McCain staffer resigns as LD 20 Chair due to district PC opposition

Anthony Miller, the Chairman of GOP Legislative District 20, while simultaneously serving as a paid McCain staffer, has tendered his resignation as District Chairman — effective immediately. His action comes in the wake of the conservative sweep at the Maricopa County Statutory Meeting on Saturday and opposition to his leadership within his own district.

Read Miller’s letter here.

Jeff Kolb, the district’s Communication Director has also submitted his immediate resignation, citing a “hostile” environment within the district.

Sophia Johnson, the newly-elected Dist. 20 secretary and Roger Dickinson, first vice chairman also quit.

48 Responses to McCain staffer resigns as LD 20 Chair due to district PC opposition

  1. MacBeth says:

    Weren’t Miller’s two positions in conflict? How could he be impartial during the last U.S. Senate campaign when J.D. Hayworth was running against Miller’s boss? He should have stepped down last year when he had an obvious bias.

    • Wesley W. Harris says:

      It is interesting that you say that. That would mean that you thing he LD Chairs and, for that matter, the County Chairs should be impartial in a primary. You know, I really tire of the tendency that we Republicans have to ‘eat our own’. Remember, it is the Democrats that are our adversaries. That said, I really believe, as you apparently do, that all ‘elected’ chairs should remain impartial during the primaries.

  2. LD-20 PC says:

    A hostile enviornment? You bet! We don’t like cheaters occupying trusted elected positions as district officers. Miller was tipped off the district was ready to launch a recall of him.

    Miller appointed the ineligible district officer and state committeeman. He wants us to believe he did not so much as have a phone call with these phony appointments? We aren’t as dumb as we look. McCain is well known for dirty tricks, obviously his fans share that particular trait. Good riddance Miller!

  3. Kimball says:

    Do you really think that was an issue for him? Not a chance!

  4. Ricky Lujan says:

    How do these squishy moderates recruit each other anyway? If you’re weak on the Republican Platform we really need you on the team?

    One way or the other, it’s great to see LD20 growing with conservative PCs. Miller only won the Chairman’s post by three votes. His recall was a lock.

  5. Vickie GOP says:

    Congratulations LD-20!

  6. East Valley PC says:

    It’s always better to walk out then to be tossed out. Miller and Co. are simply taking the first step off the plank without the push they knew was coming. Best of luck to the district as it regroups.

  7. Overtaxed1 says:

    Good for you LD20. Miller is an arrogant rude lackluster wannabe. The entire party would be better off if he left and joined the other side so he could be true to his leanings. His little tantrums are annoying to say the least. Good riddance.

  8. LD-8 PC says:

    Wow! Sounds like Miller is a great fit on Team McStain.

  9. Steve Calabrese says:

    Very sad to see such obvious glee because a Republican no longer feels comfortable participating. That’s how elections are lost.

  10. Republican Lady says:

    Anthony Miller and McCain came to our City and split it down the middle. The moderate Republicans followed Miller and McCain and the conservatives went with JD. This last Saturday conservatives were elected to the County Committee and the moderates were sent packing, every one of them!
    I couldn’t believe it when Anthony told me that he favored JD but was being paid by McCain! Making him, in my eyes, a political w—-.

  11. Another LD11 PC says:

    Miller keeps saying “I love my party,” but it was he who created the hostile environment.

    Of course, he was just “following orders” of his McCain handlers.

    I think he honestly believed that McCain is the party, the fatal flaw.

  12. BillyBob says:

    Well, it is certainly not “Miller Time” in LD-20 anymore. It seems the McKyl brand is not longer the political drink of choice.
    The “moderates” are not really moderates, they are really ego driven and should go do something else, like have a rich person’s club or something.
    The Lynch Mobsters are everywhere and in less than two weeks we will see if they are going to occupy the 24 street office or not.
    Mean time, I’m putting my stash with Ash.

  13. Another PC LD 20 says:

    OK it seems like we all agree McNasty needs to go, but to do that we need to get the Independents out of the Republican Primary. As far as Anthony is concerned he has always been very respectful to me, Anthony actually had to protect me from a yelling arrogant jerk when I was protesting McCain’s rally at a VFW. Instead of recalling Miller, recall McStain and lets give McKyl a primary challenge in 2012.

    • Kent says:

      McNasty needs to go? Did you miss the election he bought this past November? He’s now in for another six years. Get with the program!

      • ANOTHER PC LD20 says:

        yes yes I know, and I am sick about it. But recall is still an option. He tried to take over LD 20 and 22 and failed miserably. Maybe the real conservatives learned their lessons?

  14. LD-8 PC says:

    Steve, Miller was caught cheating his district with an ineligible district officer and state committeemen. He was lying to the membership and got caught. We don’t want his brand of “participation.”

  15. Diogidog says:

    Verdone, Hellon, McKyl, Miller. None of them can stand the new Republican Proletariat. That’s because none of them is very confortable in their own suit.

    They are bristled with the thought of us continuing to run “THEIR” Party.


  16. Jeff Kolb says:

    I wonder how I ever got the impression that things were hostile.

    “LD-20 PC” and “Ricky Lujan”, whoever you are, you have your facts incorrect, which is not entirely unexpected.

    The district chairman does not appoint officers. Officers are elected by the PCs. The district Chairman does appoint State Committeemen, but only when there is a vacancy, which there was in LD20.

    And Anthony won by 5 votes, not 3, in an election where there were 119 voters, and 3 candidates for Chair.

    And to the anonymous poster- Anthony hasn’t worked for McCain for several months now.

    You’re obviously going to continue your criticism regardless, but is it too much to ask that you at least get the basic facts correct?

    It’s gratifying to see myself named, however. I feel famous!

    • Ricky Lujan says:

      Oh…excuse me Jeff. So, more correctly then, Anthony Miller bypassed several state committeemen receiveing higher vote totals to appoint dependable squishes who lived outside LD20 to state committeeman slots. On his watch someone who lived outside LD20 got elected to district office.

      We know Miller is a liar. On other occasions he is only incpompetent. Either way, he feels right at home executing McCain style dirty tricks.

      • Jeff Kolb says:

        Neither of your assertions are correct. Nobody outside LD20 was appointed a State Committeeman, and nobody outside LD20 was elected to a district office.

        There is no truth whatsoever to either claim.

    • Abby says:

      Way to go Jeff! These whack-o’s go nuts over McCain, yet fail to realize that McCain solidly beat their golden boy JD in the primary. Really? I’d say it’s pretty obvious team McCain really has the support of the party, not this group of whack jobs who are trying to take over the party! Good for you and Anthony for sticking to your guns and maintaining your integrity in the face of this childish, rude and destructive behavior.

      Go Carmichael! Time to clean up the party!

      • Walt says:

        Which set of ideas was the senator pushing in order to secure his reelection? What I find hard to believe is the conservatives fell for it. Let’s see what he really does.

  17. theprecinctproject says:

    Sorry, but Jeff Kolb has his facts wrong regarding the so-called “vacancies” for state committeemen.

    There were no “vacancies” for LD 20 state committeemen. An election was held whereby the elected precinct committeemen “elected” each other to be the nominees for state committeemen. (Actually, the state committeemen are not deemed “elected” until the County Meeting — meanwhile, they are only “nominated” to become elected at the County Meeting.)

    Two of the nominated state committeemen in LD 20 were not eligible to be nominated because they had lost their status as elected precinct committeemen. The LD 20 Nominating Committee should have checked on the eligibility of every PC who wanted to be nominated as a state committeeman; apparently the Committee did not. So those two ineligible candidates were never validly nominated. Therefore, the next two top vote getters were the actual nominees. As Chairman Haney ruled at the County meeting, when the nominated state committeemen were deemed elected without objection.

    Jeff also says there were 119 voters, but the LD 20 web site says there were 112 voters:
    Jeff’s memory may be better than mine, but for some reason what sticks out in my mind was that Anthony Miller won the Chairman election by three votes and that one of the other two candidates received three votes. Thus, had the three votes for the lowest vote getter gone to the other candidate, there would have been a tie. But, as I said, that’s just my recollection and I could be wrong.

    I hope this helps get some of the basic facts correct.

    Thank you.

    • Jeff Kolb says:

      I apologize, you are partially correct. There were 116 people represented at the meeting, 96 in person and 20 by proxy. There were 119 PCs of record at the time of the election. We originally had 120 elected, but one moved out of state and officially resigned.

      Only 112 voted in the Chairman’s election:

      John Fan – 3
      *Anthony Miller – 57
      Tom Morrissey -52

      You can’t really play a “if these votes had gone to this person” game though, because they didn’t. Elections aren’t decided by wishful thinking or “what if” scenarios, they are decided by the actual vote count.

      There has, so far, been no claims that the vote count was not accurate. In fact, Chairman Haney and a whole group of County officials oversaw the count.

      Regarding the Nominations Committee:

      The LD20 bylaws state:

      1. Only duly elected Precinct Committeemen of record as of the organizational meeting present or
      by proxy after call to order may vote at such meeting.

      The credentials committee (not the nominations committee) used the elected PC list that was posted on the County Recorder’s website as their “record”, in accordance with the provision above.
      Any questions about eligibility came up several days after the election, when the county released updates to this list. If you follow the link above, you’ll see that the county still has the old file posted, which is the one that was used for the election.

      How people expected the credentials committee to see into the future, or to come up with a list that was different than the official record from the county is beyond me.

      I’m sure that LD20 can’t be the only district which held its election before a revised list came out from the county.

      It seems to be the only district, however, that has a faction within it hell-bent on removing their elected Chairman by whatever means necessary. Whatever means, except of course the provisions for removal stated in the bylaws.

      The PCs with objections to Anthony could have petitioned the county Chairman to call a special election to remove him. I’m certain Chairman Haney would have obliged the request.

      Instead they took to anonymous blogs like this one, and used other underhanded tactics such as threats and intimidation to try to get their way.

      But, now everyone has their wish, and Anthony is no longer Chairman.

      The district will hold new elections for the several vacancies on the board, and they will be overseen by the faction that wanted Anthony removed.

      So you got your way- is there really a need for all the egregious celebrating about it?

      I’d think you could at least have some class in victory. Everyone hates a poor loser, but a poor winner is even worse.

  18. Republican Lady says:

    I am just happy that the conservatives are once again in control. I was extremely unhappy that JD lost but it took McCain 20 million to beat him. Doesn’t say much for McCain and the moderates in our party.

  19. LD20 PC says:

    Another slick trick employed by Anthony Miller was this: he claimed only specific proxy copies would be counted. They had to have a bar-code or some other such nonsense as a ploy to cut down on the number of voters. Fortunately, Rob Haney quickly and appropriately overruled Miller’s attempt to cut down on the number of voters. Miller and his big government cronies can’t stand it when the grassroots stand up for what is right.

  20. DeAnn says:

    Did you see that he is claiming he quit because he is afraid of being shot? What a jerk.

  21. Patriotsunited says:

    You all need to get your head out of your asses and realize if we don’t stop all of the in-fighting we don’t stand a chance to oust the POTUS in 2012. We have our differences, yet the name calling and finger pointing ensue. Get a life! What don’t you use your energy to recruit more PCs instead of pick a part a fellow brother in the GOP!

    • LD20 PC says:

      A fellow brother in the GOP who just played the race card against us in a Republic story today. Thanks brother!

  22. theprecinctproject says:

    You can always count on the Arizona Republic “journalists” to get the facts wrong or just fail to uncover them.

    Here’s the article:
    Here’s one glaring inaccuracy which, when corrected, unwinds the entire spin of the story:

    “The newly-elected Dist. 20 Republican secretary, Sophia Johnson of Ahwatukee, first vice chairman Roger Dickinson of Tempe and Jeff Kolb, the former district spokesman from Ahwatukee, also quit.”

    Dickinson didn’t quit. It was impossible for him to quit, as he was never elected.

    Dickinson was ineligible to be on the ballot, so, in actuality, he was never elected. The candidate that actually was elected is the one who received the majority of the valid ballots cast.

    After the fact that Dickinson and another “elected” state committeeman nominee (Dickinson also ran for state committeman) were ineligible to run for office, Miller then announced he was going to make appointments to fill two state committeemen “vacancies.” The rules did not so allow. Again, two ineligible candidates (one was Dickinson) were on the ballot for the state committemen slots. Being ineligible for the office of state committeeman, all votes cast for them were invalid. But that did not invalidate the otherwise proper candidacies of the other candidates or the election itself.

    The next two top vote getters actually won. But Anthony did not read the rules properly. He tried to fill “vacancies” when no vacancies existed. He was called out on that. All of this was caused by people (Anthony, Dickinson, the other candidate) who either failed to read and follow the rules by accident or on purpose. Now, in the aftermath of their failures, the race card gets played rather than them simply explaining their failures. So sad and unnecessary. They give the Republican Party a black eye for no reason.

    Bottom line: Some followed the rules, some didn’t. Now the rulebreakers want to blame others for the results of otherwise valid elections. No one was “hounded out of office” as McComish alleges. Miller won. He decided to resign. That was his decision alone.

    The ironic thing is that although the Republic “reporter” had ample information to get the facts straight from Miller, she failed, apparently, to simply ask Miller the key question. She reported, “After the election and around the December holiday season, some of Miller’s detractors made an issue of the residency of Dickinson, the first vice-chairman. Dickinson, who did not return phone messages, was a supporter of Miller’s and allegedly moved to a different precinct within Dist. 20 last year, making him ineligible for the leadership post.”

    Wouldn’t it have been easy to ask Miller, “Mr. Miller, it’s been alleged that Mr. Dickinson was ineligible to run either for First Vice Chair or for state committeeman. You’re the Chairman. Was he?”

    I mean, he was the Chairman, after all. He ought to have known.

    There was no reason for Miller to have resigned. He won his election. Nobody “hounded him out of office.”

    Thank you.
    Cold Warrior

    • Seen It All says:

      Thanks for the clarifications, Cold Warrior. You answer a lot of questions. The idea that Miller resigned because of perceived threats on his life in the wake of the Tucson shootings is ludicrous.
      His email (in the newspaper link) included this bit of hyperbole: “Today my wife of 20 yrs ask (sic) me do I think that my PCs (Precinct Committee members) will shoot at our home?”

      I call that unadulterated race baiting. I’ll never be hungry enough to take that bait. Miller was elected by a white majority district. The comment is offensive.

    • Jeff Kolb says:

      Hey Cold Warrior- you know what would be helpful? How about if you, and some others with encyclopedic knowledge of bylaws and procedures, undertook an effort to update the bylaws, simplify them, and make them more inclusive of these strange or one-off situations?

      I understand several things were clarified at the recent county meeting, which was a good start.

      Maybe you could create a companion document with some FAQs that deals with uncommon circumstances, and had some definitions of terms that are currently ambiguous.

      That way everyone would have a clear set of rules and procedures to work from, and we’d avoid fighting over bylaw interpretations.

      I think that would be a great project.

      • theprecinctproject says:

        I think it would a great project, too. You’re a PC — why don’t you volunteer?

        But, in this case, on the issue of the eligibility of candidates to run for district officer positions and state committeeman offices, it really wasn’t complicated at all. The LD 20 bylaws are a “massively complex” 7 pages with lots of white space. Following are the applicable portions:

        Art. III – Membership
        Section A. The membership of this organization shall consist of all duly elected and appointed Precinct Committee of the District as prescribed by the Arizona Revised Statues.

        Art. IV – Organization
        Section A. Officers
        . . .
        3. All Officers of the District shall be Precinct Committeemen of the legislative district and reside within the legislative district throughout the term of office.

        . . .

        Section D. Election of Officers and State Committeemen

        1. All Officers shall be elected at the organizational meetings of the District by a majority of the elected Precinct Committeemen present in person or by proxy as prescribed by law.

        3. Members of the State Committee shall be elected at the organizational meeting from a ballot listing the names of all elected Precinct Committeemen.

        Arizona Revised Statute Section 16-822, Precinct committeemen; eligibility; vacancy; duties, provides, in pertinent part:

        D. In addition to other provisions of law regarding removal from office, a vacancy shall exist in the office of precinct committeeman when the precinct committeeman moves from the precinct from which elected or changes his political party from the party in which he was elected.

        So . . . to be elected to an officer position or the office of state committeeman, one had to be an elected precinct committeeman and residing in one’s precinct on the date of the election. What’s so hard about that?

        With rank goes responsibility. Like I said, the LD 20 bylaws are short and sweet, and the sections applicable to the elections of officers and state committeemen are neither lengthy nor complicated. The Arizona Revised Statutes relating to the election of precinct committeemen are not complicated. The Party gives every PC a handbook and the Maricopa County and Arizona GOP as well as the LD 20 web sites have lots of this info on them or links to where you can find it.

        I know that the AZ Republican Party committee and the Maricopa County Republican Committee wants to try to come up with a set of “model” bylaws for all legislative districts and is setting up a committee to help make this a reality. Why don’t you volunteer?

        Meanwhile, all precinct committeemen, even those who hold, or aspire to, LD officer positions and/or the office of state committeeman, should read and study the bylaws, read and study the bylaws, and read and study the bylaws and the Election Code, which is not very long nor complicated.

        Thank you.

        P.S. Heck, LD 20’s web site helpfully has links to the AZ GOP, the MCRC and LD 20 bylaws here:

      • Jeff Kolb says:

        “Cold Warrior”,

        My suggestion was a sincere one.

        However, I am not a PC, so I would not be an appropriate person to lead this type of effort.

        As you’ve pointed out, I am not as smart or astute as you. That being said, I don’t feel that your explanation was really all that clear.

        I see several ambiguous terms, and things that are open to interpretation.

        For instance, not being either an expert in Arizona law or Blyaws in general, I think there is more than one way to interpret the following statement:

        1. Only duly elected Precinct Committeemen of record as of the organizational meeting present or by proxy after call to order may vote at such meeting.

        The key phrase being “of record”. What does that mean? What record?

        That’s only one example- no need to clarify your interpretation here.

        What I was doing was trying to make an honest suggestion to make things run smoother in the future.

  23. Another LD20 PC says:

    “…Miller said he has been called McCain’s boy…”

    If that’s true was it really worth repeating to a Republic reporter? And the fact Miller and the Republic tied Miller’s situation to the Gifford’s shooting is reprehensible. Miller is an embarrassment to the Republican Party and not because of the color of his skin but because of the content of his character.

  24. DeAnn says:

    I called him McCain’s goon. Wonder which he prefers:)

  25. theprecinctproject says:

    Okay, Anthony Miller’s story to the press has now resulted in headlines on lefty blogs like, “Fearing tea party violence, four Arizona Republicans resign”.

    Go here:

    Is this really true, Mr. Dickinson, Mr. Kolb, and Ms. Johnson, that the fear of “tea party violence” caused you to resign? Mr. Miller?

    And, Mr. Miller, you told the Arizona Republic reporter that you “love” the Republican Party. Was the generation of all this inaccurate, bad press for the Party your way of showering love on the Party?

    And what steps will any of the four take to correct the record?

    We’ll see.

  26. Yet Another PC in LD20 says:

    I for one am glad the goon is gone. Anthony Miller, to even remotely capitalize on the tragic Giffords shooting and claim the “threat” of Tea Party violence led you to resign is beyond grotesque! You are a sad human being. You are no better than the main stream media WHORES working for the left trying to blame the shootings on “the Tea Party” (even your lovely princess Sarah) to further their anti-American agenda.

    By the way, it’s the “love of your party” that is your main problem. You should be loving your country and the principles of liberty under which it was founded. You should be fighting to restore that liberty which has been lost (under Republican watch) not dedicating yourself to a corrupt “party” and corrupt elected officials like John McCain (and every other criminal that has an ‘R’ in front of their name). The time for that stupidity is over.

    Thank you for stepping out of the way.

    • Jeff Kolb says:

      Thank you- I think your comment clarified a key point of contention among the “factions” that are disagreeing as of late.

      When I was a PC, I was under the impression that I was an official in the Republican Party. (
      A low-ranking official, to be sure, but an official representative of the party nonetheless.)

      As such, and forgive me for quoting Bylaws once again, but one of my duties was to “To canvass and campaign in their respective precincts on behalf of all Republican candidates;”

      Another was to “Creat[e] enthusiasm and support for the Republican Party”

      John McCain was the Republican Party’s nominee for U.S. Senate after the Primary Election.

      As such, my role as a PC meant that I was obligated to support, and encourage others to support, John McCain, whether I supported him in the primary or not.

      Again, I’m not a bylaws expert (which has been made abundantly clear to me), but my interpretation is that the same obligations apply even after the elections.

      I honestly don’t understand how those of you who are PCs can continue to hold such hatred for one of your party’s elected officials, but still maintain that you are fulfilling your obligations under the bylaws.

      If you want to be a “conservative activist” or a member of a Tea Party, and support and trash whoever you want, that’s fine. Nobody has said that you can’t do that.

      But to be a PC, which is an official of the Republican Party, are you not obligated to follow the bylaws, even the parts you don’t like?

  27. Henry says:

    The story below is now being linked with the Arizona Republic, and repeated by and the Huffington Post. Is there any truth to it? I would like to see some type of proof one way or the other.

  28. ANOTHER PC LD20 says:

    Tisk Tisk, I am ashamed of Anthony for his blatant race baiting. He went to the McSlime school of journalism.. I heard Anthony was going to run for Chair of the Arizona Republican Party then decided not to. The handwritting was on the wall a few weeks ago when John dumped him. To justify his decision to resign amist all he controversy he caused he blamed the Tea Party.

  29. Radical American Patriot says:

    The RESIGNATON of Party leaders who are about to lose their power, blaming those who are about take that power away from them: is really a time-worn tool to divert attention away from their own incompetence and failures. It has many variations.

    The most recent and GLARING example is Pima County Sheriff Dupnik (‘Dupa’ is Polish for A$$. How well it fits!) He immediately and falsely claimed that political discourse on the right was responsible for Saturday’s tragic shooting. And quite successfully this despicable and utterly false claim has indeed diverted the debate and attention away from his office’s dereliction of duty. Had anyone other than a son of a senior Pima County employee made the threats and had such attention from the Community College, I’m certain he would have been committed at least once! Dupanik had to divert the attention!

    In a northern state where you don’t register by party, there was a RINO Chair and a Dem in Disguise Vice-Chair, who saw the handwriting on the wall in the small county party. They gave away 80% of the county funds without telling the PCs, wrote an article to the local paper make much the same complaint as Anthony and resigned. They were really quite pathetic!

    • Teller Of Truth says:

      Excellent points, Radical American Patriot! This resignation by Miller and Company is a diversionary tactic since they were handed their heads in their hands at the Maricopa County Statutory meeting last week. The elected PCs in one of the nation’s largest counties spoke very clearly about the leadership direction they support with Rob Haney’s sweep. This was a massive repudiation of RINO McCain and his henchmen. THAT is why Miller resigned. This BS about not being willing to take a bullet and the racial overtones he infers is worse than offensive.

      If true, how does he explain getting elected in a white, Mormon enclave?