Archives

VP pick Palin wins environmentalist ‘Dodo’ prize

As prizes go, it’s probably not one you’d want on your trophy shelf: the Center for Biological Diversity’s Rubber Dodo award.

This year’s recipient is governor of Alaska and Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin.

“She richly deserves it,” says Tim Ellis, spokesman for the Tucson-based group. “Her environmental record is a disaster and we just wanted to draw attention to that.”

The handsome trophy, pictured above, honors Palin “for seeking to block Endangered Species Act protection for the polar bear, lying about, then suppressing state scientific reviews, and denying that greenhouse gas emissions cause global warming.”

The trophy will be mailed to the governor’s mansion sometime this week, I’m told.

“It’s just about ready to fly north,” says Ellis.

Despite the fairly obvious meltdown occurring in her home state – thawing permafrost, disappearing sea ice, unseasonably warm winters and generally weird weather – Palin still doesn’t believe that human activity is having an impact on the climate.

“A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I’m not one though who would attribute it to being man-made,” Palin told the right-wing magazine Newsmax earlier this summer.

It’s a view that puts her to the right even of the leaders of her own party.

It was the Bush administration’s Department of the Interior, after all, that finally labeled the polar bear as ‘threatened,’ (albeit without taking any actions that would protect the bear’s habitat from offshore oil drilling or carbon emissions.)

If Palin doesn’t believe in manmade climate change, well, I suppose that’s her right.

But where she crossed the line from fool to crook was by using her power as governor of Alaska to obscure the work of biologists with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, critics say.

Palin claimed that studies by state biologists cast doubt on the conclusions of federal scientists, who had determined that vanishing sea ice threatened the bears. Without scientific consensus, she said, listing the bears as endangered or threatened was a mistake.

“I strongly believe that adding them to the list is the wrong move at this time. My decision is based on a comprehensive review by state wildlife officials of scientific information from a broad range of climate, ice and polar bear experts,” she wrote in a New York Times editorial.

But through a Freedom of Information Act request, a University of Alaska got his hands on the studies in question — which said nothing of the sort.

“Essentially, she lied,” University of Alaska professor Rick Steiner told ABC News.

The move vaulted her over the opposition and earned her the coveted Rubber Dodo – and the enmity of environmental crusaders like Kieran Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity.

“To maintain her ludicrous opposition to protecting the polar bear in the face of massive scientific consensus, Palin stepped over the line to lie about and suppress government science,” Suckling said in a statement.

The irony is, of course, that John McCain was supposedly one of the few Republicans that actually got global warming.

He’s proposed legislation – co-sponsored with Joe Lieberman – that would have put the U.S. on track to cut emissions.

And here he is nominating for his vice-president a woman who basically thinks climate change is some kind of liberal bogeyman cooked up by environmentalists.

In our view, McCain, in a desperate, last-ditch attempt to get elected, shoved Mother Earth under the bus.

And what does this all have to do with Arizona? Maybe more than you think.

Recent studies suggest that we here in the desert may be more closely linked to the health of the Arctic sea ice than previously believed.

It seems that fluctuations in the sea ice may be linked to weather patterns in the Pacific Ocean. In particular, as sea ice declines, more storm systems from the Pacific may head north, bypassing the Southwest.

It does strike me as an interesting coincidence that the so-called Medieval Warm Period happened to coincide with the mega-drought in the Southwest that led to the fall of the Anasazi civilization.

In any case, fly, dodo, fly.

District 27 Green Party candidate touts energy, water plans

As one of the first projects for The Footprint, over the next six weeks I’ll be interviewing a cross-section of candidates and incumbents for state office across Arizona, asking them about their views on the environment, energy, climate change and other topics that interest us.

For our first installment, I spoke with Kent Solberg, a first-time candidate running for the District 27 seat in the Arizona legislature on the Green Party ticket. Solberg, 61, qualified for $32,000 in Clean Elections funding by raising several thousand dollars in small donations in his district. He hopes to be the first Green Party member of the state legislature.

According to Solberg, contrary to some impressions (mine too – guilty) the Green Party stands for way more than just environmental protection. “It’s a misnomer to say that the Green Party is strictly an environmental party,” Solberg says. “The Green Party goes way beyond just the environment.”

The party staunchly opposed the war in Iraq from the outset, and favors immediate withdrawal from that country. Their platform condemns capital punishment, favors decentralized government and strongly supports reproductive rights for women. Except for the fact that they’re running former Rep. Cynthia McKinney for President, and may sap some much-needed swing-state votes away from Obama, I think they’re great, and a much-needed antidote to the two-party gridlock that our country seems mired in.

Yet while Tucson may be one of Arizona’s most liberal bastions, Solberg faces long odds against entrenched Democratic incumbents in District 27.

In our talk, Solberg focused in-depth on two specific environmental concerns: renewable energy – in particular solar power – and water.

Near the top of his priorities, he says, is jump-starting the state’s solar power industry.

“One of the things I would do as a legislator is to fight to make Arizona the world leader in solar power,” he says. “I would encourage the Arizona legislature to work with solar companies, to bring solar companies into the state, to develop solar farms and develop the highest levels of technology.”

There are a few large-scale solar projects under construction in the state, such as the Solana Generating Station, but Solberg believes we’re still well behind where we could be.

“We should’ve been doing this 25 years ago, and we haven’t progressed at the pace that we can. Solar energy has been stagnant,” he says. “There’s ways that the legislature can change that. We can provide tax credits and tax incentives to individuals and companies.”

Solberg sees a bright future in solar, and echoed one of the themes of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s campaign – that renewable energy can be a win-win, both for the environment and the economy.

“I think we could bring in a clean new industry that can’t be outsourced,” he says.

Solberg also fears that rampant development in the Tucson area is outstripping the region’s long-term water supply and putting the Tucson aquifer at risk.

“We’re living in a place that has a limited amount of water, and for us to continue to grow in a sustainable way, we have to address the amount of water we have,” he says. “We have to look at how we can recharge the aquifer.”

Solberg proposes looking at methods to capture runoff from monsoon storms that is otherwise lost. But he opposes uses treated effluent – otherwise known as treated sewage – to recharge the groundwater.

“They’re finding more and more substances and drugs in the effluent,” he says. “Effluent can be used for other purposes. We can learn to use treated effluent in a way that would save the groundwater.”

To contact Kent Solberg for more information or to get involved in his campaign, write to: kent4house@juno.com

The campaign also has a website that Kent assures me will be active soon: www.kent4house.org

JCR

AZ species may suffer after Bush rule change

In what critics call a back-door move to weaken environmental regulations, the Bush administration has proposed a rule change for the Interior Dept. that would dramatically reduce the scientific input necessary for agency decisions with the potential to affect threatened species.

The move could have far-ranging impacts on Arizona wildlife, says Sandy Bahr, conservation outreach director for the Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon chapter.

“Ultimately, what it does is it takes science out of the decision making process related to endangered species – and there’s already far too much politics involved in endangered species,” she says.  “We’ve seen that in Arizona with the Mexican gray wolf.”

The Associated Press reported that the Bush administration has sought to fast-track the rule changes by cutting a public comment period from 60 to 30 days.

Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Tucson) slammed the move in a recent statement.

“I am disappointed once again by the recent announcement that the lame duck Bush White House plans to roll back the protections for endangered species before leaving office. It doesn’t surprise me that the legacy this President wants to leave is one of further environmental degradation and loss of more species who are already on the brink of extinction,” Rep. Grijalva said.

He continued: “This is just one more example of their ongoing efforts to undermine the environmental protections that have been in place in this country for more than 30 years. What the previous majority in Congress couldn’t accomplish legislatively, the Administration is now trying to do through revised regulations.”

The L.A. Times calls the rule change a “bum rush” in this editorial.

Bahr agrees. “Rather than a frontal attack, it’s an administrative action, so it doesn’t require Congress to do anything. It’s basically more of the same from the Bush administration.

“Ultimately, the impact in Arizona will be fewer species protected, and more politics and political decisions,” she says.

JCR

In Tempe, reactions mixed to Palin’s experience

TEMPE — Alaska governor Sarah Palin accepted the Republican party’s nomination for vice president this week, using more barbs than her running mate and earning a grudging respect and guarded optimism from some locals.

Palin’s acceptance speech was a culmination of her tightly knit family life, cutting out the doubts her opponents brought to the surface, while showing her enthusiastic support for Arizona Senator John McCain.

And with that came the inevitable mudslinging towards the opposing Democratic Party and candidates Barack Obama and his vice presidential nominee, Joe Biden.

“But listening to him speak, it’s easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform – not even in the state senate,” Palin said, referring to Obama.

She went on to say that Obama’s goals were to increase government size, take more money away from the people and generally reduce the strength of America on a global scale.

If elected on Nov. 4, Palin said she and McCain would lay down more pipelines, build more nuclear plants, create clean-coal jobs, and pursue other alternative sources of energy such as solar and wind power.

The speech garnered a mixed reaction around Tempe and the second largest university in the nation.

“It might be difficult to pass some of the bills that she’s proposing,” says Nedda Reghabi, an Arizona State University economics senior. “I do however think it’s a good idea to start looking into alternative energy sources.”

Palin used her past experiences as mayor and governor in Alaska as examples of her tenacity as a leading official.

She discussed how while seated as Governor she promised an immense ethics reform which eventually became the current law. She also mentioned her success in bringing revenue back to Alaskans when gas and oil prices skyrocketed, vetoing nearly $500 million in wasteful spending, and fostering Alaska’s state budget surplus that could reach up to $9 billion next year, according to the Los Angeles Times .

Tempe Vice Mayor Shana Ellis said that although Palin was a dark horse candidate, she has held an elected office and is qualified to be vice president.

But others say Palin’s experience places her somewhere in between rookie and veteran status. Longtime Valley pundit Richard Herrera, an associate professor of political science at ASU, said that in the event where Palin would have to take over as President, her background suggests she doesn’t have the same experience level as most vice presidential candidates although she is not the least experienced candidate to be chosen.

Court ruling backs independents, paid circulators

PHOENIX — A recent court decision gives non-residents the right to gather petition signatures for political candidates and ballot initiatives.

While guaranteeing Constitutional rights to signature gatherers who are not Arizona residents, some are concerned the ruling may end up spoiling local contests by allowing rich, out-of-state interests to pay circulators who don’t have ties here and hijack the ballot.

Rick Heumann, a Chandler City Council candidate, is one of those concerned voices. He says he has worked on several campaigns advocating initiatives in the past and has seen how “big money” can change the dynamics of voting.

“I have a concern about the whole process,” Heumann says. “It shouldn’t be influenced through money.”

Brewer’s state elections director, Joe Kanefield, says his office intends to appeal the ruling.

FIRST AMENDMENT AT ISSUE

The hubbub stems from a June 9 ruling by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Judges were responding to a 2004 complaint filed against Arizona elections officials by third-party presidential candidate Ralph Nader, who claimed the 90-day deadline that independent candidates faced for submitting petitions was unfair.

The court agreed. As a result, the state Legislature will have to come up with a new deadline that could improve independent candidates’ chances of getting on the ballot.

But perhaps more importantly, the court also ruled that it is illegal to restrict non-Arizona residents from circulating petitions for presidential candidates and initiatives.

“The residency requirement nevertheless excludes from eligibility all persons who support the candidate but who, like Nader, live outside the state,” Judge Mary Schroeder writes for the court in her summary opinion. “Such a restriction creates a severe burden on Nader and his out-of-state supporters’ speech, voting and associational rights.”

The case could, however, raise questions for Republicans and Democrats because the inclusion of a third-party candidate could take away votes form either party’s candidate. It would also allow non-Arizona residents to circulate petitions, so paid signature-gathering companies will still be permitted to send employees from other states and hire non-residents.

Special interest groups frequently use signature-gathering firms. The court’s decision could effect the upcoming elections because groups with more monetary support will be able to get the required signatures faster and more efficiently, says Patrick Kenney, chair and professor of political science studies at Arizona State University.

“Interest groups have been pushing legislation for years and this [the use of signature gathering firms] is just another venue they use, and it is legal,” Kenney says.

It’s a First Amendment issue. The U.S. Constitution gives the people the right to organize, so there is virtually no way to regulate groups with alternative interests, Kenney says.

Still, Heumann says he prefers organic signature-gathering. He cites his experience with the successful ballot initiative that banned smoking in most restaurants in 2004.

He says the campaign, which was also backed by the American Heart and Lung Association, was a grassroots-type campaign where individuals volunteered to get signatures. “People came and helped out because they wanted to,” he says.

Heumann says he does not support the Ninth Circuit court’s decision because it opposes the original design of initiatives themselves. For everyday people to get something on the ballot takes time and effort, he says.

VOTERS COMPLAIN OF DECEPTION

The issue of paid signature gatherers is a sticky one for state elections officials. Although the court has asserted their Constitutional rights, these circulators are the root of numerous voter complaints come election time, Kanefield says.

He says the majority of complaints are from people who say they were lied to by petitioners. They claim petitioners told them they were signing to support one thing when in reality they were signing something completely different.

“Most people are upset because they feel misled, or that the petitioners are too aggressive,” Kanefield says. “There have also been complaints that petitioners are not disclosing information on whether or not they are being paid.”

In response to those complaints, the Arizona Secretary of State’s office has supported a new law that will require all petitioners to be truthful, Kanefield says. The law sponsored by Peoria Republican Bob Stump Jr. makes misleading voters about what petitions they are signing a class 1 misdemeanor. Democratic Governor Janet Napolitano signed the bill into law this summer.
= = =

>>Email the editor at aklaw@zoniereport.com.

Soundbytes: Arizona’s war on drugs

PHOENIX — Recent activity along Arizona’s border with Mexico suggests that illegal drug trafficking is starting to reach the same problem status as illegal human trafficking.

Over the past decade, 80 percent of the nation’s methamphetamine production has been shifted to meth labs in Mexico. About 90 percent of the nation’s drugs come from the same country, and across the same border, says Elizabeth Kempshall, special agent in charge of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration’s Phoenix office.

Kempshall, 45, came to the Valley last fall from Houston. She has spent her entire 24-year career with the DEA as an undercover agent and administrator.

---

---

INTERACTIVES

Elizabeth Kempshall, Arizona’s top DEA agent, speaks out on:

• Her drug-busting job

• Meth

• Steroids

• Online “pill mills”

---

---

TZR recently caught up to Kempshall in her office and at a federal law enforcement shooting range near Interstate 17 and Carefree Highway north of Phoenix. [For the full story on Kempshall, her personal background, and what she intends to do about drugs in Arizona in the future, pick up a copy of the March 2008 issue of PHOENIX magazine.]

Her office has resources spread throughout the state, including Nogales, Yuma, Sierra Vista, Tucson, Phoenix and Flagstaff. She also has cooperation from local law enforcement agencies and state and federal prosecutors.

“Go on the offensive. Don’t go on the defense and wait for drugs to come across the border,” she says. “Because if I stay defensive, I’m going to miss drugs.”

Kempshall says the agency is rolling out a new public education campaign about steroids this spring in Phoenix, among other major U.S. cities. Two new tactical teams based in Tucson and Phoenix will try to infiltrate the illegal pharmaceutical industry on the Web.

But for meth, Kempshall says cooperation from the Mexican authorities is crucial. That’s because the majority of meth coming across Arizona’s border into the U.S. is being made and often shipped by the same groups behind drug and marijuana trafficking.

“Our fight against meth has been true law enforcement success, and for DEA in particular,” she says during a break from the firing line. “We’ve redirected what’s occuring in the meth business.”

Don’t be misled by the idea that enforcement has merely made meth an American import rather than ending the meth problem, Kempshall says. Now meth manufacturers have to make it across the border instead of making the drug in rural areas of the U.S. and shipping it throughout the region.

“If we can make it more difficult (to transport), then we can cost them more money,” Kempshall says. “And they’re in this for the money… . They have to go through that fatal funnel. I view that as a success story.”

= = =

>>Email the editor at aklaw@zoniereport.com.

Soundbytes: Arizona’s new immigration law

PHOENIX — He’s a native Arizonan and heir to American entrepreneurism as a grandchild of Carl’s Jr. founder Carl Karcher.

But these days, there are moments where Jason LeVecke finds himself spending as much time fighting a new state law for businesses as he does running 56 restaurant franchises covering burgers, pizza and Mexican food.

The law? A bill called “Employer Sanctions” which Mesa Republican Russell Pearce drove through the state Legislature earlier this year in an effort to keep illegal immigrants out of Arizona.

The legislation calls for fines — and ultimately the loss of a business license — for those businesses who “knowingly” hire illegal immigrants. It allows people to file complaints against businesses they suspect knowingly hired illegal immigrants, which are in turn investigated by county attorneys (whose boss, Andrew Thomas, has positioned himself as a vocal advocate for strict immigration enforcement.)

LeVecke says he struggles to make sense of the law. He says it leaves a lot of room for abuse through people who would see a business fail or competitors who would like to corner a market.

He also says its punishment is too severe and could have a chilling effect on encouraging small business entrepreneurship in Arizona.

LeVecke, a Marine on inactive duty, is fighting on two fronts. He is the brains and braun behind a group called Arizona Employers for Immigration Reform and a vocal supporter of Wake Up Arizona!, a campaign launched by several local business elite to derail Pearce’s law.

The new law, which takes effect Jan. 1, has “turned free enterprise on its head,” LeVecke tells TZR.

“Nobody who could be for this law — if they truly understood its consequences — could truly call themselves a Republican,” LeVecke says.

The problem, he adds, is the “knowingly” clause. he says that’s the part that is open to abuse. The correct punishment, he says, should focus on the cash-only economy of landscaping firms, for example.

“That’s exactly what should have been passed,” he says. “It will incentivize people to be legitimate employers and pay their taxes. Otherwise, it will be absolutely counter-productive.”

= = =

Part II: The lawman

Russell Pearce
State legislator, R-Mesa

PHOENIX — He’s a fifth-generation Arizonan who, if it were up to him, would happily have his caricature colored in sepia tones.

Russell Pearce brings an Old West, get-r-done approach to politics. His style help pass the state’s employer sanctions law earlier this year. It survived a legal challenge before U.S. District Court Judge Neil Wake in Phoenix.

Pearce says that by pushing the new law, he was just doing his civic duty. He says it only adds teeth to existing laws that legitimate employers have been following for years.

He downplayed fears raised by LeVecke and others, saying participating businesses have nothing to worry about.

“Could it be tougher? Absolutely, because the standard is ‘knowingly,’” Pearce told TZR recently. “Nobody is in trouble for making a mistake or accidentally. You’ve got to have knowingly or intentionally violated the law. And it’s been the federal law since 1986. So it’s not like, ‘Wow, new law.’ We’ve given you 20 years to comply. Maybe it’s time you finally start complying.”

Pearce, 60, says it is only one solution to Arizona’s illegal immigration woes. He says that by discouraging shady employers from hiring, less jobs will be available. With less jobs, fewer illegal immigrants will try to enter Arizona.

Supporters say its a bold plan other states should follow. Critics say it could lead to a patchwork of laws around the U.S., have a negative impact on the nation’s economy and strain law enforcement resources, which are already short-handed in the pursuit of “legal” criminals.

Still, one thing everyone does agree on is this: It’s the toughest immigration law in the nation.

That suits Pearce just fine. The Mesa Republican began his career as a Maricopa County sheriff’s deputy and rose to the chief deputy post under current sheriff Joe Arpaio. During that time, a finger on his left hand was shot off during a struggle with an illegal immigrant.

He left to run the Arizona Motor Vehicle Department, where he privatized one-third of its services, added online service and built new locations. He was fired after he helped a Tucson lawmaker fix a constituent’s DUI.

Now he represents Mesa in the Legislature and has won support from conservatives like Matt Salmon and Don Goldwater for his stance on illegal immigration.

= = =

>>Email the editor at aklaw@zoniereport.com.

Q&A: Mr. Mitchell goes to Washington

[Editor's note: The full version of this story appeared in the February issue of PHOENIX magazine.]

TEMPE — Harry Mitchell, 66, just arrived at his modest Tempe home clad in hiking boots, jeans, and a plaid shirt. He was coming from his grandson’s Pop Warner football game.

This is the guy who beat incumbent J.D. Hayworth — a flashy, Republican sportscaster from Scottsdale — to represent a huge swath of the East Valley in Congress.

Mitchell, a Democrat, is a Tempe legacy. He is a second-generation Phoenician who taught high school government for 28 years and served as councilman, mayor and state senator for Tempe.

TZR spent two hours with Mitchell and boiled the interview down to five questions.

TZR: So how did it feel to beat “the bully”?

HM: “It felt great. As the campaign progressed more and more, I really got more determined…

I really believed that the [Arizona Republic] editorial [calling Hayworth a "bully"] was pretty realistic. And I don’t know if it’s anything special to beat him, but it’s important that when you run any contest or and kind of competition, you want to win.

I never entered this thing to lose. I thought all along we had a great shot at it or I’d have never done it. I think, as I hear from people after the election, I accomplished something bigger than I thought I did.

TZR: When you announced your candidacy, you said you were running because “our basic political system…is broken.” What did you mean by that?

HM: No accountability. There was no oversight. It was just a rubber stamp. Stay the course in Iraq. We havd no-bid contracts, we had earmarks. Everything looked like people were using their influence for their friends and their family and their business acquaintances.

TZR: Hayworth was a 12-year incumbent in a district where Republican voters outnumbered Democrats 3-2. How did you beat this guy?

HM: I think elections like this are like job reviews or performance reviews. How’s he done? He got out of touch with his district.

I think there was a pretty clear-cut distinction on the major issues we talked about, and he didn’t want to talk about them. When he did want to talk about [illegal] immigration, for example, he had a very different view than what I did and what I believed the district had. And I think I was right. [Pundits have agreed with Mitchell, saying Hayworth's "get tough" stance on illegal immigrants actually drove voters toward Mitchell.]

For him to say the whole problem was we have to beef up the border and keep people from coming over here — he never did address the root cause of this problem, which is economics. There is work over here and there are workers over there, and we need to figure out a way to match them.

TZR: What stance will you take on Iraq?

HM: I don’t have a specific plan. But I think Congress abdicated its position. It has a constitutional duty for oversight, to ask questions. The president, Congress and Iraqi officials will have to come up with something.

If the President had a plan like that, he never let people know about it. The military did their job. When they came in, they destroyed the Iraqi army, they captured Saddam Hussein. But they forgot to do the political part, the diplomatic part. Once you get rid of the army and the dictator, how do you bring about the peace? [Mitchell said he will support the results of a bipartisan study led by former Secretary of Sate James Baker and former lawmaker Lee Hamilton.]

TZR: Got any good anecdotes from the campaign trail?

HM: Hmm…Oh yeah. I was walking from my car in downtown Tempe — near Z Tejas [bar and grill] — when a guy stopped me and asked, “Are you Harry Mitchell?” [Mitchell has a 35-foot-tall statue named after him in front of city hall. Indeed, Mitchell's so well-known in Tempe that it's like playing Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon.]

I told him, “Yes I am.”

He said, “Just be honest, will ya?”

It really hit me because more than one person has said that to me. People are telling me that. What kind of perception would they have [of Congress] if we actually sat down and had a long discussion about what’s going on in Washington?

= = =

>>Email the editor at aklaw@zoniereport.com.