Does anyone honestly believe that Tim Bee needs $134K and growing to
explore the idea of a running for Congress? Bee’s spin doctors are
trying to sell the idea that his ‘exploration’ involves seeing if he
can raise enough to be competitive with Gabby before he announces.
That’s not the purpose of an exploratory committee, and his insistence
on insulting the intelligence of the electorate on this issue says more
about his real fitness for office that anything that could come out of
his mouth.
Bee is proving that, to him, the law is merely words that can mean
whatever he can twist them to mean in order to suit his purpose. Such disregard for the law
is the most insidious and damaging part of the Bush era’s legacy, and
Bee is enthusiastically embracing that legacy. That, combined with the presence of dirty trickster Nathan Sproul’s consulting firm on his team, should give any
Arizonan of conscience pause before deciding to support Tim Bee.
Bee knows damn well that Arizona’s voters want their elected
officials fully focused on the job they were elected to do, not
grandstanding for a higher office or using that office to increase
their profile. That is why resign to run is part of our Constitution,
and Bee is shitting on our Constitution by refusing to resign even
though he is obviously running for Congress.
Bee is piling up a war chest of cash to challenge Gabby, plain and simple. He is not even
spending the money he has raised on exploratory activities, such as polling. Instead he’s retaining lawyers, buying advertising, developing a campaign website and leasing campaign management software, and getting professional photos made of himself. The fact
is, Bee doesn’t need to spend money exploring support for a bid. The poo-bahs of political money in Southern
Arizona’s GOP establishment have cleared the primary for Bee so that he
would have an easier time raising money, and would not have to spend
any of it on a primary fight, or prove his conservative bona fides to a
skeptical electorate (a process that Randy Graf proved can be hazardous to
your general election viability).
Team Click’s primary lock will allow Bee to remain above any fray
until his announcement in January. Then the GOP’s poo-bahs envision Bee
running his campaign from the Arizona Senate President’s chamber, using
the prestige of that office to enhance his electoral chances and to
control the political agenda. If he faced a primary, he wouldn’t be
able to avoid the appearance of electioneering and would obviously have
to resign. There is a fully-conscious strategy at work here. It’s
a very good strategy, and it is working so far. There is just one
hitch: it requires consciously and intentionally violating the spirit
and the letter of our Constitution.
Bee apparently doesn’t give a tinker’s damn about that.
Many have pointed out that it might actually be politically
advantageous for Democrats to allow Bee to violate the law because his Presidency of
the Senate may turn out to be more of a political liability than an
asset this next session. A nasty budget fight is looming on the
horizon; would Arizona’s GOP throw the bout to Napolitano just to make
Bee look as good to moderates as he did last year? Likely not. It is also pointed
out that Bee’s presence in the Senate enhances the clout of Southern
Arizona in legislature; why should we give up that influence?
Additionally, Bee cannot raise money from lobbyists while the
legislature is in session, and that could limit his fundraising efforts.
All of those are good reasons to allow Bee to break the law.
However, they over-look the clear ethical imperative that we shouldn’t
allow people to break the law, even if the result is a net benefit to
ourselves. It’s like letting a burglar rummage through your neighbor’s
house without calling the police because you are jealous of your
neighbor’s possessions and would like him cut down to size, or because
the burglar has arranged to give you a cut. While I clearly see the
benefits of allowing Bee to continue to flout the law, no amount of benefit
justifies weakening the rule of law and allowing Bee to set such a
terrible precedent so plainly contrary to the intent of the Constitution.
We should expect more from our leaders than barely-plausible
legalistic excuses. We should demand the highest possible standard of ethical
behavior and respect for the law. Men and women in Bee’s position
should not seek merely to remain plausibly within the bounds of the
law, but should rather aspire to be an example of rectitude and ethical
comportment. Bee is allowing himself to be enmeshed in a sleazy and
contemptible scheme by his advisers. He is undermining the reputation
for ethical and collegial behavior that brought him to this point in
his political career.
We, the voters of District 8, deserve better from Tim Bee. It is time to seriously consider filing a complaint with the FEC.
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Sorry Francine, while I love your points and agree, I can’t help but be seduced by the horse-race…I can’t help but be seduced by reading tea-leaves, predictions, and what the past tells us about what you need to run a campaign, bell-weathers of support, and the like.
Thanks for reminding us occasionally that this is really all about public service.
I have a great idea! Let’s not have any more elections. That way, we don’t have to worry about voting machines, counting the votes correctly. Instead, let’s set a closing date for raising money and the candidate with the most money is simply declared the winner. The money – the tons of money raised to campaign – would instead be contributed to worthy causes. That would prove that we have the best government money can buy and raise a lot of cash for good causes!
Giffords IS as I said” THE MILLION DOLLAR BABY!”
All you fools just keep giving this $&^#& envelopes stuffed with money while she screws you and me in Congress giving Millions of Dollars of Taxpayers Money to her Business Friends!
As for being a Pro- her family has been screwing Arizona for over 60 years folks!
I find the situation perplexing. I recently posted the view that if he wants to play this explore game until January, whatever. January is the fork in the road, in my opinion, and if he does not resign when he announces in January, I fall squarely into the camp of your post and Roger’s remarks here and elsewhere.
If Bee remains president throughout the 2008 session while running for office, he laughs at the intent of the law. If he is stupid enough to do this, I think he will be crippled. His fund raising, his ability to generate momentum and campaign infrastructure, etc., will be undermined.
His retaining his office while campaigning would probably cause cheers behind closed doors in the Giffords camp. By the time the session ends in June or July, she will be stratospherically ahead of him by every measure.
Over the past several months I have bounced around regarding what this guy is thinking (generally not a good sign). I would have resigned this summer and started building the machine in earnest. I’d already be, AS AN ANNOUNCED CANDIDATE, soliciting donations via email campaigns and various gatherings and events. I attended a very simple (but profitable) Giffords event over the summer. At someone’s house, we got to eat and drink and meet her, hear her speak, and everyone attending handed over an envelope.
Like her or not, she is a pro. As Roger knows, even if Bee does everything perfectly, he faces an extraordinary challenge. The early indications don’t point to his doing everything perfectly.
If he stays in office and succumbs to the Sproule, this race is already over.
Well well said Michael. To add, I have read the FEC law and it is pretty clear. It defines a “Candidate” as someone who raises over $5000 or has someone else do it for them. As a “candidate” you have to file with the FEC because the very behavior of raising money…again…makes you a candidate. Whether he declares himself exploratory or not, he is a candidate.
So, since he is a candidate under federal law. Simple, 4th grade logic holds that he has to be a candidate under Arizona law. Candidates under Arizona law, when holding another office, must resign to run.
Just adding a bit more legal language to Michael’s fantastic point about Bee violating state law and the intent of this constitutional provision. Let his lawyers fight the Democrat party lawyers I say. Let him spend some of those funds (which are quite paltry…so says conservative blog Sonoran Alliance) on these lawyers.