Arizona's Own Espresso Pundit

Maupin Up

Reverend Jarrett Maupin, South Phoenix activist and elected board member of the Phoenix Union High School District, has petitioned to intervene in the case of the Honeywell SEP.

On August 13th, I broke the story of the Governor hijacking the Honeywell Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP) in order to finance her Western Climate Initiative. I've pointed out that diverting the money to fund the Western Climate Initiative violates DEQ's own policies concerning SEPS and diverting the SEP also adds to Environmental Injustice because the violation actually occurred in South Phoenix, but the mitigation money is being spent out of state.

Here are the points that Maupin made in his intervention. 

ADEQ does not have the authority to agree to the SEP that is proposed in the consent judgment. The SEP is highly inappropriate and unlawful in many respects, including 

(1)  The SEP lacks a nexus to the violations at issue.

(2) The SEP does not fall within an authorized category of SEPS,

(3) The SEP potentially results in improper funneling of funds to ADEQ contractors

(4) The SEP does not contain appropriate  oversight over how the money will be spent by the Western Governor’s Association.

Example of a good SEP

Meanwhile, the Arizona Republic praised the Salt River Project for a SEP that SRP recently worked out with EPA and the Justice Department. 

SRP also agreed to do three other projects that will help the Arizona environment: retrofitting some Valley school buses with pollution controls, installing solar panels at schools and replacing old woodstoves with less-polluting models in the area near the power plant.

Wow, those are local projects that have a nexus with the violations...just like the policy says.  I guess if you want to take the politics out of environmental regulation, you might want to work with the federal government instead of the state DEQ. 

Say, isn't DEQ up for sunset review next year?

Do You Feel Lucky Punk? Well, Do You?

It's hard to write a good hit piece.

It's easy to write a good fluff piece.  You should probably include a puppy and a few senior citizens.  There are a few pitfalls.  For example, if you pose your candidate with kids, it's better if they are his kids.  But those mistakes are rare.

It's easy to write a good comparison piece.  You just put up a picture of your candidate and his opponent, pick some key issues and show how the candidates are different.  This works better if the two candidates, you know, actually have different positions on the issues.

It's easy to write a BAD hit piece.   A bad hit piece has no subtlety, no finesse.  It's a car bomb not a cruise missile.  A bad hit piece oftentimes destroys the candidate (and the consultant) who deploys it.  I've profiled a couple bad hit pieces this cycle.  Some hit pieces are bad because they are overtly racist.

Some hit pieces are bad because they are so nuclear that the only one left standing is the targeted candidate.  Not only do these pieces risk offending the electorate, but they also risk an editorial response. (I don't want to pick on my friend Nathan because he won't speak to me again, but it's becoming clear that I'm the only one who is still speaking to him anyway.)

If you want to see a hit piece clinic, check out the Republican Primary in CD 5. 

I met David Schweikert in 1990...Susan Bitter Smith introduced us. I been friends with both of them ever since.  I work with Susan on CAP issues and I was the best man at Schweikert's wedding.

They have both run for Congress and lost; they are both pros, they are both well financed and they are both hungry.  They also both have internal polling that says they are tied ten days out.  The gloves are off.

Schweikert fired the first salvo. 

Bitter Smith is running as "Reagan Conservative" and Schweikert fashioned a variation on the classic comparison piece by contrasting Reagan with Bitter Smith on key issues. 

Susan resisted the temptation to come back with a nuclear response.  She learned that lesson in 2000.  That's when Bitter Smith and fellow candidate Tom Liddy got into a bizarre "he-said, she-said" over opposition research that would have allegedly put fellow candidate Jeff Flake in a bad light.

The finger pointing escalated into lie detector tests and the spectacle eventually drew a sharp rebuke from Republic--which had already endorsed Bitter Smith.

However this story evolves this week, this affair has become a pathetic political side issue that demeans Arizona's most energetic and issue-oriented campaign. As we near the final week of the campaign and candidates turn up the heat, we urge each to conduct him or herself with the same sort of integrity each demands of others.

Worse than the Republic Editorial Board's response, was the awful Benson cartoon that followed.  The affair derailed both the Bitter Smith and Liddy campaigns.  Bitter Smith came in third and Liddy came in fourth.

So Susan had one chance to get it right this time.   But it's tough.  Schweikert has been running for Congress since high school, so he doesn't have a voting record that can be used against him.  He's a conservative running as a conservative, so the classic "Here's what he says vs. Here's how he votes" comparison wouldn't work.  He's more conservative than Bitter Smith on social issues, so a candidate comparison certainly won't work in a Republican Primary. 

How does she handle it?  Brilliantly.

A good hit piece evokes a subtle emotional response.  It makes you feel a certain way through imagery instead of words.  After all, words can be true or false, images simply ignite emotions.   The image on the left is what CD 5 voters found in their mail boxes yesterday. Here's a larger version.  That will get your attention.

In addition to the gun barrel, notice the font?  That's classic horror movie font.  The little splatters evoke an emotional response that is almost as powerful as the gun.  That's why movies like Clawed use the font.  Ironically, Benson used it in the Gutter Smith cartoon. 

There is no way that you can get this piece in the mail and not flip it over.

The back side is even better.  Here's the larger version.  The only actual fact in the piece is the tired old claim that Schweikert raised the tax on diesel fuel in 1993.  I've already debunked that story here.  The bill that Bitter Smith refers to was a tax REPEAL. Here's the AP story about the bill.

PHOENIX - Arizona stands to lose scores of high-paying jobs unless it gets rid of a tax that costs truckers more than double the national average and nine times what they pay California, lawmakers say.

Sure, some will complain that Bitter Smith has gone too far.  But this cycle has already seen mug shots, battered women and Nazi imagery;  the "Make my Day" theme is mild by comparison.  The hit piece doesn't cross the line.  It's scary without being racist or referring to Hitler.   It distorts Schweikert's record, but doesn't actually lie about it.  The Gothic font, gun perspective and over all layout evoke an image of fear and violence, but those theme's aren't overtly expressed or taken too far. 

The bill Schweikert supported repealed the tax on the commercial trucks and increased the tax on commercial diesel fuel.  It was revenue neutral and requested by the trucking industry.  But, the one fact in the piece is technically correct.

Bitter Smith has subtly inoculated herself from criticism. Notice that the pump handle is green? That's brilliant.  Susan can always claim that she disclosed that the tax increase was only for diesel fuel.  The rest of the piece is just imagery and emotion.  It's powerful, yet unassailable. 

Considering her constraints--Schweikert's record matches his rhetoric, he's the more conservative of the two, he has no legitimate skeletons and she got burned for going too far in the last campaign--I think the piece is brilliantly executed.

Let's see if Schweikert can respond without self destructing. 

Where Does Pete Rios Live? II

Sometimes the news makes me laugh.

The AP is reporting that a court will allow PO Boxes on nominating petitions.  Here's the funny part.

State Rep. Pete Rios, a Hayden Democrat who for years has criticized restrictions on using post office boxes as addresses on election petitions, called the ruling "half a victory."

It's unfair to expect rural residents, especially non-English-speaking seniors living on reservations, to cram in a written description of their home's location without addresses in a tiny box on a form, Rios said. "How are they going to put a narrative in there on where they live?"

Those long narratives are so tiresome.  After all, in Mr. Rios' case he would have to say.  "Well, I have an actual house in Apache Junction and even though I sleep there and my kids went to school in the neighborhood, I don't actually live there.  That's because that house is not in my legislative district, nor is it in the Pinal County Supervisors District that I'm running for.  My "real" home is a 30 year old trailer that I have parked on the back of a lot that a friend of mine owns in Dudleyville."

Pete's right.  That's way too long to put on a petition.  Since a picture is worth a thousand words, maybe Pete could attach this picture of his Dudleyville home to the petition.

In January of 2006, when I first asked the question "Where does Pete Rios live" it made quite a stir.  After a series of sharp email exchanges, I became convinced that this trailer actually qualifies as a legal residence for an elected official.  Residency is largely a state of mind; after all, George Bush senior lived in Kennebunkport Maine but said his "residence" was at the Houstonian hotel in Texas.

If the voters of Pinal County decide the Pete's living arrangement is OK, then it's fine with me.  My concern was the mileage. 

At the time I wrote the original story, Mr. Rios had been claiming that he drove to the trailer nearly every weekend and the state had paid him thousands of dollars in mileage reimbursement from his "session" home in Apache Junction to his "real" home in Dudleyville.  Hmm. While residency can be a state of mind, mileage needs to be actual. 

I had no way to prove that Pete doesn't spend his weekends at the trailer, so I let the story drop.  OK, that's not really true.  I let the story drop because Pete sent me this email.

Patterson,

Next time I see you in person don't be surprised if I punch you in the gut, after this hassle you have put me and my family through.

It's so embarrassing to be at the Capitol and have a one of the Legislators kick your ass, so I decided that I'd back off.  After all, Carolyn Allen scares me enough already...that's all I needed was to have Rios coming after me. 

But someone's not afraid to speak truth to macho.  A friend of mine forwarded this email and ad from Rios' Democratic opponent Mary Espinoza.  (I hope that she has a large nephew who can provide security.)

This is the letter/paid ad I wrote regarding Rios's residence.  I placed it in the Coolidge Examiner, Eloy Enterprise, San Manuel Miner, Superior Sun and Copper Basin News.  It is not a strong statement, but it gets the point across.

Cutting off the Dog's tail an Inch at a Time

Gannett Blog has become the go-to source for Gannett coverage.  Newspapers continue to refuse to disclose their own activities, so  sites like Gannett Blog are flourishing.  Gannett is in the midst of a 1,000 person layoff, but instead of announcing the layoff and then immediately notifying the affected employees, management is letting the news trickle out.  This technique devastates morale as employees answer every phone call and check every email in fear of being shown the door.  A friend of mine was laid off from the Republic a few years ago and he had to leave immediately.  A security guard walked him to his car and scrapped the parking decal off his windshield before he left. 

Here's the latest from Gannett Blog

Phoenix: Two reports that 35 workers are being laid off from The Arizona Republic's pressroom. "The other 'common workers' are getting thrown out without a buyout!" one reader says. "Shame on the Republic management!!" Like the Enquirer, the Republic has delayed any layoffs, pending responses to a buyout offer. I still don't know how many offers are on the table, however. Plus, were the buyouts only for certain employees -- such as those in the newsroom? Why wouldn't pressroom employees be eligible, too?

Here and Now

I'll be on FM 91.5 KJZZ's "Here and Now" today at 11:40.  Host Paul Atkinson will interview me and Donna Gratehouse from http://www.democraticdiva.com/ about the role of blogs in campaign coverage.

I like to joke about the "NPR and New York Times crowd," but I have to say that NPR has been very good to me.  This is my fifth NPR appearance--three times on KJZZ and twice nationally. 

...and justice for all?

In previous posts, I've expressed my dismay about the regressive nature of Governor Napolitano's policies. I can understand the politics behind the old fashioned redistribution from the rich to the poor.  But so many of the Governor's programs benefit the rich at the expense of the poor. 

There are plenty of examples.  She's increasing lottery sales in order to fund new construction on university campuses.  Her TIME initiative raises the sales tax to fund more roads to lessen the suburban commute as well as finance light rail and environmental projects.  Her State Trust Land initiative retires state trust land that was supposed to benefit the schools.  Instead, the new open space will benefit rich developers and wealthy neighborhoods.  All of these programs are disproportionately financed by the poor and disproportionately benefit the wealthy.

And now we have a new example.  Commissioner Pierce, in his letter objecting to the Honeywell SEP, made this point.   

By choosing to fund the WCI via Honeywell’s SEP, you have diverted $1 million that could have gone to help the people in the affected community for the development of the WCI—a regional program. I can see no justification for diverting these funds from the local community.

Pierce is raising an environmental justice issue.  Poor people are disproportionately affected by pollution.  That's because the poor live in areas that are more likely have polluted water and air  it's also because the effects of many pollutants are more pronounced in vulnerable populations that have worse nutrition and are in generally poorer health. 

That's why when the state gets extra money for environmental projects--like the Honeywell SEP--it usually spends the money in poor areas where it can do the most good.  The money helps offset what is seen by many to be an environmental injustice.

In fact, the federal government has a list of recommended projects that should be considered when a state agency has the opportunity to earmark money for an environmental program.

Here's the general principle.

These project ideas provide opportunities to garner significant public health and environmental benefits. In  addition, several of these project ideas support broader Agency priorities, including the Agency's environmental justice mission.

Here are some examples.

Sustainable infrastructure projects, such as water efficiency projects designed to encourage reduction of household water use, buy-back programs to replace older plumbing fixtures, and lead detection surveys and repair of water distribution system leaks;

The Governor's diversion of the Honeywell SEP to her Western Climate Change initiative is even more egregious when you consider that the violation actually occurred in a poor neighborhood.  Honeywell polluted the groundwater at the Motorola plant on 52nd st and Van Buren.  The plume drifted west and south from that point. 

Those south Phoenix neighborhoods were the ones affected by the pollution, and they should be the ones benefited by the fines.  But the Governor, again, reverted to her reverse Robin Hood policies and has taken the fine OUT of poor community and spent it on her Western Climate Change Initiative.

I've included the cover picture from the Western Governor's Association Annual Report.  It's from their last meeting...in Jackson Hole Wyoming.  Very nice, very clean, very rich. Not someplace that the folks in South Phoenix are likely to visit anytime soon. 

Some Signatures are more equal than others

The latest set of talking points from the TIME initiative included this ironic little missive.

The TIME Initiative Campaign is committed to ensuring that the thousands of Arizona voters who have been denied their right to be counted as valid petition signers are counted and that Arizonans have a choice to vote on a comprehensive, statewide transportation plan this fall.

So if you sign a petition you have a "right to be counted?"

Where was that "right" when the TIME guys rejected the 18,231 signatures that are still sitting on Connie Wilhelm's desk?

Depends on your definintion of "Win-Win"

Most of the coverage of the proposed State Trust initiative has involved the struggle to get it onto the ballot.  In Saturday's Tribune, however, Howie Fischer adds some analysis of what the initiative would actually do. 

The answer isn't pretty.  The Trust Land was set aside at statehood and is supposed to provide a dedicated source of revenue for public schools.  The Governor's initiative would simply retire half a million acres of prime land in order to provide open space; the schools would get nothing out of the exchange. That's why the School Boards Association opposes the initiative.

How does Governor Napolitano justify her support for the proposal?

"If you take some state trust land and protect it, you actually elevate the value of state lands that are next to or proximate to that protected state trust land," she said.

"So the economics work out," the governor continued. "This is a win-win."

The Governor has a good point.  After all, the remaining trust parcels are much more valuable if the huge tract next to them is permanently set aside as open space.  But wait a second, don't the PRIVATE parcels that are adjacent to the retired trust land increase in value as well?  Isn't that a huge windfall for the owner?  Doesn't that windfall come at the expense of education funding?

I wonder who owns those parcels?

Honeywell Hijack Update

Early last week I pointed out that the Governor had hijacked a $1 million settlement that Honeywell had paid to settle an environmental violation.   According to DEQ policy, the money should have been used to fund clean water issues in South Phoenix.  Instead, the money will be sent to the Western Governor's Association to fund Governor Napolitano's Western Climate Initiative.

ACC Commissioner Gary Pearce has written a letter to protest the DEQ move. I Com. Pierce's letter here.

The Mainstream papers have done a good job covering the Pierce letter.  I'll start with Howie Fischer's story from the Tribune.

Napolitano pet project at center of commission member's complaint

A state utility regulator is lashing out at the head of the Department of Environmental Quality for agreeing to settle a pollution claim with money for one of Gov. Janet Napolitano's pet projects.

Here's the Republic's coverage.

His letter urges ADEQ Director Steve Owens and Attorney General Terry Goddard to reconsider the allocation and to develop a new environmental project in conjunction with Honeywell that would directly benefit anyone who lives or works in the vicinity of Honeywell's 34th Street facility, which is north of Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport.

(The cool thing is that when you Google the story, there are dozens of articles, but Espresso Pundit comes up first.  That's because the Espresso Pundit story was on the web a full 48 hours before it appeared in the papers.)

ACRI Isn't going to Make it Either

On August 5th, I pointed out that the Arizona Civil Rights Initiative wouldn't be able to tolerate a high failure rate.  The Recorder's office is going through the sample today and the failure rate is in the 46% range.  Again, this number will drop as they work through the sample, but that's way too high for the initiative to survive.