Terry Goddard is a good man. He was a popular and effective Phoenix mayor, and after failing to achieve the governor's office in the '90s came back to become the best attorney general in the state's history. Among his top achievements has been going after the wire transfer companies that are enabling the smuggling of people, drugs and guns. He's also knocked off some of the rough edges he was said to possess as mayor and, I would assume, collected lots of political IOUs. For all these reasons, I wonder if he should run for governor.
A Rasmussen poll showed Democrat Goddard only 9 points ahead of Gov. Jan Brewer and in virtually tied with Treasurer Dean Martin, his likely Republican opponents. Another survey indicated Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio as a huge favorite of Republican voters and, according to the Info Center, leading Goddard by 12 percentage points. It's unclear whether the Badged Ego will run.
This seems like madness, or, if the polls are accurate, the pulse of a madhouse. The Republicans have wrecked Arizona through their policies and set it on a collision course with a very nasty future. The party's cruel, spiteful behavior is epitomized by Arpaio and detailed in the brutal budget cuts of the Kookocracy Legislature. Brewer and Martin are empty suits. Arpaio probably won't run because the exposure of a statewide race might finally cause the mask to slip and leave him exposed as the calculating bully he is. Yet why would any of these clowns even be in contention against Goddard, a man of genuine accomplishments and a centrist one would hope represents the best of my home state and the hope for its future?
Unfortunately, the polls might be right. The next election cycle will not be kind to Democrats. This is not only because of the historic swing against the party in national power, but because of the spineless and feckless governance of today's Democrats. President Obama has been compromised by the powers of the status quo. Congress can't deliver the two things most Americans want: a public option and a ban on insurance companies denying coverage for pre-existing conditions. Unemployment is in crisis, and yet America can't do public works any more, much less something effective and future-based such as high-speed rail. One result will be the "enthusiasm gap," where disillusioned Dems and especially young voters from 2008 stay home, while the tea baggers and other "conservatives" are animated with a fanatical desire to regain power.
This trend will likely be magnified in Arizona, where turnout is low, particularly among moderate and liberal voters, particularly among the Mexican-American citizens who have been caught up in the racist dragnet of the Kookocracy. The mega-church fundamentalists, Mormons, gun enthusiasts, tea partiers and assorted other "conservative" constituencies turn out reliably. So, too, do the older white voters that are the last major bastion of the GOP and found in abundance in Arizona. The hard right has an extensive infrastructure, epitomized by the well-funded "Goldwater" Institute. The center and left have nothing to compare.
We still don't know if the election of Democratic members of Congress such as Harry Mitchell was an anti-Bush fluke or a sign of the long-awaited moderating of Arizona politics caused by in-migration. In sad fact, migration has driven Arizona politics harder and harder to the right for half a century. Even Barry Goldwater couldn't win a GOP primary now. It's part of what writer Bill Bishop calls "the big sort," where people have been moving to places where they find others like themselves. It's a dolorous development for American democracy, yet is on prime display in Arizona and metro Phoenix. Note the new viability of J.D. Hayworth (a right-winger who I can't get too worked up against; he was one of only two office-holders to wish me well during my hospitalization a few years ago).
Goddard will have to overcome all these obstacles. A more daunting one is that the Kookocracy always seems to elude accountability for the disastrous results of its policies and values. Based on the economy, school quality, the environment, transportation and other infrastructure, preparedness for a future of climate change and higher energy costs, ole-boy backscratching, even sense of fair play, the Republicans should be routed in the next election. Yet it hasn't happened so far. Gilbert votes. Maryvale doesn't. Willo, Story and Roosevelt — even Tucson — don't have enough voters to overcome the right-wing tilt elsewhere. The hopeful side of me thinks if the Kookocracy gets full power and does all its cherished work — hell, shut down one or two universities! — then the apathetic majority of Arizona voters would throw them out. Yet there is always a governor forced to play adult and moderate, prevent implementation of "the Full Kook." Still, the extreme right remains in charge in the Legislature, a cancer abetted by the Real Estate Industrial Complex, apolitical but liking the paralysis and "property rights."
Arizona's governor is constitutionally weak. The Legislature has the power, and until it is fundamentally remade by voters into a more pragmatic, sane and 21st century-facing body, not much progress can be made. This was even shown in the seeming heady years of Gov. Janet Napolitano. Now most of her accomplishments have been rolled back or stymied (n.b. President Obama and Democratic Congress), and these were small-time because of the need to play constant defense against the Legislature. Indeed, Napolitano wouldn't have been narrowly elected in the first place if not for the 2001 economic collapse and her willingness to do nothing to address land use, water and tax revenues.
Is this the job Terry Goddard wants?
Of course there is a poignant rhyme of history at work. Goddard's father, Sam, was governor in the mid-1960s (I still have a Goddard button and fondly remember the "Go Goddard" ads with the roadrunner). Sam Goddard championed a forward-leaning proposal to raise the state debt limit that would have positioned Arizona for the growth to come, especially to leverage its universities. He signed a bill banning discrimination, quite revolutionary for Arizona, and made significant progress working toward the Central Arizona Project. But he faced a media-savvy conservative — and as I recall some penny-ante Democratic corruption of which he was not a part — and became the last sitting Arizona chief executive to be defeated for re-election. (In his last years, a true elder statesman but largely forgotten amid the Midwestern migration, he sometimes had lunch at Portland's in Midtown). Sam Goddard was largely right in his time about leading the state, and he was rejected.
If Terry Goddard does run, it will be a defining moment for Arizona. You've seen the results of Kooks in power. Want more of the same, only worse? And for all of you who criticize me for being too hard on poor littl' Phoenix, for abandoning the fight and leaving town (not true, actually), for being depressing with all these damned facts and not being more "upbeat." Well, prove me wrong. Show Arizona does have a quality future, not only with Gov. Terry Goddard, but with a Democratic Legislature.
Arizona needs Mr. Talton’s stentorian voice calling to the oars, now more than ever. As GPEC’s Barry Broome put it in a recent article (unfavorably) comparing Arizona’s economy with Michigan’s:
“As for Arizona, Broome said, it can diversify with a lot of work. “It is one thing to say you are going to diversify,” he said. “It’s another thing to say you are going to create from 100,000 to 150,000 new jobs in an industry you don’t currently have much of a presence in. That is hard to do.”
https://www.azcentral.com/business/articles/2009/11/25/20091125biz-michigan1125.html
This is a really fine article, by the way; but note that Arizona’s comparatively low unemployment rate is apparently an illusion, according to Dennis Hoffman, an economics professor at the W.P. Carey School of Business at ASU:
https://www.statepress.com/node/9557
As for Mr. Talton, my understanding is that he didn’t quit, he was run out of town on a rail. (More accurately, he was given a choice between unemployment or a new position as a journalistic dog-food taster, and opted for greener pastures.)
If I had the formula for dethroning the Kookacracy in the Arizona Legislature, I’d be working on implementation already. I hope someone figures it out.
AZ is so gerrymandered that a sane legislature seems impossible unless the “independent” redistricting commission is reformed. The Kooks would be the ones to create such a reform so it won’t happen.
Steve, you seem to recognize the impossibility of removing the Kooks from the Legislature. I don’t think it can be done. Think about it: The Kooks have one of their own in the governor’s chair, they dominate the Legislature and they actually gained seats in the last election. Given how the Kooks have wrecked Arizona over the last 10-15 years, don’t you think the voters would have tossed the Kooks out of the State House and chosen new senators and representatives? We can only dream.
Unless you are referring to a much older, now defunct Phoenix restaurant by the same name, my only point of contention with this piece would be that Portland’s is most definitely not located in Midtown. And, it isn’t considered to be by a fairly vast consensus. Portland’s, located on the corner of Central Ave and Portland is, well, Downtown.
Yes, total stickler for local geography here. However, as a hopeful native who has been an eager witness to the perpetually unfinished and glacial evolution of Central Phoenix ‘hoods in recent decades, I feel those in-the-know need to make a better point to speak up whenever possible to correct information no matter how meagerly inaccurate. These sentiments are less directed toward you, and more toward the countless locals who are still cringingly ignorant to the geographic characteristics of this city. Unknowingly, they read and absorb such otherwise minuscule blurbs, only to continue the unfortunate cycle of spreading and perpetuating such inaccuracies.
Though I’m obviously speaking to the choir in many regards, if anything, proper urban geography helps create explicit identities and a better sense of place for the respective areas. In the long-run it’s also a major contributing factor in common civic pride. This is all less tangible than a new collection of coffee shops or sports stadiums, I know, but no less as crucial. As far as gangly Phoenix is concerned, any little morsel of identity helps, whether you live in Alvarado or Arcadia, Midtown or Downtown.
In any event, this is just a comment much too long, from a Phoenix geek who likes things in their rightful place. As an active member of the Central Phoenix community, I cannot tell you how often this arguably trivial topic surfaces, all ending in a consensus that more needs to be done in regard to solidifying designations of the area’s respective neighborhoods and districts.
Thanks for indulging, if only for a moment.
Justin,
I am in total agreement with the spirit of your post. But traditionally and historically, downtown ran from the Southern Pacific tracks to Fillmore Street, and 7th to 7th. And I am a traditionalist, despite City Hall’s efforts to move the downtown planning area north to McDowell.
Until the City of Phoenix defines the boundaries of this area, what constitutes Downtown will remain up for debate. However, it appears that Mr. Talton is correct. The real-estate blog RealEstateConfluence.com features a description of Uptown, Midtown and Downtown Phoenix, and lists the geographic boundaries of each. I’ve pasted it below. Let the debate continue!
https://realestateconfluence.com/phoenix-uptown-midtown-downtown/
Steve M. wrote:
“If I had the formula for dethroning the Kookacracy in the Arizona Legislature, I’d be working on implementation already. I hope someone figures it out.”
Well, right off the top of my head, I would offer, not a formula, but a couple of observations.
First, a republic such as ours contains a number of bottlenecks or concentrations of power, which offer leverage to those seeking to advance their own agendas at the expense of the broader legislative body; of these the Appropriations Committee of any major legislative body is one of the most important, for without funding, any legislative initiative passed by the wider body is effectively neutered.
There is a name, in Arizona’s state legislature, which arises repeatedly in regard to obstructive, anti-democratic (small “d”) efforts. This individual simultaneously holds the positions of:
(A) Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee
(i) Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Education and Natural Resources
(ii) Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Health and Welfare
(iii) Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation and Criminal Justice
He is also an influential member of the Finance and the Judiciary committees.
That individual is Russell Pearce.
https://www.azleg.gov/MembersPage.asp?Member_ID=109&Legislature=49&Session_ID=87
Now, it is already clear that some sense of the importance of this concentration of power has been recognized: I refer to rumors that Pearce is to be suggested to head the Arizona Department of Public Safety.
Whether this is a deal with the devil — if true– is another question, though I suggest that it is, insofar as Pearce can push through his agenda beforehand and/or influence the identity of both his successor and other committee members.
What is clear is that here is a lone individual who, by virtue of his special position, has inordinate influence over the affairs of the state. He is not the only such individual, but he is illustrative of the point I am attempting to make.
If the resources of the opposition (both Democrat and Republican)are to be concentrated in an assault on the Kookocracy, here is a deserving target. The question then becomes one of, what is the best strategy to take?
The censure of Democrats is scarcely a tactic to divide and conquer; and surely that must be the broad outline of the offensive. Not necessarily to substitute a member of the legislative minority (which I think is an unrealistic hope at this stage), but to undermine Pearce while encouraging more progressive elements of his own caucus to take his place.
How do you undermine a Russell Pearce?
You do not do so by attacking, in public, his bona fides as a Kookocrat from a Democratic viewpoint: such attacks only serve to rally the faithful around the one attacked, and draw attention to his meritorious service to the cause of Kookocracy.
Instead, you must attack him on the issues that matter to his popular followers. One could write a monograph on this subject, but I encapsulate my suggestion in one word: dig!
Behind the scenes, of course, is another matter. Everyone in the legislature, even members of his own party, know his role as a doctinaire obstructionist. The key, there, is to build alliances based not on the flag one flies, but on an understanding of the issues and challenges facing Arizona.
Second, I recently saw this “Quick Hit” by Linda Valdez on the op-ed page of the Arizona Republic (Monday, November 30th, 2009):
“According to a recent release from the Immigration Policy Center [titled] “New Americans” (naturalized citizens or their U.S. born kids), [these] made up 10.6 percent of all registered voters in Arizona in 2006. Latinos made up 11.7 percent of voters in 2008. Hmmm…I wonder how they feel about the political party with a reputation for immigration bashing?” (Note that the two years are not identical: ’06 vs. ’08.)
If this does not suggest a possible strategy, then I don’t know what will. The possibility that Pearce and his fellow Kookocrats, have already accurately understood the political currents, and have based a counter-strategy on the need to deny this new component of the electorate (or potential component!) to Democrats and their allies, does not seem to have occurred to anyone, at least not in observations to be found in print. Pearce wears his ridiculous “flag-shirts” and everyone treats him as though his “patriotism” were genuine rather than the last refuge of a partisan scoundrel.
If this makes no sense to you fine ladies and gentlemen of the Arizona Democratic Party, I suggest that you lay yourselves down upon a copy of the Marquis de Queensbury’s rule book and have a quiet nap.
If the Dems want to make some headway in AZ they need to do something which has become completely unheard of in modern US politics – run as an actual party. State wide ads describing the disaster the GOP has been as leadership and how they can’t even pass a budget as the party in power. With all the wacko statements and bills there is so much to choose from but don’t make it about every single race. The message should be the GOP is wrecking the state – vote Democratic.
It’s almost as if we’re living inside a revolution where a hated aristocracy was overthrown and “real Americans” have taken over. How else do you account for someone like Terry Goddard running behind know nothings like Dean Martin and Joe Arpaio? The Kookocracy is the result of a political liberation from the trammels of complexity and sobriety.
Obviously, this just didn’t happen overnight. Arizona was predisposed to believe the fairy tale where government is the problem and “free enterprise” is the solution. There are so many problems with this narrative that we could argue for days and not make any converts. The key here is understanding how powerful a simple message is along with the heady certitude that message conveys.
Imagine a Governor Terry Goddard and a legislature that in all probablility remains a kook’s nest. The worst excesses are vetoed but the forward projection of power remains impossible.
It’s the revolution that is the problem because it satisfies a deeply-insinuated belief system. In a nutshell, the revolution tells you that reality is the fault of elites and bureaucrats who are insulated from populist outrage. Only authentic Americans know this because they’ve seen through political correctness, the MSM, and the tax-and-spend Democrats.
The wrecking crew that is the Republican Party keeps winning because their fable is so emotionally satisfying. People want to be right more than they want to learn. Any chance they’ll listen to an eat-your-spinach message?
No.
Excellent posts by Emil and Soleri.
Mr. Talton has (correctly) made the point more than once: with respect to Latino voters, Arizona Democrats must not only “appeal” but must actively organize their registration as voters. Many of these individuals have, not only a natural affinity for the Democratic position on immigration issues, but also friends and relatives who have yet to become citizens.
My (admittedly shallow) understanding of voter registration laws is that registration itself must be non-partisan. However, education campaigns need not be. Here is my suggestion (which should be vetted by a qualified legal department both in its preliminary and final forms):
First, note the districts with large contingents of Latino citizens but low voter registration relative to their numbers.
Next, organize cadres of bi-lingual party activists, primarily composed of low-level Young Democrat staffers and student volunteers, to conduct a public education program in these neighborhoods, door-to-door.
Go to the universities and — often overlooked — especially the community colleges serving large numbers of Latino students. (If you want volunteers, you must seek out those for whom this issue is near to their hearts.) You should organize clubs, conduct events (make them fun to draw in crowds) and awareness groups, with this in mind.
With regard to the neighborhood campaigns, keep organized lists and note receptive persons for ordinary follow-up contacts; in these, stress both your interest and their importance, cement commitments, and, as legally permitted, verify actual steps taken to register.
Also, always be on the lookout for those whose enthusiasm and intelligence marks them as potential additions to your campaign, in activist and leadership roles: use local people to canvass their own neighborhoods whenever possible, because as a known quantity they are more likely to be trusted. In this way, you can grow your education campaign from the ground up without excessive expense, with activists whose genuine loyalty makes them better than any mercenary canvassers.
The method of approach should be simple: We (the AZ Democratic Party) stand for immigrant rights and progressive immigration reforms. Here is a simple (one sheet) explanation, in Spanish and English, describing:
(a) Why the Democrats are the Party of the Latino people in this regard in Arizona;
(b) The practical importance of voting in state and local elections;
(c) How to register to vote in one easy lesson, including nearest locations (make certain this is up to date!).
Keep detailed organizational rolls so that you know who to contact for follow-ups (by telephone or otherwise), and whenever political campaigns and votes are at stake. These are also the basis for grassroots public opinion campaigns to influence legislators and others at critical moments in the evolution of legislative bills.
You should also anticipate that, if you are at all successful, your Republican opponents will seek to undermine you on certain social issues (e.g., the importance of religion to conservatives; abortion and contraception). Study the literature of the enemy and construct simple but sound rebuttals. Seek to compartmentalize these issues (apart from the immigration issue) by stressing the tolerant and diverse nature of the Arizona Democratic Party where these side issues are concerned, while emphasizing Party solidarity on immigration issues.
Note that this latter MUST be substantially real: use all the moral and political suasion at your disposal, as well as any Party discipline you can muster, to enforce a broad regularity on your members in this regard! Aside from corruption, nothing stinks worse than hypocrisy and opportunism where politics is concerned, especially in grassroots organizing. Those who seek to fool the people today sow the seeds of ennui and popular disgust tomorrow.
The Arizona Democratic Party seems to be the Mensheviks to the Republicans’ Bolshevik party: habitually fighting off power hand and foot even when developing demographic trends point their way.
Here’s an illustration from The State Press, “ASU College Republicans Launching Statewide Blog”. Here’s the relevant excerpt where the Democrats are concerned:
“President of Young Democrats at ASU and political science junior RJ Watson said he likes the idea of the College Republicans starting a blog to get out its ideas.
“I think it’s great they’re using social media to get out the frame beyond politics,” he said.
“Watson, however, refused to comment on whether or not his club would use any social media in the future because he said it doesn’t have anything to do with the club’s platform as a Democratic group.”
https://www.statepress.com/node/8772
In fairness to young Mr. Watson, the blame must go to his mentors in the Democratic Party. That said, here is what the article seems to teach about the principles of those mentors:
(1) Politely celebrate the concrete works of your opponents in their attempts to influence public opinion and win recruits and sympathizers;
(2) Draw no conclusions from such works, and especially don’t emulate them! Instead, fiddle around inconsequently and hope for the best, while allowing your opponents to seize the initiative.
“If the Dems want to make some headway in AZ they need to do something which has become completely unheard of in modern US politics – run as an actual party.”
-todd
A very good idea, todd. Sometimes I think Arizona Dems just like being the Washington Generals. At any rate, Arizona Dems think they have to run as Republican-Lite to be elected. Can’t be partisan, you know.
I once had the idea of trying to start a religious war between the fundy Christians and the Mormons. These two groups account for a large part of the Kookocracy base. Many fundy Christians, you see, think Mormonism is some sort of Satanic cult, but still think Mormons are less evil than liberals. Gotta love Arizona politics!