There are a couple of things post-wise that I’ve kinda let slide in the past couple of weeks. I know that my detractors (yes, even the great bloggers have detractors) will likely ascribe the lack of a response to some of these issues as evidence of…heck, they’ll come up with something on their own.
It was really a lack of inclination. Sometimes I’m in the mood to hit the keyboard, sometimes not. Plus, FC Tucson was in the playoffs.
So a couple of weeks back, I was going to comb FEC reports and find whatever was interesting. It ended up being something I didn’t have the time to pursue, so this “project” ended up being a total of one post.
Still, it generated some response, like this:
If it is true that the [Matt] Heinz Campaign started fundraising after special, then you should compare only the last two weeks of June. I just wanted to point out that if you’re as good as you think you are, maybe you would’ve notice that Barber only pooled $21,500 from 20 individual donors (including gabi and her husband’s contribution at $5000).
By the way, those figures I used included money Heinz raised before the special.
Heinz’s campaign manager also responded, asserting that Barber’s fundraising took a “cliff dive” during the period being talked about.
I went ahead and checked it out, and yes, Barber’s fundraising took a hit during those two weeks. It was also two weeks when Barber was setting up constituent offices and flying to Washington to get sworn in. It wasn’t a time that he could do a lot of phone time or stage house parties. Oh yeah, and it was two weeks following a period where he had just raised and spent $1.3 million.
The whole thing is pretty thin gruel to support the theorem that Barber’s campaign is in collapse. But, unfortunately, thin gruel is Heinz’s whole case for replacing Barber.
Take, for example, Heinz’s attack on Barber for not supporting marriage rights. This is based on Barber not signing on to an amicus brief for a case that may or may not be taken up by the US Supreme Court. Barber had previously made his support for marriage rights known during the campaign when the race was close enough that being that out front could have hurt him. He also is a co-sponsor of the Respect for Marriage act, which is essentially a repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.
He’s got to struggle to find these little bits of light to Barber’s left because, despite Barber’s two notable votes that infuriated many progressives (including me), Heinz’s legislative record makes running as some sort of people’s tribune more than a bit difficult.
For example, take Heinz’s vote to support HB 2718, which was an exercise in partisan pique by the legislature against Sheriff Clarence Dupnik. Not only was it a vote that denied funding for law enforcement for his own constituents, but he was throwing in with the knuckledraggers on immigration.
Then there’s Colorado City, the town infamous for being the former baliwick of polygamist and convicted child molester Warren Jeffs. The police in that town have been acting on directives from local religious leaders rather than the law when it comes to kidnapping and sex abuse offenses. Several officers have been decertified for offenses involving minors.
A group of Democrats and moderate Republicans wrote a bill that would dissolve their police department and allow the local sheriff to take over. The bill was even supported by Tom Horne. That bill died despite overwhelming support in the Senate when it lost a Committee of the Whole vote in the house. Among the no’s…Matt Heinz.
Supporters weren’t dissuaded; they attempted to add the language to another bill. The amendment wasn’t added because of a procedural vote. Only one Democrat voted with the Republican leadership on that one…Matt Heinz.
Hey, I know how legislatures work. Even Mo Udall had votes he wasn’t proud of. But if your argument is that Ron Barber is some sort of crypto-conservative sell-out, you have to have a better record and judgement than this. If you want to tell us that this was all some part of a savvy deal you cut, what you got out of it better be better than a close friendship with Andy Biggs.
Which brings us to an ad that he’s running:
It’s a worthwhile bill, definitely. Heinz’s campaign is claiming that this means $8 million for breast cancer screening, but the numbers I’ve seen from the legislature say $2 million. Still not a pittance. However, he leaves out what he had to promise to get it. He voted yes on the Republican’s health budget, one that included a $7 million cut to KidsCare, that’s 100,000 Arizona children dropped from the program, including some that were receiving chemotherapy. The budget included no provider increase to hospitals, despite their needs due to AHCCCS cuts.
By the way…still no money for transplants. Anyone remember that one?
Like I said, deals have to be cut, but don’t try to sell yourself as a progressive champion when you pull things like this, especially when it’s on an issue that you claim you are uniquely in a position to lead on.
