Strike Everything

Few sights say more about the end of a political career than a politician vacating his office.

On Dec. 8, one of Arizona’s longest-serving lawmakers packed his belongings in cardboard boxes, descended the stairs of the Senate and loaded them onto his car.

But Senate President Bob Burns’ departure reveals something more.

It is a result of term-limit laws that have sucked institutional knowledge out of the Capitol by not allowing legislators to stay long enough to become experts in how the multiple aspects of government work.

Burns is a member of a fading club of legislators who came on the political scene before laws limited how long politicians can stay in office.

As a result, they accumulated a great deal of knowledge about how government works, particularly when it comes to budgeting. And Burns probably knows the state budget process better than anyone. These lawmakers could tell which ideas work and more importantly, which ones don’t. Some could recite how many acre-feet of water were being diverted from the Colorado River to quench the thirst of Arizona’s expanding population.

They also tended to be less confrontational, although some could be acerbic and blunt.

This year, the Senate saw the biggest exodus of members because of term limits. In all, 11 senators were termed-out; a few others decided to retire.

Also retiring is Rep. Jack Brown, a Democrat from St. Johns who has been a lawmaker since the 1960s.

But while some are leaving, others are returning.

Sen. Debbie McCune Davis, a Phoenix Democrat who first joined the Legislature as a House member in 1979, will be joining the House next year. Lela Alston, a Democrat from Phoenix who served in the Senate from the late 1970s to the early 1990s, won her House race and will be back in the Capitol.

Burns had pretty much finished moving his stuff out – his office was already bare except for a box or two – when he took a break to talk to the Arizona Capitol Times.

It was bright outside, probably in the mid-70s, a perfect day for biking. In fact, if you wonder how a 72-year old man could keep up with all-night budget negotiations it’s because Burns is an endurance athlete. He often pedals his recumbent bike for more than 20 miles a day.

Burns, who has served the Legislature for two decades, did leave a few items in the drawer of his desk: A stapler, some pens, scissors, paper clips and a rarely used memo pad. They were there when he inherited the office from the previous Senate president, he explained.

But he is also leaving behind something he prefers he didn’t have to – a state budget that is grossly out of balance.

“It’s kind of leaving a job that’s not completely finished,” he said. “It’s going to be extremely difficult to get back on track.”

Burns, who is largely known for his cool demeanor, can be really funny at times. That day, he took a memento out from a box from his years in office – a miniature of a pig with battery-operated wings. He said he used to hang the flying pig from the ceiling during Appropriations Committee hearings and it would go round and round.

“That’s when the budget gets fixed,” he said with a laugh.

Burns’ career has been a constant battle to rein in spending. He won some fights, and lost some.

He and other fiscal hawks successfully pushed down the state’s debt load in the 1990s only for it to balloon back in the next decade. He saw government feed its appetite for spending with an unsustainable level of revenue under former governor Janet Napolitano. In those same years Republicans also pushed for tax breaks that chipped away at the states’ revenue base.

All these budget decisions would come to haunt Arizona when the country’s economy tanked, exposing the state to its worst fiscal crisis in history.

It fell on Burns to lead his colleagues in the quest to find solutions to the state’s multi-billion dollar budget shortfall, and to say it was tough would be a gross understatement.

But if those who wielded power like Burns had a singular achievement in the last two years, it is that the doors of government offices have been kept mostly open. Programs and agencies were severely cut, but core government services are more or less intact.

Burns isn’t exactly happy with the budget solutions that have been adopted.

And who would be? Most of them were temporary fixes. Some, like borrowing, simply pushed painful decisions off into the future. Burns tried to put a lid on borrowing this year, but his proposal ultimately didn’t get through.

Still, the former G.E. and Honeywell programming analyst has had a very rich political career. As Senate president, he leaves the world of legislating on top of his field, and not very many can say that.

For now, at least, Burns signals he’s taking a break and taking it easy. When asked what he’s going to do next, his standard answer is to say he’s “running for the golf course.”

He’ll be spending more of his time in Sedona, where he and his wife have just finished constructing a house.

You’ll probably still see the outgoing Senate president trying to reach the top, though it’s likely he’ll be on his bike on the side of a hill.

-Luige del Puerto

Republican Grant Woods, Democrat Fred DuVal

Even as 2010′s votes are being counted, Republican Grant Woods said he’s considering a possible 2014 gubernatorial run as an independent candidate.

The former state Attorney General and longtime adviser to U.S. Sen. John McCain, said he’s had conversations with Democratic operative Fred DuVal about Wood’s possible run for the state’s highest office.

And those talks included the possibility of DuVal running down-ticket as secretary of state, also as an independent candidate.

“Running with Fred would be a dream come true,” Woods told the Arizona Capitol Times of his Occidental (Calif.) College roommate. The two graduated from the Liberal Arts college in 1976. “That would be very exciting. Running as an independent would be exciting, as well.”

Woods was an adviser to McCain’s and Gov. Jan Brewer’s campaigns this election cycle – and he also made a controversial endorsement of Democratic attorney general candidate Felecia Rotellini, which drew the ire of the Maricopa County Republican Party.

Woods, an attorney and radio talk-show host, said he and Duval, who was the top aide during former Gov. Bruce Babbitt’s administrations and also served in the Clinton administration, have talked about their concern about Arizona’s future with the divisive nature of politics in the state, and that a remedy to that would be running as independents.

The talk of a Woods/Duval run apparently came up in at least one conversation with Wes Gullett, who was chatting up Woods about Gullett’s possible run for Phoenix mayor (Woods was once rumored to be on a short-list of big names to seek the Phoenix’s highest post, as well).

Woods said he doesn’t remember specifically whether the two discussed a gubernatorial/secretary of state run by Woods and DuVal.

As for now, Woods said he’s not changing his party affiliation and will be focused on helping McCain and Brewer in their respective terms.

As for the future: “I’m intrigued by the independent run by somebody, and I think there is a reasonable chance that the next governor in Arizona would be an independent. The timing would have to be right.”

Indeed, independents are gaining ground on the Democratic Party registration in the state, and Woods said he believes Dems will be surpassed within four years.

DuVal could not be reached for comment.

- Bill Bertolino

Karl Rove’s speech at the downtown Phoenix Sheraton Tuesday started out with about as much intrigue as I expected from the top political advisor for former President George W. Bush; for the first half-hour he flaunted an uncanny grasp for statistics as he explained exactly what’s wrong with the health care law and predicted how the 2012 elections would pan out if voters followed the same patterns as they did on Nov. 2.

It was numbers overload, even for someone who routinely tracks those things.

Honestly, I kept myself busy during that portion of the speech by imagining just how dangerous the security detail sitting next to the stage really was. You gotta’ think they put some pretty experienced bodyguards on guys like Rove, whom is routinely the subject of protests for his role in the Bush administration’s decision to go to war in the Middle East.

Twice, in fact, during Rove’s speech, protesters barged into the room to shout something that was unintelligible from where I was sitting. Rove just kept talking while authorities wrangled the protesters out of the ballroom, unfazed as if that’s what always happens during the Phoenix Chamber’s luncheon speeches.

As usual, Rove got more interesting toward the end when people in the crowd got to forward their questions through moderator-on-stage Russell Smolden. One of the questions was whether Rove had insight on the 2012 GOP presidential candidates and, if so, which one was the frontrunner.

Rove replied by saying it was too early to name a frontrunner because there is no single heir-apparent as there has been for the GOP during recent election cycles.

Instead, he rattled off 10 potential nominees: Former New York Gov. George Pataki, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Minnesota Gov. TIm Pawlenty, Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and South Dakota Sen. John Thune.

Networks project that West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin, a Democrat, will defeat Republican John Raese in the special election to replace the late Robert Byrd.  According to the right-leaning Washington Examiner’s Timothy P. Carney, Manchin’s win renders GOP chances of taking control of the Senate, “impossible.”

National Review’s Jim Geraghty offers a silver lining for conservatives,

…as Manchin will either break his word on every campaign promise or become one of the chamber’s most conservative Democrats.

Nevertheless, the GOP’s best-case scenario to take control depended on West Virginia, as well as a few other long shots like California and Washington, where polls are still open.
–John Stodder

Jon Hulburd, Ben Quayle

Ben Quayle got the big name. Jon Hulburd got the bigger money.

At least that’s how it went according to the last-minute financial disclosures leading up to today’s election.

Quayle’s campaign reported to federal elections officials Monday (Nov. 1) that it received a $5,000 donation from SarahPAC, the political action committee of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

Hulburd, meanwhile, reported six contributions totaling $11,500. Those donations mostly came from political action committees, such as a pro-choice group, United Mine Workers of America and two Democratic groups.

Of course these last-minute infusions pale in comparison to overall fundraising in the race for Arizona’s 3rd Congressional District. Hulburd has dumped $500,000 of his own money into his war chest in recent weeks but still trails the well-oiled Quayle machine in fundraising.

Quayle has taken in more than $2.1 million, while Hulburd has raised about $1.3 million, according to the latest reports.

- Bill Bertolino

Many Democrats in the state are running to the middle. And many Republicans are running to the right.

So it’s interesting strategy that in an election cycle where the GOP is energized and on the attack, a political newcomer in Legislative District 11, Republican Eric West, appears to be embracing a Democrat.

In a mailer that arrived over the weekend in District 11, which takes in north-central Phoenix and Paradise Valley, West goes out of his way to tie his campaign to that of Democratic Rep. Eric Meyer.

The West mailer points to an Arizona Republic endorsement of the candidates with the headline “Meyer, West best of strong field.” It goes on to highlight several passages that not only give kudos to West, but also to Meyer.

“Neither Meyer nor West will support Sen. Russell Pearce’s poorly conceived effort to deny citizenship to children born of undocumented immigrants,” one passage reads. Much of the flier also talks about West decrying partisan politics.

While West appears to be cozying up to Meyer’s voters, the Democrat is doing just the opposite.

A separate mailer from the Meyer campaign tells voters to “single-shot” Meyer’s name on the ballot, thus increasing the Democrat’s chances of getting elected. Neither West nor the other Republican, Kate Brophy McGee, would receive votes with that strategy.

West was somewhat of a surprise victor in the Aug. 24 primary in the heavily Republican district. He beat out a well-funded Shawnna Bolick, wife of well-known Goldwater Institute attorney Clint Bolick.

Meyer, a Democrat who got the endorsement of both the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry and Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce, was unopposed in the primary and seeks his second term.

- Bill Bertolino

About a week ago, my five-year-old son and I attended a festival at his school that included games, crafts and food. After waiting in line at a popcorn stand, a casually dressed man stooped over and began asking each child for their name and whether they would like him to serve them some popcorn.

I don’t think many parents or their children recognized the popcorn man. I probably wouldn’t have either if I wasn’t connected to the political community through my job at the Arizona Capitol Times.

At first, he was just a familiar face and I couldn’t figure out where I had seen him before. I eavesdropped as he talked with students accompanied by their parents, never once mentioning his title during introductions. When I got close enough, I saw he was wearing a badge with his name, three little elephant symbols and “LD12.”

When it was our turn, I asked the popcorn man whether he had children because I was curious why he would spend his time volunteering at a school festival. He said he had been married for about a year, didn’t have any children and was hoping to start a family soon.

What’s most notable about my short talk with the popcorn man, though, is what he didn’t say. He never mentioned that he was running for re-election. He didn’t launch into a political discussion. He didn’t ask my party affiliation. And he didn’t try to solicit my vote.

As he explained his plans to have children of his own someday, I was still waiting for the inevitable campaign plug, the “make-sure-you-vote” speech or some other subtle signal that he wants me to remember his name on election day.

But that didn’t happen.

Instead, Rep. Steve Montenegro just smiled and handed my son a bag of popcorn.

-Laurinda Cook

Heading into the final stretch of the general election campaign, Democrat Jon Hulburd is making a last-ditch effort to court women voters in Arizona’s 3rd Congressional District.

It’s clearly a group he’s appealed to before, as earlier Christian radio ads used a female moderator to attack his opponent, Republican Ben Quayle, for contributing to the predecessor of the sex-themed website TheDirty.com.

This time, though, Hulburd is veering away from the negative campaign tactics and is going positive.

Actually, it’s his wife, Carrie, who is going positive with what is designed to look like a personalized, hand-written, “woman to woman” letter talking up her husband.

She’s even included a small glossy photo of the couple on their wedding day in 1984.

A wedding photo? That was a new one for me.

Hulburd’s campaign would not disclose the cost of the mailer nor would it reveal the number of female voters who received it. Josh Abner, Hulburd’s spokesman, would only say it was sent to “tens of thousands” of women voters of all political stripes. In the letter, Carrie discloses that she’s a lifelong Republican.

Even political veterans such as Democratic strategist Mario Diaz said he’s never seen a wedding photo dropped as an accompanying piece to a political mailer.

But overall, Diaz said it’s smart to go after independent and moderate Republican women, who might be more persuadable to the Democrat in the heavily Republican district. The mailer also did a good job of painting Hulburd as a candidate with character, without veering into a negative contrast piece that voters are, late in the campaign, growing tired of, he said.

“This is a great, in my opinion, closing argument for Hulburd’s campaign,” Diaz said. “If Quayle had not had the character issues, I would say it probably would be a piece that should have been sent out as an introductory piece at the beginning of the campaign.”

But will it work? Hulburd battles Quayle in a district that has 50,000 more registered Republicans than Dems. He’s also outmatched in fundraising and name ID.

An Oct. 18 poll by Public Policy Polling showed Hulburd faring slightly better among men than women, despite his attempts at courtship.

- Bill Bertolino

David Schweikert’s campaign appears to be falsely claiming that a Democratic activist and Harry Mitchell’s campaign conspired to damage Schweikert’s signs.

The claim, issued in a press release Oct. 26 with the headline “We Caught Them!,” stems from a dust-up between a Schweikert supporter and a man who allegedly pushed down two anti-Mitchell signs and was cited by police for doing it.

But the Oct. 23 altercation between the two men appears to be isolated and did not directly involve either campaign, according to both the Schweikert supporter who filed the police report over the incident and the man accused of damaging the signs.

The man accused of knocking down the anti-Mitchell signs, 73-year-old James Arnold Lucas of Tempe, told the Arizona Capitol Times that he has never worked or volunteered for the Mitchell campaign, nor has he ever been involved with the Arizona Democratic Party beyond being a registered Dem.

Both the Mitchell campaign and Democrats say they also have never heard of Lucas, and the Schweikert campaign also could not provide evidence that Lucas was a political operative.

Lucas said he was on a morning bike ride Oct. 23 in south Tempe when he saw what he believes were the illegally placed signs that were obstructing the view of a Mitchell sign. He also claimed that the signs did not have the required “paid for” disclosure, and he felt angry about the situation, but disputes a Tempe police report that he kicked one sign and ripped another from the ground.

When asked what he did, Lucas replied: “One of them was bent. You are asking me to admit to what may be a criminal action,” he said of the alleged bent sign.

“I wouldn’t have cared if it was a Republican or Democrat (sign). If you are attempting to stop to get someone’s message out, I am infuriated,” Lucas said. “My wife is a Republican. If anybody thinks I’m going to do something to have a major fight with my wife of 27 years, I don’t think so.”

The man who filed the police report was identified as Donald R. Sanders, who told police he has a sign company called Jet Media, which has done campaign sign work for Schweikert.

But Jet Media owner Jim Torgeson said that Sanders’ signs were not commissioned by the Schweikert campaign, and that they personally belonged to Sanders, not the company.

“That’s all Donny, all the time. This is not something that is billed to David Schweikert,” Torgeson said. “This is not a Jet Media promotion.”

Sanders said he witnessed Lucas bend over two signs that were placed by a Mitchell sign. One of them said, “Mitchell a part of the problem since 2006.” The other possibly said, “Voted for Obamacare,” Sanders said.

He said he plans to pursue prosecution of Lucas. He said his signs did not have the “paid for” disclosure because he spent only $220 on the signs, well below the $500 threshold that would have triggered disclosure under state law.

“If he thought I was wrong, then he should have called the authorities,” Sanders said. “I’m pretty offended that this guy seems to think he can step all over my First Amendment rights.”

Sanders also said he was working on his own behalf, not Jet Media’s.

Meanwhile, the Schweikert press release called the man a “Democrat activist” and went on to say that “Mitchell’s campaign team knows better,” and rehashed allegations from 2000, when Mitchell was accused, and later admitted to the Arizona Republic, of stealing an opponent’s signs.

Schweikert’s campaign manager, Oliver Schwab, defended the press release to reporter Jeremy Duda today.

“Who else would be ripping down political signs?” Schwab said. “If you are taking down signs you are clearly an activist.”

- Bill Bertolino

Let’s talk about polls. More specifically, let’s talk about the polls that have recently generated headlines claiming Terry Goddard has erased what some said was a 20-point lead for Jan Brewer, and that Felecia Rotellini and Tom Horne are neck and neck in the contest for attorney general. There are two things driving those stories: inattention to detail by reporters and sleight of hand by the pollster.

The poll on the governor’s race was released Oct. 11 by Behavior Research Center as part of its periodic Rocky Mountain Poll series, which largely focuses on politics and campaigns. Publications across the country latched on to the story, as it makes for good copy: Jan Brewer appeared invincible after signing SB1070, but now she’s about to be toppled by her Democratic challenger. That story line was promoted by BRC in its release announcing the poll, which touted Brewer’s slim three-point lead.

If that were true, it certainly would be news. But it’s not. The poll was of 555 registered voters, but a sizeable number of them said they didn’t plan to vote this year. In fact, only 405 of the respondents said they were certain they would vote. Among those people – really, the only ones that matter – Brewer was up by double digits, leading Goddard 46-35, a far cry from the 38-35 lead the poll’s narrative claimed she had.

Likewise, today’s Rocky Mountain Poll on the attorney general race touts the results from the larger pool of voters in its headline: “Attorney General a Dead Heat.” Among all of the surveyed voters, the race is tied at 34 points, while Horne has a 40-36 lead among the likely voters. (The margin of error on the likely voter figures are 4.96 percent, which means the race is very close – just not as close as the pollster indicates.)

Many of my colleagues in the Fourth Estate treated the polls as gospel and unflinchingly reported as fact in both print and on television the “news” that Brewer’s large lead had magically evaporated. That shouldn’t have passed the smell test for reporters, especially when Rasmussen Reports said less than two weeks ago that Brewer had a 55-39 lead. Yes, Rasmussen’s methodology – the firm uses autodial polling, not interviews from live operators – is routinely questioned, but its figures on the governor’s race largely match figures from private polling other reporters and I have heard about.

Some got it right: Both Howie Fischer, dean of the Capitol press corps, and Arizona Capitol Times reporter Jeremy Duda wrote stories that either ignored the poll results from the “registered voters” or correctly noted they were announced, but weren’t the most important figures in the poll.

We need to be more diligent, especially when it comes to reporting on polling. Polls are important, but they are not infallible. They are not gospel, but merely a snapshot of a specific moment in a race. Reporters have a duty to carefully examine polls, not just take their results at face value and parrot those numbers to the public.