Big money could bring the end of life as we know it

• Jesse "no-social-security" Kelly (Arizona)
• Rand "who-needs-civil-rights?" Paul (Kentucky)
• Joe "no-minimum-wage" Miller (Alaska)
• Sharon "pay-your-doctor-with-a-chicken" Angle (Nevada)
• Christine "don't-masturbate" O'Donnell (Delaware)
• John "repeal-healthcare-reform-but-save-welfare-for-the-rich" Boehner (Ohio)
• Sarah "anti-feminist-pro-opportunist" Palin (Alaska)
• John "which-way-should-I-flip-flop-today?" McCain (Arizona)
• Jan "beheadings!" Brewer (Arizona)
• Russel "yikes-brown-people" Pearce (Arizona)
• John "who-needs-public-education" Huppenthal (Arizona)
• Greg "privatize-this" Krino (Arizona)

Are you scared yet? Should I go on?

These right-wing puppets (and-- thanks to the Roberts' court-- the corporatists and secretly-funded big-money groups behind them) want to end life as we know it in the United States of America. They don't want to take us back to the Bush era policies or the Contract for America.

With no Social Security, no healthcare safety net, no minimum wage, and, of course, no unions-- they want to take us back to the dawn of the Industrial Revolution, when people of all ages, including small children, slaved -- literally-- in factories and sweat shops for meager wages. If you were sick, old, or poor, it was your family's responsibility to take care of you. No family? Tough luck, you're on your own.

How could these ideas have gained so much popularity? Is it the sheer power of the moneyed forces behind the Tea Party-- like the John Birch Society Koch brothers or secretly-finded groups like Karl Rove's American Crossroads, which spent $3.5 million last week? All of this money + 24/7 yellow journalism courtesy of FOX News is trying to squash the progressive advances of the Obama Administration.

Here's some background on the origins of these ideas from The Billionaires Bankrolling the Tea Party by Frank Rich or the New York Times.

When David Koch ran to the right of Reagan as vice president on the 1980 Libertarian ticket (it polled 1 percent), his campaign called for the abolition not just of Social Security, federal regulatory agencies and welfare but also of the F.B.I., the C.I.A., and public schools — in other words, any government enterprise that would either inhibit his business profits or increase his taxes. He hasn’t changed. As Mayer details, Koch-supported lobbyists, foundations and political operatives are at the center of climate-science denial — a cause that forestalls threats to Koch Industries’ vast fossil fuel business. While Koch foundations donate to cancer hospitals like Memorial Sloan-Kettering in New York, Koch Industries has been lobbying to stop the Environmental Protection Agency from classifying another product important to its bottom line, formaldehyde, as a “known carcinogen” in humans (which it is).

Tea Partiers may share the Kochs’ detestation of taxes, big government and Obama. But there’s a difference between mainstream conservatism and a fringe agenda that tilts completely toward big business, whether on Wall Street or in the Gulf of Mexico, while dismantling fundamental government safety nets designed to protect the unemployed, public health, workplace safety and the subsistence of the elderly.

Yet inexorably the Koch agenda is morphing into the G.O.P. agenda, as articulated by current Republican members of Congress, including the putative next speaker of the House, John Boehner, and Tea Party Senate candidates like Rand Paul, Sharron Angle, and the new kid on the block, Alaska’s anti-Medicaid, anti-unemployment insurance Palin protégé, Joe Miller. Their program opposes a federal deficit, but has no objection to running up trillions in red ink in tax cuts to corporations and the superrich; apologizes to corporate malefactors like BP and derides money put in escrow for oil spill victims as a “slush fund”; opposes the extension of unemployment benefits; and calls for a freeze on federal regulations in an era when abuses in the oil, financial, mining, pharmaceutical and even egg industries (among others) have been outrageous.

The Koch brothers must be laughing all the way to the bank knowing that working Americans are aiding and abetting their selfish interests.

Has the country gone mad? Do the small guv'ment Tea Partiers think their Social Security and Medicare will be funded, while everyone under 65 will be thrown to the wolves? Fat chance. Tea Partiers, after they have used you, they'll go after your Medicare-funded scooters next.

For a look at our future, check out this book from the past-- How the Other Half Lives-- or watch Walmart: the High Cost of Low Prices.

UPDATE, October 8: Diane Rehm's Friday News Roundup covers this story. (Diane, honey, mention my blog next time, OK?)

Budget cuts: Arizona Legislature has it's meat cleavers and chainsaws ready

Random Musings and Blog for Arizona cross-posted a pretty disgusting story this afternoon about the Arizona Legislature's Finance Advisory Committee (FAC) meeting last week.

As we all know, after decades of trickle down economics and other short-sighted policies, the Republican majority in the Arizona Legislature has run this state into the ground economically and socially.

But wait... there's more!

According to an article in the Arizona Republic, Arizona has a "$2.25 billion deficit that needs to be wiped out in the next 20 months."

The purpose of last week's FAC meeting was to discuss the budget and the state's economic crisis. The briefing materials for the meeting are here, and the video is here.

Pondering what these right-wing extremists will do to balance the budget without raising revenue keeps me awake at night. As the other bloggers pointed out, the state's abysmal financial situation underscores the need for us to elect Attorney General Terry Goddard to the governorship.

We saw how crazy Phoenix was last spring with Republican Governor Jan Brewer at the helm and Republicans controlling both houses in the Legislature. Boycotts and loss of business due to SB1070 aside, Arizona was the laughing stock of the country with regular stories on The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, and Saturday Night Live. With SB1070, the birther bill, anchor babies, "Constitutional carry" gun laws, and Brewer's babbling about beheadings, we gave the satirists plenty of material.

What happens in 2011 to our quality of life and our children's future may not be easily parodied if Goddard loses. Here is a little food for thought from Random Musings:

The Republicans in the legislature are sharpening their meat cleavers and oiling their chain saws in gleeful anticipation of inflicting mortal wounds upon public education in Arizona during the next budget cycle.

"However, the presence of Terry Goddard in the governor's office will serve to mitigate the carnage.

"He and his veto pen will be there to force the anti-society extremists in the legislature to the negotiating table and force them to minimize the long-term damage.

"Of course, electing Terry Goddard only sets up a strong, but not impenetrable, defense to the worst of the lege's machinations...

"Electing more Democrats to the legislature, maybe even enough to tie or take control of one of the chambers, would go a LONG way toward stopping the R-led slaughter of Arizona's physical and societal infrastructures.

Today is the last day to register to vote in Arizona. If you haven't done so already, go to the Service Arizona website before midnight October 4, register your sorry ass, and vote on November 2.

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"?

Tucson's downtown hotel: City Council tosses the hot potato back (Part 4)

The debate about whether or not the City of Tucson should go hundreds of millions of dollars into debt to build a mega-hotel downtown crescendo'd yesterday during a 2-hour Executive Session of the Mayor and Council.

You'll remember that at last week's City Council meeting, Councilman Steve Kozachik couldn't get a second on a motion that began with the question: "What is the City of Tucson’s legal obligation to the design, development and building of the Convention Center Hotel?" and ended with a formal motion that would tell the Rio Nuevo Multipurpose Facilities District Board (RN) that the city would "not backstop or issue any bonds to secure the completion of the Tucson Convention Center Hotel, Parking Garage and Convention Center Expansion" and the city would "not approve any additional expenditures for the Convention Center Projects until RN has negotiated an acceptable GMP [guaranteed maximum price] and funding plan for the project."

Later in the week, the RN Board tossed that hot potato back at the City Council.

At yesterday's City Council meeting, the Council voted 7-0 on the following motion by Kozachik:

I move that we direct staff to proceed as discussed in Executive Session, and to negotiate the following:
a) an agreement with RN for financing the Project that satisfies the direction given by the Legislature.
b) a reduced GMP for the project, as well as reduced developer and design/build fees
c) resolution of issues relating to the use of local subcontractors; and
d) acquiring additional security from the hotel operator

I move that staff not return to Mayor and Council for any further action unless these terms are accomplished.

"Direction given by the Legislature" refers to the RN Board's original charge by the Arizona Legislature to oversee expenditure of RN funds. According to Kozachik, that means that RN cannot "toss it into our lap"... again.

LaWall uses scare tactics and half-truths to campaign against medical marijuana

As political junkie, I have attended numerous public forums, City Council meetings, Pima County Board of Supervisers' meetings, and even Arizona Legislature sessions, but tonight's "educational" forum on medical marijuana (Prop 203) was the weirdest, most one-sided and contentious non-debate that I have ever witnessed.

In a nutshell, Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall [check out the seriously under-the-radar website link] used this public forum (and a Pima County facility) to give her personal opinion on medical marijuana, scare the audience, and campaign for a No vote on Prop 203. (Isn't this unethical behavior?)

At the onset, LaWall said that the meeting was not a debate or a public forum but simply an educational meeting. She said her goal was to "educate and inform" the audience about Prop 203. Fair enough but that is not what transpired.

LaWall's slanted slide show, her "facts" about medical marijuana, and editorial emphasis on certain key points made it obvious that she was not providing education; she was using her office to campaign against medical marijuana.

Early on, in the non-debate, the mostly pro-203 audience of about 40 people began to challenge her "facts". For example, she said that marijuana was not approved by the Food and Drug Administration as a "medicine" and that it has not been research-tested. (Earth to Barbara, the FDA has not approved St. John's Wort for depression, black cohash for menopause, or any number of herbal remedies and supplements, but drug stores and health food stores are selling them.)

Marijuana has not been approved as a medicine because there are no pharmaceutical companies producing marijuana pills and funding multi-center clinical trials. Since it is illegal in most states, there is no economic incentive to pay millions of dollars to test it. (Drug research in the US is based on capitalism, not on the overall public good.) On the flip side, there have been loads research articles providing anecdotal evidence and case studies on the benefits of medical marijuana.

Regarding research testing of Controlled Substances, in the US most research is funded by the federal government or by drug companies. After the free-wheeling 1960s when Timothy Leary. Ram Das, Andrew Weil, and others at Harvard Medical School were conducting clinical trials of, writing about, and/or experimenting with mind-altering drugs, the Nixon administration clamped down on experimentation (research or otherwise), and medical research into potential benefits of controlled substances was suppressed. (Research funding is a political football.)

I digress. Back to tonight's political theater... instead of answering questions from the audience, LaWall became defensive, skipped through some slides, threatened to have people removed, and solicited help from uniformed police officers to control the crowd of citizens with legitimate questions. Since LaWall refused to call on people who raised their hands early on, audience members started shouting questions and comments.

For example, she answered one of my questions, but only when I said I was a journalist and asked, "Do you want me to write that you refused to answer audience questions?" When I raised my hand with a follow-up question, I was ignored-- along with many others.

Eventually the audience turned to heckling, but, seriously, LaWall deserved it. One breast cancer patient shouted out how much medical marijuana has helped her over the past 2 years of chemothearpy. Community activists accused LaWall of abusing her elected office by using the public forum to voice her personal opinion. Outside, a cancer doctor and palliative care cancer nurse told me that LaWall just doesn't understand the benefits of medical marijuana to their patients.

The meeting lasted about 30-40 minutes, since LaWall refused to answer the vast majority of questions or address comments from the audience. This was a pathetic performance by an elected official.

On November 2, 2010, Arizona voters will again have the opportunity to approve medical marijuana (Prop 203). Arizonans have approved medical marijuana at least twice before in my recollection. What makes the 2010 vote different? In 1998, Arizona voters got tired of voting for initiatives and then having the Republican-controlled Legislature not enact the voters' wishes. Consequently, the Voter Protection Act was passed. This forces the Legislature to enact laws approved by the voters. (Watch out for this because Republican legislators are trying to undermine our initiative process.)

Old hippies, stoners, cancer patients, people with chronic pain and other medical conditions improved by marijuana, and other freedom-loving Americans who want less government control of our lives-- mark your calendars. I'll make it easy for you. Here are the election-related deadlines you need to know:

- To vote on November 2, you must register by October 4, 2010. You can register to vote here.
- The first day of early voting and the day that early ballots are mailed is October 7, 2010.
- You can also request to be on the Permanent Early Voting List (PEVL). This means you automatically always get a ballot in the mail. (You can change this at any time; you can also drop the ballot off at a polling place on election day. It's easy, trust me.)
- The last day to request an early ballot is October 22, 2010. Here is a list of early voting sites.
- Election day is November 2, 2010. If you don't know where to vote, check out the Pima County Recorder's website. And, again, thanks to Republicans, you have to take an official government identification with you to the polls.

Also, while you're voting for medical marijuana, vote for Arizona Democrats. Statistics show that most people don't like the way the Republicans are running this state (ie, 2nd in poverty, 50th in education, worst unemployment in 27 years). It is long past time to throw those bums out!

In the future, looks for public forums on zoning for medical marijuana. Counties and cities around Arizona will be trying to control usage, dispensaries, and cultivation. Don't let them undermine your rights!

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.

Have Arizonans finally realized that the wing-nuts in the Legislature are just nuts?

Arizona has been groaning under the stress of Republican leadership for decades, but the last few years of their draconian financial management have been devastating.

This week new research from Arizona State University's Morrison Institute for Public Policy reveals that 68% of Arizona voters disapprove of the way that the Arizona Legislature has been handling the state's finance.

Yippee! Does this mean that Arizonans have finally woken up to just how crazy our legislature is? I sure hope so.

According to a very concise synopsis on the Random Musings blog, "In the poll, 61% of Republicans, 76% of Democrats, 67% of Independents and 68% overall disapproved or strongly disapproved of the job that the Arizona legislature has done with the state's budget."

For the full report, check out this ASU link.

I hope the government-in-a-bathtub people are paying attention.

Republicans and 'illegal' immigrants: Since when has breaking the law been a problem for Republicans?

Migrants from Mexico and Central America have become political footballs this election season (1, 2) -- thanks for the most part to Governor Jan Brewer, Russel "Racial Purity" Pearce, Pearce's baby SB1070, John and Jon (Arizona's Senatorial Do-Nothing Duo), and a herd of Democrats who are trying desperately not to look like progressive cream puffs.

Despite all of the right-wing rhetoric about border violence, the statistics show that the border situation is improving (crime down, crossings down). Yes, gang violence in Mexico-- due to the drug trade and poverty-- is up, but migrant workers aren't the cause of that violence. They are victims-- even more than we are.

Arizona's right-wingers pontificate about migrants breaking our laws! by crossing the border illegally! Given the bevy of crooks and liars-- literally-- that the Arizona Republican Party has put forth as candidates this election season, I'm surprised that breaking the law is a problem.

Check out these links for Andrew Thomas, Tom Horne, Jan Brewer, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and Steve May for current examples of Republican corruption and Ev Mecham and J. Fife Symington III for historical reference.)

Some people shrug this off as the wild west, but personally, I'm shocked by this widespread corruption in Arizona's Republican Party. I'm also shocked that the Arizona electorate is duped into voting for these crooks and liars.

Who writes Tucson's real estate development contracts? Cuz I don't think they know what they are doing (Part 2)

This downtown development saga begins back in December 2008, but it keeps on... well...developing...

The Cliff Notes version is that the City of Tucson was going to swap land for development services to be completed by Scott Stiteler (and his various other partners who have come and gone in the past year and a half).

The Tucson Citizen (December 17, 2008) made a rosy announcement of the downtown "predevelopment plans" and the land/cash swaps.

Later in the Spring of 2009, the Tucson Weekly (April 9, 2009) published an extensive article on multiple downtown deals.

Quoting from the Weekly:
"The concept is the city has no money," explains Jaret Barr, of the city manager's office. "What if the DTDC [Downtown Tucson Development Company, Stiteler's business] could do the work, and our compensation (to the DTDC) would be properties?"

Under the terms of the predevelopment agreement, the developers would be given options to acquire numerous parcels of valuable property for $1 each. This land was to be transferred when the DTDC finished specific tasks.

This is not a new idea. Cash-strapped municipalities have used this redevelopment tactic for many years: Give a developer some vacant land (or sell it for a token amount of money) and allow the developer to build on it, in a specified way. In the end, everyone is happy, theoretically. The developer owns a money-making property, and the city benefits from sales taxes and the value of having gleaming new construction where there once was a blighted property or a vacant lot.

During the spring of last year, several trial balloons were floated regarding which properties would be traded to Stiteler in exchange for his services. At one point, he was asking for the the Historic Train Depot and the Congress Street frontage of Ronstadt Center (which would have made it unusable as a bus station). This is when I started to pay attention. As I mentioned, these land-for-services swaps are common, but generally the municipality doesn't trade property that the city has spent millions developing. (In fact, last spring I even wrote letters to all of the City Council members asking, "The Ronstadt Center? The Train Depot? Really? What are you thinking???")

To add to the ongoing drama downtown last spring, there were two other city government/development stories also brewing in the local media. In April, the City Council fired Tucson City Manager Mike Hein. Was Hein scapegoated because of the city's problems and Rio Nuevo's ... well... sluggish progress? I don't know, but for a variety of opinions on this high-profile political action, check out these links 1,2,3,4, 5.

And, of course, who could forget the landlord-tenant food fight that sprang up between Stiteler and the the Rialto Theater Foundation, reported in the Weekly in late May 2009. The Rialto eventually lost this battle. (Note to self: never fight publicly with your landlord.)

On June 11, 2009, the Tucson Weekly reported that the Train Depot had been removed from the land swap, but the specific deal between Stiteler and the city seemed to be evolving-- just days before the June 16 deadline for a City Council decision. Furthermore, the Weekly reported that "the city could owe Stiteler and Martin [one of his partners] more than $900,000 if the document isn't ratified by June 16, due to language that was included in an earlier agreement."

Why did the city apparently sign a contract that had a deadline for their decision but not a deadline for submission of the plan? In the June 11 story, the Weekly reported several different possible multi-million-dollar scenarios-- just days before the final decision was to be made. In fact, Stiteler delivered the final plan to the City Council on the Friday before the Tuesday City Council meeting. Three days over a weekend was obviously not enough time for them to make an informed decision.

Ultimately, the City Council did what they do best; they delayed making a decision. This-- among many other Rio Nuevo snafus-- caused City Councilwoman Nina Trasoff to lose her City Council seat to Republican Steve Kozachik in the November 2009 election and gave Councilwoman Karin Ulich a very tight race. In October 2009, the Tucson Choices blog published a series of "Player Reports" with tidbits of information on several downtown deals.

Now let's fast forward to this summer 2010.

Remember the fee that the city "could owe" Stiteler? Well, the city did owe him a settlement because the 2009 deal fell through. On June 17, 2010 (a year and a day after the historic non-decision) the Tucson Weekly reported the city's settlement with Stiteler.

But, wait, there's more!

In the past year, the Arizona Legislature and Governor Jan Brewer created the Rio Nuevo Multipurpose Facilities District Board to oversee future development in downtown and to manage the Rio Nuevo funds.

On June 18, 2010 Inside Tucson Business reported that the Rio Nuevo Board (now in charge of spending the Rio Nuevo funds) doesn't approve of the city's lawsuit settlement with Stiteler. According the Inside Tucson Business, the Stiteler settlement includes a shared asset-- parking spaces in a downtown parking garage-- and the City Council didn't clear the deal with the Rio Nuevo Board. Sigh.

Again, I ask, "Who writes Tucson's real estate development contracts?"

I was going to write this, but Arianna Huffington beat me to it

Remember all of the right-wing blather about the Constitution last winter when President Obama was trying to push health care reform through the Congress?

Blah, blah, blah, we have to stick to the Constitution! The Constitution doesn't say the federal government should provide universal health care, so we shouldn't do it!

"It's not in the Constitution!" was used repeatedly as an excuse to do nothing to solve the country's multiple problems. Republicans proudly wore the badge of "Constitutional Conservative"-- until Arizona's chief wing nut Russel "Father-of-SB1070" Pearce came up with another popular white supremacist idea-- anchor babies.

What's a Constitutional Conservative-- a defender of the Constitution's purity-- to do?

The Constitution clearly says that any baby born in the US is a US citizen. There are no qualifications to that statement-- no stipulations about race, ethnicity, religion, parental citizenship-- or exclusion for mixed race Hawaiians born in the early 1960s. For a humorous look at the Congressional debate that took place when the 14th Amendment was passed originally, check out this Daily Show link..."I know it's hard to be tough on babies, but..."

Now that prominent national whities like US Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) have picked up Pearce's anti-anchor baby idea, things are getting progressively scarier, and right-wingers are coming out of the woodwork to speak out against the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

To put all of this Constitutional rhetoric into perspective, the Huffington Post published Republicans Hot, Cold on Constitution last week. The article is full of interesting factoids about politicians using the Constitution-- when it suits them-- and offering changes when it doesn't. According to Huff Post, Republicans have offered 42 amendments to the Constitution in this session, and the Democrats have offered 27.

Both numbers are shockingly large in my opinion, and all of these amendments-- and the anchor baby rhetoric, in particular-- smack of political grandstanding and just plain hogwash.

Our forefathers-- in their infinite wisdom-- made it really difficult to amend the Constitution-- thank God (or our elected officials would have thrown the country into the abyss in the name of ideology long ago.)



Does anyone remember the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)? (I do, and here is a photo of my ERA bracelet-- none of those plastic things for us feminists. We knew we were going to be wearing these ERA bracelets for a long time as we fought for equality for women.) The ERA was an amendment to the Constitution that would have guaranteed equal rights under any federal, state, or local law and would have prohibited discrimination based upon sex. It received the required 2/3 vote of each house of Congress-- a feat that seems miraculous now-- but failed to be ratified by 3/4 of the state legislatures by the 1982 deadline (10 years after it was originally proposed).

The whities who are blabbing about an anchor baby amendment aren't serious. They're using this issue as another wedge to pit races and ethnicities against each other... divide and conquer, and by the way, don't forget to vote for the wise whitie who can save you from the Hottentots and the Mongol hoards. (Sarcasm here, check out the link.)

All I can say is that it is a sad day in America when anyone outside of Mesa listens to Russel Pearce's ideas.

Why SB1070? Because Brewer and Pearce Are Beholdin' to Private Prisons

There are a myriad of reasons why people either support or denounce SB1070, Arizona's harsh anti-illegal immigration bill.

Pro: "America's under attack! The brown people are coming to take our jobs! Stop the border-crossing terrorists and drug dealers."

Con: "This is a racist policy-- and an unfunded mandate-- that could foster racial profiling, discrimination and wrongful imprisonment."

On a recent Rachel Maddow Show, she offers some interesting facts regarding Governor Jan Brewer's and Arizona State Senator Russel Pearce's steadfast support for anti-illegal immigration legislation.

Both Brewer and Pearce have strong ties to the private prison industry-- particularly Corrections Corporation of America, the corporation that holds the contract to hold federal prisoners (including suspected illegal aliens.)

Although Brewer has 2 close aids who have worked with and/or lobbied for the private prison industry, Pearce has even closer ties. Private prison corporations have donated the maximum amount to his campaigns, according to Maddow's research. To repay them, he sponsored legislation to transfer Arizona's entire prison system to private corporations and was the father of SB1070, which would increase prison populations dramatically.

Frankly, they're both opportunistic sleezeballs.

Immigration reform: the rest of the story, part 2

Xenophobia will continue to re-surface in our [state] unless and until government finds long-term solutions to this very serious problem which seems to be a result of some of the poor, the desperate and the unemployed taking matters of government into their own hands.

Given the anti-immigrant fervor sweeping Arizona and the US this quote could have been uttered by a local politician or activist. In actuality, this is a statement by African Christian Democratic Party Gauteng leader Lydia Meshoe as quoted in today's Times Live from Johannesburg, South Africa. The online newspaper goes on to say, "Sixteen people, mostly foreign nationals, were attacked at Kya Sands informal settlement north of Johannesburg in the past few days."

Hmmm... this is not unlike actions of the neo-Nazis vigilantes patrolling Pinal County, is it? (OK, they haven't shot anyone that we know of, but they're armed and ready.) Why are we as a country sliding backward from racial equality and tolerance for "the other"?

I blame extremist politicians and media personalities who twist the facts.. and sometimes just plain lie (1, 2). I'm not going into how irresponsible and destructive Faux News celebrities like Glen Beck, Sarah Palin, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reilly are but instead will focus on Arizona politicians' lies and the related facts.

Arizona's Republican politicians-- particularly those running for office-- have been fanning the flames of xenophobia to further their political careers. Unelected Republican Governor Jan Brewer, septuagenarian Senator John McCain and his senatorial sidekick Joh Kyl, and Arizona Legislator Russel "Father of SB1070" Pearce are four politicians who obviously do not employ fact-checkers.

A few weeks ago, Brewer made headlines when she accused most border crossers of being drug dealers and talked about beheadings in the desert. (For a video, try this link.) Presented with the facts, she tried to mumble her way out of it. Although McCain flip-flops on multiple issues with impunity, recently he and Kyl have been beating the border enforcement and fear drums, along with Right-Wing Anchor Baby Pearce, who has no need for facts in his rhetoric.

So where is the truth? In yesterday's part 1 on The Rest of the Story, I quoted several polls that show most Americans favor comprehensive immigration reform and a path to citizenship. Today, I'll offer some statistics to debunk the lies being told by politicians who hope to capitalize on your fear.

40 people have died in the desert since July 1, 2010. Pima County's Medical Examiner is quoted as saying, this could be "the deadliest month of all time." These people are not ranchers or drug dealers; they are undocumented border crossers-- los desconocidos-- the unknown dead who come to the US everyday for work and a new life. According to the No More Deaths website, 153 have died in the desert since October 1, 2009.

Ironically, although more people are dying in the desert this year, fewer people are crossing the border illegally. According to the Arizona Daily Star, "Apprehensions in the Border Patrol's Tucson Sector have decreased each of the past five years; remittances to Mexico have declined and anecdotal reports show the economic recession has slowed illegal immigration. Yet more people are dying than ever."

Brewer, McCain, and others have blamed undocumented border crossers for beheadings, home invasions, murders, and kidnappings. In actuality, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the violent crime rate in Arizona has been decreasing since it peaked in 1993. (It will be interesting to see if Arizona's violent crime rate increases after the new "Constitutional" Carry law goes into effect next week.)

Again, according to Bureau of Justice Statistics, Tucson ranks 38th in crime-- far behind heartland cities like Columbus, Ohio and Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Many US citizens are heavily armed, and people get shot everyday. As this blogger points out, when someone is shot in DC, no one calls for thousands of troupes to be deployed.

Unfortunately, in US politics, facts don't matter much, and according to a research study reported by National Public Radio (NPR), people don't generally change their minds-- even when presented with facts. Sigh.

Immigration reform: the rest of the story

Repeatedly, news outlets have reported that a majority of US and Arizona citizens support SB1070. More often than not, those reports do not provide the question(s) asked to determine that finding. For example, an early Rasmussen poll asked if people thought it was acceptable for police to ask for identification during a traffic stop. Most people said, "Sure. That's OK," since it is already standard procedure to ask for a drivers' license, registration, and proof of insurance. The problem with SB1070 is that it goes far beyond that (1,2).

An article from yesterday's Daily Kos quotes several other surveys that are not getting the same media attention as the pro-SB1070 polls. For example:

Did you know that most US citizens favor comprehensive immigration reform, including a path to citizenship -- particularly for undocumented workers who have been here for years? The Daily Kos quotes not one but four independent polls that revealed those results. Check the link for full details from these surveys conducted by the Associated Press, CNN, CBS/New York Times, and other reputable sources.

Even though the bill has not become law yet, SB1070 is already creating consequence beyond lawsuits, convention cancellations, protests, pizza boycotts, and the meteoric rise in Governor Jan Brewer's popularity.

We are seeing an increase in aggressive law enforcement by law officers and armed vigilantes. Last week, on the same day that the SB1070 hearing started in the courts, Sheriff Joe Arpaio conducted a desert raid with 100 of his men in the outskirts of Maricopa County. (How much did that cost to round up 11 people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time with brown skin?) In addition, we have civilian neo-Nazis patrolling the desert in Pinal County.

Seriously, folks, do we really want to live in a police state where big white boys with dangerous toys fan out across the desert looking for exhausted border-crossers to shoot? Enough is enough. I don't want to live in a heavily armed, extremist police state. This is what the Republican Legislature has given us with SB1070 and the new gun law SB1108. Both laws go into effect next week.

Send 3-year-olds to school? The French do...

All-day kindergarten was one of the victims of Republican budget cuts this year. Ignoring the scientific research on the benefits (1,2) of early education, right-wingers in the Legislature and the Goldwater Institute said there was no data to prove it. (Ironically, this "no supporting data" argument was ignored when they funded abstinence only education, but that's a story for another time.)

Repeatedly Arizona's short-sighted Legislature has chosen to ignore our most vulnerable citizens by cutting education funding and thus forcing teacher layoffs, larger class sizes, shorter school years, and school closings. Arizona actually spends less per student than it did in 1987.

The crux of the problem is that Arizona's Republican Governor and Legislature see public education as an unnecessary expense-- not an investment in the state's future.

When compared to other states, our rugged individualism has earned us the #50 slot in education funding and the #5 slot in jobs that don't require a high school education. When compared to European countries, Arizona's public education efforts are paltry, at best.

Today, National Public Radio (NPR) aired a story about early childhood education in France, where all 3- and 4-year-olds attend public school.

"Society as a whole [not just students and parents] benefits from this," said one French education official. Early childhood education is "not an expense but an investment."

France's Ecole Maternal -- a nationwide, state-supported preschool-- gives all French children the same start in life-- regardless of income, gender, race or religion. According to the NPR reporter, the French view the Ecole Maternal as a symbol of their Republican Revolution, which toppled the French monarchy and brought equal rights and equal treatment for all citizens (including women).

In the US, preschool is a patchwork, and the determining factor is money. People who can afford it send their children to high-priced preschools (which offer a variety of stimulating experiences), hire in-home nannies, and/or have at least one stay-at-home parent.

Children growing up in middle and lower class homes have limited choices-- low-cost preschools and day cares; preschool scholarships; care by family members or unlicensed baby-sitters; Head Start. For these families, all-day kindergarten helped their children catch up, and now it's gone.

I know that the do-it-for-the-children, pro-education argument falls on deaf ears in the Arizona Legislature, but let's look at this as capitalists. How can the US -- and particularly Arizona-- compete economically inn the global marketplace with an uneducated workforce?

Don't get me wrong. I am not promoting a government requirement that would force parents to send all 3- and 4-year-olds to school. I am advocating for equal opportunities in education -- and life. Arizona needs an attitude adjustment; we need more "liberty, equality, and fraternity" and less "I got mine; screw you."

Arizona voters approved a new sales tax to fund education in May. We need to make sure the Legislature spends these funds wisely.

We're #5 but it's nothing to cheer about

All too often we Arizonans hear that our state is competing for the bottom in many nationwide statistics--particularly in public health and education. For example, Arizona was already ranked #50 in per student educational funding before the latest round of budget cuts in 2010.

This week Georgetown University released a report that ranked Arizona #5 in at least one national statistic-- the percentage of jobs available to people without a high school diploma. According to the report, 14 percent of Arizona's future jobs will not require a high school diploma. According to Projections of Jobs and Education Requirements through 2018, only 61 percent of Arizona's workforce will require a post-secondary education.

This statistic is disappointing but not surprising. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, only 70.7 percent of Arizona's high school freshmen will graduate from high school. This year, Arizona's Republican Governor Jan Brewer and the Republican-controlled state Legislature eliminated the state's GED and adult education programs. These budget cuts eliminated educational lifelines for the state's high school dropouts and adult illiterates.

Is our state's Governor and Legislature-- in their infinite wisdom-- funding our educational system to the appropriate level given that we are a state of maids, busboys, wait staff, and construction workers? On some level, it's convenient to have a high dropout rate and a large number of low-skill jobs.Not that there is anything wrong with those jobs except that you can't make a living on such low wages.

Or, has our state's paltry education funding facilitated our de-evolution and the creation of a low-wage, low-literacy, right-to-work state? Low-wage, low-skill jobs and a poor public education system go hand-in-hand with an uneducated workforce (and a gullible electorate who can be manipulated to vote against their own interests).
Continuing to cut public education won't help Arizona solve it's current economic crisis-- not to mention the long-term harm it will cause to future generations of Arizonans.

US Department of Labor statistics show that education pays. Not only do people with college degrees or advanced degrees earn more money, but they also have significantly lower unemployment rates.

Poor decisions by Arizona's Republican leadership have hurt our economy, crippled our educational system, and now (with the passage of SB1070) destroyed the state's image as an engaging place to visit and a quality place to live and do business.

Referring to the Georgetown study and the state Legislature's decisions, an editorial in today's Arizona Daily Star today stated that "Arizona is on a crash course toward poverty and economic stagnation..." I couldn't agree more.

But where do we go from here?

I urge our more moderate elected officials-- regardless of party affiliation-- to look at budget-balancing alternatives that will help our state grow and prosper. The plans detailed on the Stronger Arizona website were repeatedly suggested to the Republican-controlled leadership but never given consideration in 2010.

I urge moderate voters to band together to oust extremist (and dare I add racist?) ideologues from our state government in the November elections. Many districts are not competitive, thanks to gerrymandering, but Legislative Districts 26 and 30 -- both on the outskirts of Tucson-- are.

Let's take back our state. Extremists have been in control too long.

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.

May Day March gains new momentum after passage of SB1070

Worldwide, May 1 is celebrated as International Workers' Day. Originally, the workers' holiday commemorated the struggle for an eight-hour work day in 1856 and later, marked the anniversary of the Haymarket affair in 1886. The Haymarket affair, also know as the Haymarket massacre, began as a rally in support of striking workers and ended in violence with the deaths of workers and police.

In Tucson, the May Day March not only promotes workers' rights, a living wage, and fair workplace practices but also the rights for other oppressed people, including immigrants.

Immigrant workers--legal and illegal--often work under substandard conditions in the fields, factories, and kitchens of America. It's understandable that their struggle would become part of this demonstration of worker solidarity. After the passage of the anti-illegal immigrant bill SB1070, this year's May Day March will most likely be large and boisterous.

The May Day March will begin Saturday morning at 9 a.m. at El Casino Ballroom and end with a rally at 11 a.m. in Armory Park. For details, check the Derechos Humanos website.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

Anti-immigrant legislation sparks protests and rallies in Phoenix and Tucson

Passage of anti-immigrant legislation SB1070 by Arizona's Republican-controlled Legislature has sparked rallies and protests in Tucson and Phoenix.

On Monday in Phoenix, marchers-- both pro and con-- protested at the capitol. On Tuesday, nine activists were arrested in Phoenix after they changed themselves to the doors of the state capitol and called for Governor Jan Brewer to veto the anti-immigrant legislation. Brewer, who is running for re-election, has not said what she will do with SB1070.

In addition to the protests, multiple news stories, blogs, editorials, and Examiner articles have railed against Arizona for going too far. A facebook page for people against SB1070 also has been launched. You can join here.

Most notably, NY Times editorial writers said, "The Arizona Legislature has just stepped off the deep end of the immigration debate, passing a harsh and mean-spirited bill that would do little to stop illegal immigration."

"This legislation exposes ALL Arizonan's to unnecessary prejudice," says Grijalva, who even called on a boycott of Arizona if Brewer signs the legislation into law. (You'll remember that when Arizona was the only state in the US not to honor Martin Luther King Jr. with a holiday economic pressure was put on the state through boycotts.)

This coming Saturday, April 24, Congressman Raul Grijalva is sponsoring a rally at his Tucson headquarters, 452 S. Stone.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column. Click the link to see the video of protesters chaining themselves to the capitol building.

Is Arizona the Jamaica of the USA?

Even before the current recession and multi-billion-dollar shortfalls in the Arizona budget, this state's funding for education was at or near the bottom, compared with other states in the US. Comparing 1986-87 fiscal year with 2006-07, Arizona actually spent less per student in 2007 than it did in 1987, when the figures are adjusted for inflation. Nationwide, per student funding went up by 35% during that time frame.

Fast forward to fiscal year 2009-10, and we find Republican Governor Jan Brewer and the Republican-controlled Legislature cutting millions of dollars from K-12 and university education. This resulted in larger classrooms and lower pay for teachers. For 2010-11 fiscal year, they're threatening even more cuts to education. Arizona is already competing for dead last in the state rankings for education. How low can we go?

Today, National Public Radio (NPR) aired a story (linked here) comparing schools in Jamaica with those in Barbados. These two countries are similar in location, climate, history, and government structure but very different in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita. This is the measure of all goods and services a country produces divided by its population.

Barbados has a much higher GDP than Jamaica. Consequently, Barbados spends considerably more money on its educational system than Jamaica. What is the result of this discrepancy in funding? To answer this question, the NPR reporter interviewed two school principals--one in Jamaica and the other in Barbados.

In Jamaica, the school system is grossly underfunded. Teachers buy their own supplies, and the system doesn't even have enough high schools for all of the students. Students are required to take a high school entrance exam. Those who do well on the exam are admitted to a traditional high school and have the opportunity to progress to a university. Those who do poorly on the exam are shunted to a non-traditional high school which prepares them for low-wage, non-skilled work. Discouraged, Jamaicans who have been assigned to the non-traditional schools often turn to other means of support to increase their income; this includes the drug trade and other illegal activities, according to NPR. The principal said that if she just had one extra teacher per class to work on reading that it could make all the difference in the students' lives, since 25% of Jamaica's sixth graders can't read.

The Barbados government has a higher GDP and, therefore, more money to invest in education. As a result, Barbados has a modern, fully-funded school system with modern, well-equipped classrooms and plenty of teachers. Every sixth grader in Barbados can read.

As Arizona's Republican-controlled government prepares to cut millions more from the education budget, we must ask ourselves three questions. Is Arizona the Jamaica of the USA? What will be the long-term impact of these short-sighted policies? Who are you going to vote for in the fall?

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

Honk if you can read!

If honks were votes, Arizona would have a strong public education system.

Rush hour motorists honked and cheered for protesters challenging education cuts made by Arizona's Republican governor and Republican-controlled legislature.

More than 100 teachers, parents, children and other activists joined in the March 4 Schools on Thursday, March 4 at the corner of Alvernon Way and Broadway Blvd. in Tucson. This was one of three protests sponsored by the Arizona Education Association in Tucson and one of several protests organized statewide.

Judging by the honks, many Tucsonans support public education and disagree with the Legislature's short-sighted, draconian approach to a balanced budget. Pictures speak louder than words, so check out the slide show below to learn more about today's event.

The rallies across Arizona were part of a national day of protests against cuts in public education. Here is a report from Democracy Now on the nationwide efforts.

This article and the accompanying slide show originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column. Click on the link to see more photos from the event.