Friday, February 3rd, 2006...7:40 am
Post-Mortem Equine Flagelation
Slim claimed when I last wrote about David Burnell Smith that he no longer wanted me to write about him. Yes, Slim, but you read the entry and responded to it. This must mean you were interested. Otherwise, you would have just scrolled through it looking for your name the way my brother does.
Besides, you are far more of a clean elections maven than I am.
Supporters of Smith were hoping that Smith’s name could be forwarded to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, and they could get him re-appointed. Appointments since the new law have been to replace people who have voluntarilly resigned their office, so this would have been an interesting legal test. However, I don’t believe that the Board would have appointed him in any case.
Nevertheless, Smith tried to get on “the list,” the three nominees that get forwarded to the board. Smith was, however, unable to get on the list. I guess even Republican activists weren’t buying his story. Maybe if he was a legislator that showed up, or did something, he might have had a little more support.
As a fellow loser in this process, I feel for you man. Of course, I didn’t get thrown out of office.
The names they forwarded were Nancy Barto, Howard Levine and Howard Sprague.
Howard Sprague?
Is this the same perennial candidate Howard Sprague that ran for congress, legislature and even president? As a Democrat?
I have my doubts that had the committeepeople known his checkered past they would have voted him in. Activists tend not to trust party switchers in these cases. It’s what doomed Peter Hormel’s attempt to get appointed a few years ago.
I ran a presidential caucus back in 1992, when Sprague made his astonishing, and nedless to say futile, run at the world’s most powerful office. A voter walks up to me, ballot in hand.
“Who is Howard Sprague?”
“He’s a Democratic activist, he wanted to be on the ballot.”
“What the hell for?”
NB - Howard Sprague is no relation to Todd Sprague, the alias for sex offender and Evan Mecham supporter Kip Shippy used by Ronald Watkins in his book High Crimes and Misdemeanors. What ever happened to that guy? Shippy, not Watkins.
6 Comments
February 3rd, 2006 at 9:16 am
I know this is totally irrelevant but I can’t help but ask. Is he wearing a wig?
February 3rd, 2006 at 9:53 am
I don’t know…but I’ve suspected that he overdoes the Grecian Formula.
February 3rd, 2006 at 9:54 am
Man, you shouldn’t put up pictures like that. I’m actually starting to feel sorry for the guy.
Howard Sprague for State House!
February 3rd, 2006 at 1:29 pm
Ted,
Assuming they don’t pick Sprague, which of the other two candidates is most likely to be reasonable (as opposed to a right wing wack job that will just line up with the conservative leadership?)
February 3rd, 2006 at 10:00 pm
I know little about the other candidates, I understand that Barto is the chairman of the District 7 Republicans and was a delegate to the Republican convention.
I don’t know anything about Levine.
February 10th, 2006 at 1:27 am
Arizona State Representative David Burnell Smith has made history by becoming the first legislator in America to be removed from office for violating a campaign finance law. Smith has finally paid a price for overspending on his 2004 taxpayer funded campaign for the Arizona House of Representatives. The people that elected Smith to represent them have also paid a price. Smith has been forced from the office the people of his legislative district had elected him to serve in. It seems that the American principle of, government by the consent of the governed, has also paid a price.
Smith agreed to comply with the Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission rules when he accepted public funding for his campaign. The commission, which is an un-elected- appointed body, has determined that Smith violated their rules by overspending on his campaign and must forfeit the office the voters elected him to.
Let us assume that Smith did in fact violate the Citizens Clean Elections Act of 1998, which was approved by the voters and provides penalties for violations of the Act in the form of monetary fines and if one is elected, the forfeiture of office. If a candidate for office violated the Act and lost the election, they could not possible be subject to the same penalty of, forfeiture of office, as someone who was elected, therefore, the candidate that is the choice of the people, is subject to an extra penalty for the same offense then someone that was not the people’s choice, this is not fair to the candidate that is chosen by the people or to the voters that elected him or her.
Second only to the United States Constitution, the Arizona Constitution is the supreme law in Arizona. A constitution determines the powers and duties of a government and guarantees certain rights and powers to the people that live under it’s laws. The state constitution creates a legislative branch which is elected by the people and prescribes the method of expulsion of members for disorderly behavior. The Arizona Constitution also provides for the recall of elected officials by the people through a special election for that purpose. The Arizona Constitution clearly applies the principle of, government by the consent of the governed, by giving to the people the power to choose who shall represent them in the legislature and also the power to remove elected officials when they choose to do so. There is no provision in the Arizona Constitution for the removal of an elected official by an un-elected-appointed commission.
The Citizens Clean Elections Act of 1998 gives the commission the power to impose monetary fines on candidates for violations of their rules and the penalty of forfeiture of office, when a violator is elected. The forfeiture of office provision is clearly in conflict with the Arizona Constitution. The Clean Elections Act is not part of the constitution, it is a law, and when a law conflicts with the constitution, the constitution, as the supreme law, shall prevail.
You can love David Burnell Smith or hate him, unless you disagree with the principle of , government by the consent of the governed, you must admit that the people have a right to chose their own representatives and no appointed commission should have the power to overturn their choice.
Forfeiture of office is too high a price to pay for violating a campaign finance law, it not only removes someone from office but also deprives the people of their right to have whom they want to represent them, it is government without the consent of the governed.
Bad laws can and should be changed. I pray that David Burnell Smith is the last legislator in America to be removed from office for violating a campaign finance law and that the Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Act will be amended to remove the forfeiture of office penalty.
Bob Haran,
Phoenix, AZ
http://www.Bob-Haran.info
Bob Haran is a Conservative,Citizen Activist. In 2000 he was the Republican nominee for the Arizona House of Representatives in Phoenix.