Tooley's, Preen, and Metropolis Hair) and 4 galleries (Dinnerware, Firestone, Rocket, and Central Arts [above]) on Congress to make way for a 7000-square-foot sports bar owned by Mr. An of Sakura fame.

I'm sure, at the time, Stiteler thought that Mr. An would be a more solid tenant than these funky small businesses and galleries, but that Congress Street gallery row-- coordinated for the most part by David Aguirre of Dinnerware Artspace-- created a very popular art scene and drew large crowds downtown to view rotating exhibits (1,2,3,4, 5, 6, 7).

Construction-- or destruction, actually-- started in the spring. Walls were knocked down to make way for the glittering new sports bar. The Arizona Daily Star trumpeted Mr. An's move downtown.

Now, construction appears to be stalled. Word on the street is that Stiteler is stuck with an empty shell with dirt floors, no tenants paying rent, and no Mr. An.

As Joni Mitchell sang, You don't know what you got 'til it's gone. You paved paradise and put up a parking lot..

Sept. 18, UPDATE: I received e-mails from Stiteler and Councilman Steve Kosachik on this story. According to Stiteler, construction and renovation inside structures on 200 block of Congress Street continues. He said that An and others are interested in the space but would not be more specific regarding future tenants. No time frame for completion was offered. Apparently, when the 1912 structures were gutted, they were found to be in rougher shape that anticipated. Watch for further developments on this story..

I love Paul Krugman

Yes, there I said it, "I love you, Paul Krugman."

Why am I in love with a NY times columnist? Because he's not afraid to tell it like it is.

In a column entitled Now That's Rich in Sunday's NY Times, Krugman called for an end to the Bush tax cuts, which will sunset at the end of 2010-- unless the Congress votes to extend these budget-busting give-aways to the rich.

Several weeks ago, Republican lawmakers-- like our 2 Arizona Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl-- started the spin to save the tax cuts for their rich cronies. Earlier in the summer, they voted to deny extension of unemployment benefits because paying these benefits would increase the deficit; at the same time, they were promoting extension of the Bush tax cuts. (It is blatantly obvious whose side they are on.)

The Faux News spin on the sunset of the Bush tax cuts is that Obama is a tax-and-spend liberal who wants to push through the largest tax increase in history-- or some such drivel.

The truth is that Obama wants to extend the miniscule part of the Bush tax cuts that benefits the middle class, while ending the tax cuts for the richest 0.1% of the US population.

According to the Tax Policy Center, full extension of the Bush tax cuts-- originally instituted in 2001 and 2003-- would add $3.7 trillion (with a T) to the budget deficit over the next 10 years. (Click on the link for the full sobering report.)

I say, let's finally give up on trickle down economics and end the give-aways to the richest 0.1% of Americans. Bush and his Republican-controlled Congress (including John and Jon) wrote each of them a check for $3 million. Enough is enough. Don't buy the lie. End welfare to the rich.

More than 1000 Signs Removed from Tucson Streets

On Monday morning, I posted a rather fiery blog post about political signs being removed in midtown Tucson.

Well, I kicked a hornet's nest with that story.

After multiple e-mail exchanges with the Ward 6 Office-- including Steve himself-- and neighborhood association leaders, I learned that the sign sweep was not in just Ward 6 but citywide. I also learn that only illegally-posted signs would be removed.

According to data provided by Councilman Kozachik, 1140 illegal signs were removed, including 865 political signs and 275 non-political signs. (Personally, I think that this is a waste of manpower-- volunteer manpower in posting the illegal signs and city staff manpower to remove them.)

Anyway, I want to thank Councilman Kozachik for providing the above data and clarifying the sign blight situation.

For information regarding legal vs illegal signs on city streets, check out this brochure published by the City of Tucson.

BTW, in my note back to Steve, I suggested that he could really help with the neighborhood blight caused by graffiti, illegally tall grass and weeds, and illegal dumping of trash and discarded furniture in the curb lawns by slum lords (long before a scheduled bulky pick-up). Blight begone!

We are all workers

Walking down Madison Ave last night after dinner, I saw this advertisement for Levis. Initially it struck me because I identify with the egalitarian message, "We are all workers."

We are all workers-- except for those who aren't-- that is the 1% of the population who are living off of our sweat and their accumulated wealth and the mostly Republican politicians who do their bidding.

As I was reading the NY Times this morning and eating breakfast at the hotel, Paul Krugman's editorial reminded me sadly of this small black boy in his "workers'" uniform.

Krugman predicts more unemployment for American workers and continued intransigence by Republican and conservative Democrat lawmakers and the Federal Reserve.

Republican and conservative Democrat members of Congress have repeatedly blocked legislation to help workers. Recent examples include the long battle to extend unemployment benefits earlier in the summer and last week's demise of the so-called jobs bill which would have given community banks more funds to lend to small businesses to create jobs.

While conservative members of Congress want to hold the line on deficit spending if the expenditure will help workers (ie, 99% of us), they are all for retaining the Bush era tax cuts for the rich.

As Krugman puts it, "The point is that a large part of Congress — large enough to block any action on jobs — cares a lot about taxes on the richest 1 percent of the population, but very little about the plight of Americans who can’t find work."

So, no problem with spending to help the rich. Check out this video that shows the devastating impact of the Bush tax cuts on the US economy. (These cuts must sunset if we really want to get out of debt.)

Krugam laments that this trend will not end as long as the public's outrage is unfocused.

Tea Baggers are outraged-- but for the wrong reasons, in my opinion. Many of them are calling for less government-- except for the government that provides their Social Security checks.

Hello, People, less government is what we are suffering from now. When unemployment is looming near 10% and the Congress refuses to take action, that's serious. When cities like San Jose, California are laying off fire fighters, that's serious. When Arizona is laying off teachers and furloughing thousands of workers, that's serious.

Where's the outrage? Wake up.

Sky Bar out of touch with clientele on SB1070

What started as another xenophobic law proposed by wingnut Republican Russel Pearce, SB1070 could be labeled the Ultimate Law of Unintended Consequences.

In addition to helping our GED-toting, unelected governor vanquish her Republican primary opponents, the ill-conceived bill has become a national sensation, fodder for comedians, rationale for boycotts, and the deciding factor on where to buy pizza in Tucson.

In early July, the humanitarian group No More Deaths started We Mean Business, the business-friendly answer song to Congressman Raul Grijalva's call for boycotts of Arizona after passage of SB1070. Approximately 90 local businesses agreed to post anti-SB1070 We Mean Business or We Reject Racism signs in their establishments. The rationale was that flaming liberals like me who oppose SB1070 would know which businesses to frequent and which to... well... boycott. (For a list of these businesses and a map, click here.)

Given the huge economic impact of Mexican shoppers in Arizona-- $7.3 million per day-- it makes good business sense to oppose SB1070.

According to the No More Deaths website, businesses interested in participating in the We Reject Racism movement are asked to take the following three actions:

- Post the “We Reject Racism” sign to publicly oppose SB1070

- Not allow law enforcement into their business for the sole purpose of checking immigration status of people inside*

- Not financially supporting lawmakers who voted for SB1070

*Legally businesses have the right to prevent anyone from entering or ask them to leave. The exception for law enforcement is if they have a warrant for someone inside or believe an individual is an immediate danger to the public.

Tony Vaccaro, owner of Brooklyn's Pizza and the adjoining Sky Bar on 4th Avenue, was one of the Tucson businessmen who initially supported We Mean Business 2 weeks ago. In a turn of events, Vaccaro took the We Mean Business signs down this week and contacted the Arizona Daily Star stating his flip-flop support of SB1070.

Vaccaro is quoted in the Star as saying that after having read SB1070, he now agrees with it. The Star also quotes Vaccaro as saying, "...I do not believe that businesses should get involved in politics. That is for individuals, politicians and lobby groups. I feel that I have let some of my customers down by getting involved in the SB 1070 debate."

Businesses shouldn't get involved in politics? Has this guy been living in a cave? The corporatists control our elected officials, run our country-- and are trying to run our city!

I find it hard to believe that he really thinks he let his customers down by opposing SB1070 and racism. Vaccaro's 2 businesses-- Brooklyn's Pizza and Sky Bar-- are in the heart of the 4th Ave shopping district-- nestled between the University of Arizona, the downtown arts district, and Tucson High School (whose student population is less than 50% Anglo).

Personally, I liked (note the past tense) Sky Bar. The open, airy venue features affordable pizza and adult beverages, theme nights, eclectic live music, and dancing. The downtown crowd is far from white bread-- being diverse in race, ethnicity, age, and sexual orientation. Vaccaro's new position on SB1070 is out of step with them.

Artists for Action, another anti-SB1070 movement that popped up in July, may give Vaccaro-- who hires dozens of musicians to play at his club and whose clientele includes local artists-- some heart burn.

Spearheaded by Calexico's John Convertino and Joey Burns, Artists for Action urges artists and musicians to take a stand against SB1070 and help educate the public. The group is not advocating boycotts; in fact, it is encouraging out-of-state musicians to come to Arizona and voice their opposition to SB1070 -- rather than boycotting in protest.

Who will win this tug of war? Hopefully, not the xenophobes or those who exploit immigrants (documented or not).

Is the Tucson City Council about to be 'swift-boated'?

Will the Southern Arizona Leadership Council (SALC) be successful in changing our city, our City Council, and life as we know it in the bluest part of Arizona? It could happen...

Absurd, you say? How could this small group of right-wing corporatists accomplish such a feat? By proposing City Charter changes that will weaken elected government in Tucson and further distance it from the voters.

SALC is a special interest group comprised of regional-to-multi-national corporatists who operate in Southern Arizona (eg, Tucson Electric Power, Diamond Enterprises, Jim Click, Raytheon, you get the picture). They are trying to control and restructure local government by changing the City Charter. In 2009, this same tactic was used by proponents of the failed Prop 200 initiative, which was resoundingly defeated by voters, despite overwhelming financial support by donors, including at least one SALC member.

Currently, SALC is lobbying the Tucson City Council to put a package of four changes to the City Charter on the November 2010 ballot. Their rationale is that these charter changes will bring "efficiency" to city government. (In reality, the changes will make it easier for special interest groups like SALC to influence governmental decision-making. Under the proposed new system the only person they would have to schmooze is the City Manager because the City Council members and the neighborhoods they represent would become weaker.)

What is most dangerous about these proposed changes is not the esoteric strong City Manager or strong Mayor debate, but the WIIFMs SALC has added to the package to entice the City Council's support.

City Council members are paid a measly $24,000 per year for what is supposed to be a part-time job. Included in the SALC package is a proposal to make the Mayor and Council positions full-time and to increase their renumeration significantly and bring it in line with that of the Pima County Supervisors. Two cost-neutral proposals have been floated to pay for this very attractive WIIFM: 1) each City Council member should eliminate a staff person to pay for the raise or 2) the city should eliminate off-year elections for part of the City Council. (In other words, voters would elect the entire council in the same election year.)

Let me say that I totally agree the Mayor and Council positions should be full-time, and the poor souls who volunteer to do these high-stress, thankless jobs should be paid better. BUT this is the wrong way to go about this pay increase and, more importantly, the wrong time for the City Council to be enabling a raises for themselves.

In the past year, severe budget shortfalls have forced the City Council to dramatically reduce funding for most city programs, people have been laid-off, and many workers have been forced to take unpaid furlough days.

I can hear the 2012 commercials now... [voice over] When the City of Tucson was in the depths of historic budget deficits and city workers were being laid-off, what did the Democratically-controlled City Council do? They increased their positions to full-time and gave themselves a raise! (You're right. This fantasy commercial text is not exactly true, but two years from now only the true political wonks will remember how this all came down.)

Here comes the really scary part. Since the current charter change proposal includes the provision for eliminating off-year elections, the entire City Council will be up for re-election in 2012. The five neighborhood-friendly, arts-friendly, progressive Democrats on the City Council could be swift-boated right out of office by the Republican propaganda machine.

This past Tuesday, the Tucson Mayor and Council voted to postpone the vote on whether or not the SALC-initiated charter changes should be on the November ballot to the last possible day for a decision-- July 7.

In the meantime, there will be Ward-wide public hearings on this proposal. I urge you strongly to attend the meeting in your Ward and/or to call or e-mail your City Council member and tell them to deep-six SALC's charter changes.

In the future, if SALC wants changes to the City Charter (and they probably will), they should collect signatures like everyone else-- instead of asking the City Council to do the heavy lifting (and take the heat later).

City to hold public hearings on charter changes

Tucson's City Council Chambers were filled with businessmen in suits and activists in blue jeans, as business leaders and neighborhood leaders squared off on the topic of changes to Tucson's charter.

For more than a year, corporatists represented by the Southern Arizona Leadership Council (SALC) have been promoting changes to Tucson's Charter as a strategy to manipulate local government and circumvent elected officials. (This is the same group that got the failed Prop 200 charter change initiative on the ballot in the fall of 2009.)

This year, SALC is pushing the Tucson City Council to place a set of four proposed charter changes on the ballot. These changes would:

• Give the city manager greater hire-and-fire authority over some top city department heads and remove the City Council checks-and-balances authority.

• Increase the number of wards by two.

• Give the Mayor (who currently is just a figure head) more voting power.

• Change the Mayor and Council positions from part-time to full-time and increase their pay to put it in line with that of the Pima County Supervisors.

Businessmen representing SALC claim that these changes will make the city more efficient because it will strengthen the City Manager's position (and weaken the City Council, although they are not specifically saying that.)

Changing Tucson's of government to a strong City Manager system will further distance local government from the voters. In addition, consolidating power under the unelected City Manager could lead to cronyism.

This has grass roots activists and neighborhood associations up in arms. Former City Council member Steve Leal, several neighborhood association presidents, and other Tucson residents spoke against the charter changes. Former state legislator Tom Prezelski said that SALC members thought of themselves as "colonial overlords," since this relatively small special interest group is trying to bend policy in their favor, while usurping power of the voters and their elected officials.

Some charter-change opponents went further to call for a strong mayor system. A strong mayor system would give voters the power to hold elected officials accountable. With our current form of distributed governance, the City Manager, the City Council, and, to a lesser extent, the Mayor all hold some power. At the local level, there is no one elected official who is singularly accountable to the voters-- no one who has the authority to say, as former President Harry Truman did, "The buck stops here."

After dozens of mini-speeches during yesterday's study session and during the City Council meeting, the Mayor and Council voted unanimously to hold ward-wide public meetings on the charter changes and to delay the vote on whether or not to put the changes on the ballot until July 7, 2010.

Stay tuned for meeting announcements. As always, if you have an opinion on this, don't hesitate to call or e-mail your City Council member. If you want to watch Mayor and Council proceedings, check out Tucson Channel 12.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

Progressive bloggers fill local news void

As Tucson's traditional daily newspapers slide into oblivion, citizen journalism is flourishing and becoming more influential.

Just 10 short years ago, if you wanted your story in the news, you had to court reporters from the Arizona Daily Star, the Tucson Citizen, and the three local network television affiliates. News directors, editors, and reporters all had some level of control over what stories were distributed to the public, how the stories were told, and which outlets covered what types of stories. In addition, since these traditional journalists generally had some college training in the profession, the public was guaranteed a level of quality and accuracy, which is not always seen today. (Thanks in part to Faux News.)

The Internet and blogging have blown the doors off of the journalism profession.

Yes, the accuracy of Internet "journalism" is often sketchy.

Yes, journalists, who have been traditionally under-paid, are now often unpaid.

And, yes, unfortunately, this projected lack of income is discouraging young writers from seeking journalism degrees.

But, citizen journalists are not beholden to corporate media giants, and independent journalism is as important to our democracy as it has ever been. Blogging combined with social media and the lack of corporate restraint have given us lightening-speed, worldwide distribution of ideas and news that would have languished in obscurity just a few years ago.

As hardcore news disappears from network and cable "news" shows and newspapers die a slow death nationwide, citizen journalists have stepped in to fill the communication void. In some ways, the rise of citizen journalism has taken us back to the days of Thomas Paine and Ben Franklin, when pamphleteers distributed political commentary and ideas directly to the people.

In Tucson, we are fortunate to have a strong group of progressive citizen journalists who regularly provide news and ideas that will never be distributed through the corporate media. Here are a few...

Blog for Arizona by Mike Brian, Dave Safier, and the AZ Blue Meanie

Poco Bravo by Luke Knipe

The Tucson Citizen and the Tucson Sentinel-- two blogging collectives that grew out of the demise of the Tucson Citizen print newspaper.

The prolific Hugh A. Holub, who has several blogs, including:
- The View from Baja Arizona
- Tucson Independent Examiner
- Down by the Border.

And, of course, moi. I also write under several blog titles:
- Tucson Progressive Examiner
- Tucson Baby Boomer Examiner
- Tucson Sustainable Living Examiner
- Muse Views.

Granted, finding the news is more complicated than sitting down with a cup of coffee and the print daily, but the possibilities are endless-- and just a click away.

Tucson lacks "the vision thing" but proposed charter changes won't remedy the problem

In the 29 years I have lived in Tucson, I have seen the city's fortunes ebb and flow like the ocean tides. No where has this cycle of growth and decay been more evident than in downtown Tucson. Over the years, many businesses and revitalization initiatives have come and gone regardless of how successful or popular they were.

A case in point: long before Rio Nuevo and Second Saturdays, there were the Tucson Arts District Partnership (TADPI) and Downtown Saturday Nights.

Both Rio Nuevo and TADPI were charged with breathing new life into downtown. TADPI focused primarily on downtown revitalization by showcasing Tucson artists, hosting downtown arts and music events (like Downtown Saturday Nights), and beautifying downtown with mural projects and pop-up galleries in vacant buildings.

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, there was a viable strip of shops and galleries along the east end of Congress Street-- Yikes Toys, Picante, Berta Wright Gallery, Pink Adobe Gallery, and others. Downtown Saturday Night attendees visited these shops and perused the wares exhibited by street vendors. One by one these business folded or moved.

Downtown Saturday nights and the other TADPI projects were wildly popular but were mysteriously discontinued in the 1990s.

Rio Nuevo was created in 1999 when voters approved a special tax increment district and began accumulating sufficient funding to support projects in 2004, according to the city's website. Rio Nuevo has had far more money than TADPI ever did but also has had less focus and much more bad press (thanks to a vendetta by the Arizona Daily Star). Second Saturdays is a downtown business initiative-- and not a Rio Nuevo project-- but projects occurring simultaneously downtown and tend to be lumped together in the minds of citizens.

By 2008, this same strip of shops on Congress Street (which had been vacant for years) had been reborn and housed four galleries, a coffee shop, a hair salon, and a trendy clothing resale shop, along with a few bars. Creative events (1, 2, 3, 4) drew hundreds of Tucsonans downtown to enjoy the art and check out the music and bar scene. To us supporters, downtown appeared to be experiencing a resurgence. By early 2010, seven of these businesses were closed or relocated by a developer to make way for a trendy sports bar, whose owner was glorified in a Daily Star puff piece this week.

While other cities are able to revitalize their downtowns (1, 2), Tucson's beleaguered city core suffers from the fits and starts. This leads long-time Tucsonans ask themselves: "Why does Tucson keep re-inventing the wheel? Why can't we get it right?"

Why? In my opinion, Tucson suffers from the lack of a visionary leader. Yes, we have had plenty of politicians, plans, proposals, and committees, but if you look behind the glossy PR of these initiatives, you'll usually find that they benefit special interests, and not the city as a whole.

Tucson's City Manager form of government is inherently flawed. Our Mayor is a powerless figurehead who signs proclamations and acts as a tie-breaker when City Council members can't agree.

With a City Manager form of government, there is no one elected official who takes responsibility and says, as Harry Truman did, "The buck stops here." Tucson has a City Manager, a Mayor, and six City Council members who run the government. It's no wonder that decision-making, at times, appears schizophrenic. This distributed governance allows some people to be scapegoated (like Nina Trasoff, who personally paid the political price for Rio Nuevo's perceived lack of progress), while Mayor Bob Walkup became our local Teflon Don and easily won re-election.

A leadership vacuum such as this affords the perfect opportunity for special interests to shape local government decisions. Enter the Southern Arizona Leadership Council (SALC)--a group of local businesses-- and the Tucson Charter Coalition (TC3), a spin-off organization, who want to save the city by making basic structural changes in governance.

Currently, these groups are lobbying the Tucson City Council to put city charter changes on the November 2010 ballot.

Some of these proposed changes I agree with. For example, changing city elections to even years would align them with the larger presidential and Congressional elections, thus increasing voter turnout and saving money. Changing the City Council's and Mayor's positions to full time and aligning their salaries with the Pima County Supervisors' compensation would allow the city to attract more qualified candidates. Since these positions are now all part-time, much power is held by unelected staff members. (Eliminating off-year elections will provide funds for the change from part-time to full-time positions.)

What I vehemently disagree with are SALC's proposals that would give the City Manager, another unelected official, more control.

Bureaucrats already hold too much power and are not directly accountable to the voters. Tucson needs a strong visionary Mayor to lead us into the future-- not a strong bureaucrat who owes his power to local businesses.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

Arts Advocacy Day of Action: Tucson can be 'arts friendly' and 'business friendly'

With Tucson and Arizona suffering extreme budget problems, a number of worthwhile programs have been or will be cut back or eliminated.

Rather than make the tough choices necessary to fix the state's revenue structure, the Arizona Legislature ended its 2010 session last week after slashing many state-funded programs, most notably education on all levels, healthcare for children and the poor, and the state parks system.

The City of Tucson also has tough choices to make. In recent months, the City Manager has offered solutions, but many have been shot down.

In tough economic times, arts funding is an easy target. During the 2009 city council elections, local talk radio hosts and the Arizona Daily Star (formerly the Red Star but now a right-wing mouthpiece) hammered the Democratic-controlled City council for not being "business friendly". Repeatedly, they called for cuts to arts funding as a way to solve the city's budget crisis. This kind of talk makes great sound bites for the small government folks, but Tucson's arts funding is already so paltry that eliminating it only nips at the edge of our budget problems. (Often, I believe that the right-wingers are just bad at math. Arizona's and Tucson's budget problems are cause by a tax structure that relies too heavily on sales tax. When sales go down-- as they do in a recession-- revenue plummets. Ultimately, we need to make the tough choices to fix our tax system, but that ain't happen' with our current state government.)

On Tuesday, May 4, Tucson City Manager Mike Letcher will submit his recommended FY 2011 budget to the Mayor and Council.

On the local level in FY 2010, the Tucson Pima Arts Council (TPAC)and ACCESS Tucson have suffered budget cuts. The question now is: Will they survive?

I believe that the dichotomy of "arts friendly" vs "business friendly" is just political rhetoric. Tucson has been blessed with a vibrant and diverse arts and music scene. The Tucson city government can be both "arts friendly" and "business friendly". It is not an either/or situation as the right-wing local media would have us believe.

Supporting the arts IS business friendly. Three great examples of how cities have flourished by touting their arts and/or music scenes are: Austin, New Orleans, and Ashville, NC.

My friends and I recently returned from a trip to New Orleans to attend the 27th Annual French Quarter Festival. This is a free music festival that features only musicians from Louisiana. There were 12 stages of music and plenty of food, art, and dancing in the streets. An estimated 450,000 people attended that festival in 2009, and they expected more in 2010. We came for the music, but we spent plenty of money in restaurants, shops, and the B&B where we stayed. Local businesses kicked in funds to support and promote that free music festival because they knew they would benefit from hordes of tourists attending it. This is a prime example of the New Orleans business community working with the music and arts community for the economic and cultural betterment of the city.

Over the course of our long weekend in New Orleans, we repeatedly asked ourselves: Why doesn't Tucson do this? Tucson has many music festivals-- the Folk Festival, the Mariachi Festival, the Chamber Music Festival, the Blues Festival, the Blue Grass Festival, Club Crawl, etc. Do we bill ourselves as a music destination? Not that I know of.

Today is an Arts Day of Action organized by Tucson artists and TPAC. There will be several events around town to highlight the city's arts and music scene. Here is a list of events:

- Arts for All, Coffee Reception, 7 – 9 AM (Arts for All, 2520 N. Oracle Rd)
- The Loft Cinema, Playing PSA videos all day (The Loft Cinema, 3233 E. Speedway Blvd)
- Invisible Theatre, Draping marquee, (Invisible Theatre, 1400 N. 1st Ave)

Downtown beginning at 5:30 pm:
- Jodi Netzer, a running butoh clown (starting at Maynard's)
- Flam Chen/ Critical Stilts (between Maynards and the library)
- Jeff Grubic on sax (Pedestrian bridge between El Presidion Park and La Placita Village_
- Mitzi Dasheya Cowell and pals (Scooters in La Placita Village
- Katie Rutterer and New ARTiculations (La Placita Village Plaza)
- To-Reé-Neé (near the griffin at Scott Ave & 12th Street)
- Batucaxé and Acroyoga (near Armory Park, 6th Ave & 12th Street)
- Odaiko Sonora & Lorie Heald (on the Diamondback bridge)Denise Uyehara, Adam Cooper-- Teran and friends, video projections (Amtrak depot, after 7:30 p.m.)

Check the Arts Day of Action website or tweet @tpacartadvocacy for additional events that may be added.

By ignoring the arts-- or worse, by further cutting funding-- Tucson is missing a perfect marketing opportunity to set itself apart from other tourist destinations. This is a wake up call to not only the city government but to business community and the arts community. I urge you to drop the us vs them attitude and work together.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

Tucson May Day March draws 1000s supporting human rights

Thousands of people marched through Tucson's south side to Armory Park to commemorate May Day and show their support for human rights and immigration reform.

The multi-racial, multi-ethnic, and multi-cultural crowd of an estimated 7000 marchers snaked through neighborhoods chanting and waving homemade signs. The crowd, which was approximately 30% non-Hispanic, was so large that it was impossible to see the beginning or the end until it dispersed at Armory Park to hear speeches and music.

Although May Day Marches have commemorated workers' rights for more than a century, they have evolved into celebrations of human rights in recent years. With the passage of Arizona's new strict anti-illegal immigrant bill a week ago, May Day Marches across the country focused on civil rights for everyone in the US--regardless of status. The march in Los Angeles was the largest.

Several speakers, including Dolores Huerta, Congressman Raul Grijalva, and singer Linda Ronstadt addressed the marchers in both Spanish and English.

Huerta, who organized migrant farm workers in the 1960s with Cesar Chavez, urged the audience to forget petty differences and work together for comprehensive immigration reform-- now. A life-long activitist, Huerta told everyone not to leave Arizona but to stay and vote Governor Jan Brewer and her cronies out of office.

Grijalva, who came under attack for his call for a boycott of Arizona due to SB1070, said that when reporters asked him who they would see at May Day March, he replied that they would see America-- a diversified country.

Across the street from the May Day rally, a small but noisy, all-white group of SB1070 supporters gathered. From behind the police line, they tried to provoke the May Day Marchers by flipping the bird and jeering, but their voices were drowned out by the Aztec drummers and dancers.

Pictures speak louder than words. Please check out the attached slide show and the KVOA video.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column. To see the slide show and great video coverage from KVOA, click on the link.

Brewer steps into the eye of the hurricane and comes to Tucson

Governor Jan Brewer, who signed the highly controversial anti-illegal immigration bill (SB1070) last week, will be in Tucson today, and citizens are lining up to "welcome" her.

Brewer will be attending the 96th Arizona Town Hall, "Building Arizona's Future: Jobs, Innovation, and Competitiveness.

Derechos Humanos, a local civil rights organization, is calling for legal immigration supporters to protest Arizona's "un-elected governor". The rally will be noon - 3 p.m. outside of the Doubletree Hotel in midtown Tucson. Check the Derechos Humanos link for more information or join on facebook here.

According to National Public Radio, an estimated 3000 people rallied against SB1070 outside the capitol in Phoenix on Sunday, and 4500 rallied outside of Congressman Raul Grijalva's office in Tucson on Saturday.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column. Click on the link to see a video of Brewer signing the controversial bill.

SB1070 becomes law in 3 months-- maybe

As thousands of protesters chanted outside the state capitol in Phoenix yesterday, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed SB1070. The controversial legislation would require law enforcement officers to stop people whom they believe are in the US illegally and ask for identification such as a birth certificate or passport. Moreover, it gives citizens the right to sue local law enforcement if they believe they are not implementing this law.

With stories in the New York Times and on CNN, MSNBC, the Colbert Report, and local television and radio, Arizona has been under the media microscope since this bill passed both houses of the Republican-controlled Legislature.

Now that it has passed, Arizona is under the legal microscope, according to National Public Radio (NPR). President Obama has asked his legal advisors to review the civil rights implications of the legislation. Multiple civil rights groups are planning legal challenges.

If SB1070 survives these legal challenges, it will go into effect in 3 months, according to NPR.

Economic implications aside, I personally don't see how this legislation can be fairly implemented. Thirty percent of Arizona residents are Hispanic, and many more are mixed race. By far, most are legal, but under this law they will be treated differently because of the color of their skin. Not all illegal aliens are Hispanic. There are undocumented Filipinos, Chinese, Vietnamese, Indians-- you name it-- in the US. Will the police be stopping them also? Where will it end?

It is my hope that passage of wrong-headed legislation like SB1070 will push the US Congress into finally passing comprehensive immigration reform.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column. Click on the link to see the Colbert video.

Cesar Chavez march and memorial activities this week

Wednesday, March 31 is the 83rd anniversary of union organizer Cesar Chavez's birthday. Beginning on Friday and continuing through next week, there will be commemorative events in Tucson to honor Chavez's legacy.

The week of celebration began last night with a reception for Dolores Huerta (above) at Raices Taller 222 Art Gallery and Workshop.

In 1962, Huerta and Chavez were co-founders of the National Farm Workers Association. Together, they organized farm workers and fought for better wages and working conditions across California and the southwest.

At 79, Huerta is still a fiery activist. Last night, she encouraged workers, artists, students, activists, and other progressive-thinking individuals to work together for civil rights, social justice, reform, and political power. After her short speech she urged attendees of all ages to get involved in the political process, support progressive candidates, and vote. At Huerta's invitation, Vince Rabago, candidate for Arizona attorney general, and John Bernal, LD27 candidate for the Arizona House of Representatives, joined her on stage for brief campaign speeches.

Today, Huerta will appear at the rally following the 10th Annual Cesar Chavez March, which goes from Pueblo High School to the Rudy Garcia Park on the south side of Tucson. The march, which begins at 9 a.m., goes east on 44th St. and south on 6th Ave. Click here for the parade route and more information about music and festivities at the park.

If you want to learn more about Chavez, Huerta, and the farm workers' movement, tune in to KXCI on March 31. Community radio KXCI 91.3 FM will have Cesar Chavez Day programming from 3 pm - midnight on his birthday.

Huerta's message of solidarity is particularly poignant today when immigration reform has been put on the back burner by some weak-kneed politicians, while other politicians are whipping up hatred for anyone who is different.

Both Chavez and Huerta have established foundations (linked here) to continue their struggle.

This article was originally published in my Progressive Examiner column.