Thursday, April 30, 2020

(What) WAS Martha McSally's campaign thinking?

Arizona Republic journalist Yvonne Wingett Sanchez today reports that,

McSally ad features health care testimonial from her former aide, doesn't disclose ties

Sen. Martha McSally has a new campaign ad featuring a cancer survivor who talks about how her “path collided” with McSally, whom she describes as a champion for protecting those with pre-existing medical conditions.
The emotional television ad, which started Thursday, doesn’t disclose that the woman worked for McSally’s congressional office and as a campaign staffer over the years or that in 2014 she helped defend McSally's attackson the Affordable Care Act and roll its coverage protections back. [...]
The one-minute ad is a testimonial intended to blunt a major attack line against McSally by her Democratic opponent Mark Kelly and his allies against her repeated votes as a member of the House of Representatives to undo, tweak or roll back the 2010 health care law implemented by President Barack Obama and Democrats.
McSally voted for the GOP-backed American Health Care Act, which allowed insurers to charge those with pre-existing conditions higher premiums, which the Affordable Care Act prohibited. The AHCA prohibited insurance companies from denying people coverage for having pre-existing conditions. [...]
Wingett Sanchez also gives Ms. Douglas' and Sen. McSally's side of the story. Nevertheless,
Douglas has earned at least $381,000 for her work with McSally in various capacities throughout the years, according to figures tracked by the Federal Election Commission and the website
In 2014, Douglas managed McSally’s House race and helped her champion her position on the Affordable Care Act. At the time, Douglas described the law to The Republic’s fact-check team as “an experiment in social engineering that discourages genuine competition, is funded by mandates, penalties and taxes.”
Republic columnist E.J. Montini today opined,
A spokesman for McSally tried to explain this rather damning omission with a statement that said, “After winning her battle with cancer, Kristen met Martha and was inspired by her message. She eventually decided to work for Martha serving the people of Arizona. ... Kristen has known Martha for over a decade and when she heard the lies being spread across Arizona, she decided to speak up and share her first-hand experience about how Martha has fought for individuals with pre-existing conditions.”
Douglas appears sympathetic and sincere. Genuine.
So, why not say she worked for McSally in the ad?
Why not admit she was paid a LOT of money for her work?
You know why?
So did McSally.
The Arizona Eagletarian now opines,

As genuine and sincere as Ms. Douglas no doubt is, what does this situation do to obviate the trouble Martha got herself into when she voted to acquit the Orange Menace on the two impeachment charges? Not to mention her extremely inappropriate response to CNN journalist Manu Raju to questions about seeking additional testimony.

The Tucson Sentinel posted Martha's statement about her acquittal votes as an op-ed. In it she states,
Our Founding Fathers were clear that impeachment and conviction of a president is an extreme action of last resort, to be used for only the gravest offenses.
What could be a more grave offense than abuse of the authority of his office?
The president is not perfect, and the way he evidently attempted to address his legitimate concerns about corruption involving the Bidens was inappropriate. Even if all the House Democrats allege is accurate, even if John Bolton supports their allegations in his book, even if other negative information comes out in the future, this does not rise to anywhere near the level of throwing the president out of office or off the ballot for the first time in American history.
Bullshit, Martha.

It's only been three months and Martha's hoping nobody remembers her brazen obfuscation, rationalization and minimization to pull the wool over voters' eyes.

If for no other reason, so obviously failing to stand up for the integrity and dignity that should reside in the Office of the President, Martha McSally must be turned out of office.

Tuesday, April 28, 2020

To Be (Open) or NOT to Be, That IS a question

One veteran Arizona state lawmaker now seeking election to the Arizona House of Representatives has called on Gov. Ducey to open up our state's economy again, according to a press release published in a story by (disgraced) former lawmaker David Stringer.

Judy Burges (R-LD1) said, in her release,
While we have struggled with the recent virus, the economic struggle coming may prove to be far worse! The data does not confirm nor warrant five Arizona counties remaining quarantined and not open for business. It’s time to get our economy moving again, and families back to work. Governor Ducey…your stated cure of keeping people under “house arrest” is not justified. In point of fact your response and cure is worse than the virus itself. Arizona citizens are fully capable of making mature decisions as to their safety and well-being. Our founders knew fully well that surrendering freedoms in lieu of safety should never be an option. My fellow Arizonans now fear that their government has overstepped the sacred duty to serve and protect.
Governor Ducey, time is of the essence…open our Great State of Arizona for business!
Burges did NOT specify what data she was using to jump to that spurious conclusion. Nor did she give any examples of what might be worse than dying from Covid19 or losing family or friends to it.

Additionally, use of "house arrest," was clearly intended to inflame and distract. Instead, her audience should be asking crucial questions that could give them information so that they can reduce the risk of severe respiratory illness or worse. Isn't that what capable citizens would do if they wanted to make mature decisions? 

I wonder if families who will end up losing loved ones to Covid19 might regret delegating their responsibility to Judy Burges for figuring out how to keep their families safe and healthy?

Not to mention that Burges' allusion to Ben Franklin's admonition (context here) about safety verses freedom. When he said it, Franklin wasn't thinking at all about viral respiratory pandemics. Instead, he posed the dichotomy to his contemporaries about a tax dispute so that the new nation could pay for the army it needed to fight Britain.

But I digress.

According to the Yellow Sheet Report (April 27),
One of the authors of a model the Dept of Health Services relies on said Arizona is “absolutely not” ready to start reopening on May 1.
According to the model, which was developed by Arizona State University and the University of Arizona and released publicly by DHS last week, Arizona can expect anywhere between 200 and 4000 deaths from COVID-19 between April 8 and July 31, – a huge range that depends on which restrictions remain in place and how closely the public follows them.
Tim Lant, an ASU mathematical epidemiologist who’s leading the modeling team, said while it shows a lot, there’s much more it doesn’t. “It doesn’t tell us what to do,” Lant said. “It doesn’t answer questions like is there an acceptable amount of deaths, it doesn’t really say anything about vulnerable populations… specific businesses that we should prioritize in opening first… or compliance in policies and directives from the government.”
The model is one of a handful DHS Director Cara Christ said the state relies on to make decisions.
From the AZDHS director's blog (April 22) ,
Last week, our federal partners from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR), and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) shared the modeling they had built for Arizona based on projection formulas developed by the Johns Hopkins University. This federal model takes into account the current data from the state as well as the mitigation strategies Arizona has put into place. While we are still pending approval from our federal partners to publicly share this data, this model is updated regularly and is the tool the federal government is using when determining resource allocations on a national level. This model predicts our peak resource utilization to occur around June 11, assuming our mitigation strategies are lifted at the end of the current Stay Home, Stay Healthy, Stay Connected order on April 30th. Given that our goal was to reduce transmission of COVID-19, if this model holds true, this later peak would reflect the success of those mitigation strategies. Its projections, even with the mitigation strategies lifted, predict that our current resources, including inpatient beds, ICU beds, and ventilators, will meet a healthcare surge due to COVID-19. This model appears the most realistic and the predictions are reassuring.
In other words, even IF Ducey opens up Arizona's economy this week, there will STILL be increasing need for medical resources and there will STILL be an increased number of deaths in Arizona as a result of the pandemic.

Again, from the Yellow Sheet Report,
The model was originally developed to estimate resource needs and disease transmission rates, but Lant’s team ran into problems with insufficient testing data and answering the question of when the state could safely reopen became more important. Lant said he and the team also have to deal with a rabbit hole of clarifications, like the degree of the reopening, the trade offs of reopening, and what the meaning of “safe” is. But one thing is clear – if Arizona were to start a phased opening May 1, Lant said, according to the model, it wouldn’t be safe. “Absolutely not,” Lant said. While the state hasn’t asked Lant to use his model specifically to answer the question of whether it would be safe to reopen, Lant has done it himself and plans to share it with the state and fellow modelers. “I have looked at those results and the answer is no, it’s not safe to reopen,” Lant said.
News media in Arizona seems to be suggesting that Ducey's under pressure to immediately re-open the state's economy. Yet, despite the ostentatious protesting by people who clearly have no understanding of the risk or of the history of pandemics, the governor seems to be aware of the need to do the right thing -- to protect actual lives.

Sunday, April 26, 2020

It will be a LONG time before the rest of the world again imagines the US to be great again!

Irish Times
April 25, 2020
By Fintan O’Toole

Donald Trump has destroyed the country he promised to make great again

Over more than two centuries, the United States has stirred a very wide range of feelings in the rest of the world: love and hatred, fear and hope, envy and contempt, awe and anger. But there is one emotion that has never been directed towards the US until now: pity.
However bad things are for most other rich democracies, it is hard not to feel sorry for Americans. Most of them did not vote for Donald Trump in 2016. Yet they are locked down with a malignant narcissist who, instead of protecting his people from Covid-19, has amplified its lethality. The country Trump promised to make great again has never in its history seemed so pitiful.
Will American prestige ever recover from this shameful episode? The US went into the coronavirus crisis with immense advantages: precious weeks of warning about what was coming, the world’s best concentration of medical and scientific expertise, effectively limitless financial resources, a military complex with stunning logistical capacity and most of the world’s leading technology corporations. Yet it managed to make itself the global epicentre of the pandemic.
As the American writer George Packer puts it in the current edition of the Atlantic, “The United States reacted ... like Pakistan or Belarus – like a country with shoddy infrastructure and a dysfunctional government whose leaders were too corrupt or stupid to head off mass suffering.”
It is one thing to be powerless in the face of a natural disaster, quite another to watch vast power being squandered in real time – wilfully, malevolently, vindictively. It is one thing for governments to fail (as, in one degree or another, most governments did), quite another to watch a ruler and his supporters actively spread a deadly virus. Trump, his party and Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News became vectors of the pestilence.
The grotesque spectacle of the president openly inciting people (some of them armed) to take to the streets to oppose the restrictions that save lives is the manifestation of a political death wish. What are supposed to be daily briefings on the crisis, demonstrative of national unity in the face of a shared challenge, have been used by Trump merely to sow confusion and division. They provide a recurring horror show in which all the neuroses that haunt the American subconscious dance naked on live TV.
If the plague is a test, its ruling political nexus ensured that the US would fail it at a terrible cost in human lives. In the process, the idea of the US as the world’s leading nation – an idea that has shaped the past century – has all but evaporated.
Other than the Trump impersonator Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, who is now looking to the US as the exemplar of anything other than what not to do? How many people in Düsseldorf or Dublin are wishing they lived in Detroit or Dallas?
It is hard to remember now but, even in 2017, when Trump took office, the conventional wisdom in the US was that the Republican Party and the broader framework of US political institutions would prevent him from doing too much damage. This was always a delusion, but the pandemic has exposed it in the most savage ways.
Abject surrender
What used to be called mainstream conservatism has not absorbed Trump – he has absorbed it. Almost the entire right-wing half of American politics has surrendered abjectly to him. It has sacrificed on the altar of wanton stupidity the most basic ideas of responsibility, care and even safety.
Thus, even at the very end of March, 15 Republican governors had failed to order people to stay at home or to close non-essential businesses. In Alabama, for example, it was not until April 3rd that governor Kay Ivey finally issued a stay-at-home order.
In Florida, the state with the highest concentration of elderly people with underlying conditions, governor Ron DeSantis, a Trump mini-me, kept the beach resorts open to students travelling from all over the US for spring break parties. Even on April 1st, when he issued restrictions, DeSantis exempted religious services and “recreational activities”.
Georgia governor Brian Kemp, when he finally issued a stay-at-home order on April 1st, explained: “We didn’t know that [the virus can be spread by people without symptoms] until the last 24 hours.”
This is not mere ignorance – it is deliberate and homicidal stupidity. There is, as the demonstrations this week in US cities have shown, plenty of political mileage in denying the reality of the pandemic. It is fuelled by Fox News and far-right internet sites, and it reaps for these politicians millions of dollars in donations, mostly (in an ugly irony) from older people who are most vulnerable to the coronavirus.
It draws on a concoction of conspiracy theories, hatred of science, paranoia about the “deep state” and religious providentialism (God will protect the good folks) that is now very deeply infused in the mindset of the American right.
Trump embodies and enacts this mindset, but he did not invent it. The US response to the coronavirus crisis has been paralysed by a contradiction that the Republicans have inserted into the heart of US democracy. On the one hand, they want to control all the levers of governmental power. On the other they have created a popular base by playing on the notion that government is innately evil and must not be trusted.
The contradiction was made manifest in two of Trump’s statements on the pandemic: on the one hand that he has “total authority”, and on the other that “I don’t take responsibility at all”. Caught between authoritarian and anarchic impulses, he is incapable of coherence.
Fertile ground
But this is not just Donald Trump. The crisis has shown definitively that Trump’s presidency is not an aberration. It has grown on soil long prepared to receive it. The monstrous blossoming of misrule has structure and purpose and strategy behind it.
There are very powerful interests who demand “freedom” in order to do as they like with the environment, society and the economy. They have infused a very large part of American culture with the belief that “freedom” is literally more important than life. My freedom to own assault weapons trumps your right not to get shot at school. Now, my freedom to go to the barber (“I Need a Haircut” read one banner this week in St Paul, Minnesota) trumps your need to avoid infection.
Usually when this kind of outlandish idiocy is displaying itself, there is the comforting thought that, if things were really serious, it would all stop. People would sober up. Instead, a large part of the US has hit the bottle even harder.
And the president, his party and their media allies keep supplying the drinks. There has been no moment of truth, no shock of realisation that the antics have to end. No one of any substance on the US right [Well, no one that remains inside the traditional Republican Party, that is. The Lincoln Project and Republicans for the Rule of Law are working on it, both groups have developed powerful YouTube videos to combat the idiocy. It is important to note that corporate broadcast media in the US has not stepped up to highlight either of those projects] has stepped in to say: get a grip, people are dying here.
That is the mark of how deep the trouble is for the US – it is not just that Trump has treated the crisis merely as a way to feed tribal hatreds but that this behaviour has become normalised. When the freak show is live on TV every evening, and the star is boasting about his ratings, it is not really a freak show any more. For a very large and solid bloc of Americans, it is reality.
And this will get worse before it gets better. Trump has at least eight more months in power. In his inaugural address in 2017, he evoked “American carnage” and promised to make it stop. But now that the real carnage has arrived, he is revelling in it. He is in his element.
As things get worse, he will pump more hatred and falsehood, more death-wish defiance of reason and decency, into the groundwater. If a new administration succeeds him in 2021, it will have to clean up the toxic dump he leaves behind. If he is re-elected, toxicity will have become the lifeblood of American politics.
Either way, it will be a long time before the rest of the world can imagine America being great again.

O'Toole's essay is as good a rundown of the current situation as any I've seen lately. Kudos to him for not closing the door on change in 2021. The Arizona Eagletarian concurs that the American political climate was, for reasons he cites, ripe for a demagogue to claim power and all but destroy the federal government. But American institutions have endured immense challenges before and God willing and the creek don't rise, We the People will see to it again (this year) that the course will be changed on November 3, 2020.

FAIR USE: The Arizona Eagletarian receives NO financial benefit from presentation of this op-ed column from the IRISH TIMES and shares it here exclusively for educational purposes.

Wednesday, April 22, 2020

Rancor in the Ranks of AZ Legislature Republican Caucuses?

Statement from President of the Arizona Senate on the premature plan to adjourn the 2020 regular session Sine Die as of May 1st.

Statement from Senate President Fann on a May 1st return by the Legislature
"Today I was informed by the Speaker of the House that during a lengthy meeting of his Caucus, some of the Members did not want to sine die, ending this year's legislative session on May 1. In the Senate we are continuing discussions with our Members, to determine the best way forward for the Senate and the citizens of Arizona. For now, a May 1st sine die is on hold, until we have heard from all in our Senate Caucus. I want to make sure whatever decision is made is in the best interests of the State of Arizona."
One reason Republican state lawmakers (specifically the majority party, because they don't gaf about anything Democrats want) don't want to adjourn the session is because they have pet legislation they want to pass so they can boast to their district voters. Any bill not passed before the end of the session dies.

Only one (of many) example, David Farnsworth's S1013 passed the Senate, was sent to the House on March 2nd and needs to be heard in the Health and Human Services committee. S1013 would require the Department of Child Safety to report twice each year on children missing (runaway and/or abducted) from the department's custody. 

Last October, the Arizona Republic reported, regarding a brouhaha between the Sen. David Farnsworth from Mesa and Kate Brophy-McGee, who represents LD28 in north Central Phoenix. Brophy-McGee co-chairs the Joint Oversight Committee on the Dept. of Child Safety. 
Farnsworth said he fears children in foster care are being abducted by a worldwide trafficking network and sold into sexual slavery.
"I have no proof of that, but those are my darkest fears," he said. [...]
Brophy McGee told Yellow Sheet she had advised Farnsworth he was meeting with people who were "unbalanced." She recounted having to ask security guards on at least one occasion to help her safely get back to her office.
Well, one can speculate about several possibilities why the Mesa senator would want to see that bill get passed into law, but at minimum, he seems to want to see if his fears are justified.

Nevertheless, IF Sen. Fann's statement today is not disingenuous on the subject of the best interests of the State of Arizona (i.e. the citizen VOTERS), she would have to modify her earlier position about her caucus not being in favor of allowing ALL MAIL elections in August (for the primary) and November (for the general).

If you want to make sure Fann knows how you feel about ensuring that voting this year does not put your life at risk of Covid19 infection, Fann can be reached on Twitter, as can Eddie Farnsworth (chair of Senate Judiciary committee, which would likely have to hear any bill on all mail elections) and Gov. Ducey. If the matter isn't resolved before Sine Die, Gov. Ducey would be able to include it in his call for a special session to enact the state government budget for FY2021 (which begins on July 1, 2020) @FannKfann @FarnsworthEddie and @DougDucey.

Contact Gov Ducey by email to ask him to ensure the legislature takes up the question of allowing each county board of supervisors to authorize ALL MAIL elections this year by going to

Contact Karen Fann by phone 602-926-5874 and email

Contact Eddie Farnsworth by phone 602-926-5735 and email

Monday, April 20, 2020

We are TERRIBLE at listening to warnings of impending disaster

Case in point: Covid19. We were warned years ago AND very recently.
A Washington Post article Friday night [March 20, 2020] reported that the U.S. intelligence community issued multiple classified warnings throughout January and February about the rapid spread of the novel coronavirus from China to other countries, the Chinese government’s initial efforts to play down the severity of the looming crisis and the increasing likelihood it would reach America’s shores. Throughout this time, President Trump continued to play down the threat in public.

Let's not even get started on how it may have been readily apparent during 2016 that if elected, Trump would have become the Orange Menace that he has. Or that beginning January 2017, recognizing that those Trump appointed to be his cabinet ministers would tear down every bit of safety net and environmental protection the people had, by way of Congress, implemented since publication of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring more than half a century ago.

This problem, about likely catastrophic electrical blackouts, is not something any ONE individual alone CAN solve. So, it IS a matter of what it takes to influence LARGE group decision makers. There are two basic groups that can gather the resources to address problems like this. One is corporations/consortia thereof. How do they decide things? The other is government. Theoretically government of, by and for the people. How is THAT working out right now?

But we are NOW in the middle of a catastrophic worldwide pandemic and those who have been charged with 
...establish[ing] Justice, insur[ing] domestic Tranquility, provid[ing] for the common defence, promot[ing] the general Welfare, and secur[ing] the Blessings of Liberty...
...aren't getting the job done. And we cannot rightfully say we haven't been warned about that either.

So, I would hypothesize that not only are we VERY bad at listening to such warnings, we're even worse at looking for and/or understanding the signals smacking us in the face trying to give us clues as to how soon the next disaster will fall upon us.

Now, as to the social safety net and environmental protections, we've been bombarded by distractions and misdirection in mass media that has foundations in and control by Corporations/Big Money. Namely, pervasive advertisements shouting at us in various ways to pay attention. Those interests aren't necessarily "in harmony with" YOUR interests or mine. Unless your financial foundation is in some kind of debt or equity instruments.

I have already suggested that before any of us listen to elected officials calling for premature re-opening of Arizona's or America's economy, we should mandate full and immediate disclosure of the financial details (financial instruments) of each and every one of those officials. Cases in point: Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) and Sen. Kelly Loughler (R-GA).

Given the development of the current pandemic and the political environment in which it arose, perhaps it would be wise to consider how we got conned AND how to prevent ourselves from continuing to be subject to current and future confidence jobs.

From a 2018 essay on 3 Reasons Why You Should Read Classical Literature:
As we near the end of the second decade of the 21st century we’ve developed widespread awareness that our devices have made us shallow thinkers. We’re less cognizant, however, of the effect of the content itself.
Perhaps shallow thinking is one of the keys to whether or how frequently we fall prey to confidence games. Also from the 3 Reasons essay,
In the book The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains (a 2011 Pulitzer Prize finalist for general nonfiction), Nicolas Carr looks at all the research in neuroscience and psychology about what the Internet is doing to our brains and determines that, yes, our ceaseless attempts to skim this glut of information is making us shallow thinkers who are far less capable of deep, focused, intense thought than our parents and grandparents were. 
I am NOT suggesting you or I jettison the Internet from our lives, rather...
You should read the classics in 2019 [2020] to unlearn the shallowness and impatience you are learning in your hyper-accelerated 21st century life.
Maybe those people being tossed about by every wind of doctrine, subject to the whims of the Orange Menace's stochastic terrorism, would be happier if they were able to take this time of sheltering in place to read some classic literature. Of course, to do that, they will still need to be able to pay the bills. That takes us to the financial ramifications of the recent CARES Act, legislation intended to provide individuals/families/small businesses with financial relief due to shutting down the country's economy.

Unfortunately, it provides far more relief to Big Business. Because it did so with ineffective oversight (Congress tried, but the Orange Menace, in a signing statement, signaled he would totally subvert all oversight) money appropriated to provide relief for small businesses has already run out (not even a month after implementation).
One of the great American polemics written in the past hundred years (and a must-read book for anyone who is concerned about the harmful neural effects of the digital age) is Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman.
Postman wrote his masterpiece in 1985. He was concerned that television was turning public discourse into entertainment, and in so doing, was making Americans so shallow and superficial that they were no longer able to engage in the collective action necessary to make democratic republics function. [...]
Not only does classic literature provide the kind of stimulation your mind craves (a craving which is easily exploited by opportunists who know you’re going to click on their link if they make you ragey enough), but it also explores the timeless questions and struggles of what it means to be human.
And when you explore those questions, exercising the deep thought that classic literature demands, you emerge with valuable insights, which makes you better equipped to actually solve problems rather than simply gripe about them. [...]
Moby Dick is about how rage and thirst for vengeance leads to obsession, and obsession leads to destruction.
After you’ve read Moby Dick, if you took the time to truly grapple with it, you’ll start to recognize Ahab whenever he shows up in your own life, whether in the form of your own obsessions, or in the behavior of others. You’ll see how obsession is such a powerful salve, one that allows a person to hide from his own pain and those parts of his life he’s desperate to avoid.
Read Moby Dick and you’ll also understand, on a deep level, how obsession, when mixed with charisma, becomes a dangerous cocktail that draws in other people who form cults that are so hell-bent on meeting the primitive psychological needs of the narcissistic leader that the followers lose themselves to the cause. The destruction of one man becomes the destruction of many.
Does this sound like anyone you know? Does this sound like America, or more specifically, the various factions of American politics and culture right now?
Moby Dick is, of course, just one treasure in a chest full of them that our ancestors have left for us. Classic literature is our greatest inheritance and we are fools not to take it, not to use it. For centuries humans have been writing down their thoughts, and the passage of time has withered away all but the most useful. What’s left for us is time-tested wisdom from the greatest minds that have ever lived. [...]
The result of this is not only that we are becoming shallow and distractable, but also that we are losing the broader context in which we live. As Neil Postman noted, the information age has made the world into one neighborhood, but it’s “a peculiar one, populated by strangers who know nothing but the most superficial facts about each other.” [...]
Reading Moby Dick requires a good 20 hours of dedicated time with one voice who just happens to be one of the smartest, most poetic, most insightful voices America has ever produced.
To read a work of classic literature is to engage with the best work of the best minds, and do it in a way that challenges you to be better, to seek out and appreciate beauty, to ponder the big questions, to follow a line of thought, to concentrate, to transform symbols of language into an image in your imagination, to weigh assertions, to analyze, to exercise your faculties of reason.
To nurture your soul, rather than titillate your amygdala.
And since there is, according to scripture, no new thing under the sun, perhaps reading historical (fiction AND non-fiction) stories, along with classic literature can give us key insight on what to watch and listen for that might enable us to better anticipate impending disaster and how to prepare to head it off, rather than react to find ways to survive once we're face-to-face with it.

Nevertheless, these days, to get the attention of our society's large-group decision-makers, we may also have to raise a ruckus. But unlike the stochastic terrorism the Orange Menace has been stirring up this week, we must turn our rage into constructive political action.

We've seen, heard and read stories recently about heroic service by brave first responders. Notably, nurses and doctors treating people who have suffered severe respiratory distress as a result of infection by COVID19. Some of those medical professionals themselves have gotten sick and some have died.

Because this pandemic was foreseen but our country was not properly prepared, anger over these lost heroes is entirely reasonable.

What we do about it will make all the difference for the future of our children, grandchildren and more future generations.

Politicize those deaths. Eradicate the Orange Menace. Enact regime change on November 3, 2020. And start by working to strengthen the institutions that have built America. If you need ideas, you can start here.

In the meantime, join me in dedicating yourself to learning history and studying classic literature.

Saturday, April 18, 2020

Vote by Mail in Arizona especially this year

Arizona's PPE (no, not personal protection equipment, rather the Presidential Preference Election) took place just over a month ago. It's old news by now, since all of the major candidates challenging former Vice-President Joe Biden suspended their campaigns. That means, obviously, that Biden is the presumptive Democratic Presidential Nominee.

Just before Arizona's PPE, voting by mail became a hot topic because that's when the Covid-19 pandemic became an unavoidable subject of conversation. Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs has called for conducting the August statewide primary and November general elections completely and totally by mail.
A handful of states already operate their elections using a vote-by-mail process. While Arizona Democrats have long pushed to join those states, local election officials and Secretary of State Katie Hobbs are now seeking a temporary change during the coronavirus pandemic.
It comes off like a partisan issue, but there are some Republican election officials who agree that the current crisis is not normal and all-mail ballots are necessary, even if Republican lawmakers don’t feel the same way.
Hobbs, a Democrat, announced one day after the March 17 Democratic Presidential Preference Election that she would seek help from the GOP-controlled Legislature to make the temporary switch.
“We are in unprecedented territory,” Hobbs said. “We don’t know where things are going to be in August and November.”
The Legislature did not respond to Hobbs’ request before recessing on March 23, and it won’t take up the issue when it does return, Senate President Karen Fann said.
My Republican caucus members are not in favor of that,” the Prescott Republican said. “This is more of a partisan issue.”
Conversations leading up to the March election were difficult and stressful, Hobbs said, adding that she does not want election officials, poll workers or voters to put their own health at risk to cast a vote.
“Arizona has a proven track record at being good with mail-in elections,” she said. In Arizona, voters can join the Permanent Early Voting List, or PEVL.
Given the fact that there will not be a proven effective vaccine for this severe respiratory virus anytime during 2020, vote-by-mail makes the most sense from a public health and safety perspective.

Right now, as Maricopa County Recorder Adrian Fontes states in this video, Arizona has a robust Vote by Mail system/procedure. However, currently NOT all registered voters are set up to receive an early ballot and vote this way. His explanation makes sense and is worth the few minutes listening to him here.

But very recently, the subject became much more controversial, spurred on by insane claims spewed by the Orange Menace/federal government presider.
(CNN) During his daily coronavirus briefing on Tuesday, President Donald Trump made very clear that voting by mail -- an alternative many are suggesting to deal with the ongoing stay-at-home directives -- is a very bad thing. And more than that, he suggested, it's deeply corrupt.
"No, mail ballots, they cheat," said Trump. "OK, people cheat. Mail ballots are a very dangerous thing for this country because they are cheaters."
Moments later, a reporter noted that Trump himself had voted absentee -- by mail! -- in the Florida primary last month. (Trump also voted absentee in New York in the 2018 election.) [...]
He echoed that sentiment in a tweet on Wednesday morning -- apparently while watching "Fox & Friends:
"Republicans should fight very hard when it comes to state wide mail-in voting. Democrats are clamoring for it. Tremendous potential for voter fraud, and for whatever reason, doesn't work out well for Republicans. @foxandfriends"
From the Guardian, on March 30:
Donald Trump admitted on Monday that making it easier to vote in America would hurt the Republican party.
The president made the comments as he dismissed a Democratic-led push for reforms such as vote-by-mail, same-day registration and early voting as states seek to safely run elections amid the Covid-19 pandemic. [...]
“The things they had in there were crazy. They had things, levels of voting that if you’d ever agreed to it, you’d never have a Republican elected in this country again,” Trump said during an appearance on Fox & Friends.
So, state Rep. Shawnna Bolick (R-LD20 and wife of AZ Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick), in an op-ed published by the Arizona Republic on April 2nd, followed up on Trump's pronouncement by making false claims to exaggerate and misstate risks of voting by mail. One of the most obvious misstatements was in suggesting county recorders would need to hire and train many more election workers to process mail in votes.

Having been one such worker for the 2019 jurisdictional elections in Maricopa County, and having worked for several cycles at precinct and polling polling locations, I know that claim is absurd on its face. If there are 500 polling locations in Maricopa County in a given election cycle (I don't know the actual number at this time), an all-mail election would indeed mean more workers to process the mail in votes. But not 3,000 of them, as at least 6 workers who would be necessary per polling station then are no longer needed. In 2016, the station I worked had 2,000 voters vote just that election day.

Jeremy Duda's report in the AZ Mirror on April 16 debunked Ms. Bolick's claims.
Officials in states where everyone casts their ballot by mail say Republican claims, like those made by local leaders and even President Donald Trump, that such elections are havens for fraud and stolen elections aren’t true.
Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah and Washington have all-mail elections, meaning every registered voter is mailed a ballot. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, California, Nebraska and North Dakota allow counties to use all-mail elections, while 13 other states, including Arizona, permit some localities to do so.
Arizona elections officials have urged the GOP-controlled legislature to implement a similar system here for the 2020 election to ensure voting rights aren’t limited by the COVID-19 pandemic. [...]
Among the reasons cited by opponents was that all-mail balloting would be rife with fraud. Rep. Shawnna Bolick, R-Phoenix, penned an op-ed in the Arizona Republic warning that all-mail voting would compromise the integrity of elections, and several other GOP lawmakers have used their social media pages to peddle warnings that it would be more vulnerable to fraud.
President Donald Trump has joined that chorus, tweeting, “Mail in ballots substantially increases the risk of crime and VOTER FRAUD!”
States with all-mail balloting haven’t found that to be the case.
U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, in reports dated April 1, said,
“Vote by mail is so important to ... our democracy so that people have access to voting and not be deterred, especially at this time, by the admonition to stay home,” Pelosi told reporters.
Trump told Fox News on Monday that voting by mail would hurt the Republican Party. Pelosi rejected that argument.
“When I was chair of the California Democratic party many years ago, the Republicans always prevailed in the absentee ballots,” she said. “They know how to do this.”
Indeed, some Democrats fear voting by mail could disenfranchise minorities and low-income voters who tend to move more frequently.
Nevertheless, local Arizona Republican elected officials have been taking their cues from Trump.

From Duda's news story (cited above),
Absent the legislature authorizing an all-mail election, Hobbs and Maricopa County Recorder Adrian Fontes, a Democrat, have announced plans to send notifications to every voter urging them to sign up for an early ballot.
I saw a list from Arizona News Service (publishers of the Yellow Sheet Report and Arizona Capitol Times and more) of AZ lawmakers indicating which ones are on PEVL lists and which ones are not. But there are 89 records (and 90 members of the legislature) and a couple of the names are on more than one record. So, I don't feel comfortable posting the entire list at this time. However, notably worthy insight on the subject of this post still can be gleaned from the list.

House Elections committee members include:

Shawnna Bolick (R-LD20) not listed
Frank Carroll (R-LD22) YES
John Fillmore (R-LD16) YES
Jennifer Jermaine (D-LD18) NO
Warren Petersen (R-LD12) YES
Diego Rodriguez (D-LD27) YES
Athena Salman (D-LD26) YES
Raquel Teran (D-LD30) YES
Bob Thorpe (R-LD6) YES
Kelly Townsend (R-LD16) YES

Most (all?) elections related bills in Senate are heard in the Judiciary committee. Those members are:

Sonny Borelli (R-LD5) NO
Lupe Contreras (D-LD19) NO
Andrea Dalessandro (D-LD2) YES
Eddie Farnsworth (R-LD12) NO
Rick Gray (R-LD21) NO
Venden Leach (R-LD11) YES
Martin Quezada (D-LD29) YES

Also noteworthy but not on either of these committees at this time, Sen. Michelle Ugenti-Rita (R-LD23) who previously chaired House Elections. She IS on PEVL.

Three out of four of the Republican members of Senate Judiciary (including the very stubborn Eddie Farnsworth, who controls the committee) do NOT vote by mail. So it's easy to see why, at this stage, getting legislative approval for counties to conduct all-mail elections in August and November would be next to impossible.

From the Yellow Sheet Report (April 15, 2020)
A recent study by Stanford political scientists contradicts one popular claim made by opponents of universal vote-by-mail: that the system disproportionately benefits Democratic candidates...
Trump recently argued Republicans should oppose efforts to institute statewide mail-in voting. “Democrats are clamoring for it. Tremendous potential for voter fraud, and for whatever reason, doesn’t work out well for Republicans,” he tweeted (LINK). 
One might think that by now, GOP elected officials would know better than to just take Trump's word for anything that deals with data. He seems incapable of telling the truth, or perhaps even recognizing facts when they smack him in the face... BUT... it does seem to go without saying that he's primarily interested in suppressing Democratic voter turnout.
The study, published April 14, found that in three states with varying degrees of vote-by-mail implementation, the system “does not appear to affect either party’s share of turnout,” and “does not appear to increase either party’s vote share,” all while moderately increasing turnout at levels in line with previous literature on the subject (LINK). 
The Stanford researchers examined voting-by-mail in three states, combining new data from California and Utah with existing data on the behavior of voters in all-mail elections in Washington State. The authors chose these states since in all three cases, mail voting has been expanded at the county level “in a staggered fashion” – providing the opportunity to compare turnout results with other counties in the same state where vote-by-mail hasn’t been implemented. 
“Each of these three states’ reforms are slightly different, but all share a similar feature: counties adopting the vote-by-mail expansion mailed an absentee ballot to every eligible voter in the county, not just voters who had requested receiving a mailed absentee ballot,” the researchers write. “Voters can mail their completed ballot to their county elections office, or deposit their ballot in secure ballot drop-off locations throughout the county. Alternatively, each of these states’ reforms also replaces traditional polling places with Election Day voting centers throughout the county.”

From the Stanford study cited above:
The COVID-19 pandemic threatens the 2020 U.S. election. Fears that the pandemic could deter many people from voting—or cause them to become infected if they do vote—have spurred calls for major electoral reforms. As election administration experts Nathaniel Persily and Charles Stewart put it:
“The nation must act now to ensure that there will be no doubt, regardless of the spread of infection, that the elections will be conducted on schedule and that they will be free and fair.” Persily and Stewart recommend a nationwide vote-by-mail program to allow Americans to vote from the safety of their own homes, but many question the potential political consequences of such a policy.
President Trump declared that, if it was implemented, “you’d never have a Republican elected in this country again.” On the other hand, Brian Dunn, a former Obama campaigner and founder of a company that works on vote-by-mail programs, says that “There is justified concern that Democratic-leaning voters may be disadvantaged through vote-by-mail systems.” This debate continues in part because, in the academic literature, as Charles Stewart points out, “evidence so far on which party benefits [has] been inconclusive.” [...]
This paper has offered new data to offer the most up-to-date, most credible causal evidence on the effects of vote-by-mail on partisan electoral outcomes and participation. In our data, we confirm important conventional wisdom among election experts: vote-by-mail offers voters considerable convenience, increases turnout rates modestly, but has no discernible effect on party vote shares or the partisan share of the electorate.
I am thankful that Fontes and Hobbs have already put thought into a work around. And I'm confident that voters will be fired up this year to obliterate all obstacles to eradicating the Orange Menace and returning our values of Liberty and Justice for all to the forefront.

Now, if you are an Arizona registered voter and want to ensure you are on your county's PEVL, you can RE-register to vote at (the website reportedly will not be available for the next few days, but should be back up on April 21 or 22). When the question of whether you want to be sent an early ballot comes up, be sure to answer YES.

Thursday, April 16, 2020

But I take NO responsibility... UPDATED April 17, 2020

The following IS a fake tweet, as it would not be within the CURRENT character limit as opposed to what the character limit that twitter had in place in 2009.

However, other than citing former Sen. McCain in a favorable light, this certainly could be Trump's actual voice.

Of course, he is ALWAYS ready with a rationalization, an excuse for why HE couldn't have done better when it was his turn.

Wednesday, April 15, 2020

Are Dems posturing to hold the Center or Abandoning Hope? Revisited

Next week, it will be one year since I re-published Bob Lord's excellent essay on the subject.
At times in recent months, Speaker Pelosi has shined. Her handling of Trump’s shutdown was beyond skillful. So give credit where credit is due.
But what is she thinking when she insists Democrats must “hold the center”?
Now that the Democratic Party has a presumptive nominee in Joe Biden, who has, all along, represented (in the presidential campaign) that "hold the center" thinking, is it time to rethink that sentiment regarding Biden?

In Thomas Paine's essay on the Age of Reason, he begins with this thought,
I PUT the following work under your protection. It contains my opinions upon Religion. You will do me the justice to remember, that I have always strenuously supported the Right of every Man to his own opinion, however different that opinion might be to mine. He who denies to another this right, makes a slave of himself to his present opinion, because he precludes himself the right of changing it.
The most formidable weapon against errors of every kind is Reason. I have never used any other, and I trust I never shall.
Your affectionate friend and fellow-citizen,

I can say, without equivocation, that I have NOT abandoned hope but I have changed my mind over the course of the last year regarding the candidacy of Joe Biden.  And I do not believe that the Democratic Party has lost hope to emerge from under the dark shadow of the Orange Menace.

Earlier today, I posted video of Elizabeth Warren's endorsement of the former Vice-President. There is no way I could say it with more eloquence or grace than she did.

For that matter, by the way, THUS SAITH Bernie!

Today, Joe Biden represents the most hopeful outcome of and for the American people in the 2020 general election.

A Most Enthusiastic and Eloquent Endorsement of Joe Biden for President 2020

In a video posted to Twitter, Warren called Biden a “selfless public servant” who will lead “a government that works for the American people.”

“He is committed to the fight for social, racial and economic justice,” she said. “Now it’s up to all of us to help make Joe Biden the next president of the United States.”

NOW is the time for us to Rise UP! with One VOICE to eradicate the Orange Menace in DC.

Tuesday, April 14, 2020

On this Eve of Traditional Tax Day

On this Eve of the traditional Tax Day, here are a few (hopefully pertinent) thoughts from Revolutionary pamphleteer Thomas Paine.

To understand the nature and quantity of government proper for man, it is necessary to attend to his character. As Nature created him for social life, she fitted him for the station she intended. In all cases she made his natural wants greater than his individual powers. No one man [or woman] is capable, without the aid of society, of supplying his [her] own wants, and those wants, acting upon every individual, impel the whole of them into society, as naturally as gravitation acts to a centre.  --  Rights of Man: Part the Second (1792)

Government and the people do not in America constitute distinct bodies. They are one, and their interest the same. Members of Congress, members of Assembly, or Council, or by any other name they may be called, are only a selected part of the people. They are the representatives of Majesty, but not majesty itself. That dignity exists inherently in the universal multitude, and, though it may be delegated, cannot be alienated. Their estates and property are subject to the same taxation with those they represent, and there's nothing they can do, that will not equally affect themselves as well as others. -- The Necessity of Taxation (1782)

That civil government is necessary, all civilized nations will agree; but civil government is republican government. -- Rights of Man: Part the First (1791)

It has always been the political craft of courtiers and court-governments, to abuse something which they called republicanism; but what republicanism was, or is, they never attempt to explain. let us examine a little into this case.
The only forms of government are the democratical, the aristocratical, the monarchical, and what is now called the representative.
What is called a republic is not any particular form of government. It is wholly characteristical of the purport, matter or object for which government ought to be instituted, and on which it is to be employed, RES-PUBLICA, the public affairs, or the public good; or, literally translated, the public thing. It is a word of a good origin, referring to what ought to be the character and business of government; and in this sense it is naturally opposed to the word monarchy, which has a base original signification. It means arbitrary power in an individual person; in the exercise of which, himself, and not the res-publica, is the object.
Every government that does not act on the principle of a Republic, or in other words, that does not make the res-publica its whole and sole object, is not a good government. Republican government is no other than government established and conducted for the interest of the public, as well individually as collectively. It is not necessarily connected with any particular form, but it most naturally associates with the representative form, as being best calculated to secure the end for which a nation is at the expense of supporting it. -- Rights of Man: Part the Second (1792)
Keep these things in mind when electing your policy/law makers this year.

It is also most abundantly clear to me that the contrast between the incumbent presider of the federal government and the presumptive 2020 Democratic nominee is as stark as any has ever been in the history of America. Well, at least in my lifetime. And Bernie should dispel all doubt about where he stands on the subject of electing Joe Biden the next presider.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Tuesday that it would be “irresponsible” for his strongest supporters not to get behind former Vice President Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential race.
In an interview with The Associated Press, Sanders warned that progressives who “sit on their hands” in the months ahead of the November vote would just be enabling President Donald Trump’s reelection.
“Do we be as active as we can in electing Joe Biden and doing everything we can to move Joe and his campaign in a more progressive direction?” Sanders asked. “Or do we choose to sit it out and allow the most dangerous president in modern American history get reelected?”

NOTE: due to the COVID-19 crisis, the filing deadline has been changed this year to July 15, 2020

Monday, April 13, 2020

1776 Common Sense parallels common sense in 2020

And when a man seriously reflects on the idolatrous homage which is paid to the persons of Kings, he need not wonder, that the Almighty, ever jealous of his honor, should disapprove of a form of government [Fascism] which so impiously invades the prerogative of heaven. -- Thomas Paine, Common Sense (1776)

Twitter users LOVE CNN chyron's cheeky Trump captions



fash-iz-uh m ]


(sometimes initial capital lettera governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
(sometimes initial capital letterthe philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism.
(initial capital lettera political movement that employs the principles and methods of fascism, especially the one established by Mussolini in Italy 1922–43.

Saturday, April 11, 2020

Why I NEVER watch the Orange Menace's daily coronavirus briefings

Tom Nichols posted this column at The Atlantic this morning. He is more eloquent than I, but he captured my sentiments exactly. And this is why I cannot subject myself to any of Trump's incessant bullshit.

With Each Briefing, Trump Is Making Us Worse People
He is draining the last reserves of decency among us at a time when we need it most.
There has never been an American president as spiritually impoverished as Donald Trump. And his spiritual poverty, like an overdrawn checking account that keeps imposing new penalties on a customer already in difficult straits, is draining the last reserves of decency among us at a time when we need it most.
I do not mean that Trump is the least religious among our presidents, though I have no doubt that he is; as the scholar Stephen Knott pointed out, Trump has shown “a complete lack of religious sensibility” unique among American presidents. (Just recently he wished Americans a “Happy Good Friday,” which suggests that he is unaware of the meaning of that day.) Nor do I mean that Trump is the least-moral president we’ve ever had, although again, I am certain that he is. John F. Kennedy was, in theory, a practicing Catholic, but he swam in a pool of barely concealed adultery in the White House. Richard Nixon was a Quaker, but one who attempted to subvert the Constitution. Andrew Johnson showed up pig-drunk to his inauguration. Trump’s manifest and immense moral failures—and the shameless pride he takes in them—make these men seem like amateurs by comparison.
And finally, I do not mean that Trump is the most unstable person ever to occupy the Oval Office, although he is almost certain to win that honor as well. As Peter Wehner has eloquently put it, Trump has an utterly disordered personality. Psychiatrists can’t help but diagnose Trump, even if it’s in defiance of the old Goldwater Rule against such practices. I know mental-health professionals who agree with George Conway and others that Trump is a malignant narcissist.
What I mean instead is that Trump is a spiritual black hole. He has no ability to transcend himself by so much as an emotional nanometer. Even narcissists, we are told by psychologists, have the occasional dark night of the soul. They can recognize how they are perceived by others, and they will at least pretend to seek forgiveness and show contrition as a way of gaining the affection they need. They are capable of infrequent moments of reflection, even if only to adjust strategies for survival.
Trump’s spiritual poverty is beyond all this. He represents the ultimate triumph of a materialist mindset. He has no ability to understand anything that is not an immediate tactile or visual experience, no sense of continuity with other human beings, and no imperatives more important than soothing the barrage of signals emanating from his constantly panicked and confused autonomic system.
The humorist Alexandra Petri once likened Trump to a goldfish, a purely reactive animal lost in a “pastless, futureless, contextless void.” This is an apt comparison, with one major flaw: Goldfish are not malevolent, and do not corrode the will and decency of those who gaze on them.
In his daily coronavirus briefings, Trump lumbers to the podium and pulls us into his world: detached from reality, unable to feel any emotions but anger and paranoia. Each time we watch, Trump’s spiritual poverty increases our own, because for the duration of these performances, we are forced to live in the same agitated, immediate state that envelops him. (This also happens during Trump’s soul-destroying rallies, but at least those are directed toward his fans, not an entire nation in peril.)
Most leaders would at least have the sense not to relitigate every vendetta in their personal Burn Book at such moments. That’s what rallies and sycophantic interviews with Fox News are for, after all. Indeed, polls now suggest that even the president’s base might be tiring of this exhibitionism. But that is irrelevant to Trump. With cable news constantly covering the pandemic, he seems to be going through withdrawal. He needs an outlet for his political glossolalia, or his constantly replenishing reservoir of grievance and insecurity will burst its seams.
Even Trump’s staff—itself a collection of morally compromised enablers—cannot cajole him or train him to sound like a normal human being. Trump begins every one of these disastrous briefings by hypnotically reading high-minded phrases to which he shows no connection. These texts are exercises in futility, but they at least show some sense of what a typical person with friends and a family might want to sound like during a national crisis. Once he finishes stumbling through these robotic recitations, he’s back to his grievances.
Each of these presidential therapy sessions corrodes us until the moment when the president finally shambles away in a fog of muttered slogans and paranoid sentence fragments. In a time of crisis, we should be finding what is best in ourselves. Trump, instead, invites us to join a daily ritual, to hear lines from a scared and mean little boy’s heroic play-acting about how he bravely defeated the enemies and scapegoats who told him to do things that would hurt us. He insists that he has never been wrong and that he isn’t responsible for anything ever.
Daily, Trump’s opponents are enraged by yet another assault on the truth and basic human decency. His followers are delighted by yet more vulgar attacks on the media and the Democrats. And all of us, angry or pleased, become more like Trump, because just like the president, we end up thinking about only Trump, instead of our families, our fellow citizens, our health-care workers, or the future of our country. We are all forced to take sides every day, and those two sides are always “Trump” and “everyone else.”
Perhaps to call this daily abomination “therapy” is unfair, because therapy has a healing goal. As Jennifer Melfi, the psychotherapist for HBO’s fictional mob boss Tony Soprano, realized at the end of the series, when she finally threw him out of her office, counseling someone incapable of reflection or remorse is pointless; it makes the counselor into a worse person for enduring such long exposure to the patient.
Likewise, Trump’s spiritual poverty is making all of us into worse people. We are all living with him in the moment and neglecting the thing that makes us human beings instead of mindless fish swimming in circles. We must recover this in ourselves, and become more decent, more reflective, and more stoic—before Trump sends us into a hole from which we might never emerge.

Friday, April 10, 2020

AZ Corporation Commission candidates need $5 Clean Elections Contributions -- Please Help

Three of the five seats on the Arizona Corporation Commission are up for election this year.

Coincidentally (or not), there are three Democratic candidates who have qualified for the Primary election ballot. Each are running as Clean Elections candidates. That means they will not be accepting donations from Arizona Public ServicePinnacle West Capital Corp or any other Big Money corporation attempting to co-opt YOUR voice in protecting ratepayers in our state.

Please support these candidates by making a $5 qualifying contribution on the E-Qual system.

Each of these candidates needs to collect 1,500 contributions in order to qualify for this funding.

Bill Mundell
Bill grew up in Arizona and graduated from ASU with a bachelor’s degree in Political Science. He then graduated from law school from St. Mary's University. Bill has a long history of public service in Arizona. After fighting police and judicial corruption in Chandler, Bill was appointed at age 27, Presiding Judge of the Chandler Municipal Court, where he served for six years. Bill served in the Arizona House of Representatives for six years and was Chair of the Environment Committee. During his tenure, Bill wrote numerous laws protecting Arizona's environment, including a historic law preventing Arizona from becoming the nation’s dumping ground for hazardous waste, the state’s first recycling law, laws protecting our native plants, rivers, and the Phoenix Mountain Preserves. Bill served as a Commissioner on the Corporation Commission for nine years (1999 to 2009). When he was Chair, Arizona was one of the first states to require its utilities generate a percentage of their electricity from renewable sources, solar and wind. In 2006, he co-authored the current renewable energy requirement in Arizona: The REST Rules. They substantially increased the required renewable energy percentage and at the time, made Arizona a leader in the installation of rooftop solar.
Shea Stanfield
The Arizona Corporation Commission's Mission, quite simply, is to power Arizona's future. This means oversight of utility services, growing Arizona's economy through attracting and encouraging new business, and protecting Arizona citizens in enforcing an ethical securities marketplace. The "Mission" also states the Commission is to modernize an efficient, effective, and responsive government agency. I am running for a seat on the Arizona Corporation Commission because we must be more responsive in attracting, encouraging, and growing sustainable resources for Arizona's clean energy future. Commissioners are responsible for making policy, sitting in judgment, and advocating on behalf of Arizona citizens. I have been a resident of Arizona since 1957 and come to this position having served two terms on the Cave Creek Town Council, a term on the Town's Board of Adjustment, many years as a board member and environmental activist, a teacher in our public schools, and the mother of two sons. It is obvious Arizona is increasingly falling behind in implementing clean, sustainable, and renewable energy sources. It's time to take the lead, set our environmental priorities, and elect individuals who will vigorously pursue sustainable outcomes and resources for Arizona's citizens.
Anna Tovar
Anna Tovar and her husband have been married for over 20 years and have two wonderful sons. She is a proud Arizona native and has served her community as a teacher, mentor and elected official. Anna was a schoolteacher for five years, served on the Tolleson City Council for over seven years, and was Vice Mayor for two years until she was elected to the Arizona House of Representatives. In 2013, she won election to the State Senate. As a State Legislator, Anna earned a reputation as a leader who fought for the dignity of all people. In 2011, she championed the effort to restore funding for nearly 100 patients on the transplant list, saving many lives. In 2016, Anna was the first woman elected to be Tolleson’s Mayor where she continued delivering results to make people’s lives better. The one question Anna always asked herself before making any decision is this: will it be good for my residents and the long-term future of our community? The answer to that question is why she is now running for the Arizona Corporation Commission - to restore transparency and integrity to the Corporation Commission.
Please join me in supporting these three highly qualified public servants as they seek election to this very important position.