LD 26 Debate Makes a Believer of Me

I was at the LD 26 Republican primary Clean Elections debate and have a few observations to share. Jim Nintzel did a not-so "live blog" of the show-down between the Senate contenders, but I don’t seem to find anything about the House debate at his Scramblewatch site. Thus, I will be focusing more on the content of the House debate, but commenting on both.

The Republican contenders are Trent Humpries, Vic Williams, and Marilyn Zerull. There is a good summary of the race at Scramblewatch (have I mentioned I love having a professional blog with some real resources and reporters in the mix here locally?). Let me make this easy for you: Trent is a blogger, Vic is a businessman, and Marilyn isn’t the sharpest tack in the box.

Asked the main thing they’d like to accomplish in office, Vic said he would like to improve public education in order to strengthen long-term economic development, Humphries said he would like to be "transformative" and address health care availability, Marilyn wanted to cut taxes and spending.

Q "How to improve education?"

Marilyn thinks we need to make sure all the children can speak English. Trent thinks we need to measure performance correctly: we need to use MAPPS not AIMS to measure performance continually (he’s very passionate about this). Vic thinks we should consider better early education through better teacher training and pay and smaller classes.

Q "should the state promote solar energy?"

Trent says yes, but not just solar, we should do coal and nukes too and become an energy exporter bolster our property tax base (Trent seems to not realize that we already export energy to CA and our electrical generation property tax is held way low and controlled by the state lege as a sop to the industry: we get the pollution and investors get the profits – taxpayers get a pittance). Vic say you bet, but it’s not economically viable just yet (tell that to the investors lining up to plunk down billions on new solar thermal generation plants, Vic). Marilyn say no, we should rely on the private sector and nukes are the way to go now (apparently not realizing that the private sector has NEVER built a nuke plant without major government subsidies).

Q "should Pima County raise taxes to support baseball?"

Everyone thinks this is a poor idea, but Trent thinks the voters deserve a crack at deciding the issue.

Q "should we continue having a payday loan industry in AZ?"

Trent says something about the ballot initiative and doesn’t answer. Vic says we should reform the industry. Marilyn, like a broken clock, is right for once and says we should stop payday loans.

Q "how do we get more funding for higher ed?"

Trent thinks more lottery funds are supposed to go there and may have been diverted from proper use. Vic doesn’t seem sure, but he sure thinks we ought to spend more. Marilyn doesn’t know but she doesn’t want any higher taxes, maybe there is a few bucks in the state land trust?

Q "how do we get healthcare to more folks?"

Vic thinks access to healthcare is a main problem, but we shouldn’t look to government for a solution but instead have more privatization (Vic freezes up and has to reboot at this point and then blurts out something about better market info to make decisions on). Marilyn thinks we need tort reform (apparently nobody ever bothered to tell her that compensation caps on damage awards are unconstitutional in Arizona). Trent thinks cost isn’t the only issue (i.e. not the one he wants to talk about) instead we need tort reform (he later corrects in private convo saying he means changing evidentiary standards in med mal cases, not unconstitutional caps), more private sector involvement and better retention of medical personnel in the state.

Q "reinstate or repeal the education property tax?"

Marilyn thinks all taxes are evil (though she doesn’t use those words…) and is always in favor of tax cuts and supports the property tax revolt initiative (which didn’t make the ballot… a point of which she seems, like most things, blissfully unaware). Trent thinks we should tax last, not first (whatever that means) but that we should not eliminate it (which is consistent with his stated support of education, at least). Vic thinks property tax too high and we should eliminate this one (which is not consistent with his claimed support of spending more on education).

Q "ban non-hands-free cell phones in cars?"

Trent says maybe. Vic is tired of the nanny state: no way. Marilyn thinks its dangerous, but we should have personal responsibility (tell that to the survivors, Marilyn…)

Q "ban gay marriage?"

Vic says yep, but not in the constitution (which is the way it currently is…). Marilyn seem confused, she thinks its too bad the lege couldn’t get it taken care of (they already have and they can’t change the constitution, only the voters can, so she seems to be unclear on the concept…). Trent says "yep, and put it in the constitution," redefining marriage is a slippery slope and could unravel society (like when we redefined marriage to allow miscegenation… look at all the trouble that has caused, eh Trent?)

Q "will you stand up to the Maricopa krewe?"

Marilyn thinks we shouldn’t elect people from Maricopa down here (dead silence as people try to figure if she really just said that…). Trent wants to put the people of S. AZ first and work across party lines, after all some good people are Democrats… Vic wants a coalition of S. AZ to band together across party lines on local issues.

That was pretty much the debate. Without a doubt, Trent ruled, Vic choked, and Marilyn was clueless.

Zerull just isn’t equipped to be a credible legislator. She doesn’t know the first thing about law or government that she didn’t obviously pick up from listening to Rush. I don’t expect a lawyer or a scholar, but I do expect a candidate to know that the legislature can’t change the constitution and the basic facts about the policies one purports to support. Take Zerull’s mindless dittoing on "tort reform." She squeezes an enormously complex issue into a little mental box labeled "tort reform" and never even considers that this whole idea is a just a means for the GOP to attract campaign contributions from small percentage of shady hack doctors who account for most malpractice claims masquerading as a policy solution for the healthcare crisis. She’s merely a ditto-headed ideologue. In this, she is a perfect partner for Al Melvin.

As much as it would better for my own party’s chances in LD 26 in the general election if Marilyn Zerull and Al Melvin were two of the GOP nominees, I just can’t bring myself to cheer for people who aren’t remotely qualified to hold office just to gain an electoral edge.

As much as I would prefer to see Cage, Young-Wright and Jorgensen sweep the district, I can’t get enthused about any party nominating the likes of Zerull or Melvin. Cage would certainly have an easier time taking down Melvin than a quasi-incumbent and reasonably thoughtful politician like Hershberger, but I can’t make myself advocate his nomination, even in a GOP primary. I refuse to hope that the public interest be harmed so that my party might benefit: that is in a nutshell what is wrong in politics in America right now.

Some might question how that position squares with my continuing delight in the leadership of the Arizona and Pima GOP. I can only say that, thankfully, the GOP’s leadership is only a matter of embarrassment to Arizona Republicans, not a disaster for the general welfare. I don’t believe that self-inflicted harms should be criminalized. It’s only when your self-destruction starts harming others as well that society should be concerned.

The state is diminished in it’s capacity for self-governance and wise public policy when it elects ideologues like Melvin and Zerull. It’s like lobotomizing our government.

I may not agree with much of what Trent or Vic or Pete want to accomplish in office, but I can at least recognize that their motive for seeking office is to serve what they believe is in the public interest, not to attack the whole endeavor of serving the public interest as if it were a communist conspiracy. Folks like Trent, Vic, and Pete at least have enough wisdom to know when and how to compromise, and enough intellectual honesty to be subject to persuasion. That’s all I ask, and I won’t won’t settle for less.

You could replace Zerull and Melvin with moderately well-mannered
chimps trained to hold up signs bearing the slogans "cut taxes,"
"family values," "let the free market work," and "God hates gays" with
no discernible degradation of their electoral appeal. In fact, such
message discipline might help the chimps outperform Zerull and Melvin
among their voting base (note to Querard: maybe you should try this
next?).

I will make predictions now. Trent and Vic will take the House nominations, and Pete will take the Senate nod. I make these predictions based solely on my faith in the common sense of my fellow Arizonans, not on any special insight into the demographics or voting history of the district. I predict they’ll be nominated merely because they should be.

I gotta believe Arizonans won’t elect a know-nothing like Zerull or a cornflake like Melvin when given clearly preferable alternatives. Of course, I’ve been disappointed in the past and have no particular reason for optimism – but democracy is as much a civic religion as it is a system of government, so I chose to keep believing.