Archive for March, 2009

Sometimes public officials exit public life very gracefully.  Sometimes they don’t.  The Arizona Republic reports today that Gilbert Town Councilman is dropping out of the race for Mayor.  He was second place to top vote-getter John Lewis in the primary, and the two were headed for a May run-off.  Skousen cited health concerns in his family as the reason to exit the race.  I admire a guy who recognizes priorities in life.

Incumbent Mayor, Steve Berman, came in third in the primary and is lashing out in a disappointing, but not surprising way.  He is quoted saying that Skousen is an “unethical flea.” Then he went on:

“He should have said during the primary election that he was running to pull votes away from me to help someone else get elected,” Berman said. “He bastardized the electoral process. Lewis comes into office under a cloud with the question of what would have happened if we had had a real election.”

Berman needs to take a deep breath and recognize that there isn’t some grand conspiracy against him.  He had a long run as mayor, and people want a change in direction.  The absurdity of Berman’s quote is that even if EVERY Skousen vote had gone to Berman, Berman would have still lost to Lewis.  Lewis received nearly 42% of the vote, Skousen got 20% and Berman got 16%. 

The truth of it is that had Skousen not been in the race, Lewis would have won the seat outright with more than 50% of the vote.  There is no cloud following John Lewis, it is the bright sunshine of a new day.

Either way, Berman is gone, which given his propensity to create negative drama, is a very good thing.

Tuesday, March 31 is a big, big day in politics this year.  Why, you ask? It is the special election for Rep. Kristin Gillibrand’s seat that she vacated to ascend to Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat in New York.

“NY-20” is going to be a critical touchstone for months to come as we go into next year’s mid-term elections.  This is a Democrat seat, and the Democrat’s have pulled out all the stops to keep it in their column.  President Barack Obama has now weighed in, and both parties have major get-out-the-vote operations in place, with phone banks both in New York and D.C., and even some remote volunteer phone banks in other states.

This is an absolute must-win for the Democrats – because it will be seen as a litmus test on the Democrat Congress and on President Obama.  If the Democrat candidate, Scott Murphy, doesn’t get elected, the shockwaves will be felt from San Francisco to New York to D.C. and everywhere in between.

In some ways, the Republicans couldn’t be in a better spot.  If Republican Jim Tedisco wins, the momentum will have shifted less than 100-days into Obama’s administration.  If Tedisco loses, but keeps it close (within 5 points) it will still have a lasting impact on the way the Democrats in the House and President Obama play their cards (including “card check”) going into 2010.  For Republicans, this is a win-win, as long as a “loss” is close.

Murphy has some problems that are unique to this time – he’s been a lobbyist for Wall Street and he was an executive with an internet company that lost millions of dollars and later approved big bonuses for executives (sound familiar?).  AIG is a central issue in this campaign.  Here is how the NRCC has framed the issue:

This will be one of the biggest elections this year – it may be even more important than the Virginia’s Governor’s election this fall.  One thing for sure, the Democrats know the risk of losing, and they have doubled-down.

Does it bother anyone else that the White House has “directed” GM to sack its CEO Rick Wagoner?  I know there will be some who say that with the amount of money the government is pumping into GM that they should have some say into who is running the joint, but it makes me a little queasy, if not downright nauseous.

We’ve entered really dangerous territory.  This isn’t government creep, it’s creepy government.

“Think of your forefathers!  Think of your posterity!” –John Quincy Adams

“If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” –Samuel Adams

If there is one thing Republicans are very consistent at, it is shooting at each other, and shooting themselves in the foot.  Yes, Democrats shoot at each other as well, but I get the sense that we do it more often, more publicly and more lethally.

Case in point is the warfare that has been playing out on the conservative blog Sonoran Alliance for the last few days.   Almost all bloggers who contribute to Sonoran Alliance are anonymous, and one of those bloggers is “Chewie Shofir”.

Chewie posted an over the top hit piece on local lobbyist/political operative Chuck Coughlin who runs a firm called Highground.  Chuck has been in the biz for the better part of 25 years and has many friends and many enemies.  My own relationship with Chuck has been hot and cold – depending on the issue that is being debated at the moment, but we remain friends and respect each other.

Chuck responded to Chewi with a rational, calm and well written explanation.  He laid out, in a systematic way, the problem that Arizona faces (thanks to former Gov. Janet Napolitano and her allies in the legislature) and points out that Gov. Brewer believes that we may not have any choice but to raise taxes.

Chuck’s response is the way that Republicans should dialogue with each other on difficult issues.  To go postal on each other just leaves blood on the floor and Democrats smiling.

“Because ours is a consistent philosophy of government, we can be very clear:  We do not have a separate social agenda, a separate economic agenda, and a separate foreign agenda.  We have one agenda.  Just as surely as we seek to put our financial house in order and rebuild our nation’s defenses, so too we seek to protect the unborn, to end the manipulation of schoolchildren by utopian planners, and permit the acknowledgment of a Supreme Being in our classrooms just as we allow such acknowledgments in other public institutions.”  –Ronald Reagan

Maybe it’s because it is really late at night as I write this, or it’s because I have been really, really busy and not able to focus, but this story is really confusing to me.  I mean, talk about something right out of the twilight zone.  Things are not as they appear, or just the opposite of what you would expect.

The Hill has a story headlined “Napolitano says thanks, but no thanks, DHS has funds” and then reports on a Senate hearing about border security.  Here is a quick synopsis.

Chairman Lieberman (D-CT) said he requested $380 million for enhanced border protection.  But Napolitano said that she had already found the money within the agency to make sure such enhancements are “budget neutral.”

Senator McCain jumped into the discussion and suggested that Napolitano take the money.  She said she didn’t need it – that we are in difficult times and need to make do with current funds.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) jumped in and criticized Napolitano for not taking the money and said that he would support sending military to the border to deal with the drug cartel violence.

Lieberman concluded saying that he was going to work to get more funding whether Napolitano thought she needed it or not.  “This is kind of war,” he said referring to the border violence.

So let me get this straight, the Chairman of the committee says he is requesting more money for border security, he is supported in that by two Republican Senators (whose position on immigration is no secret) and Napolitano says, no, wouldn’t be prudent.

I only have one question: Where in the h*** was this prudent, fiscal responsibility from Napolitano when she was the Governor?!?!?

This is what I came home to tonight. My 10-year-old son, Adam, reading the most current issue of Sports Illustrated to get ready for the biggest weekend in College Basketball.  I love you man.

Arizona Corporation Commissioner Paul Newman wants you to pay more for electricity.

Newman has sent a letter to the Chairman of the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee, Henry Waxman (D-CA) asking that stimulus money be sent directly to the Corporation Commission so that they can ensure that there are funds for pushing more renewable energy in Arizona. He doesn’t trust Governor Brewer or the Legislature.

Under current law, Arizona’s power companies are supposed to generate 15% of their power from renewable energy sources by the year 2025.  Newman wants to push that number to 25%.

What most people don’t understand is how incredibly expensive it is to produce renewable energy. (That’s why there is so little of it.)  So how much will it cost taxpayers to get us to 15% of renewable?  First, we need to know how much renewable energy we currently produce.  The answer?  0.1% of the energy produced in Arizona is renewable (under current definitions, since, incredibly, radical environmentalists don’t count hydropower as renewable.)

So moving from 0.1% to a full 15% in the next 15 years is going to cost A LOT of money.  And that comes right from your pocket in the form of either higher rates or higher taxes.

Below are excerpts of Newman’s letter.  It is a tour de force of pie-in-the-sky thinking which takes shots at Governor Brewer, the legislature, the Goldwater Institute, and of course, power companies.  If Newman thinks this is what Arizona voters thought they were getting when they voted for him, it’s a good thing it’s a four year term.  Heck, if he pushes this kind of agenda, especially in the middle of a recession, he might get recalled.

… I am writing to request that future funding for renewable energy and energy efficiency be appropriated directly to the Arizona Corporation Commission rather than to the executive branch. Please let me explain why.

The Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) is one of only seven states with a constitutionally created public utilities commission.  We have jurisdiction over Arizona’s current Renewable Energy Standard (RES), which received final approval in 2007. Enacting the RES too many years and was fought in the courts by conservative think tank the Goldwater Institute.  Arizona’s RES currently requires regulated utilities to get 15% of power from renewable resources by 2025.  I am pushing to raise the RES to 25%.

Arizona’s conservative legislature has forced the Corporation Commission to play defense, as bills have been introduced that would:

·         Remove the power to enact and administer the RES from the Commission and give the legislature “exclusive power, authority and jurisdiction” over energy policy;

·         Declare nuclear power a “renewable” resource, effectively gutting the RES; and

·         Forbid state environmental officials from participating in the Western Climate Initiative.

 

Former Governor Janet Napolitano joined the Western Climate Initiative, and after some chiding from critics, including myself, our new Governor Jan Brewer decided she will remain a participant, albeit a passive one.

We appreciate and support federal funding for renewable energy, weatherization and energy efficiency projects in the recent stimulus bill.  However, I am writing to ask you to consider an alternative allocation for states like Arizona with constitutionally created Commissions:

1.      that energy funds be directed to the Corporation Commission rather than the Governor’s Energy Office or the legislature in future legislation considered by your committee;

2.      that the Arizona Corporation Commission is required to be in the process that determines how the funds are spent, perhaps with veto power or at least a couple of votes.

… As we look at the institutions with jurisdiction over our energy decisions, it is becoming more clear to me that we need diverse voices at the table.  The power companies, co-ops, and investor-owned utilities that are NOT under the jurisdiction of expert and independent public utilities commissions continue to be dominated by narrow special interests. We must break open that juggernaut if we hope to make progress in those states that are lagging in renewable energy production…

… The Commission has set aside $37 million for energy efficiency projects that are allowed cost recovery by regulated utilities; but I’m afraid that is all the stimulus funds are sent to the Governor and legislature, we will not make the best possible use of these monies.

I believe that the current Arizona Corporation Commission has a much greater level of commitment to implementing renewable energy and energy efficiency. I request that you consider requiring a wider diversity of voices to determine how Arizona’s energy stimulus funds are spent by requiring that the ACC and similarly situated public utility commissions be part of the decision-making process in determining how funds are spent.”