Arpaio 'army' gearing up for recall war

(PNI) Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has 700 deputies under his command, along with roughly 2,000 detention officers and a volunteer posse said to number 3,000.

Apparently, that's not enough to combat his latest enemy: voters.

The sheriff's friends in the county Republican Party are mustering volunteers for yet another Arpaio army. They are hoping to attract recruits to a gathering over the weekend where, according to an e-mail sent to Arpaio supporters:

"The purpose of the meeting is to muster and organize a 'shadow army' of 'shadow warriors' that are willing to volunteer their time to stand toe-to-toe at the majority of the locations here in Maricopa County where the paid progressive socialists are collecting petition signatures to recall Sheriff Joe."

Not long ago, some of the same people who successfully recalled former Senate President Russell Pearce announced they would launch a recall effort against Arpaio, who was elected to a sixth term in November.

Arpaio immediately cranked up his political-campaign machine, sending out a fundraising letter to his many donors that read, in part:

"These sore losers just never stop. They figure if they can force an election in an off-year they'll be able to turn out every pro-illegal-immigrant voter and steal this election. We saw them do the very same thing to an Arizona state senator just over a year ago."

The sheriff's friends want to bolster his campaign war chest by putting boots on the ground.

The e-mail seeking "shadow warriors" calls local activist Randy Parraz and the rest of those behind the Arpaio recall "domestic terrorists" and "thugs."

"What are they so afraid of?" Parraz told me. "If Joe is such a great guy, why would they even give the recall a second thought? It sounds like what they have planned will just give us an opportunity to catch people doing illegal things on videotape. At the Pearce recall, it got ugly. You can't try to intimidate people. If they do that, we'll get it on tape."

One of those helping to organize Arpaio's army, John DeCarlo, said volunteers will be respectful when trying to persuade folks not to sign a recall petition.

"The idea is to have a presence and be informative but not get in anyone's way," DeCarlo told me.

He works in the same office as Arpaio's campaign manager, Chad Willems, although Willems said his people are not in command of the "shadow army" but only offering advice and assistance.

"What happened is that there is a group of very active supporters of the sheriff who have been wanting to do something to stop the recall," he told me. "The chairman of the county (Republican) party said that he would like to send people out and stand next to circulators and voice their opinions. Our phones have been ringing off the hook with people wanting to know what they can do."

What will these "shadow warriors" tell voters trying to decide whether to sign a recall petition?

"One thing will be the cost," DeCarlo said.

The price of a recall election has been estimated at over $5million.

Parraz calls that a small amount compared with what Arpaio has cost the county in lawsuits over the years, not to mention the department's other problems, like the 400-plus uninvestigated child sexual-abuse cases about which the sheriff just released a 10,000-page report.

"The election in November doesn't wipe away what Arpaio has done," Parraz told me. "People know why they should sign a recall petition. We don't have to persuade them. These Arpaio people are just drawing attention to why Arpaio should be recalled. They're helping us."

No petitions are being circulated yet. The recall group, like the Arpaio group, is meeting this weekend.

Recall supporters have 120 days to collect roughly 350,000 signatures. It won't be easy.

"We don't have the resources they have, but we have a lot of support," Parraz said.

The odds of success are heavily against a ragtag guerrilla force taking on a well-equipped, well-funded army. At least that's what military and political strategists have been saying since way back in -- when was that? -- 1776.

Reach Montini at 602-444-8978 or ed.montini@arizonarepublic.com.

Copyright 2012 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

Wisconsin recall vote may be lift for Romney

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker provided a template for Republicans looking ahead to the presidential race with his victory in Tuesday's recall election: big money, powerful organization and enormous enthusiasm among his base. Can Mitt Romney match that in November?

Both sides will examine the results for clues as to whether Wisconsin, which hasn't voted for a Republican presidential candidate since 1984 but has been fiercely competitive in two of the last three elections, will again become a true battleground. If it does become as competitive as it was in 2000 and 2004, the electoral map will become far more challenging for President Barack Obama.

In defeating Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, Walker dealt a sizable blow to Wisconsin Democrats, progressives and the ranks of organized labor, who together threw everything they could into the effort to send the governor home before his term was half over. Whether he significantly damaged the president, who kept his distance from the contest, is less clear.

Romney was quick to seize on the results and claim broader implications. In a statement issued Tuesday by his campaign, he said, "Tonight's results will echo beyond the borders of Wisconsin. Gov. Walker has shown that citizens and taxpayers can fight back -- and prevail -- against the runaway government costs imposed by labor bosses."

Obama had no comment on the outcome.

Romney can hope to replicate Walker's model in two areas. The first is money. Walker raised more than $30million for his recall campaign, with some from large donations that exceeded the normal limits because of the laws governing recall elections. Barrett raised $4million. Romney won't raise significantly more than Obama. But the presumptive GOP nominee can count on Republican super PACs to give him an overall advantage.

Obama began the campaign more than a year ago amid assumptions that he would easily raise more than his Republican opponent. But Obama advisers worry that they will be heavily outspent by GOP super PACs. Other than the state of the economy, that potential funding disparity is the campaign's biggest concern. Money may not decide the election in the end, but Romney and the Republicans currently appear to have the edge.

Walker's victory was a party victory. The Republican Governors Association spent more than $9million on his behalf. The Republican National Committee, led by Reince Priebus, a former Wisconsin GOP chairman, and the state Republican Party combined for a total effort in mobilizing voters. All that paid dividends in defining Barrett and building an organization that proved superior to what many Democrats considered a fine get-out-the-vote operation of their own that was run by their party and the unions.

Democrats were divided over the wisdom of going ahead with the recall, although, given the determination by their rank and file in Wisconsin, there was no way to stop it from happening. Obama campaign officials worried that it would take resources and energy away from the presidential race. The Democratic National Committee drew criticism for not backing Barrett more aggressively. Had the outcome been closer, the president would have faced criticism for not campaigning on behalf of Barrett.

DNC Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida said before the election that the recall would be a "dry run" for the Democrats' ground operation for November. What Republicans showed in Wisconsin on Tuesday was their ability to run a superior voter-mobilization operation, at least in this one election. Democrats doubt they can do that elsewhere. Obama officials say they see little evidence that Romney is as well-organized as they are in the battleground states. But the Wisconsin effort gives the GOP something to build on.

Walker's victory was also very much a personal one. To Wisconsin Republicans, Walker is a hero, a rock star. Now, he may be one nationally as well. When he appeared at a GOP dinner with Romney and then-GOP candidate Rick Santorum a few days before the Wisconsin primaries in April, it was clear that he was the most popular politician in the room by far. Wisconsin Republicans may admire Romney, but the enthusiasm for him doesn't match the affection for Walker. He will need some of that Walker enthusiasm if he hopes to win the state in November.

There is one other important element to the Walker template for Republicans -- conviction. Walker took a controversial position in going after labor unions as part of his overall effort to deal with the state's fiscal deficit. In the face of a huge backlash, he stood behind what he did. He admitted he hadn't thought enough about how to sell his program and paid a price for it that won't be erased by Tuesday's victory. But he did not back away from the changes he implemented.

That makes Walker the kind of conviction politician that many Republicans want in their leaders today -- a model emulated by some of the other Republican governors around the country. It is what many Republican voters thought was missing in Romney during the primaries. Republicans in Wisconsin were willing to go to almost any lengths to keep Walker in office. It's questionable that they will do as much for Romney. His hope still rests on his ability to fuel and channel the anti-Obama anger in the Republican base as the chief motivator in November.

If the results Tuesday buoyed Republican hopes for November, the exit polls offered some counterevidence that Obama may still hold some advantages in Wisconsin as the campaign heats up. When voters who turned out Tuesday were asked how they would vote in the presidential election, Obama ran ahead of Romney, although his margin was short of the 14 points by which he won the state in 2008.

Overall, about 17 percent of Walker voters said they would support the president in the fall. Well over half were self-described independents -- disproportionately more than in the overall electorate on Tuesday -- and more than half were moderates. Overall, independents made up a larger share of the electorate Tuesday, and Walker won them, but by a somewhat smaller margin than in 2010.

A plurality of Wisconsin voters Tuesday also judged Obama superior to Romney in his ability to help the middle class. The president held a narrow advantage on who would likely be better at improving the economy. A memo from the Obama campaign's Wisconsin director that was issued overnight noted, "There hasn't been a single poll that shows Romney ahead of the president in Wisconsin."

Walker and the president actually share something in common. The governor did not back down from the most controversial elements of his platform, but he sought to avoid throwing them back in the faces of the voters. Instead, his main message was similar to what the president has been using as he campaigns around the country: We've made progress, things are a little better, don't go back to where we were before I came into office.

Tuesday's recall was described by partisans on both sides as the second-most-important U.S. election this year, just behind the presidential race. It lived up to those expectations, and Walker exceeded expectations with his victory. It was not a referendum on the president. That election is coming soon enough.

Copyright 2012 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

Wisconsin voters keep Walker after recall election

PEWAUKEE, Wis. – The political themes in Wisconsin turned from divisive and contentious to healing and concensus after state voters decided to keep their embattled Republican governor, whose drive to end collective-bargaining rights for most state workers resulted in a caustic recall campaign.

By Darren Hauck, AP

In heavy voting, Gov. Scott Walker turned back the challenge from Democrat Tom Barrett. Walker had defeated Barrett in the 2010 election.

By Darren Hauck, AP

In heavy voting, Gov. Scott Walker turned back the challenge from Democrat Tom Barrett. Walker had defeated Barrett in the 2010 election.

In heavy voting, Gov. Scott Walker drew 53% of the vote to Democratic challenger Tom Barrett's 46% in Tuesday's recall election. The results were a virtual reprise of the 2010 election, when Walker defeated Barrett, Milwaukee's mayor, 52%-46%.

"Bringing our state together will take some time, but I hope to start right away," Walker said in a victory speech. "It is time to put our differences aside and figure out ways that we can move Wisconsin forward."

Barrett conceded in a telephone call to Walker. "Now we must look to the future," he said. "We are a state that has been deeply divided. And it is up to all of us, their side and our side, to listen to each other and to try to do what's right for everyone in this state."

The race was closely watched nationally for clues about fallout for other elected officials who cut workers' benefits to ease crunched budgets. There also could be implications in the presidential race between President Obama and Republican rival Mitt Romney in a state with 10 electoral votes that both would like to win.

By Tom Lynn, Getty Images

Tom Barrett speaks with members of the media after voting in Milwaukee on Tuesday.

Romney issued a statement saying Walker's victory "will echo beyond the borders of Wisconsin."

Walker "has shown that citizens and taxpayers can fight back — and prevail — against the runaway government costs imposed by labor bosses," Romney said. "Tonight voters said no to the tired, liberal ideas of yesterday, and yes to fiscal responsibility and a new direction."

Charles Lipson, a political science professor at the University of Chicago, said Walker's win is "a big deal" because "it squashes the Democrats in the most important by-election of the year."

The results also suggest "suggest that Republican and moderate Democratic governors can retain voter support even if they take on public-sector unions - and perhaps because they take on public-sector unions."

Lipson said Wisconsin's results spell "big trouble for unions," which have already lost power in private industry. He also believes some unions will blame Obama for the loss.

"The unions would rather keep Obama than deal with Romney, but the fizz has gone out of that champagne," he said.

Walker's win "suggests that Wisconsin's in play" in the presidential race, said Barry Burden, a University of Wisconsin-Madison political scientist. "This is a state that's competitive."

Other analysts said Walker and the state's Republican Party will be strengthened after winning the rematch with Barrett.

"He's empowered and emboldened" after withstanding the Democrats' efforts to recall him, said Kathleen Dolan, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.

"He withstood as much heavy artillery as any governor could," said Brandon Scholz, a Republican lobbyist and strategist based in Madison. Other elected officials, he said, "will take that lesson and apply it in their state" with austerity proposals.

"People are going to realize the presidential race and U.S. Senate race and the Legislature are up for grabs," says Paul Maslin, a Madison-based Democratic pollster.

The recall election was the culmination of a bitter battle that began in February 2011, when Walker announced his plan to erase a $137 million budget shortfall in part by requiring state workers to give up collective-bargaining rights and pay more for health insurance and pension benefits.

Recalls of four Republican state senators also were on Tuesday's ballot. The results in those races could shift control of the Senate, which is now divided 16-16.

Walker's proposals triggered massive protests in the state Capitol in Madison and prompted 14 Democratic state senators to leave the state for three weeks in an ultimately failed attempt to prevent passage of Walker's legislation. He signed it into law in March 2011.

Before the vote, the state's sharp divide was evident in the Democratic stronghold of Madison. The house across from the governor's official residence displayed a "We Stand With Scott Walker" sign. The house two doors down: "Tom Barrett for Governor."

"Unfortunately, Wisconsin has become in some ways a microcosm of the partisan wars that have been raging nationally," said Dolan, the political scientist.

Regardless of the election outcome, she said, it will take time for the state to recover from the divisive debate and revive bipartisan spirit in the Legislature. "We really are at a place of sort of paralysis," Dolan said.

The amount of out-of-state money flowing to the campaigns here and the appearances of high-profile supporters of Walker and Barrett were evidence of the race's national overtones. More than $62 million was spent by the candidates and outside groups. Much of the $30 million raised by Walker came from outside the state. Barrett has spent about $4 million; most of his donors live in Wisconsin.

Former president Bill Clinton campaigned with Barrett, and fellow Republican governors Chris Christie of New Jersey and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana appeared with Walker.

No Republican presidential candidate has won Wisconsin since Ronald Reagan in 1984. Obama defeated Republican John McCain here in 2008, 56%-42%.

Scholz, the Republican strategist, saw Walker's victory as "a significant blow" weakening the clout of the labor unions that provide campaign cash and infrastructure for Democratic presidential candidates.

Dolan cautioned against reading too many presidential implications into Wisconsin's political fight. "Will Obama's chance of winning Wisconsin be made harder if Walker wins? Sure, maybe a little," she said. "But what's going on here is so episodic and so idiosyncratic."

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.

View the original article here

No Recall

For disappointed Democrats, seduced by early exit polls into a vain hope that the union-busting Wisconsin governor Scott Walker might actually be recalled from office late last night, the good news is that some of their pre-election spin still holds up. Yesterday’s recall vote is not necessarily a bellwether for the general election, not necessarily a sign that Mitt Romney can win a slew of purple states, not necessarily proof that the country is ready to throw in with Walker’s fellow Wisconsinite Paul Ryan on issues of spending and taxation.

But neither is it anything like good news for liberalism. We are entering a political era that will feature many contests like the war over collective bargaining in Wisconsin: grinding struggles in which sweeping legislation is passed by party-line votes and then the politicians responsible hunker down and try to survive the backlash. There will be no total victory in this era, but there will be gains and losses — and the outcome in the Walker recall is a warning to Democrats that their position may be weaker than many optimistic liberals thought.

To understand the broader trends at work, a useful place to turn is Jay Cost’s essay on “The Politics of Loss” in the latest issue of National Affairs. For most of the post-World War II era, Cost argues, our debates over taxing and spending have taken place in an atmosphere of surplus. The operative question has been how best to divide a growing pie, which has enabled politicians in both parties to practice a kind of ideologically flexible profligacy. Republicans from Dwight Eisenhower to George W. Bush have increased spending, Democrats from John F. Kennedy to Bill Clinton have found ways to cut taxes, and the great American growth machine has largely kept the toughest choices off the table.

But not anymore. Between our slowing growth and our unsustainable spending commitments, “the days when lawmakers could give to some Americans without shortchanging others are over; the politics of deciding who loses what, and when and how, is upon us.” In this era, debates will be increasingly zero-sum, bipartisan compromise will be increasingly difficult, and “the rules and norms of our politics that several generations have taken for granted” will fade away into irrelevance.

It’s useful to think of Obama’s stimulus bill and Walker’s budget repair bill as mirror image exercises in legislative shock and awe.

This is a perfect encapsulation of what’s happened in Wisconsin these last two years: Walker and the Republicans used a narrow mandate to enact unexpectedly dramatic public-sector reforms, and the Democrats responded by upping the ante significantly, with mass protests, walkouts by state legislators and finally a recall campaign. A similar story could be told about Barack Obama’s Washington, in which a temporarily ascendant Democratic Party pushed through sweeping spending bills and social-compact altering health care legislation before unprecedented Republican obstructionism ground the process to a halt. In fact, it’s useful to think of Obama’s stimulus bill and Walker’s budget repair bill as mirror image exercises in legislative shock and awe, and the Tea Party and the Wisconsin labor protests as mirror images of backlash.

At both the state and national level, then, the two coalitions are aiming for a mix of daring on offense, fortitude on defense and ruthless counterattacks whenever possible. The goal is to simultaneously maximize the opportunities presented to one’s own side and punish the other party for trying to do the same.

That’s obviously what the organizers of the recall hoped to do to Walker – to punish his union busting and spending cuts as thoroughly as House Democrats were punished in the 2010 mid-term elections for the votes they cast on the health care bill and the stimulus. The fact that the labor unions and liberal activists failed where the Tea Party largely succeeded sends a very different message, though: It tells officeholders that it’s safer to take on left-wing interest groups than conservative ones (the right outraised and outspent the left by a huge margin in the recall election), safer to cut government than to increase revenue, safer to face down irate public sector employees than irate taxpayers.

A similar message is currently being telegraphed by the respective postures of the two parties in Washington. The House Republicans have spent the past two years taking tough votes on entitlement reform, preparing themselves for an ambitious offensive should 2012 deliver the opportunity to cast those same votes and have them count. The Senate Democrats, on the other hand, have failed to even pass a budget: There is no Democratic equivalent of Paul Ryan’s fiscal blueprint, no Democratic plan to swallow hard and raise middle class taxes the way Republicans look poised to swallow hard and overhaul Medicare. Indeed, there’s no liberal agenda to speak of at the moment, beyond a resounding “No!” to whatever conservatism intends to do.

That “No!” might still be enough to win Barack Obama re-election. But November 2012 will just be one battle in a longer war, and the outcome in Wisconsin suggests that the edge in that war currently (and to some extent unexpectedly, given the demographic trends that favor the left) belongs to a limited government conservatism. The Democrats threw almost everything they had at Scott Walker, and it wasn’t nearly enough. And when you fail in what is essentially a defensive campaign, it makes it that much more difficult to get back on offense.

View the original article here

Primary Preview: Recall, Redistricting and Confident Republicans

Voters head to the polls Tuesday in Indiana, North Carolina, West Virginia and Wisconsin, and while two marquee races have grabbed the spotlight – the Republican Senate primary in Indiana and the Democratic primary in Wisconsin for the recall race for governor – several down-ticket contests may shape the House next year.

The big show remains in Indiana, where Senator Richard G. Lugar is fighting for his political life against the state treasurer, Richard E. Mourdock, who has surged to a strong lead in recent polls by vowing to ditch Mr. Lugar’s penchant for compromise and to stand on conservative principles. Democrats believe a Mourdock victory will put the seat in play for their candidate, Representative Joe Donnelly. Republicans scoff.

“It’s a Republican state. I feel confident about holding the seat,” said Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas and chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Democratic voters in Wisconsin appeared ready to pick Tom Barrett, the former mayor of Milwaukee, for a rematch against the state’s embattled Republican governor, Scott Walker. Mr. Walker beat Mr. Barrett in 2010, 52 percent to 47 percent. The recall election is scheduled for June 5.

For Republicans, Indiana and North Carolina present a target-rich environment, thanks to party-led redistricting – and that has created crowded Republican primaries.

In Indiana, Representative Larry Bucshon faces a Republican primary rematch against the opponent he squeaked by in 2010, Kristi Risk. Aside from the Lugar showdown, it is expected to be the only real chance that an incumbent could lose on Tuesday.

In North Carolina’s Eighth District, redistricting has made it even more difficult for the Democrat incumbent, Larry Kissell, and Republicans smell blood. The perceived front-runner for the party’s nomination, Richard Hudson, a former Congressional aide, briefly caused a stir when he proposed that the chief justice of the Supreme Court be required to certify the citizenship of presidential candidates, asserting “there’s no question President Obama’s hiding something on citizenship.” But Mr. Hudson is backed by Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the House majority leader. One of his opponents, Scott Keadle, a dentist, has the backing of the conservative political action committee Club for Growth.

The crowded field of Republicans hoping to succeed Representative Heath Shuler, a Democrat who is retiring, could be narrowed to a runoff, but the businessman Mark Meadows is the party’s front-runner. Representative Brad Miller, a Democrat who is also retiring, is likely to be succeeded by George Holding, a former United States attorney and the favorite in Tuesday’s Republican primary.

Representative Mike McIntyre, a Democrat, will try to win re-election in a new district that no longer includes his home and gave 58 percent of its vote to Senator John McCain in 2008. Mr. McIntyre survived the Republican tidal wave of 2010, beating Ilario Pantano, an Iraq war veteran. Mr. Pantano is seeking a rematch in a better district, but Washington Republicans would prefer to give State Senator David Rouzer a chance.

View the original article here