As other pundits in the national and local media have pointed out, It will be tempting these next several months to focus on the Popular Vote Loser’s (Presidents) tweets, outrageous comments and behavior, and potentially criminal acts that will be adjudicated in the courts.
Now that they will be in control of the House of Representatives, Democrats do have a responsibility to provide oversight of the Executive Branches actions that the Trump (Republican) Party failed to undertake. That is only right and proper.
Democrats and Progressives, in the federal government and in the state government offices they triumphed in, should also take this as an opportunity to advance progressive policies (both incremental and ambitious) that will further attract supporters in the rural, urban, and suburban parts of the country. They should attempt to create bipartisan consensus with the Trump Party but be prepared to fight for and campaign on what the Trumpists obstruct in the Senate and the Oval Office.
Posted in Activism, Arizona Congressional Delegation, Arizona State Legislature, Budgets, Campaigns, Commentary, Community, David Gordon, Debates, Education, Energy, Healthcare, Infrastructure, Initiatives, Legislation, Party Politics, President, Science, Senate, Taxes, Transportation, Veterans, Voting Rights
Voters in Arizona can confidently vote “yes” for Proposition 127, knowing that it will cut the use by state utilities of polluting fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas, and knowing that it will not cause an increase in electric rates.
There has been persistent false propaganda against the measure, asserting that Prop. 127 will cause electric rates to go up from $200 to $1,000 per year or that it bankrupt public schools or that it would somehow hurt air quality. None of this is true.
An example of these baseless arguments was the recent op-ed by Arizona Board of Regents member Karrin Taylor Robson who argued without evidence that Prop. 127 would costs schools millions. The article cited estimates by unnamed “public utilities.” If the article referred to a study from Arizona Public Service — the chief opponent of Prop. 127 — that study has been widely debunked.
Rep. Pamela Powers Hannley (right) and Republican challenger Ana Henderson.
Can’t decide how to vote in the November 6 election? If you live in Legislative District 9, check out the LD9 debate before casting your vote.
The debate video below reveals clear differences between the candidates on key issues such as the minimum wage, food security, the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), climate change, abortion, gun violence, and more.
Five people are running for the three LD9 Legislative seats: incumbent Democrats Reps. Randy Friese and Pamela Powers Hannley (me), Republican challenger Ana Henderson, and Senate candidates former Democratic representative Victoria Steele and Republican write-in candidate Randy Fleenor.
The Citizens Clean Elections Commission (CCEC) conducts candidate debates, videotapes them, and stores them on their website and YouTube channel. If you live in a district other than LD9, check out the CCEC archive for the other 2018 debate videos. For Southern Arizona Legislative Districts, here are links to debates for LD2, LD3, LD10, LD11, LD8, and LD14. (The LD9 debate is embedded below.
Posted in Abortion, Arizona State Legislature, Campaigns, Charter Schools, Climate Change, Debates, Economics, Education, Elections, Labor, Pamela Powers Hannley, Political Events, Poverty, Propositions, Science, Taxes, Tucson
Tagged Ana Henderson, Citizens Clean Elections Debates, Dr. Randy Friese, pamela powers hannley, Randy Fleenor, Victoria Steele
David Brooks asks, “Are the behavior and actions of the President and the Republicans what you want to see in your public servants?”
During the Shields and Brooks segment of the PBS Newshour on October 19, 2018, David Brooks, the center-right commentator from the New York Times rightly suggested that a closing argument for the Democrats should be “Are the behavior and actions of the President and the Republicans what you want to see in your public servants? Is their belief in what America should be your beliefs in what America should be?”
In the end, it does come down to that. Mr. Brooks is right and this can be applied to Arizona and our state leaders over the last two years as well as America and its leaders over that same period. People need to consider if they want to live in a state or a country where the trajectory over the last two years is taking us backward as opposed to forwards. Please consider:
Do we want to live in an Arizona and America where the leaders behave like demagogues, self-serving oligarchs, and, in the case of the current occupant of the White House, petty dictators, dividing us with the “big lies” and pitting us against each other?
Do we want to live in an Arizona and America where the wealthy are catered to and the poor and unfortunate shunned?
Do we want to live in an Arizona and America where corrupt oligarchs and plutocrats pay equally corrupt public servants behind the scenes with dark money to achieve their ends?
Do we want to live in an Arizona and America where our women are potentially denied the right to choose when needed?
Posted in Activism, Civil Rights, Climate Change, Commentary, Community, David Gordon, Economics, Editorial, Education, Elections, Energy, environment, Gender Equality, Healthcare, History, Immigration, Infrastructure, Justice, Labor, personality cult of Trump, Poverty, Racism, Science, Transportation, Voting Rights
The United Nations scientific panel on climate change issued a terrifying new warning on Monday that continued emissions of greenhouse gases from power plants and vehicles will bring dire and irreversible changes by 2040, years earlier than previously forecast. The cost will be measured in trillions of dollars and in sweeping societal and environmental damage, including mass die-off of coral reefs and animal species, flooded coastlines, intensified droughts, food shortages, mass migrations and deeper poverty.
President Trump’s uninformed climate skeptic response? Who drew it? Trump asks of dire climate report, appearing to mistrust 91 scientific experts:
Who drew it? The president wanted to know.
Ninety-one leading scientists from 40 countries who together examined more than 6,000 scientific studies. Specialists such as Katharine Mach, who studies new approaches to climate assessment at Stanford University; Tor Arve Benjaminsen, a human geographer at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences; and Raman Sukumar, an ecologist at the Indian Institute of Science.
They are among the members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a group of scientists convened by the United Nations to make recommendations to world leaders. Their report, issued Monday, warns of environmental catastrophe as early as 2040 and advises that the worst can be staved off only if civilization is transformed more profoundly than at any point in recorded history.
President Trump, in comments to reporters Tuesday on the South Lawn, seemed unaware of the IPCC, as the body is known, and expressed doubts about its determinations. The remarks put him at odds with most world leaders, as well as with scientific fact — a familiar position for the brash former businessman who has long ridiculed climate concerns.
Posted in Arizona Congressional Delegation, Arizona Congressional Races, Arizona State Legislature, AZBlueMeanie, Ballot Referendas and Initiatives, Campaigns, Climate Change, Congress, Economics, Elections, Energy, environment, Ethics, GOP War On..., Governor, Legislation, Party Politics, President, Propositions, Scandals, Science, Senate, Water
Tagged climate change deniers, Climate Science, Paris Climate Accord