Simcox bid will rely on GOP grassroots, but support might be thin

By Matt Bunk
Arizona Capitol Times

A top advisor for Chris Simcox said the Minuteman founder will rely on ground-level support in his bid to knock off incumbent Sen. John McCain, but so far it's not clear whether Simcox will be able to rally the necessary support and financial assistance from Arizona's grassroots GOP.

Hours after news broke that Simcox is gearing up to take on McCain (http://www.azcapitoltimes.com/freestory.cfm?ID=11000), some Republican Party activists said a Simcox candidacy is good for Arizona and will provide voters with an option between McCain, who has shown a moderate streak on immigration, and Simcox, who started the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps and has aggressively pursued increased military presence along the border and the construction of a border wall to halt illegal immigration.

Eric Johnson, an acting advisor for the Simcox campaign and a former staffer for Don Goldwater's gubernatorial bid, said the plan is to target Republicans who feel disenfranchised and may have left the party in recent years.

"There are a lot of people who left Republicans and became independent because of McCain," he said.

Rob Haney, chairman of Maricopa County Republican Committee and one of McCain's most vocal detractors, told the Yellow Sheet Report he's glad Simcox is running.

"I think we need someone in there that represents the grassroots, and certainly John McCain does not," Haney said.

Others, though, flatly refused to consider Simcox over McCain.

Farrell Quinlan, a lobbyist who is also a Maricopa County Republican Party precinct committeeman from District 20, was skeptical of Simcox's ability to mount a viable campaign against such a strong incumbent.

"It looks like this is a vehicle to make a point on certain issues," Quinlan said. "I think McCain has strength in Arizona that has yet to be tapped... McCain will do a thorough job of defending his seat."

Some Republican leaders were circumspect about which candidate they would support.

Tom Husband, Executive Director of the Maricopa County Republican Committee, wouldn't say who he would vote for, but he acknowledged the need for change and speculated that the race would come down to one issue: border security.

"We'll have to see what they say for the future," Husband said. "We certainly have enough problems...a lot of discontent with where we've been and where we're headed."

Husband said Simcox would have a difficult time raising enough money to take on a candidate as entrenched as McCain.

"McCain has a tremendous machine," Husband said. "I certainly don't know where (Simcox's) funding will come from. We're going to have to wait and see."

Arizona Republican Party Chairman Randy Pullen was attending a meeting of the Republican National Committee and was unavailable for comment.

Haney, though, said Simcox has done an outstanding job running the Minuteman organization. "If it hadn't been for him, this issue would not have come to the forefront as far as what the grassroots are feeling as opposed to what's being dictated to us."

Anybody who is strong on border issues, strong about defending the Constitution and strong on national security gets attacked, Haney said.

"I'm glad that we do have an alternate opinion, an alternate candidate so I would support anybody's candidacy that's going to support our national security, as opposed to dissing our Constitution the way that John McCain has."

Attempts to reach Sen. John McCain's office April 21st were unsuccessful. McCain has said he plans to run for re-election in 2010.

Campaign adviser Johnson said Simcox's campaign will be about more than immigration.

"(Simcox) is a true conservative Republican. His platform is what it should be," Johnson said.

McCain has strayed from GOP principles numerous times over the years, Johnson said, including the McCain-Feingold campaign finance legislation and efforts to limit sales of firearms at gun shows. "He went after the First Amendment, then the Second," Johnson said.

However, illegal immigration does figure to play a major role because it is a common thread through many of the problems facing America now: health care, schools and prison overcrowding, in particular, Johnson said.

Robert Kiley, a California political consultant who will manage the Simcox campaign, said the candidate's national profile will allow him to raise the $10 million to $15 million needed to take on McCain, who has served in Congress for the past 28 years.

"We don't think there's going to be an issue raising money," Kiley said. "There's a lot of anger out there."

But for now, the campaign organization is minimal. Simcox reportedly told the -- Washington Times -- that "I have a Web site, SimcoxforSenate.com, two paid campaign staffers and a bank account of zero, so the American people will let me know if I'm the one they want to send to Washington."

Simcox will join state Rep. Carl Seel at a press conference at 11:30 a.m. April 23rd to urge elected officials to take a stronger stance against all forms of illegal immigration as border violence increases.

Simcox is expected to step down from the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps in order to focus on the campaign.

- Staff writers Jim Small, Tasya Peterson and Capitol Times intern Trevor Guyette contributed to this report.

One Last Whack at that Poor, Dead Horse

At the risk of keeping this dust up alive for another day, I've got one last post concerning the Great STS-Quinlan Snarling Match between the Sonoran Alliance blog and the Willet Creek Dam blog.

Brett Mecum on staff at the state party sent me a nice note clarifying the situation surrounding the seven-page December 31, 2008 mailing from the state party on the state of the party and their record over the last two years. In the interest of putting this matter to rest with everyone getting a fair shot at making their best case, here is the note in total:

Farrell,

I hope that you and your family had Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. I’ve been watching the exchange between your blog and Sonoran Alliance with quite a bit of amusement. I’m willing to bet that you’ve been getting some pretty decent traffic hits today. While I agree with the axiom that a man’s blog is his castle and that you should be able blog whatever you would like (after all, it is free speech), you are mistaken on at least two counts:

1. The mailing we did was $0.59 not $0.95 (In fact, the entire cost of the mailing was $67.26, if you want to get technical);
2. The report in questions was a report to the Executive Committee, not the entire State Committee.

The Executive Committee consists of the officers, three members at-large from each congressional district, the chairman, 1st vice chair, and 2nd vice chair from each county. The chairmen of the legislative districts serve as ex-officio non-voting members.

The reality is that we sent that mailing to just over 100 people who serve on the AZGOP Executive Committee, not to the 1,018 State Committeemen. You should view the Executive Committee on the same level as a corporate board of directors. Being new to the internal workings of the Party, I can understand your confusion. The seven page mailing was designed as a year-end report to the Executive Committee and shouldn’t have been construed beyond that. We have done reports such as this in the past to update the committee with various operations of the State Party. And just as you [Note: Farrell Quinlan is chairman of LD20 Republicans] are allowed to communicate with your district PCs, the AZGOP should communicate with its Executive Committee.

In the interests of accuracy, I trust that you will correct these errors with your readership. In the future, you should know that you can call the office and talk to Chairman Pullen or myself on such matters for clarification before you decide to send them into the public sphere.

All the best,

Brett
____________________________
Brett Mecum
Political Director, Arizona Republican Party
3501 North 24th Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85016
bmecum@azgop.org

Fair enough. I stand by my concern that though arguably "OK" and technically defensible, the recent flurry of mail to state committeemen from the state party extolling Chairman Pullen's tenure was/is too much and borders on and might actually be an abuse of office. These relentless mailings implicitly seek to "make the case" for his re-election while hiding behind official communications from the party.

I hated that practice when Rick Romley, on his way out as county attorney and preparing to run for other elective office, published his die-cut hagiography on the taxpayer's dime.

I hate it now.

Brett and I just disagree.

Does this make Randy Pullen a bad guy who a Republican state committeeman should under no circumstances vote for? Not at all. They should vote their conscience on January 24th. I know I will.

My only regret in all this is that Sen. Jim Waring's outstanding legislation got lost in the imbroglio (or is that imbloglio?)

Lighten up, Francis

When I read this post on Sonoran Alliance, I was reminded of the scene from the Bill Murray comedy "Stripes" where members of the platoon were sitting around telling stories about themselves, where they come from.

Psycho: The name's Francis Soyer, but everybody calls me Psycho. Any of you guys call me Francis, and I'll kill you.

Leon: Ooooooh.

Psycho: You just made the list, buddy. And I don't like nobody touching my stuff. So just keep your meat-hooks off. If I catch any of you guys in my stuff, I'll kill you. Also, I don't like nobody touching me. Now, any of you homos touch me, and I'll kill you.

Sergeant Hulka: Lighten up, Francis.

All I could say while reading the post, “Lighten up, STS.”

Who or what is STS and what did I ever do to him… her… them… ah… whatever?  STS must be one of the Sonoran Alliance’s bloggers who doesn’t feel comfortable being “out-of-the-closet” yet (to use SA’s own formulation).  All I know is that when someone posts a entry brazenly proclaiming “Policing the Blogosphere” as its title, I’d really appreciate the ability to face my accuser, or at least know them as a real flesh and blood human being.  But who am I to judge the judge, right?  Let’s put aside STS’s manifest cowardice… er, no… I mean… spunky use of a pseudonym and address some of the indictments in his/her/its 1,264 words of breathless, over-the-top caviling.  

I’ll take them in order…

Correcting other blogs?  Absolutely, but doesn’t everything STS then goes on to write about fall into the “disagreeing with other blogs” category rather than being placed in the correction pile?

Bias Disclosure? Again fair point for some blogs, but in what way precisely am I hiding my biases on Willet Creek Dam?  It’s a personal blog that I use to comment on all manner of topics ranging from books to movie, from sports to politics.  I’m confused how I’m false advertising.

Hardliner on Immigration?  This is refreshing.  Quinlan has “an extremely hardline position in favor of ‘comprehensive immigration reform’ and he is a consistent advocate for businesses being able to hire illegal aliens, essentially without consequences.”  Interesting turn of phrasing.  I’ll admit, I don’t wake up at 3 a.m. in a pool of sweat anxious about the Rise of Atzlan and how I’m going to get screwed exchanging my dollars for Ameros from our new North American Union overlords.  If that makes me an apostate and not a REAL conservative in the eyes of some, I’ll live with that and be happy.  I wholeheartedly support the 2008 Republican Platform plank on immigration as well as the 2004 Republican Platform plank on immigration. ‘Nuff said.

My State Political Contributions?  No secrets, do a name search here.  On the federal level, I gave money to Mitt Romney, John Shadegg, Jeff Flake, David Schweikert, Jim Ogsbury, Laura Knaperak, Mark Anderson, Tim Bee and McCain-Palin.

My Lobbying Clients? Click here.

Bogus Franking?  STS goes to great lengths to defend Randy Pullen’s innocent one-page congratulations letter to state committeemen dated December 23, 2008.   If that letter was what had caused me to suggest some abuse of official communications then STS would be correct to criticize me for being unfair to Mr. Pullen.  But I wasn’t cheesed off about that mailing.  It was bent about the indefensible seven-page “2007-2008 Report” mailed on December 31, 2008 at $0.95 a pop.  Now that one really reeks of using Arizona Republican Party resources in a strategically-timed manner to aid in Randy Pullen’s re-election campaign.  Since that’s what I was referring to, then much of STS’s hair-trigger defense of Randy Pullen is moot.

Political Agenda?  My “self-serving… political agenda” is just that, self-serving because it’s mine.  No mystery here or need for Surgeon General-level consumer warnings to the blogosphere that STS condescends to (“Quinlan’s complaint is clever to a casual reader, but…”).  And where is STS’s evidence that my clients give fig about my blog posts?  Really?  The Arizona Landscape Contractors’ Association has not put me up to liking the movie Dark Knight or my disappointment with the U.S. Mint’s four reverse designs for the 2009 penny.  Sometimes there really aren’t wheels within wheels and the world is as straightforward as it presents itself.  Can’t I just believe that abusing official communications for campaign purposes is shabby without being a member of the Trilateral Commission or the Illuminati?

Quinlan Endorsement:  Then STS really gets his Castroesque and Kim Jong-il-like cult of personality rant really into high gear making all kinds of assumptions and conclusions about which candidates I am supporting for various party positions.  Here’s the deal, I’m a homer.  I’m supporting Diane Ortiz-Parsons for Maricopa County Republican 1st Vice Chair and Mike Middleton for Maricopa County Republican 2nd Vice Chair.  Why?  Because they are LD20 folks and I know they will do a good job.  Did I also endorse Jerry Brooks for Maricopa County Republican Chair?  Sure.  Why?  Because Diane and Mike are running on a ticket with him and I trust their recommendation.  I wouldn’t know Jerry Brooks or Rob Haney if they waved at me at Wal-mart.  All I know is that Jerry is from Chandler and so am I.  He’s already sent me two mailings (on his own dime!) asking for my support.  I’ve got nothing from Haney and it being a week out, I’ve decided that Brooks is my man.  (By the way, the West Valley Chambers of Commerce Alliance and the Arizona Contractors Association don’t really care and have released my from my feudal vassalage to make this decision on my own.)

Pot Calling the Kettle Black:  Ah-hah!  STS reveals that LD20 GOP Chairman Quinlan e-mailed his PCs with info about the upcoming county meeting and endorsed Brooks, et al… HYPOCRITE!!!  Lighten up, Francis.  My e-mail was from my personal account and wasn’t an official communication to anyone.  The official communication came in the mail from the county party a couple days ago.  And it didn"t have a list of candidates in it (only the announcement, resolutions and proxy form).  Comrade STS, am I not allowed to communicate with the PCs in my district?  

Finally, STS really begins to show the effects of oxygen deprivation when he concludes with soaring rhetoric about “the kind of Republican” I am and how I’ve “forfeit[ed] the mantle of integrity” and all that.  Yikes.  STS really has very thin skin about Dear Leader.  Or maybe, STS has a hidden, integrity-diminishing agenda against Farrell Quinlan and all his ilk!  

Whatever.

Blogging should be fun.  That’s how I approach it.  STS, good luck and be well.

Sen. Jim Waring Bill Seeks End of Officeholders' Abuse of Official Communications

Bravo to Sen. Jim Waring on his new legislation that seeks to keep public officials from abusing the public trust to promote themselves. It really angers me when officeholders use their position to inappropriately insinuate themselves into official communications from their agencies in blatant attempts to gravy train off a government expenditure. Incumbency is powerful enough.

Now if we could only get Arizona Republican Party Chairman Randy Pullen to stop using official party communications with GOP state committeemen to push his accomplishments ahead of the January 24th election of the next state GOP chairman. In that race, Pullen is running for re-election in a rematch with Lisa James who Pullen bested by a slim 4-vote margin in 2006. Regardless of Pullen's case for a second term, it's a risky strategy to play so loose with his "franking" privileges with an electorate that is so proud of its conservative credentials. I guess we'll see on January 24th how ideologically consistent these state committeemen are.

Read this account from the Arizona Capitol Times of Sen. Waring’s legislation here:

Arizona Capitol Times

January 2, 2009

Bill curbs public funds for media announcements

By Luige del Puerto

luige.delpuerto@azcapitoltimes.com

Three years ago, Gov. Janet Napolitano was featured on a state-sponsored billboard to promote Arizona tourism and safe driving on the state’s highways. The move was lambasted by her Republican opponents as a way to grab free publicity as the 2006 election approached.

But she isn’t the only elected official who has used state money to promote a public cause – and to reap the residual benefits of name recognition.

In 2007, the office of Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall published a 56-page booklet that included several pictures of LaWall herself. One photo showed LaWall next to a toddler with a caption that read “Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall believes our children are our future.”

And last year, Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas followed suit with a 45-page handbook called “Roadmap to Crime Prevention” that included several references to Thomas and featured his smiling portrait.

This year, however, Sen. Jim Waring will try to end the practice of using public money on frivolous promotional material. The Phoenix Republican has sponsored legislation that would prohibit the use of public money for print or broadcast media announcements or Web site campaigns featuring elected officials or their employees.

The filing of SB 1002 on Dec. 9 represents Waring’s second try to get the bill passed. Last year, a similar Waring bill was not heard in the Senate.

SB 1002, though, includes new language to outline that the use of public funds for public announcements would be banned only when they refer to an official who is elected or appointed to elective office.

The bill also contains language effectively saying it should not be construed to prevent the official from “performing the duties” of his or her office, and it does not restrict an elected official’s right to communicate on “matters of public concern.”

The bill raises a couple of questions: How do you determine whether a print or broadcast media announcement is relating a matter of public concern? When is it in line with executing the duties of an elective office?

For instance, Thomas has vigorously defended publication of the handbook, saying it was an effective way to distribute public safety information.

The money used to pay for LaWall’s report came directly from funds seized in connection to criminal activity in the county.

And Napolitano has defended the decision to put up the billboards, saying she was just doing her job. At the time, she also pointed out that there were similar billboards featuring political figures all across the nation.

The legislation has a new sense of urgency, given the tough budget climate the state faces, Waring said.

“We do not have money to waste,” he said.

The Phoenix lawmaker said some of the ads or public announcements he has seen these past few years were neither efficient nor effective use of public money.

“The worst are the billboards with the governor’s picture — totally pointless,” he said.

Waring admitted that the bill is open-ended, but emphasized he needed a place to start, given that his previous bill did not go anywhere this past session.

“I am going to tighten it up and make it so it is clear, with no potential loopholes or ambiguities or it is not going to go,” he said.

Last session’s bill was assigned to the Senate Government Committee, chaired by Sen. Jack Harper, a Republican from Surprise. Harper did not hear the bill in committee.

Harper said there were complaints about the rigid language of last year’s bill. He said he hasn’t read the new version yet but added he supports its intent.

“It’s a great concept. I think it’s very taxpayer-friendly,” Harper said.

Jeff Kros, legislative director of the League of Arizona Cities and Towns, said his group’s concern over the previous bill was that its language was “probably too broad” and “too restrictive.”

“I think we have the same concerns as everybody else in that a lot of our elected officials have to use the media to do their jobs, and this seemed to be really restrictive,” Kros said.

Waring introduced his bill last year after Thomas’ handbooks had unleashed a firestorm across the state, with Maricopa County supervisors questioning the wisdom of using public money to produce them.

Waring, though, has said the bill was not intended to target any particular official.

Theoretically, under SB 1002, Thomas’ handbooks still could be produced — but minus the county attorney’s name and picture.