Websites indicate US Reps, Sens main money streams

November 22, 2014

D.C. lobbyists do the heavy lifting, saving home town folks the back aches

Most of us have ended up on congressional mailing lists. Issues large and small provoke the incessant emails warning of dire consequences unless we immediately cough up cash. The requests hit breakneck speed preceding elections and the release of quarterly reports, where a competitive showing is crucial to incumbents seeking reelection and desirous of quashing upstart challengers.

But how much do they actually need us? Are the home folks of either party the backbone of incumbent’s revenue streams?

As dedicated observers of the political scene, our interest was piqued as we stumbled onto MapLight, a newly launched site that promotes itself as “Revealing Money’s Influence on Politics.” Check out the golden links along the top of the home page.

There is an abundance of fascinating information here which we have just begun to examine. 

Among the items that provided a chuckle was this dual list (House and Senate) showing who gets the most money from the agricultural chemicals companies.

Who’da guessed John McCain, who is legendary for spreading manure, would be a top recipient of the fertilizer industry?

Take a minute to read the Research Guide and look into the navigation tools —- especially those that show the correlation between donations to politicians and the corresponding favorable votes they cast. It’s all there on “Contributions By Vote.” 

Money Near Votes” shows all contributions given within days, weeks, or months of a vote, and the effect of that dough on voting yes or no.

You’ll want to check out any House or Senate member here and see who their major donors are and how much they give. Incumbency pays well, which is why it’s so difficult to oust entrenched Washington players.

Another intriguing site revealing the political money trail is the Sunlight Foundation.  Its home page, Political Party Time, has this compelling intro:

“From the early hours of the morning until late in the evening, politicians are breaking bread and sipping cocktails with donors. Sunlight’s Party Time lets you know who’s fundraising and where.”

Not surprisingly, a good portion of the fundraising takes place in Washington, D.C.

 


Obama 2011: Executive order on amnesty “not appropriate”

November 15, 2014

New_citizens

Obama 2014: Eagerly embraces Mexico’s poverty exportation scheme as political retaliation

The news is rife with speculation that lame-duck President Barack Obama intends to unveil a series of executive orders that will shield millions of illegal aliens living in the U. S. from deportation, while granting them work permits and access to taxpayer-funded benefits.

His timing is odd, given that the Nov. 4 midterm elections repudiated Obama’s policies —- including those making America an illegal alien sanctuary nation, with an intentionally unenforceable border. Voters across the nation spoke clearly by turning the senate to a Republican majority as well as retaining the House and GOP governorship dominance by even greater margins. Obama’s response is to engage in a flagrant and lawless assault on our constitution to enact measures wrathfully calculated to increase the Democrat voter base.

Democrat duplicity abounds. Obama was pressured to suspend such actions by his own political partisans concerned about the effect amnesty would have on their reelections. These self-serving liberal congressional stalwarts supported Obama’s agenda more than 90 percent of the time.

Of crucial importance is the fact our porous border provides entry to all comers, many who intend harm to America and her citizens. Obama, however, puts his leftist ideology before America’s security.

How do struggling American citizens, many still unemployed or underemployed, benefit by having at least 5 million suddenly legalized foreign workers competing for jobs while undercutting salaries? The new action will expand Obama’s 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policies, which are already pitting our college-bound students against the now legitimized influx for university placement. 

By now it should be clear that Democrats stock in trade is not putting Americans first and lying about it. This is Obama speaking to a live Univision audience in March 2011. Univision television, based in New York, is an American Spanish language broadcast network with major production facilities in Florida.

“With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case,” Obama said at the time.

“We’ve got three branches of government,” he instructs.  “Congress passes the law, the executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws and then the judiciary has to interpret the laws,” he says.

“For me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.”


Ask your AZ US Reps: “Who should get the next jobs?”

October 27, 2014

This 30-second ad is part of a national campaign informing Americans that nearly all U.S. job growth since the year 2000 has gone to new immigrants while millions of Americans who want a full-time job still can’t find one. The ad questions whether Congress should continue to add 1 million more immigrants every year to compete for jobs or if the priority should be for the jobs to go to the Americans and legal immigrants already here who are still looking for work.

“We’re urging every citizen to ask a very simple question of their Senators —- and of anybody who wants to be a Senator,” said NumbersUSA President Roy Beck. “Who should get the next jobs? Do they think their constituents who are looking for work should have priority for jobs? Or are they committed to catering to special-interest groups and helping corporate lobbyists continue to flood the labor market with new foreign workers who, through no fault of their own, depress the wages and job prospects for workers already here?

“Despite the dismal wage and employment reports on American workers, most Members of Congress continue to favor high immigration of workers at all skill levels,” Beck said. “But polling shows the folks back home are far more interested in an immigration policy that protects America’s wage-earners and their families.”

Recent opinion research by The Polling Company/Woman Trend indicates Americans believe immigrants take jobs from Americans rather than create jobs and nearly 9 out of 10 believe U.S.-born workers and legal immigrants already here should get first preference for jobs.

Since 2007, special-interest groups have spent more than $1.5 billion on more than 3,000 lobbyists who have pushed passage of an immigration bill that would dramatically increase immigration. In mid-2013, the groups nearly succeeded when the US Senate passed S.744, a bill that would have doubled legal immigration over the next ten years. Many Senators who voted for S.744 have been distancing themselves from the bill recently. The bill has not been brought to the floor of the House of Representatives.

NumbersUSA.com tracks and grades every Member of Congress on actions that affect the numerical level of immigration. The website also compares the immigration positions of every candidate running for Congress. Check out the grades of the Arizona delegation —-U.S. Senators and Representatives —- HERE. You might be in for a surprise.


Hillary shares Obama’s class warfare mentality

October 26, 2014

Liberal focus remains on disparagement of job creating businesses

“Don’t let anybody tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs,” Hillary says.

“You know that old theory? Trickle-down economics. That has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly. You know, one of the things my husband says when people say, ‘Well, what did you bring to Washington?’ he said, ‘Well, I brought arithmetic.”

This is Hillary Clinton’s “you didn’t build that” moment. Americans have been forewarned that another four years of Obamanomics could be right around the corner.

Oct. 24, 2013:

July 12, 2012:

Pay attention. As Shakespeare stated so eloquently, “What’s past is prologue.”


Just one question re: Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi

October 2, 2014

It has now been 185 days since 25-year-old Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi was jailed and held in solitary confinement in Tijuana, Mexico on weapons charges. He had three guns among his possessions packed in his truck as he was moving from Florida to California.

The Marine veteran, diagnosed with post traumatic stress syndrome that has gone untreated, served two tours in Afghanistan. He said he never intended to leave the country but missed an exit when heading to meet friends for dinner at a border town restaurant.

If convicted of weapons charges, he faces six to 21 years in a Mexican prison. Barack Obama has never followed through (news video) on his stated intention to contact Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto to request Sgt. Tahmooressi’s release, although the two have discussed other issues. 

Question: Isn’t it time to cut off foreign aid to this crime-ridden and noxious nation that defies our sovereign border, brazenly disregards our laws and blatantly treats our citizens with contempt? Mexico received $265 million in U. S. taxpayer paid foreign aid in 2013 —- excluding military aid.


Gifting ASU’s Prez with $95K raise+benies = one helluva deal

September 30, 2014

Crow called “a bargain” at $900,000 a year

When it wants to push its leftist perspective, the Arizona Republic is a marvel of inconsistencies. Look no further than the convoluted meanderings of Monday’s editorial as it attempts to justify the outrageous salary increase for Arizona State University president Michael Crow.  The heist is headlined, “It’s vision, not money, that motivates Crow.”

In this still troubled economy with many remaining behind the eight ball financially, the state Board of Regents awarded Crow a $95,000 raise and we are told we got a bargain in the process.

Betch’a didn’t know that Crow is a “gale force of big ideas, who swept into this intellectual desert” when he arrived in 2002.

He is also extolled for “throwing open the doors to a surge of low-income and minority students…”  Back in 2007, when Crow began promoting scholarship funding and in-state tuition for illegal alien students the open-border newspaper called Crow’s efforts  to subvert the voter approved Prop. 300 “courageous.”  Crow referred to the hundreds of foreign national students here illegally as “special-class international students.”

This previous post “Michael Crow, Sybil Francis: A$U’s pricey duo,” fills in the dollar amounts in salary, bonuses, pensions, retirement and “step up bonuses,” car and housing allowances that Crow and his wife Sybil Francis were previously raking in. Updated, enumerated numbers are not readily found, although this year alone he receives a $40,000 incentive and up to $180,000 in 2015 for “meeting goals.”

It’s difficult to pick a winning line in the blatherous editorial, but the words, “money doesn’t motivate him” which he proves by staying on here in Arizona, where this superhuman “visionary” is “underpaid,” float to the top.

“It’s no secret that a lot of major institutions would like to steal him away from us,” Regents Chairman Mark Killian said. “We think he’s doing a wonderful job, and we’d like him to stay around.”

Regent Greg Patterson “gushingly” heaped further praise, actually calling Crow “transformative.“

 That electric definition alone could power up Sybil Francis and Michael Crow’s $million+ nest in swanky Paradise Valley.

The swooning regents duo sound suspiciously like former U.S. Senator Dennis DeConcini, then a regent in 2007.  “He’s worth every dollar he gets paid because he delivers,” DeConcini said.

As Crow and Francis live large, citizen students feel the sting as tuition and fee hikes continue to rattle Arizona families. And the question remains, if  Crow isn’t motivated by money, why do the regents continually throw more of it at his well-shod feet?


MC GOP Chair LaFaro exposes Wes Gullett in complaint

September 25, 2014

Maricopa County Republican Chairman A J LaFaro has filed a campaign finance complaint against ‘Arizona Grassroots Action’ with the Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission, Arizona Secretary of State’s Office and Maricopa County Elections Office.   

Here is the complaint:

I wish to file a campaign finance complaint against Arizona Grassroots Action (AGA), which lists its address at 300 West Clarendon, Suite 460, Phoenix, AZ, 85013.  We encourage anyone who reads this complaint to “Google” the address to see who is really located there.*

AGA conducted independent expenditures in multiple Legislative Districts (LD) in multiple counties to effect the outcome of Precinct Committeemen (PC) races.  However, AGA never registered as a political committee, nor has it disclosed its donors or its expenditures.  We went to a great deal of effort to verify that AGA was not filed with the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office and with the various counties in which it campaigned, etc. 

AGA is also not registered with the Arizona Corporation Commission.  It appears that AGA is a name selected to mimic an old campaign committee that was called Arizona Grassroots PAC and was closed in March of 2014.  It is also the precise name of a federal PAC formed to benefit GOP Congressional candidates Martha McSally and Andy Tobin.  However, the federal PAC uses a Virginia address and appears to be quite separate.  So the selection of the name seems to be purposefully for the sake of creating confusion.

At this time we do not have a firm idea on exactly how many expenditures were made, however we have proof that AGA used a series of up to three mailers per precinct that was targeted in their Graham County efforts, two to three mailers per targeted precinct along with robo calls here in Maricopa County.  PCs have reported receiving and seeing AGA’s campaign literature in LD23, LD25, LD28, and LD29. 

We have put the word out asking people to report if AGA’s campaign literature was used in their LDs and will update our list as we get more responses.

While races for Precinct Committeemen do not attract the media attention that larger offices do, they are very important to the candidates who participate in them. The outcome of those races determine the makeup of party leadership both at the county and state level, and control of that leadership includes the ability to speak for the party as well as control over the party’s purse strings.  These races can be very high-stakes.  As such, the strategic advantage that accrues to a group that knowingly violates election law in order to gain a stealth advantage is tremendous. You do not have time to gather an effort to counter something that you have no idea is coming.

The penalties for failing to file a committee and failing to file reports that detail contributions and expenditures are substantial and are laid out in ARS 16-904 for example.  The failure to file and report are both violations of ARS 16-902, 16-902.01, 16-904, 16-912, 16-913 and potentially 16-913.01 and 16-914.02 depending on the source and nature of the funds used to pay for this electioneering and expressed advocacy.

Furthermore, AGA failed to notify the candidates who were listed on their mailers of their independent expenditures in a timely manner as prescribed by ARS 16-917.  The penalties for failing to do this shall be three times the cost of the literature.

Lastly, AGA would be required to list any individuals, corporations, LLCs and labor organizations paying for these expenditures should the source of any of this money come from any of these individuals, corporations, LLCs and labor organizations.  There is no such disclosure save for “Paid for by Arizona Grassroots Action” and the penalties for failing to properly disclose are up to three times the cost of the literature.

It is too late to undo the damage done to the candidates who were disadvantaged by these unannounced and unreported mailings.  However, your office can and should send a strong message to this group and those groups who would mimic this technique in the future that their actions carry severe financial penalties.

People and organizations that feel they are above the law by not registering with the appropriate state and county agencies so they can use their dirty money to fund their egregious acts of misleading and confusing the voters is totally unacceptable.

It is quite obvious AGA has violated election laws by not registering as a political committee or filing campaign finance reports, and I am requesting a full and thorough investigation into this heinous matter.  Please consider this complaint a “class action complaint” on behalf of the thousands of individuals that have been wronged.

– A. J. LaFaro, Chairman, Maricopa County Republican Committee (MCRC) Office: 480-752-9164, E-mailaj_ml@hotmail.com

 * First Strategic Communications and Public Affairs

Under “Our Team” you’ll find the names Wes GullettKurt Davis, Marcus Dell’Artino, Barry Dill, Crystal Bradley, Bettina Nava, and Steve Roman. Five of the six highlighted names share a common thread: They have all worked for John McCain.  At least a couple of those McCain cohorts show up on this 2006 Republicans for Janet (Napolitano) list.

___________________

Seeing Red AZ has previously provided additional background on such shenanigans:

This post card is an example of those sent out by then-Sen. Jon Kyl in 2012, as he intruded in the LD 28 precinct committeemen races and attempted to facilitate the removal of conservatives.

Another example of Republicrat duplicity also took place in District 28, where conservatives were targeted for removal on a slate pushing RINOs for election as state committeemen.

Integrity is in short supply these days. Here is a list of RINOs supporting liberal Democrat Felecia Rotellini. “Republican” is a convenient label for these turncoats to keep as they show their true colors while ripping fellow Republicans.  If they reregistered as Democrats, their traitorous acts would lose their potency.

 


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 339 other followers