Adams and Jefferson

I can see November from my house!

2010-09-01T20:30:00.000-07:00

The Price of Freedom

2010-03-15T08:14:00.002-07:00

Since September 11, 2001, I have lowered the flag in my front yard on numerous occasions to honor the sacrifice of a soldier, sailor, marine, or airman who had recently paid the utmost price for my freedom. In each instance I have said a prayer for the family of the departed hero as my flag lowered to honor their sacrifice. During the official period of mourning, the sight of my half-masted flag was a quiet and eloquent reminder of the fact that "Freedom Isn't Free".

On Friday night I went out to my flagpole and, once again, lowered my flag to half mast. But the prayer I offered that night was for my own family this time. Earlier that day my cousin, SFC Glen Jacob Whetten, joined the ranks of those who have given the last full measure of devotion for their country.

The flag in my front yard flies at half mast, and I see Jake now every time I pass it. When the official word gets out and flags across the state lower to half mast, I will see Jake. And I will cry. I am more intimately acquainted with the price of my freedom now. The Hall of Heroes is no longer a nameless, faceless group of men and women from ages past. It now has the name and face of someone I know and love, someone I looked up to and prayed for.

SFC Glen Jacob Whetten, United States Army
March 19, 1978 - March 12, 2010
Operation Enduring Freedom

Mr. Reagan on Big Tents

2009-12-04T08:50:00.001-07:00

Exerpts from a Speech at

Conservative Political Action Conference

Washington, DC

Governor Ronald Reagan (R-CA)

March 1, 1975

Americans are hungry to feel once again a sense of mission and greatness.

I don ‘t know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, “We must broaden the base of our party”—when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur - even more - the differences between ourselves and our opponents.

When have we ever advocated a closed-door policy? Who has ever been barred from participating in this Republican Party?

Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people?

Let us show that we stand for fiscal integrity and sound money and above all for an end to deficit spending, with ultimate retirement of the national debt.

Let us also include a permanent limit on the percentage of the people’s earnings government can take without their consent.

Let our banner proclaim a genuine tax reform that will begin by simplifying the income tax so that workers can compute their obligation without having to employ legal help.

Let our banner proclaim our belief in a free market as the greatest provider for the people.

Let us also call for an end to the nit-picking, the harassment and over-regulation of business and industry which restricts expansion and our ability to compete in world markets.

Let us explore ways to ward off socialism, not by increasing government’s coercive power, but by increasing participation by the people in the ownership of our economic machine.

Our banner must recognize the responsibility of government to protect the law-abiding, holding all those who commit misdeeds personally accountable. Laws already on the books should be enforced!

And we must make it plain to international adventurers that our love of peace stops short of “peace at any price.”

We will maintain whatever level of strength is necessary to preserve our free way of life.

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principles. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert our principles and raise them to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their own way.

100 REASONS TO OPPOSE "OBAMACARE"

2009-08-24T10:13:00.002-07:00

The AZ GOP distributed the following points during their executive board meeting on Saturday, August 22, 2009:

Limited choices
1. The Health Choices Czar will choose your healthcare plan for you.
2. A Government committee will decide what treatment procedures you receive.
3. Government will create a healthcare exchange to control private healthcare plans.
4. Government will dictate benefit packages for private healthcare plans under the healthcare exchange.
5. All individuals who are deemed Medicaid-eligible will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid.
6. It will prohibit the purchase of new private healthcare insurance from qualifying as acceptable coverage for purposes of the individual mandate after the effective date of the new regulations.
7. Will create one size fits all healthcare standards.
8. Government will decide which healthcare providers can participate in the public healthcare option.
9. Will require all employer-provided healthcare plans to be approved by the Department of Labor and a new Health Choices Administration (Czar).
10. Government will decide personal health decisions.
11. Government legislation will increase the cost and limit the healthcare choices for veterans.
12. The bill will lead to a "single-payer" system as private insurers are eliminated by a Government monopoly on regulations and controls.
13. Government plan will not create competition because federal government will impose a list of benefits that each plan will be required to offer.
14. Preventive care will be reimbursed, but patients will pay for all other routine doctor visits and tests with their own money from their HSA account.
15. Government will determine and provide approved list of end-of-life resources and procedures.
16. Government will control end-of-life treatment.
17. Government plan will eliminate diversity of plans and creativity in the healthcare insurance sector. Government Intrusion 18. Government will have real-time access to individuals' financial information.
19. Government may have direct access to your bank accounts for automatic funds transfer.
20. Individuals not having acceptable healthcare coverage, according to government regulations, will be taxed 2.5 percent.
21. School-Based Health Clinics will provide healthcare services for students without parental notification.
22. Will require cumbersome Government review of claims.
23. Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to financial and personal records.
24. Government bureaucrats will instruct and consult with individuals regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc.
25. Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as a patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for an end-of-life plan.
26. Government plan will unleash the IRS on anyone who fails to sign up for a government-approved healthcare plan.
27. The IRS is authorized to verify incomes of those under the public healthcare options.
28. Government plan will lead to interference in families and the growth of intrusive Child Protective Service agencies.
29. Government is more likely to pass additional restrictions or increase taxes on smoking, fast food, etc., leading to a further loss of personal freedoms.

Limited Healthcare
30. Government will ration healthcare. You will only get so much medical care per year.
31. Government will have the authority to deny coverage to dependent family members of veterans.
32. Government plan will require people to be assigned a primary care doctor, and the doctor will control your access to specialists.
33. Government plan will reduce services for Medicaid covered patients.
34. Government plan will reduce spending for Medicare and Medicaid, resulting in rationing.
35. Government plan will suppress the development of new medical procedures by doctors and hospitals as they will not be reimbursed for their research efforts.
36. Government plan will make the medical profession less attractive and rewarding to people, which will lead to fewer people entering the field.

Financial Implications
37. Most of the population will be forced onto the Government plan until they will have no choice but to raise taxes on all Americans.
38. Will force young, healthy people, new to the work force with lower incomes than older workers, to pay more than their actual healthcare cost.
39. Government plan will subsidize older workers, who have private health insurance plans by limiting premiums.
40. Government plan will ban insurers from charging premiums based on the health of the individuals, thus most will pay more.
41. By mandating plans, Government will prevent individuals and employers from choosing less expensive plans that cover only major medical expenses.
42. No ability for cross-state shopping for a cheaper, better insurance plan.
43. The CBO says the current Democrat House plan would increase the deficit by $239 billion over 10 years.
44. Reductions to reimbursements similar to those made in Medicare by Government, could prompt health providers to charge private insurers more.
45. A sudden change due to government intervention in how payments for healthcare are made could significantly disrupt cash flows and financial strength of businesses.
46. Government plan doesn’t address the future infrastructure and capital financing aspects of healthcare.
47. Government plan could severely impact the financial strength of the U.S. drug companies, which employs hundreds of thousands of workers.
48. For taxpayers who earn between $32,490 and $43,320 a year, they will lose health insurance deductions, effectively a tax increase.
49. Government plan eliminates a provision in the Medicare prescription drug law, which would eliminate coverage for drug costs over $2,700 a year.
50. Patients aren't likely to curb their drug costs and doctor visits if healthcare is free; thus, total costs will be several times what they are now.

Government Mandates
51. Government will mandate linguistic appropriate services. For example, translators for illegal aliens.
52. No new private insurance will be allowed after passage of this bill.
53. For many employees in large corporations all ready covered by the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974, they will be required to choose only from approved plans after five years.
54. If an employer's health insurance co-pay, deductible, or coverage changes for any reason -- the employee must drop out and shop through the exchange.
55. Government will set mandated rates for public health insurance options.
Impact on Business
56. Government will audit the financial records of all small and large employers who self-insure.
57. Employers will be mandated to pay for healthcare for part-time employees and their families.
58. Employers with payroll of $400,000 and above, who do not provide a healthcare plan, will pay an 8 percent tax on all payroll to the government.
59. Employers with payroll between $251,000 and $400,000 who do not provide a healthcare plan will pay a 2 to 6 percent tax on all payroll to the government.
60. Will require employers to provide healthcare coverage for their employees or pay a tax penalty of $750 per year.
61. Half of all small businesses with 20-249 employees will have their income adversely affected by a surtax.
62. If the surtax on businesses doesn’t generate enough revenue to cover the costs of the government plan by 2013, the surtax automatically doubles.
63. Large employers will be required to automatically enroll workers in coverage, which will cost over $1 trillion.
64. Employers will be required to prove compliance under the proposed law to the Government.
65. Employers will drop their private health insurance coverage when offered a cheaper Government-run plan.
66. For small businesses, that can choose from a wide range of plans to offer their current employees will be forced to offer only "qualified" plans to new employees, via the health exchange.
67. Government plan will not allow businesses a deduction for employee health plan. Medical Profession
68. Government will set standards for doctor/patient time, professional judgment, methods, etc., thus determining the value of medical service.
69. Will impose new regulations on the individual and small group insurance providers.
70. Doctors will be financially rewarded for denying care, as HMO physicians were rewarded more than a decade ago.
71. No matter what medical specialty a doctor may have, all will be paid the same wage, thus suppressing individual effort, productivity and creativity.
72. Hospitals and clinics will be penalized for what the government deems to be preventable readmissions.
73. Possible penalties for Doctors who treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission.
74. Doctors would be prohibited from owning and investing in private healthcare companies.
75. Hospitals and clinics will be unable to expand without government approval.
76. Government plan could restrict drug companies' patents, which will lead to legal disputes, fewer new drugs and delay cheaper generic drugs.
77. Less income could force doctors to lay off fellow doctors, nurses and assistants.

Miscellaneous
78. Government may use partisan political groups such as ACORN to sign up individuals for government healthcare plan.
79. No company or individual can sue the government on price fixing. No "judicial review" against government monopoly.
80. Another federal bureaucracy, Health Choices Administration, will be created.
81. Will leave over 30 million uninsured based on Congressional Budget Office analysis.
82. Free healthcare for 12 to 13 million illegal immigrants.
83. Government will surcharge high income individuals.
84. Government legislation does not include tort reform. Trial lawyers will continue to cause unneeded defensive medical procedures by doctors.
85. The public option never has been and never will be cheaper (see Massachusetts', Canadian, British, and French plans).
86. No private company or individual will be able to sue the government for price-fixing.
87. Government will regulate rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.
88. Government plan will make abortion more widely available and more common by requiring insurers to pay for the procedures and providing funding to pay for abortions.
89. Workers and businesses already pay for everybody on Medicare and Medicaid and the Government plan would just add more people to them.
90. Government plan will require insurance companies to sell coverage to anyone at any time, which will allow people to buy insurance only when they need medical care.
91. Existing healthcare in the U.S. already covers over 90% of citizens.
92. No matter how much regulation or enforcement effort, no government healthcare plan will be 100 percent effective.
93. Government plan will establish price controls, which will lead to a black market in healthcare services
94. Real reform in healthcare should be market driven and not government controlled.
95. The unintended consequences of such a hastily assembled Government healthcare plan will be daunting and costly.
96. Government will mandate linguistic appropriate services. For example, translators for illegal aliens.

What it DOESN’T Do
97. Government plan will not allow for the adoption of health information technology.
98. Government plan does not provide guidelines to stop unnecessary medical procedures.
99. Government plan provides no incentives for quality and positive patient outcomes.
100. Government plan does not provide incentives to existing Medicare and Medicaid programs to reward more efficient and effective doctors and hospitals.

If you had any doubts about the healthcare bill...

2009-07-20T08:01:00.003-07:00

By Rep. John Carter (R) Texas

Monday night Democrats voted to shut down the U.S. House Representatives rather than allow a handful of Republican Congressmen to speak on the floor. What could have been so offensive or frightening about our discourse that Speaker Pelosi felt she had to protect her party by gagging free speech in the House?
In fact, we had planned to speak on the lack of transparency of the House since Democrats took control. We had planned to criticize Speaker Pelosi for repeatedly denying Members, the media, and the public to right to read legislation before it was voted on. We were set to discuss House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer’s statement last week that if his Members were required to read the Democrats’ healthcare reform package before it was voted on, it would fail.
So the Speaker obviously feels that if the public is truly aware of her party’s agenda, they will reject it. She is now making sure the public is kept in the dark by trampling the centuries-old democratic traditions of the House. What are those traditions? Every day that the House is in session, following the final vote of the day, representatives are allowed the privilege of free speech on the House floor in what is known as “Special Orders.” They may speak for one minute, five minutes, or one hour segments, and must request their time in advance. Time is allocated equally to both parties on a first-come basis.
Since the advent of live C-SPAN coverage of the House, this has provided a national televised outlet for both Republicans and Democrats to speak to the nation on topics they feel were not adequately addressed during regular order in the House, during which the Democrat majority has the parliamentary ability to limit debate and speeches.
Special Orders therefore frequently serves as a political safety valve if the party in the majority becomes too dictatorial during debate, using their majority status to truly oppress the minority’s ability to debate and offer amendments.
That is now the case in the House, with the Democrat majority under Pelosi repeatedly rejecting House rules to ram a far-left agenda through before the public has time to learn what is actually in the bills.
This is what we were committed to bring to public light.
House rules require a bill be publicly posted for three days before it can be voted on. That basic rule was written by none other than Thomas Jefferson as part of the original rules package of the House, as it is essential to the survival of representative democracy.
The House can waive that rule if it chooses on specific occasions. The Republican-controlled House chose to waive it when considering the Patriot Act in 2001 following the terror attacks of 9-11. They thought there was enough of a national defense emergency to just bring the bill to the floor for a vote.
But Nancy Pelosi and her House Democrats have chosen to ignore the rule on every major issue taken up by the House this year, including:
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - The Obama Stimulus: This one just had to pass that very day because time was a-wastin’ in getting those new jobs coming. We couldn’t wait for Members to read it. But then the President waited four days to sign it into law while he spent the weekend in Chicago, and months later none of the new jobs have come into existence.
The Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization (SCHIP): Speaker Pelosi couldn’t wait on this one either, although the deadline for reauthorization was still two months away.
The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act: Lilly was peddled as covering decades-old wage discrimination cases, but after waiting 20 years, Congress couldn’t wait one more day to let Members actually read the thing.
The Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009: No excuses at all on this one. They just didn’t want the details known.
The Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009: This one has been languishing since last October, but we suddenly had to pass it that day.
The AIG Bonus Tax Act: This had to get through right then, don’t mind the details, we just had to go after those bonuses. Only when we read what passed after the fact, the bill contained waivers for all of the same executives the bill was supposed to reign in, many with curiously close ties to Treasury Secretary and tax cheat Tim Geithner.
The Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009: No rush whatever on this one time-wise, the Democrats just didn’t want people talking about the hundreds of billions given to foreign banks that should have gone to our troops.
The American Clean Energy and Security Act/National Cap-and-Trade Energy Tax: No excuse was offered on this one, the Speaker just didn’t want anybody reading Henry Waxman’s 300 page amendment he sneaked in overnight before we were forced to vote. Three weeks later, the Senate shows no intention of taking up the bill before the opening day of dove season, if then.
There’s a reason all these bills are listed. The list constitutes every major policy bill undertaken by Congress this year. House Democrats are not just waiving the three-day rule -- they have destroyed it, and are intentionally pushing their agenda to the floor with blindfolds on the media and the public.
This constitutes an astonishing and chilling acceleration of the assault on representative democracy that began in earnest this January.
Representative democracy works when a U.S. Representative listens to the input of their constituents, and votes the way the majority of their district would vote. Only a Representative can’t listen if no one has ever seen the bill, or had time to provide input. They have to vote blind, which for too many, is voting the way their leadership tells them.
This is what Republican House Members were going to the floor to say Monday night. We were set to decry the loss of openness in the House.
Instead, we were met with a slammed door by Democrats, who are now committed to burying truth along with democracy.
The Democrats are the majority -- for now. They chose to silence debate on the floor by gagging House Republican Members from using their historical right to speak after the close of the day. But they cannot stop us from speaking outside the halls of Congress and letting the American public know the truth about their ongoing attack against the very foundations of a free Republic.

The Declaration of Independence

2009-07-03T13:01:00.006-07:00

One of our family's traditions is to read the Declaration of Independence on Independence Day each year. Happy 4th of July!

In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
Massachusetts:
John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
Maryland:
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton
North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

Memorial Day

2009-05-25T23:05:00.000-07:00

I couldn't let the day slip away without acknowledging the tremendous debt I owe to the brave men and women who have fought and died for my freedom over the 200+ years of this nation's history. I am grateful not only for their tremendous sacrifices, but for the sacrifices of the families that they left behind. It is fitting and proper that we should take a day each year to remember those who paid the last full measure of devotion so that we could enjoy the freedoms we do today. One of the headstones we looked at today described the RAF cadet interred there as his parents "much loved and only son". This inscription really touched me as I realized how much this particular family had given up in defense of freedom for themselves and their countrymen. This young man never married or enjoyed all of the wonders of parenthood. He didn't have a career, finish his education, or live to ripe old age. Instead, he was cut down in his prime while doing his duty.
I am grateful for the opportunity Memorial Day gives me to take my children to visit our local cemetery and pay our respects to brave soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines who have put it all on the line so that we could enjoy the life we now have. I am thankful for this wonderful land we live in and those who have fought to establish it and keep it free. God bless their memory!

Senator Pearce on Budget Cuts to Education

2009-02-05T11:28:00.004-07:00

Dear family, friends and fellow citizens,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts about the proposed spending reductions to education. As a state senator in Arizona, I always appreciate hearing the concerns of the public, and as a father and grandfather, I can personally relate to the apprehension regarding the future of education in Arizona. Here is the '09 challenge: We just resolved a $1.6 billion deficit to fix, with only 5 months left, with only 50% of the budget to work with due to voter protected initiatives, and entitlement programs. Now, we are trying to solve a $2.5 to $3 billion deficit for fiscal 2010 that starts July 1st, again with only 50% of the budget on the table to work with. Tax increases are not the answer with families and businesses struggling to survive. Record foreclosures, a 26 year high in unemployment and many folks including myself that live on a fixed income. The attachment will clear up some of the misinformation on education funding in Arizona.

As you well know, the landscape of Arizona’s economic environment has changed. Families and businesses throughout the state have been forced to adapt to a faltering economy. In fact, it is the worst budgetary shortfall in our state’s history. In consideration of rising expenses that far outweigh declining revenue, Legislators are being forced to make the same difficult choices that face many American families. We are working to correct Arizona’s steep budget crisis during this economic downturn, but there are only three viable options: increasing taxes, borrowing money, or reducing spending. Times of recession call for conservation. Increasing taxes would likely prolong this recession, or, even worse, push it into a depression. Likewise, borrowing money would only delay the problem, hurt the overall financial health of our state and essentially mortgage our children’s future.

A significant portion of the proposed education “cuts” are really just rollbacks of spending increases that were made over recent years when our accounts were flush with money because of a strong housing market and a relatively prosperous economy. In fact, these increases illustrate the importance and value that Legislators have placed on education. Amidst this fiscal crisis, if we do not make reductions to education, which makes up almost 60% of the budget, or health/human services and public safety, which accounts for another 35%, we have only 5% left to work with—at a time when we are as much as 30% short! As difficult as these decisions may be, and as painful as they may feel in the short-term, reducing spending is necessary to preserve the long-term vitality of our education system.

I continue to fight for families and the taxpayers of this great state. One issue we continue to ignore and is the elephant in the middle of the room when it comes to crime, taxes, education, healthcare, is the illegal immigration issue. No one talks about it as we examine our budget shortfall. The failure of our local law enforcement and social service agencies to enforce our immigration laws costs the Arizona taxpayers significantly. The illegal immigration impact on our state is $2-$3 billion annually - $1 billion in K-12 alone plus lost jobs to Americans, lower wages and, according to FBI and local records, the huge crime wave including deaths and maimings that we are experiencing.

Remember, I did not create this deficit. I have continuously fought to hold down reckless spending while fighting for education, public safety and transportation as our priorities. Our former Governor with co-conspirators have created this mess by growing government by an average of 12% for the past 6 years, while inflation PLUS population has been 6%. It has been reckless spending by those who ignore the impact to the taxpayers in this state. We must protect working families while we address critical issues facing this state. No one said it would be easy.

God bless everyone and may God continue to bless America. I wish you and your family all the best during these difficult times.

Senator Russell Pearce, LD18, Mesa

Senator Pearce's Attachment

Education Funding (Sources are in parenthesis)

Per pupil funding (from all sources): $9700. (JLBC)
Education comprises nearly 60% of the state general fund. (JLBC)
Arizona ranks 21st in aggregate dollars spent on K-12. (NCES, NEA, ATRA)
Arizona ranks 21st in aggregate dollars spent on current K-12 operating expenses. (NCES, NEA, ATRA).

Teacher Salaries

Arizona ranks 11th for teacher salaries. (NCES, NEA, ATRA)
Arizona ranks 1st in the average salary of instructional staff on a per capita income basis. (NCES, NEA, ATRA

Test Scores

Arizona ranks 21st nationally for ACT composite scores. (ALEC)
Arizona ranks 27th for SAT Math and Critical Reading scores. (NCES)

Student Enrollment

Arizona ranks 13th in aggregate K-12 total student enrollment. (NEA)

Higher Education

Higher Education general fund monies have increased by 43% since 2004. (JLBC)
by 43% since 2004.

Arizona ranks 11th in percentage of individuals 18-24 years old with a Bachelor's Degree (National Science Foundation)

Why it is INACCURATE to say Arizona ranks 49th in Education:
These rankings are based on the “per pupil” spending calculation which does not take into account the following:

- Uniformity as to what funding categories go into the calculation from state-to-state (for example, Arizona is highly ranked in terms of capital expenditures per pupil, but none of those dollars are factored into Arizona’s per pupil calculations)

- Actual dollars spent in the classroom from district-to-district or state-to-state
cost of living adjustments

- State constitutional requirements/limitations with regard to education funding
estimates and redundancies in student counts

- Calculation variances that occur because of rapid growth issues faced by states like Arizona, versus states experiencing little, no or negative growth

There are better gauges to education ranking that are outcome-based indicators, such as student achievement, test scores, etc.
This calculation looks at education spending in a vacuum. It makes absolutely no sense for public policy to be driven by one isolated apples-to-oranges statistic.

Fact vs. Fiction - The Budget Cuts and Education

2009-01-29T09:06:00.003-07:00

The Goldwater Institute has published the top ten myths about the education budget cuts. This is eyeopening information and should be considered before lambasting our legislators for doing their job.

Top 10 Myths about Education Funding and Budget Reductions

Goldwater Institute separates budget myths from reality as lawmakers grapple with billion-dollar budget shortfall

Phoenix--Arizona faces one of the largest budget deficits in the nation and lawmakers are struggling to close the gap. Because half of all General Fund spending goes toward education, schools and universities will necessarily be affected by the state's across-the-board belt tightening. While some school administrators and special interest groups have referred to the potential budget cuts "slashing education" and "shortsighted and borderline malicious," the Goldwater Institute would like to separate the reality of education funding in Arizona from several often publicized myths.

Myth #1: Schools simply cannot afford the budget reductions being proposed by the legislature.

Fact: The budget cuts proposed by the State House leadership amounts to a 2.5 percent reduction. Over the last five years, K-12 funding has increased by 40 percent. Reducing funding by 2.5 percent will still leave schools with more money than they had in 2008 adjusted for inflation.

Myth #2: Schools have tightened their belts as much as possible. There's simply nothing left to cut.

Fact: Last year Tucson Unified School District lost track of millions of dollars in equipment. With similar highly publicized stories frequently surfacing, there's room to tighten up. In addition to implementing better controls on equipment and supplies, the Goldwater Institute recommends three more ways schools and school districts can cut their budgets without eliminating teaching positions: 1.) Ban teachers from having non-classroom assignments; 2.) Ban teacher's union employees from conducting union work on district payroll; 3.) Cut administrative bloat at the district level. Arizona has an unusually large share of non-teaching public school employees. Teachers make up slightly less than half of on-site staff in public schools, placing Arizona fourth worst among the 50 states and the District of Columbia in teachers as a share of on-site public school staff.

Myth #3: Arizona already ranks 49th in the nation in education funding and we don't want to be number 50.

Fact: When all of Arizona's funding streams are added up, Arizona school funding ranks in the middle of the states at more than $9,000 per student per year.

Myth #4: Suspending the tax credit for donations toward private school tuition will save money and mitigate the need for education budget cuts.

Fact: Getting children into private schools with $1,000 of foregone tax revenue costs less than the $9,000 spent on a child in the public school system. To save money, the legislature should expand the private school scholarship tax credit and move more children from public to private schools. Suspending it will disrupt these students' educations and increase costs to the state as children return to public schools.

Myth #5: Student success will suffer if budget cuts lead to increased class size.

Fact: Research shows that students would be much better off if schools did let their most ineffective teachers go, and redistributed the students to more effective instructors. Teacher quality has been found to be 10- to 20-times more important than class size in achieving student learning gains. Schools could thereby cut their spending and improve student learning simultaneously.

Myth #6: All-day kindergarten is essential to successful child development and should not be eliminated by budget cuts.

Fact: Studies have consistently shown that any benefit from all-day kindergarten disappears by the time a child reaches the third grade, a phenomenon termed "fade out." Also, all-day kindergarten was widespread in Arizona public schools before a specified state funding stream was created two years ago, districts can continue all-day kindergarten if it is a priority.

Myth #7: Individual districts and schools are reluctant to cut their own budgets, so the legislature should direct where cuts will be made.

Fact: Individual districts and schools will be far more effective in determining how to cut their budgets while protecting their students and employees and should be given the flexibility to set their own budget priorities. To that point, Madison Elementary School District Superintendent Dr. Tim Ham said on January 26, 2009: "The Madison School District understands the crisis the State of Arizona is in economically and knows reductions in education funding will be required. We would ask that districts be allowed to use any of their funding sources to meet their obligations. This would require a temporary suspension of current legal requirements. However, it would provide flexibility, local control, and equality among districts."

Myth #8: Cuts in university funding will drive Arizona into "Third World" status.

Fact: Statewide, higher education budgets have increased by $332 million since 2004. If the full proposed FY 2009 cut of $80.5 million to ASU's budget were enacted, it would still receive more state funding than in 2006. Northern Arizona University would lose $31 million in FY 2009, but still receive more state funds than in 2007. The University of Arizona faces a proposed $103 million cut in FY 2009, which would take it back to 2004 state funding levels.

Myth #9: Investment in higher education is critical to the future success of Arizona's economy.

Fact: Comparing states' higher-education appropriations and gross state products yields no evidence that spending drives economic growth. From 1991 to 2000, none of the top 10 states in greatest higher-education appropriations were among the top 10 in economic growth.

Myth #10: Cuts to university budgets will make it necessary to double tuition thereby violating the Arizona Constitution's clause to make higher education "nearly as free as possible."

Fact: Legal precedent has determined that "nearly as free as possible" means tuition for Arizona public universities must remain in the bottom-third of the nation. Any increase in university tuition is required to meet that standard. As it stands, tuition at Arizona public universities is very low compared to national averages.

The Goldwater Institute is a nonprofit public policy research and litigation organization whose work is made possible by the generosity of its supporters.

For more information on the Goldwater Institute visit www.goldwaterinstitute.com

Protecting the defenseless

2009-01-26T16:14:00.004-07:00

On January 22, 1973 the Supreme Court of the United States issued their ruling in the Roe v. Wade case, essentially declaring that a woman's right to privacy outweighed the fundamental right of an unborn child to live. The result of this landmark decision: 52 million innocent lives lost over the past 36 years.

Earlier today I saw a great post on Sonoran Alliance about the steps being taken by the Obama administration and other Democrats to make abortions more readily available. Their decisions have far reaching consequences, and the videos shown on this post give a lot of food for thought.

As I was reviewing the videos and information on the post, three quotes came to mind that seemed to fit the debate on abortion:

"Whenever I hear any one arguing for slavery I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally." - Abraham Lincoln

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

"Have you ever noticed that everyone who is pro-choice has already been born?" - Bumper Sticker

When the travesty of this malignant court decision is overturned, America will be on her way to a brighter future. I look forward to that day.

The Budget and the 49th Legislature

2009-01-14T21:25:00.008-07:00

The first general session of the 49th State Legislature got off to a start this week with the official swearing in of the legislators and the governor's State of the State Address. The 800 pound gorilla in the room for this session is the $1.2 billion hole in the FY 2009 budget as well as similar forecasts for the 2010 and 2011 budgets.

The projected shortfalls in the state budget for the next few years are huge, and leave our legislators with a host of choices to make, none of which are going to be pain free. To help drive this point home, the House/Senate leadership convened a joint panel discussion with local business leaders/owners this morning, as well as a joint budget study session this afternoon.

During the panel discussion, each panelist explained how the current economic climate has affected their business, the tough decisions they have had to make, and the actions they have taken to position themselves for survival in the short term while keeping an eye on future opportunities. They also provided the legislature with their own thoughts on ways the business climate can be improved in Arizona. These suggestions mostly revolved around equalizing the tax codes and removing onerous regulations (which isn't a big surprise) but they drove their points home with specific examples of ways this could improve the economy in the long run. I saw that most of the legislators took notes - I hope they refer to them often during this session.

During the joint budget study session, the specific challenges of the current budget were reviewed in detail for the members. Several legislators seemed to realize the extent of the shortfall and how it would affect their pet programs during this presentation.

As a guest of Sen. Pearce, today I had the opportunity to sit in on these meetings as well as listen in on the conversations he had with other legislators and members of leadership. It was eye opening to see the amount of work that goes into preparing all of the options for members to consider, as well as the realities of making tough choices with the budget. I also got to see the opportunities that this budget crisis presents for our legislature. Without minimizing the difficulty of the decisions that will be made on programs and departments, the shortfalls in the budget actually present the legislature with a golden opportunity to streamline, reduce costs, and create efficiencies. The overall effect can be a government that better serves the people of our state.

Unfortunately there are going to be human costs to these decisions. In spite of this, our legislators and governor are just going to have to make the tough calls and deal with the consequences. The option of continuing to fund everything and not make cuts is just not tenable, and we are ill served by elected officials who won't "cowboy up" and make the hard choices. Families can't live beyond their means and neither can businesses, so why should government get away with it? In this climate cuts have to be made by everyone.

This creates a dilemma for politicians who will eventually incur the wrath of people affected by the cuts they decide to make. People are going to be unhappy with them and it may cost them later on, but it is the right thing to do. It will be interesting to see which legislators do the right thing and which ones do the "expedient" thing. From what I have seen of Sen. Pearce and several of the other legislators I spoke with today, I have high expectations. Time will tell.

A special "Thank You!" to Sen. Pearce for allowing me to be his shadow today and answering my questions. I also want to acknowledge the unsung heroes of our state legislators. Their executive assistants do a tremendous job keeping the legislators schedules, managing the traffic in and out of their offices, answering phone calls, keeping track of their paperwork and making the contacts our legislators need to do their job. Sen. Pearce's assistant, Karen, is a superhero, and has made each of my visits to Sen. Pearce's office a productive and enlightening experience. Thanks Karen!

The Arizona Outlook

2008-11-12T09:03:00.006-07:00

Despite the national beating Republicans took this year, the news in Arizona is actually pretty good. Yes, we lost two seats on the Corporation Commission and one of our Congressional Seats, but the bloodbath that was predicted for us did not occur at all. Consider this:

McCain won Arizona (I know, a fine lot of good this does us, but it is still comforting)
In spite of being outspent anywhere from 5/1 to 20/1 in the most cometitive legislative districts, the Republicans held onto and expanded their majority with two new seats in the House and 1 new seat in the Senate.
Congressman John Shaddegg held off a tough competitor, winning by a double-digit margin. (Congressmen Flake and Franks buried their opposition with an average of over 60% of the vote)
15 of the legislative races won by Republicans were for open seats
The Republican candidates for Maricopa County offices won in commanding majorities.

There is other good news in all of this. With the replacement of moderate Republicans like Sen. Tom O'Halleran and Rep. Pete Hershberger we not only have a stronger majority, we have a more conservative one. (With any luck their defeat will also help keep remaining moderates, like Rep. Bill Konopnicki, in line with the conservative agenda.)

The icing on the cake for us this year would be for Governor Napolitano to accept a cabinet post in the Obama administration. (Man it hurts to say those last two words!) This would give us a Republican governor that would work with the legislature to get us out of the financial mess we are in as a state.

Moving forward I see three main items for Republicans to focus on for this next election cycle. Getting our budget crisis resolved, repairing the Republican brand, and finding a new standard bearer for our party that we can put in the Governor's office in 2010.

The party's over people, let's get back to work!

Taking a hard left turn...

2008-11-05T09:06:00.007-07:00

This post will probably sound like a whole lot of weeping over spilled milk, but now that the election is over - I am free to say several things that have been eating at me for some time now.

There is no denying it - on a national level we Republicans got our butts handed to us last night. As sad as that makes me, I have to say that we deserved it and will continue to deserve it until we get some true leadership in our party. The main factors in our defeat (as I see it) were as follows:

John McCain

First and foremost - we were ill-served by John McCain as our party's nominee for president. Last night he claimed sole responsibility for the loss of this election and he was dead right for once. Over the past 8 years he has consistently fought against the party and the wishes of his constituents on key issues: immigration, campaign finance reform, judicial nominees, the marriage amendment, etc. He may have made a few conservative votes over the past several years, but his liberal forays during the same time period (McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, the Gang of 14, fighting the Bush tax-cuts, and so on) pretty much shredded his credentials as a conservative for many of us and alienated the Republican base. News flash to future Republican candidates - If the base isn't excited about your candidacy you don't have a snowball's chance in Phoenix of getting to the White House. (How McCain became the party's nominee is a whole other topic for a different time)

Republicans in Congress

Second - The majority of the Republicans that have served in Congress for the last 8 years have sold us down the river. Government spending and growth surpassed all kinds of records on their watch. We have new entitlement programs, a new government agency, and a further intrusion on state's rights thanks to these bozos. Huge violations of our rights have not only been allowed, they've been legislated into law: No Child Left Behind, McCain Feingold, Sarbanes-Oxley, the Patriot Act, TSA in the Airports, etc. And let's not forget earmarks. Not only are these little spending appropriations unconstitutional, they are the gateway to all kinds of corruption. And we have reaped what we have sown. Republicans have been taking earmarks like flapjacks on a Sunday morning, and we have the indictments and convictions to prove it. This has cost us big, because Republicans (well, Conservatives anyway) are deeply offended by lawbreaking and ethics violations. Unlike Democrats we throw the bums out and good riddance.

President George W. Bush

Third - President Bush. While I appreciate many of the things he has done to keep us safe over the past 8 years, the man has shown no spine when it comes to Congress. He as vetoed only a small handful of bills, even when he has publicly disagreed with them. When he signed McCain-Feingold into law he said, in essence: "This is probably an unconstitutional piece of legislation, but I am going to sign it anyway and let the courts sort it out." What part of "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States" didn't he get?
The War on Terror has been another issue. I agree that it is better to fight them there than fight them here, but he should have had a better plan to get in and exhibited more agility in responding to the political and tactical realities once we were there. Bluntly speaking, he should have hit those fundamentalist nuts with overwhelming force and pursued their extinction, not surrender.

The Media

Fourth - The mainstream media was in President-Elect Obama's hip pocket from the word "Go". This isn't a surprise, it is a fact we have known for a long time. Nonetheless, it has its effect, and it needs to be acknowledged. They have long ceased to be a credible source for news and information and are, instead, the "unofficial" organ of every liberal group and view in this broad country. Perhaps a loss of more subscribers will help them recognize their bias for what it is, but I'm not holding my breath. At least we will have the entertainment of contrasting their fawning reports on our new president with the snide remarks and vicious accusations leveled at our last president.

Abandoning Constitutional Principles

Last, but not least, the Republicans have abandoned the proven Constitutional principles of individual freedom and personal responsibility. Constitutionalism is the true essence of Conservatism and, while it is always the most difficult road to follow, it is ultimately the most successful. The Republicans have left this road for the easier road of expediency. We have not articulated the value of conservatism in word or deed, and this is the crux of my whole argument about this election. Those results and the pickle our country is now in, are directly attributable to a falling away from conservatism. Every time conservatism/constitutionalism is given an honest try it works and wins. We have lost because we left it behind. The Republicans have pursued liberal policies for the past 8 years and have created a mess for the country. An uninformed, sound-bite driven electorate responded to the message of "Change" and so now we will get more of the "Same". We are now exposed to liberalism's full force, and there aren't enough conservative Republicans left in the national government to do anything about it. Only when things fall apart and liberalism is exposed for the farce it is will we get the "Change" we really need - a return to conservatism. I hope it won't be too late.

Man I could sure use a shot of vintage Reagan right about now.

Exercise your rights - VOTE!!!

2008-11-04T09:39:00.006-07:00

This is going to be short, sweet, and straight to the point. GO VOTE TODAY!!!

If you have moved and didn't bother to change your registration, you will need to go vote in your old precinct.

To find your precinct click here.

And just in case you've missed it from my earlier posts:

VOTE JOHN MCCAIN FOR PRESIDENT

VOTE FOR YOUR REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES IN ALL OTHER RACES

VOTE YES ON PROPOSITIONS 100,101, and 102

VOTE NO ON PROPOSITIONS 105, 200, 201, 202

Stay tuned for my "editorial" on the results and my feelings about the entire process - after the results are in.

Adams and Jefferson Votes For...

2008-10-28T08:28:00.003-07:00

A week from today Arizonans will get the opportunity to cast their votes for the candidates and positions of their choice. Without further comment, Adams and Jefferson will be voting for the following individuals:

President - John McCain
US Representative, District 6 - Jeff Flake
State Senator, District 18 - Russell Pearce
State Representatives, District 18 - Cecil Ash, Steve Court
Corporation Commission - Marian McClure, Bob Stump, Barry Wong
County Board of Supervisors, District 2 - Don Stapley
County Assesor - Keith Russell
County Attorney - Andrew Thomas
County Recorder - Helen Purcell
County School Superintendent - Don Covey
Sheriff - Joe Arpaio
County Treasurer - Charles "Hos" Hoskins
North Mesa Justice of the Peace - Lester Pearce
North Mesa Constable - Ed Malles
Maricopa County Special Healthcare District 2 - Greg Patterson (Harlan Stratton would also be a good choice)
Mesa Unified School District #4 - Steven Peterson, Kate Ali'Varius, Lance Entrekin

For a guide to the propositions and judges, see my previous post.

To find your polling place click here.

Adams and Jefferson's Take on Arizona's Ballot Propositions

2008-10-13T15:18:00.004-07:00

This past Tuesday I had the opportunity to make a presentation on the 2008 Ballot Propositions. We had a great discussion and spent well over an hour hashing out each proposition and its potential effects on Arizona. Without further ado - here are my notes from that presentation:

Disclaimer: I personally have real issues with making laws by initiative petition. That is what we have a legislature for. We do a lot of damage to our state with some of these propositions, and we can't undo the damage easily or quickly. My arguments against the initiative process will have to be the subject of a future post.

100 Series Propositions

100 series propositions are amendments to the state constitution.

Proposition 100 – No New Taxes on Real Estate
Prop 100 will prohibit the state or any other government entity from charging a sales tax on the sale of real estate.
Currently there is no sales tax in the State of Arizona on the sale or transfer of real property from one entity to another.
This proposition will make it constitutionally illegal for any subdivision of government to impose such a sales tax in the future.

Advantages:
Prohibits a type of tax on real estate transactions

Disadvantages:
Eliminates a potential revenue source for Arizona in the future

Adams and Jefferson says: VOTE YES on PROP 100

Proposition 101 – Freedom of Choice in Health Care
Proposition 101 will make it so that no law can:
Restrict a person’s freedom to choose a private health care plan or system of their choice
Interfere with a person’s or entity’s right to pay directly for lawful medical services
Impose a penalty or fine, of any type, for choosing to obtain or decline health care coverage
Impose a penalty or fine, of any type, for participation in any particular health care system or plan

Advantages:
Ostensibly preserves the right to choose your health care options in the future free from government, employer, healthcare provider or other entity’s influence.
Seen as a pre-emptive move against the effects of socialized medicine.

Disadvantages:
“Fixes” a problem that doesn’t exist yet with a constitutional amendment. The long-term ramifications of this type of law cannot be determined yet.

Adams and Jefferson says: VOTE YES on PROP 101

Proposition 102 – Defense of Marriage Act
Prop 102 defines marriage in the State of Arizona as between one man and one woman. It allows for no other definition of marriage. Because it is a constitutional amendment, it will not allow a court to overturn this definition.

By law, the State of Arizona already only recognizes marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Because this definition is found in the Arizona Revised Statutes (as opposed to the State Constitution) this law is open to challenge in the State courts and can be overturned by an unelected majority in the State Supreme Court. This is what occurred in Massachusetts a few years ago, and happened earlier this year in California.

Prop 102 takes this decision out of the hands of our court system and puts it directly into the hands of the people – where it belongs.

Adams and Jefferson says: VOTE YES on PROP 102

ABSOLUTELY VOTE YES ON PROP 102

PLEASE VOTE YES ON PROP 102

Proposition 105 – Majority Rules Initiative
Prop 105 amends the constitution to require that a majority of qualified electors be required to pass any future initiative measure that seek to raise taxes, fees or other revenue, or mandates a spending obligation – whether by a private person, legal entity, labor union or the state.

In plain English - this means that any spending or taxing initiative that is on the ballot will have to pass by a majority of all registered voters, whether they all voted or not.

Advantages:
Will bring an almost absolute halt to spending measures and tax increases by initiative petition.

Disadvantages:
Counts people who do not bother to vote as “no” votes.
Depending on how this law gets interpreted by courts, it could completely shut down the initiative ability of the citizens of Arizona

I agree with the intentions behind this proposition - to limit the number of spending and taxing initiatives passed into law directly by the people. Unfortunately this proposition is the equivalent of killing a cockroach with a .357 Magnum. The cockroach is definitely dead, but you have probably caused serious damage to something else unintentionally. A shoe would have worked just fine.

In this case - a better proposition would require a supermajority of votes cast to pass spending and tax initiatives. It would eliminate most of the stupid issues that we have passed recently without slamming the door on this ability forever.

Adams and Jefferson says: VOTE NO on PROP 105

200 Series Propositions

The 200 series of propositions are initiatives put on the ballot by the citizens of Arizona or special interests who got enough signatures. These kinds of changes to our state laws cannot be limited by the legislature once they are passed, they can only be "expanded". Be very careful about these propositions.

Proposition 200 – Payday Loans
Arizona has a law on the books that allow payday lenders to operate in the State through July 1, 2010. Prop 200 extends that law out indefinitely and adds additional regulations on the payday lending industry.

This law was put together by the Payday Loan industry and is being promoted by a very deceptive campaign. It advertises itself as a proposition that will put needed regulations on the payday lending industry, but if this passes it will restrict the legislature's ability to modify and/or make any new regulations. The payday lenders are worried that the law allowing their existence will expire without being re-authorized, so they are doing this as an end-run around the legislature. Because it is a ballot initiative - it will be very difficult for the legislature to modify any regulations on the industry if this passes. They have plenty of time to persuade the legislature to re-authorize the law and pass other needed regulations, it does not need to be passed by initiative petition. I am a free-market capitalist, so I don't care if payday lending exists, but initiative petitions are not where these types of regulations should be passed.

Adams and Jefferson says: VOTE NO on PROP 200

Proposition 201 – Homeowners’ Bill of Rights
This bill will allow homeowners and prospective buyers, the right to sue their builder/contractor for deficiencies found in their homes. It will mandate that any dispute between a homebuilder and a homeowner (or prospective homeowner) be settled in a lawsuit. It also makes it so that the seller of the home cannot recover attorney and court costs from the buyer – even if the seller wins the lawsuit.

There is nothing in Prop 201 that is good for Arizona. This proposition will:

Require that any dispute between a seller and buyer/prospective buyer be settled by a lawsuit. Mediation will not be an option.
Increase the cost of homes regardless of their actual value.
Allow lawsuit happy people to sue the pants off builders with impunity.
Will prohibit the victim of a frivolous lawsuit from recovering court costs and attorney fees even if they prevail and the lawsuit is actually deemed frivolous. This will allow lawyers to file multiple lawsuits multiple times for the same "offense" without risking additional costs if they lose their case.
Help our already over-litigious society to become even more so.

Adams and Jefferson says: VOTE NO on Proposition 201!!!

Proposition 202 – Stop Illegal Hiring
Prop 202 alters Proposition 200 – the Employer Sanctions Law - that was overwhelming passed by voters 2 years ago. It removes the penalties (specifically the business "death" penalty) on businesses that knowingly and intentionally hire unauthorized aliens to work for them. It eliminates the requirement to use E Verify in hiring decisions, and instructs the State of Arizona to take their cue from the Federal Government before enacting any of their own laws relating to illegal immigration. It creates stronger penalties for employers who do not properly report cash wages paid to their employees.
This proposition will alter a law that has shown signs of improving our current situation, but hasn’t had enough time to work so we can make an informed decision.

Adams and Jefferson says: VOTE NO on PROP 202

300 Series Propositions

300 Series propositions are laws that are referred to the people of Arizona by the legislature. It usually means one of three things:

1 - The governor vetoed it and the legislature couldn't override the veto but they still wanted a shot at passing the law so they sent it to us.

2 - The legislature couldn't get enough legislators to sign onto the legislation to send it to the governor so they passed it on to us for a decision.

3 - It is a matter that can only be decided by the people of Arizona, such as an increase in legislator's salaries.

Proposition 300 – Legislative Salaries
Any increase in the salary of our State Legislators has to be approved by the voters of Arizona. Currently they make $24,000 for roughly six months of work. This would raise that salary to $30,000.
Advantages:
Potentially get a wider range of people to represent us in the legislature.

Disadvantages:
Greater cost to the state.

Adams and Jefferson doesn't feel strongly either way about this proposition but will probably vote NO

Mesa Special Elections

400 series propositions are referred to the people by their City Council and are used to make changes in the City Charter. Questions are almost always to approve bonds.

Proposition 400 – Residential Inspections
Proposition 400 would allow city inspectors/code compliance officers to inspect the interior of slum properties with the consent of the owner/occupier. Right now they can only inspect the exterior of these properties.

Advantage:
Will give the city another tool to combat urban blight by inspecting the interiors of slum properties.

Disadvantage:
Do we really need more inspections?

Adams and Jefferson doesn't feel strongly either way about this proposition but will probably vote NO

Question 1 – Public Safety Bonds, Question 2 – Street Bonds
Question 1 will authorize the City of Mesa to issue $58,300,000 in general obligation municipal bonds to pay for improvements to the city fire and police department in infrastructure, personnel and equipment. Question 2 will allow the City of Mesa to issue $110,900,000 in general obligation municipal bonds to pay for improvements to the city’s streets, highways, and traffic control systems. Both bonds are to be paid for over 25 years and are secured by a secondary property tax on all taxable properties in the city.

Advantages:
Improved public safety
Improved roads

Disadvantages:
More borrowing for the city
Secondary property tax will be triggered by these bonds.

We have a new mayor and city council that have worked hard to trim the fat in our budget. These bonds are actually half of what the city departments originally proposed to the city council. I hate to borrow more, especially when it will trigger the property tax, but we get the city we pay for. I would like a better city than the one we live in now.

Adams and Jefferson says: VOTE YES on QUESTIONS 1 and 2

Judicial Review

In terms of how they are performing the daily tasks of their job, only one judge does not meet Judicial Performance Standards as determined by the Commission on Judicial Performance. All others received either a unanimous or near unanimous rating of “Meets Expectations” by the commission.
Judge Crane McClennen of the Maricopa County Superior Court does not meet expectations.

A terrific blog that rates judges based on their rulings can be found here.

A Legacy of Freedom

2008-09-17T07:39:00.009-07:00

"We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." - Preamble to the Constitution

221 years ago today, after five months of arduous debate, negotiation, argument, compromise, dreaming and planning, a group of inspired men completed their work and signed the document that they had worked so hard to create. It then left Independence Hall in Philadelphia for its journey to New York, where Congress reviewed its contents and sent it to the states for ratification.

The framing and ratification of our Constitution was nothing less than a miracle. Men from twelve very different states with a variety of prejudices and attitudes towards government came together to form a strong central government that still preserved the rights of individual citizens and their respective states. Each state then elected delegates to their own conventions and debated these same principles again. When they decided to ratify the Constitution (in some states by a mere handful of votes) each state willingly gave up a portion of its authority to become a part of a larger nation. It was a tremendous gamble on their part, but their actions went on to create the freest and most prosperous nation the world has ever known.

We owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to the men who framed our Constitution and fought for its ratification in each state. For over two hundred years their efforts have secured the blessings of liberty to us - their posterity. Over the years, these blessings have been preserved from generation to generation through both armed struggle and the careful vigilance of informed citizens. They too are deserving of our gratitude for keeping our inheritance intact, and passing it on to us.

Preserving and defending the Constitution becomes the great mission of each generation of Americans, and now it is our turn to rise to the challenge like our forefathers before us.

For some of the best among us, defending our Constitution means putting on the nation's uniform and defending it against enemies abroad. For others it means to create, enforce, or interpret laws in a way that is in harmony with the Constitution. For all of us, whether we are soldiers, statesmen or citizens, it means to know our Constitution from end to end and then to do our part to ensure that the government is strictly following its principles and staying within its bounds.

If the next generation of Americans is to continue this tradition, we need to pass a love for and knowledge of the Constitution down to them with the added example of our own generation of leaders. Leaving them a larger legacy of freedom than the one left to us will ensure that our Republic continues to be a blessing to millions of Americans yet to come.

For those of you who are interested - Heritage Academy in Mesa is hosting a Constitutional Seminar this Saturday, September 20th from 8:30-4:30. Reserve your spot by calling 480-969-5641

Cost is $7.50 for the required workbook.

Clean Elections Debates Start Tonight!!!

2008-09-15T15:34:00.002-07:00

The Clean Elections Commission is holding debates for several races beginining tonight.

Click here for information about the debates.

An Iraqi Veteran for John McCain

2008-09-09T10:16:00.002-07:00

Enough said!

Convention - Day 2

2008-09-03T14:00:00.002-07:00

We have a ton of events planned for pretty much every moment of the day, so making these posts is fairly difficult. My appologies for not keeping everybody as up-to-date as possibe.

Last night's session was the kind of rip roarin', crowd pleasin', foot stompin' type of event you would expect a convention to be. We paid tribute to Republican presidents of the past (Lincoln, Roosevelt, Ford, George H.W. Bush) and the men and women of our armed services. Perhaps the most moving moment of the night was when we watched a video on the sacrifices of one of our country's finest, U.S. Navy Seal Michael Monsoor - the fourth recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor from our current war in Iraq. Michael's sister was with us as well as five other MoH recipients and they were honored with a thunderous standing ovation.

First Lady Laura Bush spoke, highlighting the accomplishments of President Bush's administration over his 8 years in office, and then introducing him. President Bush spoke to us from the Whitehouse - emphasizing McCain's leadership abilities and his stand against legislation and policies that he does not agree with. He emphasized that McCain is the only candidate with the experience necessary to keep us safe during these difficult times, and that he is ready to be the President of the United States of America.

Service was the theme for the night, and the speeches all centered around ordinary Americans doing their best to serve their country, putting country first. Correlations between their actions and John McCain's lifetime of service to the country were drawn, culminating with our key speakers of the evening - Senator Fred Thompson and Senator Joseph Lieberman.

Senator Thompson's speech reviewed Sen. McCain's years as a prisoner of war and emphasized that being a POW does not qualify you for office, but it definitely reveals a lot about your character. He touched on the economic issues that are affecting our country right now and how the best way to help our country flourish is to get government out of the way. His speech was magnificent!

Sen Lieberman closed the evening explaining why he supports John McCain and making an appeal to his fellow Democrats and Independents to consider carefully their choice this election, and to choose someone with the experience and the character we need in the Whitehouse - John McCain.

More later - we have another meeting to run to.

Vindication!

2008-09-03T06:35:00.002-07:00

A strong majority of the Republican voters in LD 18 repudiated the attacks on Rep. (soon to be Sen.) Russell Pearce and gave Kevin Gibbons a sound trouncing in the Republican Primary yesterday. (Click here for official results)

In other election related news, it looks like our district will be represented in the House by Cecil Ash and Steve Court. A razor thin margin of 72 votes put Steve Court over Ron Middlebrook, and Kanani Henderson was far behind the pack with about half the numer of votes received by Court and Middlebrook. (Click here for official results)

This was a difficult race for Rep. Pearce and his family due to the despicable attacks on his character. The attacks were unwarranted, unfair, and undeserved by such a fine public servant. In spite of these attacks, Rep. Pearce stayed firm and is standing up for all of us in LD 18. On behalf of me and my family - Thank you Rep. Pearce. You are one of our heroes.

Off to a (not so roaring) Start

2008-09-02T07:55:00.005-07:00

With Hurricane Gustav making landfall yesterday, the convention began on a much more muted tone than normal. We were gaveled to order a little after 2:30pm and began taking care of the statutory business of the convention - adopting the rules, selecting officers for the convention, appointing committees, and receiving/accepting reports. The most important matter of business was the adoption of the official Platform, which was done by a voice vote with no opposition (or at least none that I could detect - it all happened rather fast).

Throughout the meeting appeals were made to donate to several hurricane relief fund efforts and, in true Republican fashion, over $1.3million was donated within the first hour.

By far the most rousing and celebrated moments of the convention were the appearance of our First Lady, Laura Bush, and our future First Lady, Cindy McCain. Both ladies added "a touch of glamour" to the event and received thunderous applause and standing ovations. During their appearance additional appeals for funds were made, and video presentations were made from 4 of the five Gulf-State governors. A motion was made to adjourn and we left for our hotels after a very abbreviated first session.

The Arizona delegation along with delegations from California, Tennessee and other areas were treated to a great party by Medtronics at their world headquarters. An ice bar and several fantastic entertainers filled the evening. Along with several Medtronics officials, Gov. Pawlenty and Sen. Coleman both spoke to us about the challenges and opportunities we have as Republicans.

The real party will begin tonight as we get into full swing with high profile speakers and a much more celebratory atmosphere at the convention for session 2.
The response to the hurricane by the McCain Campaign has been admirable, focusing our attention on being Americans first and showing concern for the welfare of our fellow citizens above and beyond our politics. Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin have been touring the area, lending support and raising funds for relief.

Barrack Obama's response? He'll go when things have calmed down and he is offering his campaing email list to fundraisers.

Typical.

Meeting a TRUE American Hero

2008-09-01T10:20:00.004-07:00

This post is a small deviation from the political news of the RNC, but it involved an American Hero, and was such an inspiring event that I want to include it here.

As my wife and I were getting off the elevator a few minutes ago I spotted an elderly gentleman and his wife seated right next to the elevator banks with this around his neck:

I discreetly pointed him out to my wife, not wanting to interrupt him, but then I couldn't resist and had to go pay my respects. His name is Cpl. Hiroshi H. Miyamura, a Medal of Honor Recipient and WWII/Korean War Veteran. I told him what an honor it was to meet him and his wife and how grateful we are for his service and others like him. He was very gracious and allowed my wife to take this picture of the two of us:

Mr. Miyamura is from New Mexico and is also a first time attendee at the Republican National Convention. He told us that he wanted to make an appearance at the convention to tell people who he was voting for and why. He said we needed real American men to lead our country and that he was there to honor Sen. McCain's service in the military and encourage us to vote for him.After chatting for a few minutes I walked away, with goosebumps running up and down my arms. It was such an honor to meet this man and personally thank him for his service to our country. After running our errands I had to run back up to the hotel room to look up Cpl. Miyamura's Citation. After reading it aloud to my wife I once again got chills. I would rather meet and visit with one of these authentic American heroes than a President of the United States. I couldn't wait for tonight to get this post put up on my blog. It is too exciting for me!Here is Cpl. Miyamura's Medal of Honor Citation:

MIYAMURA, HIROSHI H.

Rank and organization: Corporal, U.S. Army, Company H, 7th Infantry Regiment, 3rd Infantry Division. Place and date: Near Taejon-ni, Korea, 24 and 25 April 1951. Entered service at: Gallup, N. Mex. Birth: Gallup, N. Mex. G.O. No.: 85, 4 November 1953. Citation: Cpl. Miyamura, a member of Company H, distinguished himself by conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity above and beyond the call of duty in action against the enemy. On the night of 24 April, Company H was occupying a defensive position when the enemy fanatically attacked threatening to overrun the position. Cpl. Miyamura, a machine gun squad leader, aware of the imminent danger to his men unhesitatingly jumped from his shelter wielding his bayonet in close hand-to-hand combat killing approximately 10 of the enemy. Returning to his position, he administered first aid to the wounded and directed their evacuation. As another savage assault hit the line, he manned his machine gun and delivered withering fire until his ammunition was expended. He ordered the squad to withdraw while he stayed behind to render the gun inoperative. He then bayoneted his way through infiltrated enemy soldiers to a second gun emplacement and assisted in its operation. When the intensity of the attack necessitated the withdrawal of the company Cpl. Miyamura ordered his men to fall back while he remained to cover their movement. He killed more than 50 of the enemy before his ammunition was depleted and he was severely wounded. He maintained his magnificent stand despite his painful wounds, continuing to repel the attack until his position was overrun. When last seen he was fighting ferociously against an overwhelming number of enemy soldiers. Cpl. Miyamura's indomitable heroism and consummate devotion to duty reflect the utmost glory on himself and uphold the illustrious traditions on the military service.

Republican National Convention Eve

2008-08-31T21:00:00.003-07:00

With Hurricane Gustav expected to make landfall tomorrow, the atmosphere and tone of the convention have changed significantly. President Bush and Vice-President Cheney have both cancelled their appearances here tomorrow, and the schedules have been altered significantly as a result. In keeping with the theme- "Country First" - the convention has been scaled down to the minimum requirements of the RNC Bylaws for nominating a President and Vice-President.

There is still a lot of excitement in the air, but it is tempered by concern for our fellow Americans in the Gulf States. Most of our peripheral meetings/receptions have been modified to become fund-raising events for the Gulf State region, and the event sponsors have generously set up matching grants to help double our impact.

Day 1 of the convention officially starts tomorrow. As developments happen I will have notes and commentary. Stay tuned!

A VP we can REALLY Believe In

2008-08-29T08:19:00.007-07:00

Sen. John McCain announced Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate this morning. This move is a an absolute masterstroke by McCain. Some of Gov. Palin's many strong points:

She is a young, energetic mother of 5
She is solidly pro-life. Her youngest son, born this last April, has Downs Syndrome. This is a perfect counterpoint to the pro-death views of the Democratic party - who would have aborted this beautiful child.
She has made a name for herself fighting the corruption that Alaska has become infamous for.
She is the mother of a US Soldier. In the War on Terror both her and Sen. McCain have put their money where their mouth is. When they put soldiers in harms way it is personal for them. They won't take this responsibility lightly because the stakes are so personally high.
As both a mayor and governor she has cut wasteful spending and then returned the funds to the people that paid into it.
She directly confronted corruption and entrenched interests in her state to make government serve the people, not the special interests, demonstrating a courage not often found in politicians.
She is the Governor of our largest oil-producing state, but not an oil executive. This gives her credibility on the energy issue without suspicion. (Who better to tell us the TRUTH about ANWR?)
She has executive experience as both a Governor and a Mayor
She has credibility on environmental issues.
She is fiscally conservative in every sense of the word.
She is a lifetime member of the NRA as well as an avid hunter and fisher. She is absolutely rock-solid on the 2nd Ammendment
Finally, she is a woman. Selecting her as his running mate gives the lie to Democratic accusations of our party being sexist and may help attract and/or retain the "defense moms" that put President Bush over the top for his second term.

Governor Palin will bring great strength to Senator McCain's campaign. He has made a choice that surprised a lot of people - demonstrating his independent streak, but this choice also takes some of the spotlight off of Obama's historic run as the first African-American to be a major-party nominee. Governor Palin is a choice that the party base can enthusiastically support, and this move will bring much more excitement and interest to the GOP base that has been mostly lukewarm to Sen. McCain's candidacy.

Excellent choice Senator McCain!

J.T. Ready - Please Resign

2008-08-27T08:02:00.003-07:00

One of the more odious issues to come out of this election cycle is the neo-Nazi affiliation of J.T. Ready, an elected Republican PC in LD 18 and a former candidate for both the Mesa City Council and the State Legislature.

Congressman Jeff Flake and MCRC Chairman Tom Husband have been exchanging letters recently regarding Mr. Ready and his affiliation with the Party as an elected PC. In this exchange it has become obvious that the Party cannot officialy do anything about Mr. Ready's position - the only one who can change that status before Sept 2 is J.T. himself. The only thing that is left for us to do is to ask him to resign his position before Sept. 2nd.

Let me be the first:

J.T., your neo-Nazi affiliation is an embarrassment to the good people of your precinct who elected you as a PC, to the other PC's of LD 18, and to the Republican Party as a whole. We do not accept your twisted worldviews and ask that you please resign your position as a PC forthwith.

Primary Campaign Cannibalism

2008-08-26T10:07:00.014-07:00

The full-scale war that is being waged for the LD 18 Senate Seat reminds me of a similar battle that was waged in our district in the not-so-distant past. Four years ago Rep. Karen Johnson and Dr. Mary Jo Vecchiarelli squared off in a primary campaign for the LD 18 Senate seat being vacated by Mark Anderson. We had a comparatively large group of active PC's working in the district at the time and this particular campaign split us pretty much down the middle, with half of us going with Rep. Johnson and half with Dr. Vecchiarelli. At times the verbal attacks and ripostes between these two were very entertaining, but the overall effect was damaging to our district as a whole. The decline in active PC's over the years since this contest seem to indicate that we are still dealing with the consequences of those attacks. I'm sure that there are several other factors which have contributed to our decline in PC activity in LD 18 over the past few years but I can't help noticing that the active individuals who supported Dr. Vecchiarelli in that contest four years ago have mostly vanished from our meetings. And, unfortunately, they have taken their strength with them.

The problem with these types of dirty campaigns is the wedge they drive between good people who probably agree with each other on at least 95% of the other issues. It seems that our claims and counter-claims of Republican orthodoxy can make us so dogmatic that we can't clearly see the other person's point of view. If we could see clearly I am sure that most of the time we would find our differences to be more about tactics than principles.

The primary campaign that is going on right now is a perfect example of how bad things can get. The personal attacks directed at Rep. Pearce during this campaign and the responses from all camps have made the atmosphere of our district more like a war zone than a free and open political forum. Instead of being excited about whichever candidate we are supporting, we are perpetually angry at the other candidate. This bunker mentality distracts us from the other real issues we need to focus on if we are to win in November, both on a local and a national level.

I realize that in any contest we have to point out differences, but we don't need to attack people's character for having a different point of view. It is also OK to approach each contest with an open mind about the different candidates and their ideas. We only help the other party when we engage in sandbagging each other. The truly Reaganesque thing to do in these types of contests is to stick strictly to the issues and obey the 11th Commandment - "Thou Shalt Not Criticize Thy Fellow Republicans".

In those instances when we have a candidate who simply can't seem to abide by this simple commandment we silence them in the most effective and permanent manner possible - we soundly defeat them at the ballot box.

(I realize that this post is probably a little too idealistic and might even open me up to accusations of hypocrisy, but I am really getting sick and tired of the personal attacks that are going around, not just in our district but in Republican races throughout the state. Do we really need this much cannibalism? Look at what it is doing to our party!)

Countdown to the Convention - Minnesota Here We Come!

2008-08-25T09:40:00.003-07:00

Earlier this year I was elected to be an Alternate Delegate to the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis-St. Paul. My wife and I fly out this coming Saturday and will be there through the convention, returning to sunny AZ on Friday, September 5th. I am taking my laptop with me and will attempt to give a daily update on the convention and our different activities during the week. Stay tuned!

Honoring a Local Hero

2008-08-21T19:51:00.006-07:00

This morning I had the opportunity to ride with other Patriot Guard Riders as we escorted Lance Corporal Juan Lopez-Castañeda to his final resting place. I was touched as I witnessed first-hand the sacrifice that our servicemen and their families make for our nation. The following short bio on Lance Corporal Lopez-Castañeda was sent to all of the Patriot Guard Riders with the details on the escort mission:

Lance Corporal Juan Lopez-Castaneda, 19, US Marine Corps died on Thursday, 14 Aug 08, while supporting combat operations in Helmand Province, Afghanistan.

Juan was a rifleman who joined the Marine Corps on June 4, 2007. He was on his first deployment and received the Purple Heart, Combat Action Ribbon, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Afghanistan Campaign Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal and the National Defense Service Medal.

Lopez-Castaneda was assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, I Marine Expeditionary Force, Twentynine Palms, CA.

Thank you, Corporal Lopez-Castañeda, for your service and sacrifice that have helped keep us free.

Q.E.P.D.

A Man of Courage

2008-08-20T07:31:00.009-07:00

One of the more gratifying political developments lately has been the backlash against the numerous hit pieces run against Rep. Russell Pearce. Instead of weakening his position, the attacks have only galvanized his base of supporters and stirred them to action, effectively counteracting their intended effect. It has also ruined any hopes of a political career that Mr. Gibbons hoped to have in this district.

The Republicans in LD 18 are not only very passionate about their politics, they are also informed voters that are concerned about the issues . This is definitely one area where Rep. Pearce shines. The attack ads did not address any issues, they just attempted to assasinate Rep. Pearce's character. In doing so they made a foolish (if not downright stupid) miscalclulation - a large portion of the Republican voters in LD 18 know Russell Pearce personally. It doesn't take more than about 5 minutes with the man to discover that he isn't a racist, that he loves his family, and that he is committed to his positions because he sincerely believes that they are the right things to do. They are also well thought out and reasoned approaches to the issues that concern our state. Just talk with him about the different issues - illegal immigration, bloated state budgets, unconstitutional government programs, etc. - and you will discover that he has put a lot of thought into the problems, their origins, and possible solutions. He is not a reactive legislator.

Rep. Pearce also has another character trait that has made him a "favorite son" in this district - Courage. On the issues that concern us the most, Rep. Pearce is the point man. Yes, other legislators support him, but Rep. Pearce is the one who gets the issues brought to the forefront. As a result he also becomes the punching bag for the political pugilists that take opposite points of view. Rep. Pearce has sponsored referendums and initiatives that, when put to a vote by the citizens of Arizona, have been approved with over 70% of the vote. Despite this obvious connection with the Arizona electorate, the media outlets would have you believe that Rep. Pearce is the most loathed man in the state. Rep. Pearce has remained committed to his policy positions regardless of the complaints and accusations from his opponents. He is doing the people's business, and we would all be better off if the other legislators showed at least half of the courage and conviction that Rep. Pearce shows every day.

Blogger Roundtable Discussion - LD 18 Senate Race Part 5

2008-08-15T07:46:00.002-07:00

The good people at Mesa Issues have put together a roundtable discussion between bloggers who are covering the LD 18 Senate race. East Valley Immigration, Thoughts on Mesa, Sonoran Alliance and Adams and Jefferson agreed to participate. The fifth and final installment of this discussion follows:

5. Make a prediction on how you think the race will ultimately turn out.

East Valley Immigration:
Pearce wins by a good margin. The immigration stuff is too big for Gibbons to overcome.

Thoughts on Mesa:
I believe the race will ultimately turn out in Pearce favor. Before that happens though I believe that we will see a lot more negative mail pieces.

Sonoran Alliance:
Russell Pearce will ultimately win this election. The attack on Russell will backfire even though he is outspent by his opponent and political action committees. Russell knows his district and he knows his voters. West Mesa voters will back Russell because he is one of them and an attack on Russell is seen as an attack on them. Gibbons and his supporters will leave the political scene quietly with some never getting involved in politics again.

Adams and Jefferson:
I predict that Rep. Pearce will win this race, but it will be close and may weaken him politically.

Mesa Issues:
Pearce wins, but the polling will motivate some more people to come out against him. He must realize that this is not a ringing endorsement, but rather a great time for him to mend the rifts in the party and make friends. You must always be gracious in victory.

Participating in this roundtable discussion has been great, and I want to thank Mesa Issues for putting it together. It has allowed me to post something interesting during a very hectic couple of weeks.

Blogger Roundtable Discussion - LD 18 Senate Race Part 4

2008-08-14T07:56:00.002-07:00

The good people at Mesa Issues have put together a roundtable discussion between bloggers who are covering the LD 18 Senate race. East Valley Immigration, Thoughts on Mesa, Sonoran Alliance and Adams and Jefferson agreed to participate. The fourth installment of this discussion follows:

4. If you had one piece of advice to give to one of the candidates, what would it be?

Sonoran Alliance:
Russell Pearce - Stay very visible and continue to communicate to the voters in your district. They respect you and expect you to stand and fight for them. Running and hiding from the hit pieces will create doubt in their mind and validate the hit pieces. Fight for your supporters and they will fight for you. Kevin Gibbons - Get to the know the voters of district 18. Running a campaign from a distance won't gain voters. Elections are about addition and the more you meet and listen to voters, the more support you will gain. Also be adamant about why you are running. This is not about becoming someone. It's about doing something.

Thoughts on Mesa:
Don't attack people personally. It is OK to attack on the issues but not on family.

Mesa Issues: For Kevin Gibbons - be honest about why you are running, who is helping you and where your money is coming from. Acting like you are above everything is going on after you gave money to the Domestic Violence Shelter and the ADL shows you had an idea about what was going on and where people were going to attack Pearce.

Adams and Jefferson:
For Kevin Gibbons - When you are asked a question in a debate - just answer the question. It is impossible to find out what you really think about the issues because you never answer the question that is being asked.

East Valley Immigration:
Talk about the issues instead of trying to insinuate another message. It seems like Gibbons is running the I'm not Russell Pearce campaign which means I know nothing about him. That tells me that the candidate is an empty suit.

Blogger Roundtable Discussion - LD 18 Senate Race Part 3

2008-08-12T16:56:00.002-07:00

Blogger Roundtable Discussion - LD 18 Senate Race Part 2

2008-08-09T08:50:00.003-07:00

The good people at Mesa Issues put together a roundtable discussion between bloggers who are covering the LD 18 Senate race. East Valley Immigration, Thoughts on Mesa, Sonoran Alliance , and Adams and Jefferson agreed to participate. The second installment of this discussion follows:

2. What do you think is the greatest handicap for each candidate?

Sonoran Alliance:
Pearce- people think he only is about immigration. He's actually a big player in the no-tax crowd. Gibbons- He's all for open borders and has aligned himself with by taking money from big time Democrats.

Mesa Issues:
Its going to be hard for people to get past the fact that Gibbons and his donors are double dipping in donating to his campaign and for the independent expenditures. If he has changes to the employer sanctions laws, he better speak up now, instead of letting others speak for him.

Thoughts on Mesa:
Gibbons – his ties to those fighting the employer sanctions laws and his own attempts at personally attacking Pearce.Pearce – He talks too much and gets off subject.

East Valley Immigration:
Pearce- people think he only is about immigration. He's actually a big player in the no-tax crowd. Gibbons- He's all for open borders and has aligned himself with by taking money from big time Democrats.

Adams and Jefferson:
I see three main challenges for each candidate:
Russell Pearce:
His strong position on illegal immigration has allowed his opponents to accuse him of being a racist.
He has angered a lot of powerful people across the state who have organized a concerted effort to remove him from office.
He is a Clean Elections candidate which limits his financial resources and also gives the Gibbons camp an opportunity to challenge his conservative credentials.

Kevin Gibbons:
His list of campaign contributors include Democrat party activists and othergroups who directly oppose key principles/platforms of the Republican Party. This has angered the Party and led to the MCRC endorsement of Russell Pearce in this primary - a very uncommon thing for them to do.
His supporters are more "anti-Pearce" than "pro-Gibbons" which isn't the best motivation for voters
He has snubbed the LD18 Precinct Committeemen who are now mad as hornets at him and will be working with their friends and neighbors to make sure the Rep. Pearce is sent to the Senate.

Blogger Roundtable Discussion - LD 18 Senate Race Part 1

2008-08-09T08:34:00.003-07:00

The good people at Mesa Issues put together a roundtable discussion between bloggers who are covering the LD 18 Senate race. East Valley Immigration, Thoughts on Mesa, Sonoran Alliance , and Adams and Jefferson agreed to participate. The first installment of the discussion follows:

1. Which candidate (Pearce or Gibbons) do you think has greater negatives right now?

Adams and Jefferson:
Kevin Gibbons - he is taking on a "favorite son" in the district and will have difficulty proving himself to be more conservative than Mr. Pearce in an incredibly conservative district.

Thoughts on Mesa:
Even though a negative piece came out on Pearce about a 28 year old divorce filing, I think that most republicans can see what is going on by the "open boarder" and "cheap labor groups" supporting Gibbons. I still firmly believe that Gibbons has the greatest negatives.

East Valley Immigration:
Although Gibbons is making a run at smearing Pearce, I think when you consider the fact we are in a Republican Primary, Gibbons has the most to lose. He has come off looking like an open border, democrat taking special interest money. I know my neighbors in Mesa don't exactly line up that way.

Mesa Issues:
I think that the independent expenditures were fired up because they saw that Gibbons had clearly been put forth as the outsider with a lot of questionable connections. Gibbons has spent considerable time trying to put Pearce down more, when in fact, he should be trying to play up his positives. I predict that from here on out, Gibbons will go positive and allow his colleagues to do the mudslinging.

Sonoran Alliance: One would think that Russell Pearce has the highest negatives with the recent independent expenditure hit pieces against him but it is quite the opposite. Kevin Gibbons negatives are greater and continue to increase as more attacks on Pearce occur. Even before the attacks on Pearce, Gibbons was considered an outsider with ties to business interests trying to thwart the employer sanction laws. One must remember that West Mesa neighborhoods are a very tight-knit community and an outside attack on someone so closely identified and respected is seen as an attack on the whole community. Over the years, Pearce has earned the respect of many people in his district and knows more people than his opponent anticipated. Gibbons has an uphill battle trying to earn the respect of a community that which knows he has not been apart of. The revelation that Gibbons did not participate in previous elections will hurt him. Gibbons' ties to immigration legal services is also a problem with voters who have seen their community negatively affected by illegal immigrants and cheap labor. Finally, there is also a perception that Gibbons comes from a higher class status and was handpicked by individuals seeking political power. West Mesa voters are very protective of their community and elected officials and are not likely to be told what to do. Kevin Gibbons has an uphill battle and it only gets more difficult with each hit piece on Russell Pearce. I believe that Mesa Deserves Better's tactics are backfiring back on Gibbons.

LuAnne Pearce Responds

2008-08-06T21:11:00.003-07:00

Representative Russell Pearce's wife LuAnne has issued the following statement regarding a really nasty hit piece that was recently mailed out by a group called "Mesa Deserves Better":

"Recently opponents of our State's employer sanctions law made despicable, misleading and false attacks on my husband and our family. Twenty-eight years ago a petition for divorce was filed on my behalf. The allegations in this 28 year old document are not true and the petition was shortly thereafter withdrawn.

The people behind this "Mesa Deserves Better" committee are not honorable. Their only purpose is to destroy my husband's good reputation, to hurt our family and to repeal the law which prevents them from hiring individuals who are in this country illegally. I urge everyone to reject these mean spirited people and all who are affiliated with them. It is apparent that they will go to any length and use any measure to further their own political agenda.

My husband is a good man, a man of faith who taught our children and grandchildren the meaning of honor and duty to God, Family and Country. I hope all voters in District 18 join me in supporting my husband for State Senate and rejecting these misleading and false attacks."

-LuAnne Pearce

Buy now, pay later.

2008-07-31T08:08:00.006-07:00

I am getting thoroughly disgusted with the volume of stupidity that is coming out of our state and national capitals. Our elected officials put a small, feel-good fix on whatever crisis is currently grabbing the headlines and then leave the underlying problem for future generations to deal with. Our nation is being overrun by this mentality, with the Mortgage Bailout bill being only the latest example to point to. With lots of wind-sock leadership from our congress and the aquiescence of a lame-duck president, our national debt increased $800 billion with the stroke of a pen yesterday. Instead of letting people and industries suffer the consequences of their bad decisions, we rescue them and pass the bill down to future generations. (The latest calculation on your personal liability for our national debt - over $30,000 for every man, woman, and child in the country) What is really beyond belief, is that these elected officials think that this solves the problem! Honestly - if industry leaders know that Uncle Sam is going to pick them up every time they fall, what possible motivation could they have to change their ways?

In our own state a group of spineless legislators and a spendthrift governor have just saddled us with a mountain of unconstitutional debt. The borrowing and accounting gimmicks they used to "balance" the budget this year are the equivalent of placing a band-aid on a full-limb amputation. And, just like that band-aid won't stop the bleeding, using funny math will not get us out of the mess we are in. It just delays the inevitable.

We have real problems in this country with out of control spending. President Reagan said it best during his first innaugural speech on January 20, 1981:

" For decades, we have piled deficit upon deficit, mortgaging our future and our children's future for the temporary convenience of the present. To continue this long trend is to guarantee tremendous social, cultural, political, and economic upheavals.
You and I, as individuals, can, by borrowing, live beyond our means, but for only a limited period of time. Why, then, should we think that collectively, as a nation, we are not bound by that same limitation?"

Amen Mr. President!

Kevin Gibbons and Illegal Immigration Policy

2008-07-23T15:44:00.003-07:00

District 18 Senate Republican Candidate Kevin Gibbons claims that he has the answers for our immigration policy problems. As an immigration attorney Mr. Gibbons has a credible claim to expertise in immigration law, but one look at his list of donors shows where his loyalties in immigration policy come from.

While Gibbons says that he wants to represent Mesa, only 20.6% of his donations come from people who live within the city. In fact, only 15.1% of his donations are from people in District 18. In contrast, 100% of Russell Pearce’s donors are from inside the district.

More to the point 53 of Gibbons’ donors are out-of-town farmers from Yuma and Buckeye, with over 30% of his total donations coming from Yuma alone. A large majority of these donations come from the farming community that is actively engaged in employing cheap labor which is against Arizona’s new employer sanctions laws. Since Mr. Gibbons would obviously better represent the views of his Yuma “constituents”, perhaps he should consider running for their senate seat.

Kevin Gibbons supports initiatives that will weaken the laws requiring the use of E-Verify. He also advocates for a guest worker program that will basically open the borders for his farm and fast food supporters who desire cheap labor. Kevin Gibbons’ policy positions are not the forward thinking policies supported by the citizens of District 18. On the contrary, they are the failed “business-as-usual” policies that do nothing to solve our immigration problems and promote the defiance of our laws.

While Gibbons talks of “real reform” for illegal immigration, his supporters and backers tell a different story. From former Democratic Party Chairmen to Open Border Supporters, his rhetoric does not match the real intentions of his patrons.

Russell Pearce has been a champion of the taxpayer and a nationally recognized leader on immigration issues. He has the conservative credentials and a solid track record of representing the people of District 18. Even a cursory examination of Mr. Gibbons’ list of out-of-town open border advocates and Democrat power brokers reveal who he would really represent.

If Mr. Gibbons sincerely wants to represent the citizens of District 18, I suggest that he return donations he’s received from supporters whose policies we have clearly rejected.

Review of the LD 18 Debate

2008-07-11T10:48:00.002-07:00

Last night was the Clean Elections debate for the Republican candidates from LD 18. I humbly offer to you my opinions on each candidate's performance last night and what I now think of each one.

In alphabetical order:

Cecil Ash

It was apparent that Mr. Ash has spent some time giving careful consideration to the different issues facing our state. His answers were well reasoned and demonstrated that he was open to considering alternatives to our problems vs. blind obedience to the party-line. This shows that he thinks for himself, and I like that. I have some reservations about his position on taxes, but at least I have the confidence that he will think things through and not just automatically use a tax increase as a knee-jerk reaction to a looming problem.

Steve Court

Going into this debate I didn't know a whole lot about Mr. Court's positions on anything. I know him personally and like him a lot, but he didn't come to the debate sponsored by the LD 18 Republicans last month, so this was the first opportunity I had to hear him.

I liked his answers. They were very free-market, conservative, and fiscally responsible. He came across as someone who could look at the State budget, find problems, and correct them. Since we are losing Rep. Pearce's budgeting expertise in the House, having someone with similar talents is important for us, and that is a huge plus for Mr. Court.

My concerns:

1- His alignment with Kevin Gibbons (see below) and some of Gibbons’ supporters (Udall et al).

2- Will he be responsive to the LD 18 Republicans? I would like to see him involved in the party with the rest of us.

Kanani Henderson

Miss Henderson spoke about how much experience she has in so many different areas that it called her credibility into question. Seriously - how much experience can someone in their early 20’s have? Some of her responses were just naive, and her comment on marriage showed that she didn’t understand the point of the Marriage Ammendment at all.

She said that she was passionate about several things, but could never really articulate a clear position on the issues she was passionate about.

I give Miss Henderson kudos for running traditional in an open primary where everyone else is running with Clean Elections Funds. With a few more years of experience under her belt she would make a much more credible candidate and have a fair shot at being an effective legislator. If she gets elected now she will just be a door mat for the legislators that have been around the block a few more times.

Ron Middlebrook

Mr. Middlebrook is a straight down the line conservative. He clearly articulated his desire to get back to the basics of a very limited government that stays within its constitutional parameters. He mentioned finding a way to protect states from renegade federal judges who legislate from the bench, and I would be interested to hear how he would accomplish this. (To me this is an issue that can only be solved at the federal level - but it needs to be solved so I'll take any suggestions) Mr. Middlebrook has a lot of passion and is able to articulate this passion clearly and concisely into believable policy statements. My only concern is that he is passionate about his positions to the point that I don't know if he would give fair consideration to opposing points of view. We want principled and courageous legislators, but we also need legislators who can work with others to get things done. He has the first part down pat. Let's see about the "plays well with others" part.

Kevin Gibbons

This post will unfortunately reveal one of the things that I absolutely hate about politics. Even if you personally like a guy, your disagreements with them on policy issues are public and not always very nice.

I have never seen someone pander to a crowd with such despicable regularity as he did last night. He didn't directly answer a single question. Instead he showed his accumen as a lawyer by turning every question into an opportunity to bash Mr. Pearce about some policy or another. He told so many pointless stories that I thought I was at a campfire event, not a debate.

When asked a question about child welfare Mr. Gibbons said: "I think all babies are valuable, even brown ones." It was a underhanded dig at Mr. Pearce that completely missed the point of the question and revealed who the real "racist" on the stage was. The comment that really got my goat was when he said "You need to understand that the immigration debate is a complex issue." True enough, but his tone was so condescending that it made you think that only he held the key of knowledge that could unlock its mysteries.

Mr. Gibbons showed that he is not a conservative by any stretch of the imagination. Overall, I think his performance on stage last night may have backfired on him. He came across as pompous and arrogant, and showed that he would not articulate a response to an important question. I have serious reservations about Mr. Gibbons' being our State Senator.

A word of advice for Mr. Gibbons for the next debate (if there is one). Stop telling pointless stories and answer the questions.

Russell Pearce

All in all, I thought Mr. Pearce showed enormous restraint when responding to the incessant digs Mr. Gibbons threw his way, but he did take the bait a couple of times. He answered the questions that were asked, but frequently got too caught up in the details to finish answering his questions in the allotted time. Mr. Pearce's grasp of the issues and what can be done about them came across loud and clear. He has taken a beating in the public for many of his positions, but he didn't back down from any of them and was able to give a reasoned argument for those positions. I know that a lot of people hate him, but you never have a doubt about where he stands on the issues.

It is unfortunate that Mr. Pearce is running with Clean Elections funding this go-around because it gives Mr. Gibbons a handy stick to beat him with.

My advice to Mr. Pearce for the next debate (if there is one): Try to give a more succinct answer to the question. The dizzying array of detail you provide is impressive, but it doesn't leave you enough time to make it through the entire point.

I thought that the debate itself was well done by the moderator. He was completely impartial and politely attempted to keep the candidates within allotted time frames.

The low point in this debate was when illegal aliens were being discussed and someone in the audience said “Throw them all in the gas chamber, that will solve the problem.” What an asinine comment! That disturbed individual just gave the media more grist to grind us with. Even though the entire audience reacted with horror and disgust to this comment, the only thing that will be reported is that the comment was made at a Republican debate.

Ship of Fools

2008-07-09T12:28:00.005-07:00

Today I just need to complain about a few things - please bear with me:

1 - Steve Benson

Shame on me for getting worked up about what he draws, but some of his assumptions just demand a reply. (Which is his whole purpose, I am sure)
His cartoon on July 4th is of a monument with "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal" inscribed on its face. Barrack Obama is looking up at it and saying "We'll see on November 4th".
Give me a break! We are not a country of racists, and Obama's winning or losing has absolutely nothing to do with equality in our nation. This is just unalloyed propaganda trying to get gullible people to feel guilty unless they vote for Obama. Give us SOME credit Mr. Benson. Who cares what color he is? The reason I don't want him is because his ideology will drive our country into the ground.

2- Government Bureaucrats

I swear that sometimes these guys make up rules and regulations just to justify their existence. We are currently dealing with a guy who is obviously out of his depth, and who changes his story everytime we talk to him about what we can and can't do. The problem with these people is three-fold:
A. They are appointed to their positions, so they really aren't accountable to the public.
B. They have an absolute monopoly on the "service" (I use that term loosely) they provide. You can't go anywhere else and they know it so you literally have to bow and scrape to their every whim to get something accomplished.
C. They have no compunction about appropriating authority that doesn't belong to them because the only way to call them on it is through a costly lawsuit. They get an attorney paid for by the taxpayer (which happens to be you) and you get to foot the bill for your attorney as well.

3 - Idiots with Authority and an Agenda
I am currently dealing with a little assistant branch manager at my bank who got all of my accounts frozen by crying "wolf" to the Risk Management Department. This would be hot-shot saw what he thought was suspicious activity on my accounts (deposits and checks and withdrawals - oh my!) and then accused me of kiting. Anybody with half-a-brain in that industry knows that kiting involves writing checks from an account you own at one bank, depositing it in another account you have at another bank, and then reversing the process before the first check clears. You can't kite by pulling cashier's checks and cash out of your accounts. Duh! All he had to do was just a little bit of research to see that all of my transactions were legitimate. Instead, he tried to make a name for himself by "catching fraud". Now, he has damaged a relationship with a customer who, up until yesterday, was singing this bank's praises to everyone he came in contact with. I have a special spot on my office wall for this kid's hide.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaugh!!!!!!!

Our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor!

2008-07-04T18:59:00.005-07:00

The video posted immediately below this entry is a dramatized reading of the Declaration of Independence done by several of the prominent actors of our day. It thrills me to hear these powerful words and think about what they started. I hope you take the time to listen to this and rejoice in the blessings of liberty that were bequeathed to us by our Founding Fathers, the Revolutionary soldiers who fought the good fight, and the families who loved and lost during the epic struggle that followed July 4th, 1776.

God bless their memory and God bless the United States of America!

The Declaration of Independence - July 4, 1776

2008-07-04T18:56:00.002-07:00

Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!

2008-07-03T16:37:00.002-07:00

In my build up to Independence Day, I like to read inspiring speeches and literature regarding the events that led to July 4, 1776. This speech was given on March 23, 1775 before the Virginia House of Burgesses. The question before them was whether or not to deliver up the Virginia Militia to the Revolutionary War. Reportedly, when Mr. Henry sat down the public jumped up and shouted "To arms, to arms!" Twenty-seven days after this speech was given the first shots of the Revolutionary War were fired at Lexington and Concord.

"No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free-- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death! "

Amen Mr. Henry!

We Win One!

2008-07-01T07:00:00.006-07:00

"A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."
- 2nd Amendment to the Constitution

Thursday, June 26, 2008 was a red-letter date for freedom. In a landmark decision, the US Supreme Court found that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms. Although the decision was 5-4 in favor of the individual right (which is disturbing) the fact that we finally have a definitive declaration from the court on this important right is absolutely thrilling! An excerpt from this ruling:

“The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditional lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.” - District of Columbia vs. Heller

For decades, this fundamental right has been under assault by gun control groups and like-minded politians throughout the country. Their main claim is that the Second Amendment is a "collective" right of the States to arm and train individuals to serve in state militias. Because of the rise in gun violence over the last century, they claim that the government not only has the right and ability to regulate firearms ownership - it has the obligation to do so.

I have never really understood this rationale. When the constitution was framed and the amendments proposed, one of the framers big concerns was the effect of standing armies on personal liberties. The fighting of the Revolutionary War began as the result of a standing army marching to disarm the citizens of Lexington and Concord Massachussetts. The colonists knew that if they lost their weapons, they would be completely at the mercy of a government that was proving itself to be hostile to their liberties. Rather than laying "supinely on [their] backs... until [their] enemies [had] bound [them] hand and foot" these brave men stood and resisted, and "fired the shot heard 'round the world."

As the realities of nationhood settled in it became clear that the government would need to maintain an army and a navy, even during peacetime, to keep us secure from invasion and to maintain order within. To safeguard the people's rights from a government with a standing military, the Second Amendment was written. The brave and brilliant men who formed our nation had firsthand knowledge of how private arms ownership was a protection for liberty, and they wanted that liberty passed on to the generations that would come after them. As you read the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights it becomes obvious that the Founding Fathers were concerned with individual liberty first and foremost, and the governments they created were only important and meaningful to them insofar as they protected those liberties.

My own personal interpretation of the Second Amendment has always been this: "Because the security of our nation requires the maintenance of well regulated militias (i.e. standing armies), the rights of the people (i.e. law abiding private citizens) to keep weapons for their defense against tyranny (i.e. a government run amuck or evil individuals) shall not be taken away."

(I am not a legal scholar so obviously my thinking may have legal flaws, but I think that this is a reasonable interpretation of the Second Amendment. Then again, since when have lawyers been reasonable?)

As I contemplate what could possibly motivate someone to take away this fundamental right of American citizens, I can only come up with two reasons:

They are too cowardly to take personal responsibility for their security and want someone else to take care of them or,
They have designs against our other freedoms and need to take away this one first so they can do so "safely".

Thursday's decision was a huge step in the right direction, but there is still much to be done. This ruling, while setting a precedent, only overturns the gun bans in Washington D.C. For freedom to continue its march, we need to overturn all of the onerous gun ban laws across our country. As you read this, the National Rifle Association and other pro-2nd Amendment organizations are filing lawsuits in Chicago and other liberal bastions to overturn these egregious assaults on our freedoms. For more information please visit http://www.nra.org/

Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less

2008-06-24T15:46:00.005-07:00

I am getting sick and tired of all the snivelling liberals in the media and around the country who complain about Big Oil's windfall profits. Will someone please tell me when success became a crime, and when enormous success became downright un-American?
All companies, including oil companies, are in the business to make money. In a free market, this is done by creating a product or service that the public wants and then selling it for the most money the market will bear while keeping your costs down. In this regard, the oil companies have been a fabulous success. Their profit margin is only 4% after they pay taxes and all of the associated costs of exploring, drilling, transporting, refining, distributing, and marketing their product, and yet they still make billions and billions of dollars.
The fact of the matter is that our economy depends on oil to function. It isn't "nice" that we have oil - it is essential. Because every other industry depends on the availability of petroleoum and petroleum products, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that oil companies are going to make a boatload of money, even with a measely 4% profit margin.
If anything, you have to admire the oil companies for their restraint in this market. Because the world's economy runs on oil, they can pretty much ask whatever price they want for their product, and we will pay it. We have to have it and will pretty much pay whatever price we have to to get it. The fact that they have limited their take to 4% speaks volumes about their generosity. They could up that margin at any point, and there is really not a whole lot that could be done about it.
What I find downright criminal in regards to our current fuel crisis is that the government is involved in the free market anyway, and the absolutley asinine solutions that some of our elected oficials propose. Among the more ridiculous proposals are the so-called windfall profit taxes. The assumption is that, by taking away more of the oil companies' profits, the price of gas will come down. Do they not understand who will ultimately pay those taxes? The average American these politicians claim to care about and look out4 for.
Also, don't let the government fool you about who is really making bank in the fuel industry. On average for every dollar spent on fuel, the government gets $0.15 as compared to the "evil" oil companies' $0.04. Who is getting the windfall here?
If our elected officials really cared about the cost of fuel, here are several easy steps for them to take:
1) Lift the restrictions on drilling off our coasts and within our borders. (Yes - this includes ANWR)
2) Allow new refineries to be built in the U.S.
3) Ease back on the amount of taxes that are charged for fuel purchases
4) Create an incentive for the development of alternative fuels that really work
5) Stop insisting on ethanol - it doesn't reduce emissions and not only increases our fuel price, it increases our food price

6) Allow more nuclear facilities to be built in the U.S.
If you would like to help send a message about petroleum policy to congress and the president, sign the Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less petition at http://www.americansolutions.com/

Campaign Finance Reform We Can Live With

2008-06-23T08:05:00.002-07:00

McCain-Feingold is one of the greatest losses of freedom we have experienced in recent history. All in the name of taking "Big Money" out of politics. I am sick and tired of politicians stealing our freedoms in the name of "reform" or "anti-corruption". They always paint their hair-brained schemes as a brilliant solution to our problems, camoflauging the true effects of their so-called reforms. So, in the name of true reform, I propose the following campaign finance laws that will restore our freedoms and put the lie to the stupid solutions that self-serving politicians have foisted on us for years.

Only citizens of the United States can contribute to a political campaign.
If you can vote in an election, you can contribute to a campaign. If you can't vote - you can't contribute. This means that corporations cannot donate to a campaign, because they can't vote, and neither can political action committees or lobbying groups.

Citizens can only contribute to a candidate that they can actually vote for
I can contribute to the candidates running to become MY congressman, but not to the candidates running to become YOUR congressman.

Citizens can contribute as much as they want
It's my money and I can spend it how I want to.

No candidates for ANY office can use public funds to finance their campaign
We have more important things to do with our funds - like pay off the national debt.

Candidates have to disclose who gave donations in excess of $1,000
That way the citizens can monitor if their elected officials are pandering to any one donor.

Corporations can purchase air time and print space to run issue campaigns, but cannot mention any candidate by name or issue endorsements to any candidate
They can clarify their issues to educate the public, and then the public can see which candidate best matches those issues. Again, corporations can advertise and advocate for their positions, but since they are not citizens and can't vote - they can't campaign.

This list of rules may seem a little simplistic, but maybe simplicity is something we could use in this country. The complicated schemes of slick politicians sure don't seem to produce the desired result.

What So Proudly We Hailed...

2008-06-03T07:33:00.005-07:00

Throughout my life I have been consistently intrigued by the power of symbols and symbolic communication. Whether it is with carefully crafted words, brilliant artwork, or the standard of a nation, symbols can quickly and succinctly communicate a multitude of messages to us. Of all the symbols that are in the world around us, few elicit the emotional responses that a flag does. The flag communicates so much with such elegant simplicity. It represents the history of a nation, its values, its hopes for the future, and the highest ideals that move it toward its ultimate destiny in the world. The flag brings back memories of victories won, of accomplishments achieved, and of challenges overcome. It reminds us of the foundations upon which we are built, and then impels us onward to new achievements in the ongoing chapters of our nation's history. Our flag graces the tops of our most important government buildings and monuments, and greets us each morning in classrooms around the country. When we come home from abroad, the flag waves its welcome to us from the port of entry. The flag leads our young men in battle, reminding them of home and the loved ones they are defending. In honored glory it also accompanies our dead, reverently covering them in its folds as they make their final journey home. In moments of celebration, the flag is a bouyant and cheerful symbol of national pride and joy as it is waved from the hands of children and from the homes of each proud citizen. In moments of mourning, nothing speaks so eloquently of national sorrow as a flag at half mast.

The flag of the United States of America was created 231 years ago on June 14, 1777. Since that day it has told the story of our nation, and how we have gone from 13 rebellious colonies to 50 united states.

Happy Birthday Old Glory!

The Price of Freedom

2008-06-03T07:29:00.002-07:00

Last Monday was Memorial Day, and while I would love to wax eloquent about the meaning of the day and the price paid for our freedoms, the picture above says far more than I ever could. Marine Staff Sergeant Marcus "Marc" Golczynski was killed on March 27, 2007 during his second tour of duty in Iraq - a tour he volunteered for. This picture shows 8 year old Christian, receiving the flag that covered his daddy's casket from Lt. Col Ric Thompson at the conclusion of Marc's funeral services on April 4, 2007.
As we relished the "freedom" of a three-day weekend, I hope that we all remembered the real meaning of freedom and the price paid for us to have that freedom.
God bless our Veterans and their families!

Crossing the Firing Line

2008-05-11T09:17:00.009-07:00

I recently forwarded this picture to several friends. This is Ted Kennedy explaining why he supports amnesty for illegals crossing the Rio Grande. I thought it was hilarious, but it did touch a raw nerve somewhere. One of my responses was as follows: "Tell all your bigot Arizonan friends that we're just reclaiming the land stolen from us and if they have a problem they should just commiserate with all the Native Americans displaced when all THOSE "illegal aliens" moved onto THEIR land.”

I haven't formally stepped into the immigration debate before because I have really mixed emotions on the whole issue and am still developing and refining my views. For some reason, responding to this email made me feel compelled to finally join the debate.

My response:

The land wasn't "stolen" it was won in a declared war between two nations. At the conclusion of the war the conquering party offered to buy the land. I will concede that the U.S. was "making an offer that couldn't be refused", but since they had won the war and were already occupying these territories anyway, they didn't have to offer ANY compensation. As part of the treaty, the Mexicans that were living in the occupied territories got to stay there and became American citizens. When you consider all the crap that kept going on in Mexico afterwards, this was a pretty sweet bargain for them. Later on we purchased another chunk of land in a negotiated treaty with the Mexicans. We didn't have a pistol to their heads that time, they just sold us the land. The only thing that changed was the location of the border. Nobody was displaced or run out, and for several decades afterwards people went back and forth across the border freely.

As for the Indians, yep, they got the short end of the stick any way you slice it. Here in the southwest the Spaniards plundered them, then the Mexicans fought with them, and finally the Americans came and despoiled what was left. This chapter of history is just plain ugly, and is a separate issue that can be debated at another time and place.

All of this being true, the current citizens of this nation are not personally guilty of any of these historical injustices to these "wronged people". I am not reaping my "just desserts" because I haven't done anything to injure anyone. As a citizen of the United States I am, however, being wronged by many of the consequences of illegal immigration. I am punished in the form of astronomically higher healthcare costs when they visit emergency rooms and don't pay their bills. The children of this state get a lousy education when their progress is held back because some kids in their classroom still need to learn English. When one of them committs a crime, I get to pay for their attorney and/or the lawsuits that they file because getting caught committing a crime is somehow a form of racist discrimination. I run a much higher risk of my SS# being used fraudulently by someone who is "just looking for work", and my city's inner core is decaying due to the imported crime and lack of concern over the dillapidated state of their homes.

Large groups of these individuals loiter around private businesses while they wait for someone to hire them for the day, driving off potential customers and making it difficult for business owners to make ends meet.

When I am in Mexico, I have to conduct my business in Spanish. Is it too much to ask them to speak English when they are here? Apparently, because I have to pay for all government documents to be printed in English and Spanish. Among the more ludicrous examples of this is voting materials and instructions printed in Spanish. Being able to read and write English is a requirement for citizenship and only citizens can vote. What the heck is going on here?

Last, but certainly not least, I am sick and tired of their marches and lawsuits claiming that they have a "right" to be here. People that aren't born here don't have that "right" until they have gone through the process of becoming a citizen. The hypocrisy of this claim is breathtaking. We all know that any foreigner that tried this type of protest in Mexico would be detained, jailed, and then deported in a New York minute. (I have also seen firsthand how Mexico treats foreign nationals it is about to deport. It is ugly and inhumane.)

The negative consequences of illegal immigration are not only felt in the United States. Mexico also suffers. It is never forced to face its problems because of the escape valve of immigration. It is exporting an innordinate amount of its most ambitious and hard working citizens, and families are being raised without the benefit of both parents in the home. This last fact alone undermines the future possibilities of the country, because a country will never rise above the strength of its families.

Because we have lost control over the number and type of people that are entering the United States our infrastructure is being stretched past the breaking point. (For example - California has to build a new school each day just to keep up with the rising number of students - mostly due to illegal immigration.)

Our schizophrenic approach to border enforcement has only exacerbated the problem in the US by contributing to the creation of a sub-culture of people who live in the shadows of society. They do not fully integrate into the community and create a hole in our social fabric characterized by suspicion and jealousy.

Just because we are the strong nation we are does not mean we are able to solve all of the world's problems by bringing them here. Continuing with things the way they are does not lift up Mexico or any other nation that is sending us its people, all it is doing is dragging the U.S. down. How exactly would that help anyone? (Besides, that kind of argument illustrates the practical effects of communism - Don't lift everyone up, drag the successful ones down to the lowest common denominator.)

I am not a racist. I am grateful for the lottery I won by having citizenship in both the United States and Mexico. I am blessed, and I wish that all people could be equally blessed. But we all know that this is not possible in the world we live in. No country is that big or that rich. Calling people "racists" or "bigots" just because they want their laws respected doesn't further the debate about the changes in our laws that need to be made.

Are some people racists and bigots? Absolutely! But these people come from both camps, they are not exclusively from the "border enforcement" crowd. The vast majority are just people who have seen some alarming trends as a result of this influx of people and want to stop it before the damage done is irreversible.

There are many reasons that the United States needs to get control of its borders, the most compelling being security risks in a post 9-11 world. There are an equal number of arguments that can be made for the need to reform our current immigration system. America needs immigrants and it needs security, and that is where the debate needs to be focused. And, as selfish as this sounds, the debate needs to be couched in terms of what is in the best interests of American citizens. It would be great if we could solve the world's problems by simply bringing them all here, but that is not possible. And, even if it were, wouldn't it be better for people to solve their own problems where they are so that every land is a land of opportunity? If each nation took responsibility for the good of its own citizens first instead of looking for someone else to fix things, we would have less problems in the world.

Is it fair that some of us were born with the great blessing of US citizenship and others weren't? No, probably not, but that is the way it is. Crying foul about this won't change anything, and the sooner these people stop running around yelling that they were robbed, the sooner they can get on with solving their problems.

Finally, it is time that some civility became part of this discussion. People who want immigration reform are not "traitors", and people who want our laws enforced are not "bigots". Until we can get past the name calling we will never be able to resolve this issue by bringing fair minded people to the table for a free and open debate about what should be done.

Lessons from our Founding Fathers

2007-10-19T10:06:00.003-07:00

During the last few years of their lives John Adams and Thomas Jefferson wrote each other a series of fascinating letters. In them these two brilliant men reflected on their remarkable careers, the events that shaped their new nation, and the impact their personal actions had on the development of the United States of America. These letters became a window into their opinions and thoughts on a wide variety of topics, becoming a "Founding Fathers Blog" if you will.

In the spirit of this type of interaction I have created this blog - Adams and Jefferson. The workings of government have always fascinated me, and the creation of our Nation, its Constitution, Government, and Bill of Rights is, to me, one of the greatest miracles in human history. On this blog I would like to explore different topics of historical interest, principles of constitutional government, and the political events of today that are shaping our nation for future generations.

I look forward to our discussions.