Rum, Romanism and Rebellion

Governor Janet Napolitano should sit in her office all day and anonymously sign paperwork.

So says former State Senator John Greene, who this week filed a complaint about Napolitano’s activities with the office of Attorney General Terry Goddard. No word on Goddard’s reaction when it crossed his desk, but I’m guessing it was somewhere between indifference and a smirk.

Greene’s beef is that Napolitano’s name and face has been appearing on billboards promoting tourism. Despite this being common practice in every state of the union, Greene feels that it is unprecedented and unfair.

Boo hoo.

Greene’s frustration comes from a couple of different places. The biggest one is this: the Republicans have not had to run against an incumbent Democratic governor since 1982 (In that year, Bruce Babbitt pulverized Leo Corbett). The talk in Republican circles (as well as among some Democrats, you know who you are!) was that Napolitano was a one term fluke who would be easily beaten by any Republican, maybe even Joe Sweeney.

What was never considered was the power of an incumbent executive. Even one that whose policies are widely unpopular can be difficult to beat, ask Sen. John Kerry about this one. Or, you can ask Mayor Paul Johnson, who ran against an ineffectual and boring Gov. Jane Hull in 1998 and got his hat handed to him. Or, ask Regent Eddie Basha, who was personally very popular but got beaten by the thoroughly disliked Gov. Fife Symington back in 1994. Unless you really mess up, or are running against a really spectacular candidate, people are generally willing to let you finish the job you were elected to do. The last incumbent to lose was Gov. Sam Goddard back in 1966. This means that in my lifetime, no governor has been defeated, but one resigned, one died, one was impeached, and one was convicted of a felony. If you’d like to over-interpret that data, a governor stands a better chance of being appointed ambassador to Argentina or impeached for misuse of goverment funds than losing an election.

The other thing that is happening here is the Republicans are having to face the unpopularity of their policies. Despite any evidence to the contrary, they have convinced themselves that the vast majority of Arizonans share even the most retrograde parts of their agenda and share their opinion that Napolitano is some sort of Trotskyite knee-jerk extremist. The legislative leadership has gone toe to toe with Napolitano and has expected the populace to rise to their side. Instead, their issues have been met with either indifference or hostility from regular citizens. They have been shocked by this, but it is only natural, since most of them get elected from such gerrymandered districts, they never have to talk to anyone but the most conservative voters. To run for governor, their candidate actually has to talk to other sorts of voters.

It is useful to point out that Rep. J. D. Hayworth and others who have bowed out of the race did so long before Napolitano’s four foot tall face was touting the joys of riding the rapids in the Grand Canyon. They did this because polling data showed that the polularity of Napolitano’s actions made a race Quixotic. This why they are left with the largely unknown Greene and the dull Don Goldwater. Maybe they ought to be looking at the sort of agenda their state leaders have been following and ask if this is really good policy and good politics.

***

Some notes on this that really didn’t fit in above:

I saw no complaints from the Republican side when Maricopa County Attorney Rick Romley was sending county-funded mailings to Sierra Vista (in Cochise County!) touting the accomplishments of his office. This was back when he was talking about running for governor. I also saw no complaints about Seceretary of State Jan Brewer using Help Amerca Vote Act money (money that is supposed to be used to, um, help people vote) to send out postcards with her name and face on them. But, I guess that’s okay since they are Republicans.

I also remember a while back that Pima County Supervisor Paul Marsh was angry when Sheriff Clarence Dupnik started a major anti-gang initiative. Marsh said that it was only for reelection. Dupnik was years away from what, as usual, would be an easy re-election. Marsh was angry at Dupnik because Dupnik was doing his job. Imagine that. By the way, Marsh lost his next primary, Dupnik is still around.

Tucson Weekly reporter Jim Nintzel talked a bit about Greene’s complaint on Arizona Illustrated. He was dismissive, but wondered what anti-billboard activist Mark Mayer* would say about Napolitano’s use of billboards. Meyer will probably call me about it, so I’ll keep you all informed.

*I originally spelled Mayer’s name incorrectly, and I was hapilly corrected my a member of our legislature. R³ regrets the error.