Homeless in Arizona

Of course the webmaster doesn't like Jan Brewer for several reason.

The most current reason is that Jan Brewer tried to flush Arizona's medical marijuana law which Prop 203 down the toilet.

The webmaster is still angry at Jan Brewer for when she was on the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and passed the law allowing Maricopa County to steal a billion dollars from us serfs and build a baseball stadium for Jerry Colangelo.

That's the same Jerry Colangelo that got millions in corporate welfare from the city of Phoenix for his Phoenix Suns basketball team.

Source

Brewer's third-term delusions

By ROBERT ROBB

Fri, Nov 30 2012 12:23 PM

From the political notebook:

* At first, I thought Gov. Jan Brewer was just funning with her talk about possibly running again. But apparently, she is at least semi-serious.

That’s unfortunate. The legal advice she’s getting is delusional.

The state Constitution clearly limits a governor from serving more than two consecutive terms including “any part of a term served.”

At the time voters enacted this provision, the state had gone through two transitions in which the secretary of state succeeded to the office of governor and served a partial term as Brewer has done – Wes Bolin replacing Raul Castro and Rose Mofford replacing Evan Mecham.

According to Brewer’s former general counsel, Joseph Kanefield, voters didn’t have these recent experiences with partial terms in mind when term limits were adopted in 1992. Instead, they had various stratagems in mind that no one had ever thought about until Kanefield thunk them up to offer a rationale for Brewer to run again.

According to Kanefield, rather than the partial terms voters had recently witnessed, they were thinking about a devious governor resigning shortly before the end of his second term to avoid the limitation. Or, if a secretary of state the devious governor didn’t like won election to succeed him, resigning shortly before the end of his term so the unliked successor would effectively have only one term as governor.

There’s utterly nothing in the historical record to support Kanefield’s devious governor interpretative theory. The plain language of the Constitution and the historical context in which the term limit was adopted clearly indicate that Brewer is done.

If Brewer clings to the devious governor theory, it will be unpleasant and messy. For one thing, it isn’t clear when adjudicating Brewer’s ability to run again would be ripe. Would it be when she files the paperwork to be a candidate? When she files the nominating petitions to get on the ballot? Or only if she actually gets elected and tries to continue in office?

Arizona happens to have a pretty good crop of candidates eyeballing the governor’s race in 2014, on both sides of the aisle. Brewer’s flirtation with running for a third term damages Republican chances. The longer she flirts, the less traction a possible Republican successor can get. And if she actually runs, what a mess, legally and politically.

* Both Democrats and Republicans say that Democrats did better this election because of the new lines drawn by the redistricting commission. Despite the consensus, there’s little evidence to support the contention.

According to Democrats, they did better in congressional races because the most recent commission gave more priority to creating competitive districts. The commission that drew the old lines should sue for slander.

Under the old lines, Arizona’s congressional delegation went from 6-2 Republican in 2002, to a 4-4 split in 2006, to 5-3 Democratic in 2008, to 5-3 Republican in 2010. At least one congressional seat traded party hands in every election held under the old lines except one (2004). It doesn’t get much more competitive than that.

Republicans claim that the new congressional districts are stacked in favor of Democrats. But it is premature to conclude that based upon one election in a presidential year. The Republican turnout advantage is magnified in off-presidential years. If the Ron Barber-Martha McSally race in Southern Arizona had been decided by the off-presidential year electorate, McSally would have won.

Crediting the redistricting commission with declining Republican numbers in the Legislature requires an acute case of historical amnesia.

Republican numbers did decline, but because Republicans grossly overachieved in 2010.

Republicans have 17 of 30 state Senate seats. That’s the same number they had under the old lines in 2002 and 2006.

Republicans have 36 of 60 state House seats. That’s more than they had under the old lines in both 2006 (33) and 2008 (35).

* Those criticizing Arizona U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl’s proposal to give legal status to some of those brought to this country illegally while children for not going far enough apparently have forgotten that legislation still has to pass the House. And that the House is still dominated by Republicans in safe districts who don’t have to fear the Latino vote.

Moreover, Kyl’s proposal has been mischaracterized. It doesn’t deny these young adults a pathway to citizenship. In fact, it provides one. It just doesn’t provide a quicker or special one. They would have to apply for a green card, just like anyone else. After which, they could apply for citizenship.

In the meantime, they would have legal status to live, work and study in the United States, which they don’t have now.

I’d favor a much more generous amnesty for young adults brought here illegally as children. But Kyl’s approach may offer a quicker and surer way of getting them out of their current legal limbo.