Just Republicans Only: August 2013

Friday, August 16, 2013

Bipartisanship: Some embrace the B-word

(PNI) Rep. Ron Barber called him the "young man who shot us." He didn't have to say: Jared Loughner. We all knew.

"Had people really understood what they were seeing," Barber said of the young man's descent, "he might well have gotten into treatment and not committed that act."

Barber didn't have to define the act, either. We all knew he was talking about Jan. 8, 2011, when an untreated mentally-ill young man killed six people and wounded 13, including Barber and then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.

As the Democratic congressman from District 2, Barber spoke at a recent Saturday-morning breakfast hosted by the Community Partnership of Southern Arizona, a regional behavioral-health authority based in Tucson.

I met Barber and his communications director, Mark Kimble, crossing the parking lot on the way in. We chatted briefly -- the usual small talk above asphalt that was already radiating too much heat.

I thought about how parking lots and public places have a very different significance for Barber. It takes a great deal of personal courage to remain a political figure after being shot at a political event.

Barber was at the breakfast to celebrate Arizona's approval of Medicaid restoration and expansion, which will bring in billions in federal funding to provide health care and mental-health services to more than 350,000 people.

It took another kind of courage for state lawmakers to make that happen: political courage.

Rep. Ethan Orr is one of the Republicans who voted with the Democrats for Medicaid expansion.

That got him named on a T-shirt -- available on eBay -- that identifies Republican Gov. Jan Brewer as a "traitor" and features a bloody knife splitting the sentiment "another conservative stabbed in the back by Ethan Orr." Or Steve Pierce. Or John McComish. Etc.

Orr told the gathering that his vote was a matter of putting the community "above personal and partisan interests." This third-generation Arizonan says that's the history of Arizona politics.

The partisan stuff -- the bloody knives and the threats of primary challenges from the right -- do not reflect the spirit of cooperation that built this state, Orr says.

"That's the anomaly," he said. "Arizona is about bipartisanship."

At this point, you may think you've slipped down a rabbit hole.

Reality check: Medicaid expansion and the budget were bipartisan only because the governor was forced to rely on Democratic votes to get her legacy program passed.

It was a Kumbaya nanosecond. It ended on a shrill chorus of "Yes, you did! No, I didn't!" Democratic Sen. Steve Gallardo accused Brewer betraying the Democrats' trust by signing an election bill they hated. She said she'd never promised not to.

The snap back to partisan conflict felt normal. Predictable. Pathetic.

But wait.

Orr and Rep. Victoria Steele, his Democratic seatmate in District 9, were still committed members of a mutual-admiration society during the breakfast appearance with Barber.

This bipartisan pair orchestrated the other legislative accomplishment that was being celebrated that morning: added funding for Mental Health First Aid.

The program involves training people to recognize signs of mental illness. Sort of like emergency CPR training, but for disorders of the mind. People learn how to get help for friends, students or children who are at risk of hurting themselves or others.

Barber is pushing this in Congress.

In Arizona, Orr and Steele pushed for $250,000 to expand the program, which has trained thousands of people statewide since 2011. Their bill easily passed the House and got stalled in the Senate. It was resurrected in the final hours of the session.

"The secret to this was bipartisanship," Steele said.

Holy mackerel. There's that B-word again. Steele also says the current image of the GOP in Arizona isn't a reflection of the Republican Party, it's just "a loud minority."

"I think most Republicans are like Ethan," she said. Nice. Reasonable. Able to disagree on some things and work together on others.

There's that seemingly irrational faith in the system again.

Is it possible? Could the extremists be assigned to the Flat Earth Committee while moderate people from both parties run things?

"I firmly believe that if you reach across the aisle, you will find willing partners," said Barber.

Some will suggest he should have his head examined.

But just imagine if that way of thinking catches on.

Reach Valdez at linda.valdez @arizona republic.com.

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Thursday, August 15, 2013

Brewer clueless on insult to GOP

(PNI) From the political notebook:

Gov. Jan Brewer recently sent out another appeal to Republican Party activists asking them to eschew primary fights over her Medicaid expansion. The letter merely reinforced that the governor still does not understand the magnitude of what she has done.

She did not just force through her Medicaid expansion over the opposition of most legislative Republicans and activists. She shut out three-quarters of Republican lawmakers from any meaningful input into the state budget, the most fundamental of all governing documents. She emasculated the Republican legislative majority in a way that Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano never did.

Yet this shouldn't be a topic of debate and discussion in Republican primaries? What the hell should be discussed in the 2014 Republican primaries? What kind of NBA draft candidates think the Suns had?

Primaries are where parties sort out internal squabbles about policy, personnel and procedures. Brewer says that the soundness of her policy (Medicaid expansion) and the propriety of her action (orchestrating a temporary coup of both legislative bodies) shouldn't be debated in Republican primaries because that might help Democrats win additional legislative seats in the general election.

In the first place, that's only true in a small number of districts. In several districts in which Brewer co-conspirators face a potential primary challenge, Republicans could stage a bare-knuckle cage fight and still win the general election.

But much more troublesome is the suggestion that primary voters shouldn't be given choices and robust debate.

The problem isn't with the fight. The problem is the late date of Arizona's primary election, which makes it difficult for either political party to recover from a robust primary sufficiently to fairly contest the general election.

Having a primary in Arizona during the dog days of August is nuts. A June primary would better serve the electorate by permitting sharply contested primaries and fully competitive general elections.

Arizona Sen. John McCain has twice exercised uncharacteristic diplomacy to avert the so-called nuclear option in the Senate over filibusters. In 2005, he neutralized an effort by Republicans, then in the majority, by getting a critical number of Democrats to effectively commit not to support a filibuster of the judicial nominees of then President George W. Bush.

Last week, he neutralized a similar effort by Senate Democrats by getting Republicans to stop blocking most of President Barack Obama's executive-branch nominees.

This sounds unkind, but next time, I hope McCain just lets the place go kaboom.

The filibuster is an extra-constitutional measure that thwarts, rather than furthers, the checks and balances the Founders devised. The Constitution states the circumstances in which an extraordinary majority of the Senate is required: approving treaties, amending the Constitution, impeachment. By implication, everything else was intended to be done by a simple majority.

The filibuster, and even worse the practice of a single senator putting a hold on a nominee, gives dissident senators more power than the Founders intended. The "advice and consent" power rests with the body, not individual senators.

Phoenix leaders told voters that, if they approved a bond to expand and improve the convention center, private investors would build a new downtown hotel to support it. That turned out not to be the case, and Phoenix taxpayers had to build the hotel, as well.

When Phoenix leaders conned legislators into picking up half of the cost of the expansion, they promised that it wouldn't actually cost the state anything. Extra revenue generated by the expansion would produce significantly more than the state's share. If not, Phoenix would make up the difference from its state-shared revenue.

Now that the time has come for an accounting, Phoenix wants to renege or renegotiate. The excuse is that it's been a hard economy and the Legislature contributed to the convention center's underperformance by passing SB 1070.

So, in addition to paying for half of the cost, the state has to allowthe convention business to control the state's immigration-enforcement policies?

The state had no business making such a special deal with a single city in the first place. It certainly shouldn't agree to let Phoenix off the hook for its false promises.

Reach Robb at robert.robb@arizonarepublic.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Medicaid wounds are still raw in GOP

If the latest fracas between Gov. Jan Brewer and Republican Party operatives is any indication, it's going to be a long, ugly 13 months until the 2014 primary election.

Brewer recently reached out to the right wing of her party in hopes of healing wounds left by the bipartisan passage of Medicaid expansion, saying it's time to put differences aside and unite for the good of the party.

Conservative Republicans responded by sharpening their invective and moving forward with a series of "no confidence" votes against the governor and the 14 GOP lawmakers who backed the governor's expansion plan last month.

Supporters of the new law to broaden health-care coverage for the poor under the federal Affordable Care Act say the legislative precinct committee members represent a small fringe of the GOP and their symbolic votes don't matter.

But at the same time, they warn that, in some districts, working to knock off GOP moderates in the primary could give the seats to Democrats in the general election.

Brewer was concerned enough to send a letter Friday to thousands of precinct committee members across the state who make up the grass-roots political machinery of the GOP, making her case for Medicaid expansion and asking for their support.

"To continue efforts to potentially hurt and intimidate those who stood with me only puts Republicans' chances for electoral success next year back into harm's way," the governor wrote.

"We are allies. It is time to move on, work together for a united front in 2014 and focus on the key issues that face our state, including the economy, quality education and public safety."

Brewer sent a similar missive to GOP officials in March, when they were passing, during legislative-district meetings, harshly worded resolutions that opposed expansion and threatened the political careers of Republican lawmakers who supported it.

At that time, the governor argued that the GOP would be more at risk if it turned down the federal funds that will pay for most of the expansion and kicked their constituents off Medicaid.

But the conservative party loyalists say Brewer and the Republicans who teamed with Democrats to pass expansion have abandoned conservative GOP principles and made matters worse by pushing the bill through in a three-day special session that the governor called without consulting GOP leadership.

"They're elitists who think that what they've done can be forgiven. They're mistaken," Maricopa County GOP Chairman A.J. LaFaro said. "We are not going to be able to defeat all of them, but we will definitely defeat some of them. They are Arizona's 15 most wanted."

So far, GOP executive committees in five legislative districts have approved no-confidence resolutions or resolutions to censure the renegade Republicans and Brewer for supporting Medicaid expansion.

Most also include Rep. Michele Reagan, R-Scottsdale, who voted for expansion once but against it in the end. Another vote is scheduled in Mesa's Legislative District 16 on Thursday.

The votes have no legal impact, but GOP officials hope they will help turn voters against the incumbent lawmakers.

Rep. Heather Carter, R-Cave Creek, was out of town late last month when her Legislative District 15 GOP committee gave her a no-confidence vote.

Carter, who shepherded the expansion bill through the House, said she's proud of her vote but doesn't want to dwell on divisions within the party.

"I don't make decisions based on my political future," she said. "I make decisions based on what's best for my state. If you look back in history, when the Republican Party has done well, they have always provided a big tent."

Veteran Arizona pollster Bruce Merrill said the GOP split over Medicaid is another example of the conservative takeover of the state's GOP machinery.

"It just shows the extent to which the Republican Party is really fractured," said Merrill, a senior research fellow at Arizona State University's Morrison Institute for Public Policy. "The right wing has really taken over the party."

Merrill said the precinct committee members should not be underestimated in their ability to get conservative candidates elected in primaries, when most Arizona races are decided.

They may not represent mainstream Republicans, he said, but they know how to play politics.

"They're a smart, hardworking group of people who understand how the system works," Merrill said. "I reluctantly give them credit. … At the precinct level, they help you win."

Rep. Carl Seel, R-Phoenix, said he's not concerned about whether bouncing moderate Republicans could give Democrats the advantage in some districts.

As he sees it, the moderates, by voting with Democrats to pass Medicaid expansion, already have given Democrats control of the House, where the GOP holds a 34-26 advantage.

"One could make the argument that those nine turncoat Republicans in the state House are now Democrats," Seel said.

"It's not safe for any of them."

Posted

View the original article here

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

Oh, what a tangled website they weave

(PNI) What's good for the goose …The state Republican Party last week sent out an e-mail criticizing the state Democratic Party for removing "important files and records" from their site.

"Several years worth of agendas, minutes and event reports have vanished from the website," according to the Republican statement.

A search of the site shows there are no minutes to be found, and a Google search leads to a link to nothing.

Democratic party spokesman Frank Camacho did not return a call seeking comment.

The more records available to the public, the better, at least in Insider's eyes. Which got us wondering …

If the Republicans have deemed these documents so vital to the public, surely they would make available the same information on their website.

Nope.

Stay interesting, our candidates … After going after Democratic opacity, the state GOP set its sights on what it viewed as Democratic mediocrity: gubernatorial candidate Fred DuVal, whom the GOP labeled "the most uninteresting man in the world."

DuVal rose to the challenge in a, dare we say it, interesting way. He shipped a case of Dos Equis beer to GOP Chairman Robert Graham, along with a photoshopped picture of himself as the beer's bearded pitchman, aka the "Most Interesting Man in the World."

"Stay desperate my friends," DuVal wrote in his note, signing it as "the most electable man in Arizona."

DuVal, who so far is the only Dem in the race for governor, said he wanted to set a new standard for statesmanship. If that new standard involves cases of cerveza, Arizona's political climate just might get merrier.

Now there are two …As opponents of the state's new election law circulate petitions to get it on the 2014 ballot so they can make a case for how awful and terrible it is, not one but two groups have formed to defend the wide-ranging bill.

But what they will do, exactly, is unclear … even to the spokesman who is representing both the Protect Our Secret Ballot group, headed by state Sen. Michele Reagan, R-Scottsdale, and the Stop Voter Fraud group, led by former state lawmaker and congressional candidate Jonathan Paton.

"I can't tell you what they're doing," said Barrett Marson, of the groups that support House Bill 2305. After all, he noted, the measure has yet to be referred to the ballot (opponents face a Sept.12 deadline) so there is nothing to strategize.

That hasn't stopped the Stop Voter Fraud group from raking in $60,000 in big-dollar contributions, with $50,000 coming from the limited-government American Action Network and $10,000 from the Arizona Republican Party. The committee turned around and promptly spent $10,000. But Marson said he didn't know what that money went for.

As for Reagan's group, the Senate Elections Committee chairman said she wanted to keep her options open, but it was important to have a committee for fundraising. But if they're out tapping donors, they're doing it in smaller chunks, which means they don't have to adhere to a state law that requires immediate disclosure of contributions of $10,000 or more.

Quote of the week

"I believe there are more important issues than my last name. But sometimes you have to put sugar on the broccoli to get people's attention and bring these issues to the front." -- Phoenix City Council candidate Austin Head, whose "I (heart) Head" campaign signs have helped him get voter attention in a race crowded with well-known names.

Compiled by Republic reporters Mary Jo Pitzl and Alia Beard Rau. Get the latest at politics.azcentral.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Monday, August 12, 2013

Supporters cautiously optimistic

Despite the missed goals, uncertain timetable and at-times heated rhetoric in the Republican-led House of Representatives, immigration-reform supporters remain cautiously optimistic that a game plan is emerging that will have lawmakers voting on the legislation this year.

Action in the House is on hold until after Congress returns from its August recess on Sept.9. But the five-week break, during which representatives will hold town-hall meetings and otherwise gauge the feelings of their constituents, could go a long way toward determining the legislation's fate.

Immigration-rights activists this month are planning to press their case with House lawmakers. Business, religious, law-enforcement and labor groups already have been lobbying aggressively for reform. Opponents of immigration reform -- which many critics call "amnesty" for law-breaking immigrants -- also are expected to make their voices heard, but the House's inaction so far has provided little to galvanize them.

The break comes as other developments offer renewed hope for supporters of immigration reform.

While House Republican leaders flatly rejected the comprehensive immigration package that the Senate passed June27, making it seem as though immigration reform was destined to die a slow death,it appears likely that votes on a series of bills are possible in October and that a conference committee with the Senate could be completed in December or early next year, before midterm-election-year politics paralyze Capitol Hill.

Reform advocates say they detect a sincere effort by Republican leaders such as House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., to come up with solutions for the most vexing problems associated with the nation's broken border system, including addressing the status of the estimated 11million undocumented immigrants who have already settled in the country.

At a town-hall meeting last month in Racine, Wis., Ryan, the 2012 Republican vice-presidential nominee and a possible 2016 White House hopeful, told the audience that the group ofHouse immigration bills would include one "to legalize people who are undocumented," the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported.

Hoping to avoid the broad pathway to citizenship included in the Senate-passed plan, many House Republicans are more open to legislation without a special path for most undocumented immigrants. They are more inclined tolimit citizenship to young undocumented immigrants brought here as children, known as "dreamers," and leave the majority of the 11million who have no legal status without a certain path to citizenship. The idea would allow many to work toward citizenship through existing channels, such as having their children or employers sponsor them, which would be more difficult than allowing them to apply for citizenship on their own after they received permanent residency.

While many reform backers disagree with that concept, they say it at least would provide a starting point for House and Senate negotiations on bringing undocumented immigrants out of the shadows.

Even controversial remarks, such as those made by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa -- who caused a furor last month by calling some dreamers drug runners -- might wind up helping the reform movement by reminding Republicans of the political damage immigration hard-liners can do to the GOP brand among Latino voters.

Boehner called King's comments "deeply offensive and wrong" and contrary to the values of the American people and the Republican Party.

Since President Barack Obama's 2012 defeat of Republican Mitt Romney, many Republican leaders have said that the GOP needs to make rebuilding its relationship with Latino voters a priority.

"My sense is … that momentum is growing," said Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif., who is part of a bipartisan House group that for months has been working on a comprehensive immigration-reform bill. "Even, to some degree, you're beginning to hear House Republicans change their tune. It's still got a lot of sour notes in it, but at least they are now singing a tune that is talking about possibly getting this done. But it is decision time. We are watching the clock run out."

Frustrations mount

So far, the House immigration push mostly has been a series of disappointments for supporters.

Becerra's group has yet to produce a bill, and on a recent media conference call, he acknowledged that it has taken longer than expected.

"Many of us would have preferred to have done this before the August recess," he said.

Others similarly had hoped that the House would pass at least one immigration-related bill -- border-security legislation was seen as the likeliest candidate -- before the break, but that didn't happen, either.

Boehner's criticism of the Senate bill, which passed on a 68-32 vote, and insistence that any House immigration legislation have the support of a majority of Republicans, also has complicated matters.

August could prove pivotal. Reform supporters and immigration-rights activists aim to keep up the drumbeat for a pathway to citizenship and let Congress members know that they are not giving up.

"The August recess is very important because … we're trying to make it clear to our Republican colleagues, including those in Arizona, that we'd like for them to pass the legislation that they think is best," said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the lead GOP negotiator on the Senate bill. "Then, we would look forward to a conference and trying to meet the concerns of both sides and come up with legislation. I believe we all share the conclusion that the status quo is unacceptable."

Promise Arizona, a pro-reform organization founded in opposition to the controversial 2010 state immigration law known as Senate Bill 1070, and a coalition of 22 other groups this month plan to step up the pressure on Republican members of Arizona's House delegation.

In Arizona, activists are targeting Rep. Trent Franks because of his work on family issues and Rep. Matt Salmon because of his East Valley constituents. Salmon's district is home to many Mormons, whose church supports reform, and has a high number of Pacific Islanders, a demographic group often affected by immigration policies. The activists plan to attend the representatives' town halls, reach out to their staffs and continue canvassing their districts.

"Congressman Salmon recognizes there is a real opportunity to finally secure our borders and reform our immigration system," Salmon spokeswoman Kristine Michalson said. "As such, he has made it a top priority to meet with constituents, businesses and immigration groups to discuss how to find a workable solution using fair and practical policies. To date, the congressman and his staff have held over 40 separate meetings and listening sessions and more are planned for the August work period."

In June, Promise Arizona sent flower bouquets to McCain and Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., to thank them for writing and helping pass the Senate bill.

"Republicans need to see (immigration reform) as an opportunity," said Petra Falcon, Promise Arizona's executive director. "It's an opportunity for the GOP to turn around its image and get to working on other things. Immigration reform should be an easy answer."

Critics of immigration reform say they intend to make their own points at town halls this month.

"We're planning on making all of the events of the congressmen and congresswomen," said Tim Rafferty, president of the group RidersUSA, a Valley organization that recently put up a billboard promoting Flake's role in "the Flake-Obama amnesty." The group is part of a coalition called "Remember 1986," named for the year a previous law provided amnesty to nearly 3million undocumented immigrants.

'It's not going to be pretty'

While the scope of the mobilization of immigration-reform foes remains to be seen, one leading reform advocate said supporters have a "tremendous amount of activity" planned around the country.

"We're pretty confident that we'll come out of the summer with momentum, and we're optimistic that the House Republicans are going to find a way to get to 'yes,'" said Frank Sharry, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based organization America's Voice. "It's not going to bepretty, and it's not going to be quick, but I really do think that they get that doing nothing is not an option … that as a political party, they can't deny that a majority of the people want reform and that a mobilized majority of Latinos want respect."

Sharry noted that the blowback from King's derogatory comments about dreamers already was overshadowing the strides made by McCain, Flake and other Republicans who backed the Senate immigration bill. Sharry and Flake both said the controversy should provide House Republicans extra motivation to get immigration reform done.

"I don't think most Republicans want to be tarred with that brush, and most Republicans don't feel that way," Flake said. "But when people like Steve King keep saying things like that, it, unfortunately, kind of puts everybody in the same category. I think people want to resist that and want to do something to show that we want to move ahead."

Other observers also said there may be cause for cautious optimism about immigration reform's chances in the House.

The Senate took a top-down approach, with a group of influential senators leading the way, while the House is taking more of a bottom-up approach, but House Republicans are grappling with the issues and asking, "What can we do, how far can we stretch," said Tamar Jacoby, president of ImmigrationWorks USA, a coalition of business groups that backs immigration reform.

More Republicans are talking about a way to achieve legal status for undocumented immigrants without a special path to citizenship, Jacoby said. And from her perspective, the House's take on workplace enforcement, a lower-skilled worker program and border security might turn out better than the Senate's.

"The House could come through in ways that really would advance the ball and be helpful and be part of the solution," she said. "It's not going to be the Senate way, but I don't think the question is going to be the Senate way or nothing."

Republic reporter Rebekah L. Sanders contributed to this article.

Posted

View the original article here

House plan frustrates 'dreamers'

WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON Republican leaders of a key House panel said Tuesday they are willing to offer a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children but cannot do the same for their parents who knowingly broke the law.

Laurie Roberts: "Dreamers'" opposition to

the House GOP citizenship proposal is a bold stand, but understandable given that they are also sons and daughters. Unfortunately, it's also something they may regret. B1

That position is opposed by the young immigrants the House leaders are trying to help, creating a dilemma for Republican lawmakers as they try to show compassion for the most sympathetic group of undocumented immigrants while remaining true to their party's tough stance against illegal immigration.

The House is trying to craft its own immigration legislation piece by piece after the Senate last month approved a sweeping overhaul that provides a pathway to citizenship for most of the nation's 11million undocumented immigrants.

Immigrants brought here illegally as children "deserve to be treated from a different perspective" than immigrants who knowingly broke the law by crossing the border illegally or overstaying their visas, said Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. An estimated 2million undocumented immigrants were brought into the United States as children.

"They had no input into their parents' decision to bring the family to the U.S. illegally," Goodlatte said at a hearing of the panel's Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security. "And many of them know no other home than the United States, having grown up as Americans since they were toddlers in some instances. They surely don't share the culpability of their parents."

Goodlatte is working with Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., on a bill tentatively called the "Kids Act" that would offer a pathway to citizenship for the young immigrants. But he and Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., chairman of the immigration subcommittee, said they don't believe the parents of those children should be able to become citizens.

"Parents bringing their young children to the U.S. illegally is not something we want to encourage," Goodlatte said. "Not only because it would lead to continued illegal immigration, but also because illegally crossing the border is dangerous. We have all seen the pictures or even video of children who are dehydrated and lethargic from an arduous trek across the Arizona desert with their parents or with smugglers paid by their parents."

Gowdy said he wants to make it clear that advocates who insist on a pathway to citizenship for all 11million undocumented immigrants living in the United States "will only end up hurting the most vulnerable."

Goodlatte indicated that he might be willing to consider giving some kind of legal status to the parents of young immigrants that stops short of citizenship.

But two of the young immigrants that Goodlatte and Gowdy are seeking to aid testified that they would oppose any legislation that would help them while deporting their parents or barring their parents from ever earning citizenship.

"When members of Congress tell me that I deserve an opportunity to earn citizenship and my mother does not, I tell them that if anyone deserves that opportunity to earn citizenship, it is my mother, Rosalinda," said Rosa Velazquez, a 30-year-old Arkansas resident and graduate student who was brought to this country illegally when she was 5 years old. "If Congress were to adopt an incomplete solution that would provide a path to earned citizenship for (young immigrants) like me, but something less for our parents, it would be like saying that I can now be one of you, but my parents can never be. Such a solution would tell (us) that our hardworking parents are good enough to pick your crops, babysit your children, landscape your yard, and at the same time never treated as equal members of this society."

Pamela Rivera, who was born in California to undocumented immigrant parents, was asked by Goodlatte about how her mother would feel about getting legal status to stay in the United States but not getting citizenship. Rivera's mother was deported to Colombia six years ago after being caught during a minor traffic violation.

"She wants to be a part of this country," Rivera said. "She still thinks of herself as an American. I think my mother would want a shot at becoming a citizen."

A leader of the conservative Southern Baptist Convention told the House panel that he would like Congress to give immediate protection from deportation to young immigrants brought here as children. About a quarter of them have already applied for protection from deportation under an Obama administration program started a year ago that allows them to stay in the country and work legally for at least two years.

"I think you must also consider the parents of these young people," said Barrett Duke, a vice president of the convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission. "They are likely still their principal supporters, especially of those who pursue an education track. I do not think that you can confer a legal status on their parents through this legislation. That should be part of the broader immigration reform that must be done."

The issue of what to do about the estimated 9million undocumented immigrants who came to the United States illegally as adults is an especially difficult one for House leaders, who are faced with a divided GOP caucus. Conservatives generally see any kind of legal status for undocumented immigrants as amnesty for law breakers. Other Republicans, such as Goodlatte, would be willing to consider some sort of legal status that stops short of citizenship.

National Republican leaders and senators such as Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said the Republican Party must pass immigration reform to have any hope of appealing to Latino voters in the future. Latinos voted overwhelmingly for President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats in the 2012 elections.

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, one of the most vocal opponents of the Senate immigration bill, said at Tuesday's hearing that he is skeptical of any citizenship bill, even one that would apply only to those brought here illegally as children. King said such a bill could be "a backdoor route to amnesty" for all undocumented immigrants.

He said the attitude of some House leaders is that, "We'll just do this little sliver here (for immigrant children) because this tugs at our heartstrings." But that could lead to special consideration for their parents and other family members, King said.

"You've sacrificed the rule of law on the altar of political expediency," he said.

Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., an immigration-reform leader, said Tuesday's debate shows just how far House Republicans have come after years of rejecting efforts to legalize young immigrants brought here as children.

"I am not here to slam you," Gutierrez told Republicans. "I am here to say thank you. I am here to say welcome aboard. Those of us who have sat at this table and felt lonely are glad you are stepping up again to talk this over with us. If the Republican majority is starting with the young people we call 'dreamers' because that is as far as you are willing to go in terms of legal status for undocumented immigrants, I say thank you for coming this far, because taking a step in the right direction is the first step in any good-faith negotiation. It is the first step that says a compromise may be within reach. It is a place we can start."

Posted

View the original article here

Migrant reform: Game of political chicken

(PNI) Two weeks after the U.S. Senate passed sweeping immigration reform, House Republicans pick up the political hot potato this week, and the question of the summer is this:

INSIDE

E.J. Montini: Florists throughout Arizona step up to help a little shop in Prescott fulfill its role in mourners' farewell to the 19 fallen firefighters. B2

Is 2013 the new 2006?

Clint Bolick says it shouldn't be.

Bolick is with that bastion of liberal thought, the Goldwater Institute. He sees immigration reform as Republicans' best hope for getting the things they most desire: a secure border, a better economy and a new system that allows more legal migration of the workers we need rather than the relatives of those already here.

So, will it happen?

"Am I optimistic?" he asks. "No."

Bolick is working with former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush to explain the reasons, both economic and political, that immigration reform makes sense for Republicans. The two men wrote a book, "Immigration Wars: Forging an American Solution," last year, and last week, they co-authored an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, making the Republican case for reform.

"I've spoken to a lot of conservative audiences, and when they come into the room, they are dead-set against immigration reform, which they think of solely as amnesty, and they leave being very, very open to the topic," Bolick told me. "I hope that the same arguments will pierce the House Republicans."

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen. Politicians are deathly afraid of all those e-mails they get, written in capital letters.

Besides, House Speaker John Boehner has said that whatever passes the House will pass with a majority Republican vote. Given that just 14 of 46 Republican senators voted for the "Gang of Eight's" immigration bill, it seems unlikely that reform is on the way.

Bolick, however, says Republicans need to consider the impact of not passing a bill: a continuation of the things they hate -- illegal immigration and a porous border -- and a lost opportunity to boost the economy and reduce the federal deficit.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the Senate bill would reduce the deficit by $900billion over the next two decades, given taxes that would be paid by new and legalized immigrants.

The bill overhauls the visa system to reduce chain migration -- which now accounts for two-thirds of all green cards issued as immigrants sponsor their extended family members -- and it increases visas for high-skilled workers. It also expands guest-worker programs, offering immigrants a way to come and go legally.

And, yes, it would give immediate legal status to most immigrants who are here illegally and a 13-year-path to citizenship, once certain border security triggers are met.

That'll be a non-starter in the Republican House; just legalization without a citizenship option is a no-go in the Democratic Senate.

Which leaves us, basically, back to 2006, when reform efforts died of terminal stalemate.

Brace yourselves, America, for one giant game of chicken, 2013-style. Republicans want better border security, but are they willing to agree to a path to citizenship to get it? Democrats want 11million immigrants out of the shadows, but are they willing to forgo a path to citizenship to make it happen?

Yep, 2006 it is.

Bolick says last year's presidential election, with Hispanic voters breaking nearly 4-1 for Barack Obama, was a big wake-up call for the Republican Party. Most House Republicans, however, are far more concerned with their own re-election prospects in 2014.

Bolick thinks their concern is overblown.

"The conservative base of the party, by and large, remains militantly opposed to any immigration reform, and they are extremely vocal and active in primaries, and as a result, they terrify members of Congress who ought to know better," he said.

"But if you look at the landscape, we don't have President Tom Tancredo. We don't have Congressman Randy Graf. We don't have Senator J.D. Hayworth. When it comes down to the actual elections, you find out that this extreme position is also very, very much a minority position."

Bolick says both Republicans and Democrats should have plenty of incentive to forge a compromise that will both solve a long-festering problem and provide a much-needed boost to the economy.

It sounds logical. It sounds laudable, that the men and women of goodwill -- these statesmen we elect -- could put aside their own petty concerns and find that elusive middle ground for the good of the country.

Hey, immigrants aren't the only ones who can dream.

Reach Roberts at laurie.roberts.arizonarepublic.com or 602-444-8635.

Posted

View the original article here

Sunday, August 11, 2013

ONE MAN'S BATTLE FOR THE REPUBLICAN FUTURE

He called Gov. Jan Brewer a "Judas" for betraying Republican principles.

He likened GOP senators' support of Medicaid expansion to Pearl Harbor's "day of infamy."

He said state GOP leaders were lucky there weren't gallows in the town square.

All the barbs came from A.J. LaFaro, the improbable head of the Maricopa County Republican Party. All the barbs were about fellow Republicans, though LaFaro would insist the targets of his ire had abandoned the true principles of their party.

Elected six months ago, LaFaro represents one front in the battle for the soul of the Republican party.

Brash, opinionated and unafraid of offending, LaFaro rode a wave of "tea party" support in his bid to replace one of his own heroes who shares his brand of politics -- Rob Haney.

LaFaro was elected in January following a confrontational election in which he ran farther to the right of another candidate, Lisa Gray, who credits his win to "dirty campaign tactics."

Before his election to county GOP chair, LaFaro fought Tempe City Hall on issues ranging from taxes to employee leadership.

Members of his own party either love him or hate him. Almost no one is in the middle. And everyone, it seems, has an opinion about LaFaro.

Senate Majority Leader John McComish, R-Phoenix, who was among the Republican lawmakers who backed Medicaid expansion, said he is disappointed in LaFaro's performance.

"The difficult thing about rhetoric that's so personal is that it has an impact, and then at some point in time, the primaries are over and you want to get together and be unified," McComish said.

Republican Tom Husband is a fan of LaFaro, saying his leadership "is very focused, clear and vigorous."

"He basically sees things very clearly, and he can articulate some of the subtle distinctions," Husband said.

LaFaro believes his combative defense of conservatism is needed to define what his party stands for -- to Republicans and non-Republicans alike. There's no agreeing to disagree with LaFaro, no gestures toward a big tent.

"I will always speak out; I will always be vocal for the things I believe in," he said during the interview he'd arranged to be held in the historic state Supreme Court chambers in the Capitol museum.

Movements need a conscience, a voice to steer them past pitfalls. LaFaro sees himself as the sharp-tongued enforcer for county Republicans.

"I'm not advancing my agenda -- I firmly believe that I'm advancing the conservative grass-roots agenda," he said.

But some in the party hear a potential death knell in his bombast, saying he further divides the party and alienates potential Republican voters at a crucial moment for the GOP.

Kim Owens, an Avondale Republican who supported LaFaro's opponent for GOP county chair, said she doesn't doubt his sincerity but believes his approach could destroy the party.

LaFaro has no right to determine "who is and isn't a proper Republican," she said.

"The statement he made about the governor and Judas, the comparison to the bombing of Pearl Harbor, the letter referencing building gallows in Prescott for Senator (Steve) Pierce and Representative (Andy) Tobin -- those are not the kinds of things that leaders should do," she said.

"This will lead us to fewer Republicans wanting to identify as Republicans for fear of being associated with (those) type of actions," she said.

Still, LaFaro's style plays well with some conservatives who say he has reflected their deep frustration with Brewer -- someone they once admired for her stances on states' rights, illegal immigration and, at one time, President Barack Obama's health-care plan.

How can her embrace of the health-care law's expansion of Medicaid, which LaFaro labeled "OBrewercare," be anything but betrayal, some have asked.

LaFaro cited polls showing a majority of Republicans across the country oppose the president's health-care overhaul.

"The governor says she is a Republican. … She needs to start acting like a Republican," he has said.

Asked if there is room in the party for a diversity of opinion on major issues, LaFaro said he cannot reconcile how a Republican can "sacrifice (their) principles and beliefs ? and propose Medicaid expansion."

So LaFaro makes no apologies for his attacks, saying he should not have to hold his tongue to make a few members of his party more comfortable.

History of activism

The son of "conservative Italian Catholic" parents, LaFaro grew up Tulsa, Okla. ("The reddest state in the United States," he's fond of saying.)

His father was a mechanic for American Airlines before moving up the management ladder and leaving the union ranks. His mom stayed at home and cared for him and his younger sister.

He said his parents taught him to work hard and encouraged him to save money earned from a paper route and bagging groceries to help pay for parochial school.

His political activism began at 21, when he volunteered on city council campaigns. He would again volunteer during Ronald Reagan's presidential campaign in 1980, serving as a part-time volunteer in Reagan's Oklahoma campaign offices. He would also work as a volunteer on Reagan's re-election campaign.

By then, LaFaro had spent time in the Air Force, married, finished college and begun a career as a computer programmer. After the petroleum company where he and his wife worked offered them lucrative voluntary severance packages, they moved to Tempe.

LaFaro largely stayed out of politics until 2000, when he launched a recall campaign against Republican Tempe Mayor Neil Giuliano, partly over a proposal by the city manager to restrict employees' United Way contributions to certain organizations, such as Boy Scouts. The proposal came as the U.S. Supreme Court essentially ruled that the Scouts could prohibit gays from being Scout leaders.

It was a bitter campaign. At one point, LaFaro served as witness and his own attorney as he sought a court injunction to prevent harassment from a Tempe councilman who accused him of bigotry.

LaFaro lost the recall election, held Sept. 11, 2001, by a wide margin.

"I'll always remember that day," he said. "We weren't successful in recalling Neil Giuliano."

The former mayor called LaFaro's supporters at the time "very fringe." He credits LaFaro for giving him political capital to power through his term.

"There will be times where he may be right on an issue … but he's so far out of the mainstream of knowing how to deal with and work with other people that he's never going to be an effective leader," Giuliano said. "I think it's an unfortunate commentary on the state of the county Republican Party if A.J. LaFaro is all they've got."

Over the next decade, LaFaro continued to criticize Tempe leaders over the "ill-conceived Rio Salado Town Lake project" and other spending. He urged voters to reject proposed tax hikes and budget-override measures.

His local activism whetted his appetite for party politics.

In 2011, the Maricopa County Republican Committee elected him as its Legislative District 17 GOP chairman. Then, last fall, he ran for -- and won -- the chairmanship of the county GOP, partly on a platform of inclusiveness.

Political tactics

LaFaro says he'll use his two years as head of the party to bridge the "real, real divide" among conservatives, moderates, tea partyers and Libertarian-leaning Republicans.

His supporters hope the county GOP's influence will grow under his leadership.

But some Republicans and political scientists see LaFaro's brand of politics narrowing the base of the Republican Party at a time when it should be promoting a big-tent philosophy.

The party's image in opinion polls has hit a historic low, according to a recent survey by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. According to that survey, released in February, 62 percent said the GOP is out of touch with Americans, 56 percent thought it's not open to change and 52 percent said the party is too extreme.

Rep. J.D. Mesnard, R-Chandler, said LaFaro, as the face of the county GOP, should be "a more thoughtful, rational voice that is attractive."

"We want to bring people into the party; we want to show them we're a party of ideas, not just a party of rhetoric and flippant comments," said Mesnard, who opposed Medicaid expansion but booed LaFaro for his Judas comment.

McComish said LaFaro's actions contradict his promise to bring Republicans together.

"You want to get together and be unified, but it's hard to do that when you're vilifying … your own party," he said. "It plays into the enemy hands: Democrats love it."

Mesa GOP Sen. Rich Crandall dismissed LaFaro and the county GOP, saying they think they are bigger players than they really are.

"It's a place for people who just want to make a lot of noise, but they have no money, they're not organized in large mass and they're always led by the far, far extreme right," he said. "Until they have the ability to bring solutions to problems, they'll kind of be inconsequential."

David Berman, a senior research fellow at Arizona State University's Morrison Institute for Public Policy, said LaFaro's rhetoric might keep the base "activated and aroused," but it remains to be seen if it's productive.

"You have the leading icon of the Republican Party (Brewer), and you have this county chairman who thinks he's fully entitled to call her whatever he thinks," Berman said. "It makes the party look like an extremist party. It will stiffen resistance (against Republicans) and cause a lot of heat. And in the end, I don't know if they're going to get what they want."

Rob Haney, who urged LaFaro to run to replace him as chairman of the county GOP, said that LaFaro speaks for the Republican base and that sometimes leaders need to be outspoken to be effective, even if it stirs controversy.

But other Republicans, while agreeing with LaFaro politically,wish he'd take a more measured tone.

"Although the sentiment of what he is saying is felt by many precinct committeemen, I just wouldn't have said it," Mickie Niland, chairman of the LD 12 Republican committee, said of the Judas remark. "I want to disagree, but I don't want to be disagreeable."

LaFaro says he will now work to oust Republicans who supported Medicaid expansion and aid an effort to refer Medicaid expansion to voters.

One recent morning, dressed in a gray suit and tie, LaFaro stood in a House hearing room shortly before a Medicaid debate, shaking hands and patting the shoulders of conservative lawmakers.

"Thanks for the good fight," he said to one.

To two women wearing red AARP shirts, he bellowed, "Hey, I used to be in your organization! I dropped my membership of AARP after 13 years."

The organization supported Medicaid expansion.

LaFaro, who considers himself to be articulate and bold, says he sees no need to apologize for his remarks and style. But that doesn't mean the incident hasn't given him a reason to reflect.

"I will probably think more carefully before I choose my words," he said.

Posted

View the original article here

Saturday, August 10, 2013

Pair in GOP committee won't attack on Medicaid

(PNI) Pushing back on Medicaid pushback …It's all the rage now for Republican precinct committeemen to vote to censure Gov. Jan Brewer and the 14 Republicans who voted in favor of Medicaid expansion.

When the issue came up at a District 26 meeting, district resident and gubernatorial candidate Hugh Hallman cast an unpopular "no" vote.

"In the interest of the Republican Party, I don't think it makes sense for Republicans to be attacking members of their own party," Hallman said.

Besides, censure is a legal concept and not within the purview of the committees, he said, showing his lawerly side.

Hallman called Medicaid expansion "a 'Sophie's Choice' of the worst magnitude," but said he comes down in reluctant favor of it because the piper must be paid and it's unfair to foist uncompensated emergency-room care onto hospitals and doctors.

Those costs will ultimately get passed on to the paying customers.

"It's not a Republican principle that we tax people who are paying the medical bills through insurance or private dollars to pay for those who aren't covered," Hallman said.

The other "no" vote at that meeting?

Former state Sen. Jerry Lewis, R-Mesa.

Signs around town… Dozens of campaign signs have sprung up on street corners in central Phoenix and Ahwatukee Foothills in the last week touting unusual messages: "Lobbyists Support Sal DiCiccio" and "Developers Support Sal DiCiccio."

As one might assume, the Phoenix City Council member isn't the one behind the signs.

An independent-expenditure group, Phoenix Truth and Safety, paid for the signs.

The group is funded by public-safety unions.

They hope to oust DiCiccio in the upcoming Aug.27 primary election.

It's the latest jab in a bitter feud between DiCiccio and the police and fire unions.

The two have been at war over DiCiccio's criticism of employee pensions and overall compensation.

"The signs are accurate," said David Leibowitz, a public-relations consultant working with the group. "Campaign-finance reports make that abundantly clear … and yet he holds himself as some paragon of virtue."

DiCiccio said that while he has accepted donations from lobbyists, businesses and developers, his opponent, Karlene Keogh Parks, is accepting contributions from unions.

He said the unions are trying to block his efforts to make reforms.

"I think people see through this," DiCiccio said. "It's all part of the union control of City Hall."

Your policy doesn't cover "Cat Scratch Fever" … Conservative rocker Ted Nugent will reportedly take up the anti-Medicaid-expansion banner at his concert scheduled for tonight at Celebrity Theater in Phoenix.

Frank Antenori, a former state senator from Tucson and an organizer of the petition drive to put the Medicaid-expansion law on the 2014 ballot, said he had dinner with the gun-loving, Obama-hating, 64-year-old "Motor City Madman" a couple of years ago and the two connected over their love of archery hunting.

When Antenori learned Nugent's tour was coming to Phoenix, he put in a call to see if the "tea party" darling would give an on-stage shout-out to the referendum effort and ask fans to sign petitions after the concert.

After last summer's U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding the federal health-care overhaul, Nugent called Chief Justice John Roberts a "traitor" and said he was "beginning to wonder if it would have been best had the South won the Civil War."

The United Republican Alliance of Principled Conservatives, which is leading the referendum drive, hopes to collect 120,000 signatures by the Sept.11 deadline.

Compiled by Republic reporters Mary Jo Pitzl, Dianna M. Náñez, Dustin Gardiner and Mary K. Reinhart. Get the latest at politics.azcentral.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Firefighters' memorial was indeed emotional

(PNI) When I first heard that 19 firefighters had been killed in the Yarnell area, I was in shock. I wanted to help. I heard from a friend that the Westboro Baptist Church was coming to protest and that bikers were organizing to block them, so I volunteered.

On the ride up from Phoenix, my friend Chris and I ran in to the Gatekeepers MC, a firefighters' motorcycle club, and they invited us to join them and help block the protesters. In the end, we never ran into the protesters.

I walked around with Chris and my new biker friends to ensure that no protesters were around and then watched the rest of the service from Buffalo Wild Wings. On Facebook that night, I put up a couple of pictures and my story. The only comment I got was from my aunt, who said, "That must have been emotional."

We had watched speakers talk about dedicated fathers, sons and brothers, these men who lived and died side by side. We saw friends, family and loved ones who lost their own and 18 others support each other. We heard a short part of the story of these men's lives. We talked to other firefighters and heard their stories of triumph and tragedy on the job.

And we listened as pipers from many firehouses played "Amazing Grace." I can't think of a more sorrowful sound than that song well played on bagpipes.

Yes, it was emotional.

--Benjamin Packard,

San Tan Valley area

Bush served the people

Regarding "In role of pacifist, Bush bears little resemblance to old self" (Opinions, Thursday):

Dana Milbank, like his liberal cohorts, seems confused by George W. Bush. Could it be that the former president is actually a complex, intelligent man, instead of the cowboy rube that the left wanted to believe?

His involvement in helping Africa should not have been a surprise, but since celebrities, like Kanye West, are allowed to establish a narrative based on the required left-wing talking points, it is no surprise that he would have us believe that Bush "hates Black people." And if Bush was in fact the flawed human being they would have us believe, is he not allowed to "evolve," or does that just apply to liberals who make mistakes?

The reality might be that George W. Bush will eventually enjoy a positive legacy because he took his job seriously and showed up to the office every day instead of participating in endless campaigning and speeches. Right or wrong, Bush worked at serving the people instead of being served by the people.

--Charles Lopresto, Phoenix

How to improve schools

Regarding "Schools to charters is a scam by districts" (Opinions, Friday):

Instead of backhanding traditional public educators once again, why not extend that hand in a meaningful, and sincere, gesture of cooperation and collaboration?

Republic columnist Robert Robb accurately identified the essential impediment to high achievement as "compensating for dramatic differences between students in their preparedness to learn and support for learning at home." But then he dismisses the significant effect of such dramatic differences by insinuating that traditional public schools lack rigor.

Greater academic achievement is no simple task. Attaining it will require effort by all of us, in open communication regarding all the factors involved. A wonderful place to start such a discussion would be on how to maximize preparedness and home support.

I am tired of these red handprints on my cheek.

--Scott B. Nelson, Phoenix

Too many road closures

Can someone please tell me why the Department of Public Safety shuts down highways every time there is an accident? I've lived in several major cities and never have seen anything like this before.

You spill some vegetables or someone gets hit by a car, and we see the roads close for hours to investigate. It used to be: Move it to the side, clean it up, check it out and get the cars moving. But here it is an hours-long catastrophe. What gives?

--Ray Valle, Sun City West

CPS has history of failure

After listening to the TV news Thursday night, which included a report about the death of a 15-month-old child because of malnutrition, I told my wife that soon we'll read in the paper a column by Laurie Roberts reporting on this death and the role played, or not played, by CPS.

We'll read how somewhere in this child's short life Child Protective Services was involved and how workers "investigated" the situation, made a determination that all was A-OK and closed the case as being unsubstantiated.

If history repeats itself, as it usually does, we'll hear in the future from CPS that because of privacy laws, they are unable to discuss the facts of the case, which, to its way of thinking, seems to absolve the agency of any further involvement or responsibility.

Next will enter Department of Economic Security Director Clarence Carter, who will discuss what a tragedy this was and how a complete and thorough investigation will be conducted to determine what went wrong so CPS can take any and all steps necessary to keep this from ever happening again.

The only problem with this, based on past history over and over again, is it will happen again.

It appears to me that Director Carter and all who have gone before him having made this "never again" and/or "keep it from happening again" promise simply have made promises they can't keep.

I, for one, am sick and tired of empty promises that result in child deaths, which seem to always follow an unsubstantiated complaint or referral.

--Tommie N. Rasmussen, Globe

GOP must stand ground

I wonder how many American citizens like me are fed up with the Democrats and the liberal media's "talking point" that the Republican Party should abandon its goal of "border security first" in the immigration-reform issue so they can appeal to the Hispanic voters. What utter nonsense.

I am a registered independent who strongly urges the Republicans in Congress to stand by their morals and principles. Because if they were to appease Hispanics simply to get votes, they would be no better than the liberal Democrats who use this tactic all the time.

--Bob Ferrante, Phoenix

Working vets benefit all

I would like to suggest one solution for two problems:

Our infrastructure is falling apart, and our veterans are out of work. We should start a program similar to Works Progress Administration (maybe without the kickbacks). Call it the Service for Civil Improvement or whatever. Pay decent wages, so we don't irritate the unions.

First requirement on the applications is honorable- discharge papers. Maybe even continue military benefits, or something as good.

These veterans served us well. Now, let's serve them well and get an added benefit: infrastructure we can trust. They have already proven they are reliable. Are we?

--Don Gwynne, Mesa

Posted

View the original article here

Google Search

Friday, August 16, 2013

Thursday, August 15, 2013

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

Monday, August 12, 2013

Sunday, August 11, 2013

Saturday, August 10, 2013