But, What Does That Leave for Us Snide Bloggers?

I ran into Dave Joseph last week, he’s one of the Democratic nominees for State House up in District 11. He handed me his palm card, and it bore the slogan “Let’s create jobs, not headlines!”

Hmm. His current legislators include Al Melvin and Terri Proud, and one of the guys he’s running against is Steve Smith. What could he be referring to?

Terri Proud Thinks e-Mails Should Be Private, Most of the Time

I’d like to point out this unhinged e-mail exchange between Terri Proud and a local citizen who was concerned about Proud’s uninformed reasoning regarding Pima County’s bonds.

It isn’t the first time that Proud’s e-mails have gotten her into trouble. As Dave Fitzsimmons points out in the article, Proud has complained in the past when her rants sent on the public dime become, well, public.

Then again, check out this Twitter exchange that the Weekly wrote about when the Daniel Patterson nonsense was about to reach crescendo. Yep, Twitter exchanges are public and accessible, but take a look at the last entry:

Patterson: (in direct message to Proud) ‘Rep. Proud, I don’t want to argue with you. Respectfully, Daniel Patterson’

Okay, let’s put two and two together here (an act, I understand, Proud would call “communism”): if it’s a direct message, the only people that could have seen it were Patterson and Proud. Patterson, the article notes, deleted the public part of the exchange, so it’s unlikely he forwarded that on to a reporter, especially if that reporter is Patterson’s bête noire, Hank Stephenson.

So, kids, who was leaking a private electronic exchange to the press?

Because You Demanded It…

…today in Daniel Patterson news.

Talk is that Chad Campbell will once again try to get Patterson expelled, possibly by having Terri Proud or Jack Harper introduce the motion.

I understand Campbell’s frustration here, but I fail to see what these continued motions are going to do. The Republicans have already agreed to expedite the process, which means hearings next week. If Patterson’s defense in front of an ethics hearing match his defenses with the press and investigators, he’ll be gone shortly after the hearings commence.

And by the way, he’s been absent from the capitol for most of this week, and may not even be around to offer his defense next week. This talk of this being an emergency sound a bit overblown when Patterson is over a hundred miles away. He’s more of a danger to residents of Barrio Santa Rosa or where ever he’s living these days than he is to folks on West Washington.

Patterson should be gone, but let’s let the process work.

UPDATE: Patterson took to Twitter to announce a press conference set for Tuesday morning.

Yep, It’s About Shaming Folks

Terri Proud’s e-mail to a constituent on an abortion law she’s pushing shouldn’t be too surprising. This is not, and never was, about making sure women are informed. It’s about shaming people who don’t share Proud’s moral viewpoint.

Hey, Proud is pro-life. Good for her. Well, why not write a law banning abortion in Arizona? You’ve got a legislature that would pass it, a governor that would sign it and a US Supreme Court that would probably uphold it.

Of course, they’ve made a political choice. They’d rather keep the issue and keep their base excited. Pass a law curtailing reproductive rights here and there, just enough to keep their supporters excited but not enough to get the majority of Arizonans mad enough to do something about it. Talk about women being “fully informed,” all the while hoping that the winks towards the right are enough to keep getting re-elected. Hey, if you don’t want to ban abortion and access to brith control, why not just shame those “immoral” people by making them tell their employers or subjecting them to humiliating tests? Nothing is an easier political sell than to shame folks that are unpopular with your base.

I’m glad to see Rep. Proud admitting it.


One bright spot I’ve seen in the current argument is that Democrats have not been shy about joining it. I wish there was a little bit more of this when SB 1070 passed.

I was amazed at how many congressional candidates sent out press releases on this, not a national issue but a state one. The senate candidates have gotten involved too. Richard Carmona wrote a piece in Huffington Post about Nancy Barto’s bill, and Don Bivens is running this ad:

Bond Committee Meeting Fun

I’m headed off to a meeting of the Pima County Bond Advisory Committee today. My understanding is that Terri Proud and some other sponsors of a bill to cripple the county’s ability to sell bonds will be there.

The bill would give Sahuarita, Oro Valley and Marana the ability to effectively veto projects. Ostensibly, this is being done to protect those communities, but those communities also have reps on the bond committee, request some big money projects and, near as anyone can tell, haven’t asked for this bill.

But hey, why miss a chance to bash local government? Especially one run by Democrats. Facts be damned.

Oh, by the way, if this is about protecting smaller communities, why not South Tucson? Just curious.

I’m working on an op-ed about the bill. Look for it.

Not So Quiet Anymore

A month ago, it looked like the District 9 races would be snoozers. Rep. Steve Farley was set to run against former Rep. Dave Bradley for state senate might provide a hint of excitement, but the house race only consisted of two declared candidates for two seats: 2010 candidate Mohur Sidhwa and former KOLD reporter Victoria Steele. The general election was looking to be even more sonambulant. Republican incumbent Terri Proud would rather not run in a race where she needs to talk to mid-town Democrats and has indicated she isn’t going to run.

The Democratic House primary looks to become a bit of a contest, however. U of A professor Todd Camenisch has looked seriously at the race. Camenisch made a run against Sen. Frank Antenori in the old 30, but registration advantage and a poor Democratic year meant he barely got 40% of the vote. Despite this, the Catalina Foothills school board member is looked at as a rising star in the party.

Enter another rising star: Brandon Patrick, recently hired on for Councilman Paul Cunningham’s staff, has been making calls exploring a possible run. Patrick’s first foray into Southern Arizona politics was his work against the police association backed Prop. 200, which polled well at first and in the end went down in flames.

The question becomes whether Patrick’s behind the scenes work for campaigns holds more sway with interests like labor unions than whatever cred Camenisch has build up as a school board member and the guy that took on Antenori.

Oh, add to that another piece of fun: what happens should Farley or Paula Aboud resign their seats to make a run either in the special election or the new CD 2?

What Was Weak Last Week

Only one entry today in my weekly re-hash, and this week’s no-prize goes to Sonoran Alliance.

I talked to a journalist in town and he wondered why even waste time on the silliness with this photograph that the Sonorenses posted that purported to be Colleen Mathis and her husband. As reported here, the photo was really of two people who work for a non-profit whose office happens to be in the same building as Raúl Grijalva’s congressional office. This fact is confirmed by the first comment in their non-retraction written by the uncle of the young man in the photo.

By the way, in that retraction they claim to be “double-backing” on the photo to confirm the identities of the people in the picture. It only took me one text message and one phone call to find out, so it shouldn’t take long. But, I imagine that this investigation will be much like O. J.’s hunt for the real killers, ‘cept with less golf.

This isn’t the first time the photo has surfaced. It made the rounds on Facebook and at least one Republican blog (since off line) back in July. It didn’t seem to get any traction back then, probably because it was just as silly then as it was now.

Here is why I think this is worth going on about. Let’s assume for a second that Mathis and her husband decided to visit with Grijalva to draw maps for him and mess things up for that poor Ben Quayle. We are supposed to think that these meetings with Grijalva mean that Mathis was doing his bidding.

But Grijalva hated the first draft maps that came out weeks after this alleged meeting occurred. How do I know this? He called me to tell me he hated them.

Let’s make this clear: they are alleging that a deal was made, even though the congressman in question did not get what he wanted.

This is something I’ve been talking about for a while: all this Republican kvetching, whinging, crying, complaining and false outrage from la Cervecera, legislative leaders and activists is over a map that many Democrats aren’t happy with and that is largely a good deal for Republicans.

Okay. I’ve written this a half dozen times, and I’d like for at least one member of our state’s responsible press to ask Terri Proud or Frank Antenori about these things the next time they mouth off about redistricting. Here is the score:

– Republicans came to the meetings and demanded three border districts. They got them.

– Republicans came to the meetings and demanded that northern areas of Yuma get separated from Tucson. They got that.

– Republicans came to the meetings and demanded that Cochise County get separated from Tucson. They got that.

– There are four bullet proof Republican congressional districts out of nine. This is better than their actual registration numbers in the state (36%).

– There are fifteen strongly Republican legislative districts. This gives an all but guaranteed Republican legislative majority.

So, what exactly would be enough? And please, spare me the process arguments. The actions of the legislature last week show they don’t give a rat’s ass about process.

And one more thing about that picture: in their since removed post, they claimed in the comments that the picture was taken by someone that happened to be at an event in the area. Across the street, where the picture was taken from, is all houses. What sort of event was this guy at in the middle of the day in a residential area? Or, was he just parked in front of people’s houses (it looks like he was in front of my friend’s place, actually) taking pictures of young women in skirts? Someone needs to re-examine his life.

Sauce for the Goose Department

I’ve been wondering for a while when there would finally be some attention paid to Rick Stertz. There have been attacks on IRC chairman Colleen Mathis supposed connections to the Democratic Party that are, at best, tenuous. The press has been more than happy to buy into the partisan attacks on Mathis and the commission process, but have let allegations against Stertz go unaddressed (I’ve been writing about them since before he was appointed). Something else unaddressed: Stertz is a key source of information for Tom Horne’s ongoing jihad against his fellow commissioners Mathis and José Herrera.

With him pulling this sort of monkey wrenching, I wonder if Stertz is as disinterested in the IRC process continuing the way the voters intended as Terri Proud and Andy Tobin are.

Well, that probably ends today. The Arizona Democratic Party has sent a letter to the Attorney General, Pima County Attorney and Maricopa County Attorney, alleging that he:

[W]ithheld information regarding his political affiliations, employer and business disclosure from Mr. Stertz’s spouse and children, tax information, accusations of fraud, and judgments. A sworn statement was submitted to the Commission of Appellate Appointments where the facts where omitted.

Bill Montgomery and Horne will ignore it, and the Star will run an editorial blaming both sides for Stertz’s omissions.


The “grid maps” have been released by the Independent Redistricting Committee. You can check them out here.

Unfortunately, they are without much detail when it comes to the urban areas. This deprives political junkies the joy of seeing who got drawn out of their districts.

Both congressional “grids” have three districts along the border, which was a demand from some Republican activists that spoke before the committee. Also interesting: neither legislative “grid” causes the greater Tucson area to lose a legislative district.

The main thing to keep in mind is these are not final maps, far from it (case in point: that I-19 corridor district 30 on the first “grid” would never pass pre-clearance). That’s probably why they use the word “grid” rather than “map.” The committee needs somewhere to start, and they are prohibited from starting with existing districts.

Even though these are basically random lines, expect Terri Proud and company to say this is evidence of a conspiracy.