Category Archives: Arizona

Fund Planned Parenthood, You Anti-Feminist Woman Hater!

Dr. Ben Carson: Current Border Fence ‘Certainly Wouldn’t Keep Me Out’

NACO, Arizona — As a motorcade carrying GOP presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson down to a service road behind part of the border fence that was built here, there were no Border Patrol agents in sight.

The fence—which local law enforcement from the Cochise County sheriff’s office confirms could easily be cut through with a blow-torch, something illegal aliens do quite frequently—ends a few miles up the road.

“This is a nice small impediment that certainly wouldn’t keep anybody out,” Carson told reporters as both Cochise County Sheriff Mark Dannels and Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu and several local deputies and ranchers showed Carson, his wife Candy, his staff and a handful of media around. “You need to have agents. This [a fence] will slow them down, agents will stop them. A wall or a fence is a good thing, but not in isolation.”

Dannels, speaking to Carson and the group about 10 minutes after arriving at the border, explained “we haven’t seen an agent all the way down here—and they knew we were coming today.”

“Not a single one,” rancher John Ladd, on which whose property the border tour took place, added.

It wasn’t until after the whole group was out here for half an hour that a handful of Border Patrol vehicles—seemingly coming out in response to a large motorcade coalescing on the border—showed up. In that timeframe, an illegal alien or drug smuggler could have cut through the fence and been well into one of the ranchers’ properties here on their way to freedom.

The fence that’s there—which agents explained illegal aliens cut through with blow torches while other gaps and holes exist throughout, while showing one such hole in the fence that’s since been patched over with a few rungs of barbed wire—“certainly wouldn’t keep me out” Carson added. When one reporter asked if Carson could scale either the 10-foot fence, or the 14-foot fence—there are areas where both types of fences are interspersed—Carson said he definitely could do it.

“It’d be a piece of cake,” he replied.

Carson said if he were trying to sneak into America illegally he’d throw a rope with a hook on it onto the top rung of the 14-foot fence “and climb up” and over into the United States.

“All you have to do is take a rope with a hook on it and hook it on that bar up there and climb up,” Carson said. “It’s no big deal.”

“I thought it would be more of an impediment than this,” Carson said when asked what he expected versus what he was seeing.

The barbed wire in the hole in the fence cut through previously with a torch was so ineffective a patch that two of the news photographers accompanying the Carson-led delegation to the border actually hopped through it to the other side to take photographs of the group. They were technically still in America because the fence doesn’t begin until three feet or so into this country, Sheriff Dannels informed the group, joking that he was “keeping on eye” on the photographers to make sure they didn’t accidentally enter Mexico a few steps away.

Carson said he wants to build a wall but doesn’t think that’s the only thing that should happen. He wants more people patrolling from the Border Patrol and the military, and tons of technology to back them up.

“I think there are ways to have physical barriers like this, but people are smart,” Carson said. “Given time and isolation, they will manage to get through that. But they will have a much harder time getting through it if you have other people trying to stop them from getting through.”

“I think the border wall is a good start,” Carson added. “But in and of itself it’s not going to be that effective. It’s going to require human beings to be involved and we have human beings who can do this job.”

“How easy would it be just to have a few drones flying through here?” Carson asked Dannels.

“A fence is only as good as the people behind it, and that’s the key,” Dannels replied. “You can put in all the infrastructure you want but you need good people behind it.

Ladd explained to Carson that since his ranch doesn’t have “severe terrain,” it makes it easy for illegal aliens, international criminals and drug smugglers to sneak through his property to the highway three miles away. “That’s why we’re so busy,” Ladd said. “The trails in the low spots, the cameras can’t see.

Ladd noted that while there is a radar system set up by Border Patrol at the highway, it’s only as good as its operator. And the Border Patrol frequently, nearly daily, rotates whoever is operating it—so sometimes the most talented operators of the radar system aren’t on that job—and people slip through undetected frequently.

“Sounds like bureaucrats in charge,” Carson replied to that comment from Ladd.

Carson’s trip to the border here on Wednesday came after an earlier helicopter tour in Pinal County–where 70 miles inside the border, Babeu explained, the drug cartels run free and the United States does not have operational control of American territory. Breitbart News accompanied Carson to the border and on the helicopter tour; more reporting from this trip and the tour are forthcoming, including an exclusive with Carson on how he’d secure the border.

Lite Rail a Trainwreck, Derails Rationale for Prop 104

The contention that light rail is a good investment because “it serves nearly as many people as SR 51” is a ludicrous distortion of reality.

Even if we allow for the absurd comparison of the ridership for the ENTIRE light rail system to be compared with this single freeway we can observe that SR 51 carries over 150,000 vehicles per day at its busiest point near the junction with I-10 to over 80,000 at its least busy point near the outer loop. This is 100 percent more than the  touted 43,000 riders per day for all light rail routes combined.

Light rail is, and forever will be, a tiny contributor to the region’s mobility. Its less than 100 million passenger miles per year pales in comparison to the Phoenix freeways’ 11 billion vehicle miles of travel and the street system’s 30 billion vehicle miles of travel. Yet, Prop 104’s allocation of funds plans to spend only 7 percent of the revenues on roads–3 percent to add lanes and 4 percent to remove lanes to make way for bike paths, pedestrians, and light rail trains.

In contrast, Prop 104 plans to spend 40 percent of the revenues on a light rail system that will accommodate only three-tenths of one-percent of travel. This is an unbalanced allocation that compels the 99 percent who drive to heavily subsidize the less than 1 percent who use rail transit. Lest we think that these subsidies to light rail are aimed at helping the poor, Valley Metro boasts that rail is attracting more higher income riders.

Here’s the deal: if Prop 104 passes or if it voted down–either way–99 percent of travel in the city will continue to take place in automobiles. Light rail will play an insignificant role in how people move about the community. Is this insignificant impact worth taking on all the burdens of deficits, debt, and higher taxes that Prop 104 will impose?

John Semmens, retired transportation economist
Chandler

Dark Money

By The Goldwater Institute

The proponents of mandatory reporting of private civic activities have won a major marketing victory by the widespread use of the phrase, “dark money.”  As one commentator put it, “Dark money.  The name itself carries ominous undertones, undertones that critics of this relatively new campaign-finance phenomenon claim reflect a genuine threat to democracy.”[x]  But the term is misleading.  “Dark money” would be more aptly referred to by what those who find free speech objectionable actually support – mandated government disclosure.  The use of such terms is intended to cast suspicion on those who contribute to various civic causes so the debate revolves around ad hominem attacks rather than engaging on the issues.

So, what is “dark money”?  It conjures images of shady political operatives greasing the palms of politicians in dark, smoked-filled rooms.  But does it also apply to traditional political activities, like you and your neighbor contributing your time and money to civic and social activities that you support?  And is it really a threat to democracy, or are those who seek to silence the voice of opposition and limit speech the real threats?

“Dark money” generally refers to funds spent for political activities by businesses, unions, nonprofit organizations, and individuals who are not required by law to disclose the identities of their donors.  Depending on where supporters of government disclosure draw the inherently arbitrary line, dark money could refer to donations made to the American Civil Liberties Union (“ACLU”) or to your local church or soup kitchen.

As a general matter, all spending that calls for the election or defeat of a political candidate or constitutes “electioneering communications” involves some level of disclosure to the government.  In fact, there are more disclosure obligations on the books today than at any other time in our nation’s history.[xi]  Nevertheless, some supporters of government disclosure claim that current laws do not go far enough.  They assert that certain charitable and social welfare organizations, including those organized under § 501(c) of the federal tax code, should be forced to disclose the identities of their individual donors when those organizations engage in political activity, even if that is not their primary function.[xii]

Those calling for the elimination of “dark money” are thus attempting to dramatically extend the reach of government-mandated disclosure to a wide variety of organizations, activities, and communications.

Advocates for expanded disclosure call for such dramatic and far-reaching regulations despite the fact that “dark money” is not a pervasive element in American politics. Some government disclosure advocates claim that so-called “dark money” expenditures constitute a significant portion of political spending in the United States.[xiii]  But the characterization is inaccurate.  In the 2014 election cycle, the Federal Elections Commission reported approximately $5.9 billion in total spending on federal elections.[xiv]  Of that $5.9 billion, roughly $173 million came from groups that are not required by law to disclose donors.[xv]  This represents a mere 2.9 percent of all spending on federal elections – hardly a significant portion.  In fact, this figure represents a decline from the 2012 election cycle, where such expenditures amounted to 4.4 percent of spending on federal races.[xvi]  As the Center for Competitive Politics observed from the 2012 election cycle, “Nearly all of the organizations that financed such independent expenditures . . . were well-known entities, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the League of Conservation Voters, the National Rifle Association, Planned Parenthood, the National Association of Realtors, the National Federation of Independent Business, NARAL Pro-Choice America, and the Humane Society.”[xvii]  As a result, there is no secret as to what causes and issues such groups support.

Under existing campaign finance laws, the identities of these groups must be revealed when making direct contributions to candidates or political parties or engaging in other electioneering communications.  Additionally, donor identities must be disclosed when they specifically earmark their donations to nonprofit organizations to be used for electioneering communications.  Those types of donations can hardly be characterized as “dark money” in need of further regulation when under existing disclosure rules, anyone can see that the NRA contributed to Candidate X and Planned Parenthood contributed to Candidate Y.  The positions of those organizations are well known.  Characterizing those expenditures as “dark money” is, therefore, disingenuous.  But forcing further disclosure of donor identities is at best unnecessary, as donors may contribute to organizations to support the overall mission rather than any specific political candidate.  Their donations are intended to support certain issues, not politicians.

Claims that “dark money” is distorting American politics are even more tenuous when leveled at 501(c)(3)s, considering these nonprofit organizations are prohibited from participating in any partisan political activity.

Casino Gambling in Arizona Claims More Victims

Gambling and casinos have caused a lot of problems in Arizona and every other state where they are legal. Many have succumbed to gambling addiction, stolen from their employers and broken up their families and marriages. The sad story that follows isn’t the first in Arizona and it won’t be the last — not as long as we have legalized gambling. Some say, “oh but the money builds roads and schools.” The bottom line? It’s ill-gotten gain off the backs of shattered lives and broken families. This is a dark day for a culture in decline.

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich announced the sentencing of Larry Dahl, a former Phoenix attorney. Dahl was sentenced to 3.25 years in prison and seven years supervised probation after defrauding his former clients of $2,940,439.

“The defendant stole millions of dollars from his clients to fuel a gambling addiction,” said Attorney General Mark Brnovich. “Dahl was in a position of trust and he abused that trust. The Attorney General’s Office takes these cases very seriously.”

In addition to his prison sentence, the Honorable Jay Adleman ordered Dahl to pay $2,940,439 to the former clients he defrauded. In 2013, Dahl was indicted on 20 felony counts accused of embezzling money from client funds for nearly 5 years, from January 2001 to January 2005. Over that time period, Dahl gambled the $2,940,439 he had stolen at various casinos and lost the entire sum.

Dahl embezzled client funds directly from their interest-bearing money market accounts by writing checks payable to himself. To perpetuate this scheme, Dahl frequently transferred money between 46 client money market accounts to create the illusion of accurate individual account balances.

On June 25, 2015, Dahl pled guilty to three felony offenses: Fraudulent Schemes and Artifices, Money Laundering and Theft.

Mr. Dahl was disbarred in 2006.

Assistant Attorney General Brett Harames prosecuted this case.

Government Waste Watchdog Cites Franks and Salmon for Serving the People with Distinction

(Washington, D.C.) – Today, the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW) applauded Reps. Trent Franks and Matt Salmon (R-Ariz.) for their relentless and unwavering support of the fiscal interests of American taxpayers while serving in Congress.  Reps. Franks and Salmon were two of the 17 lawmakers to earn a perfect score of 100 percent in CCAGW’s 2014 Congressional Ratings, making them “Taxpayer Super Heroes.”  Since Rep. Franks was elected in 2012, he has a lifetime rating of 95 percent, while Rep. Salmon maintained a 97 percent lifetime rating since his election in 2012.

The report, which CCAGW has issued since 1989, highlights the voting records of all 535 members of Congress.  It identifies members whose impeccable voting records helped protect and save the taxpayers’ money, earning them the honored title of “Taxpayer Super Hero,” while it cites members who consistently voted against the fiscal interest of taxpayers.

CCAGW rates members of both chambers on a 0-100 percent scale.  Members are placed in the following categories: 0-19% Hostile; 20-39% Unfriendly; 40-59% Lukewarm; 60-79% Friendly; 80-99% Taxpayer Hero; and 100% Taxpayer Super Hero.  The 2014 Congressional Ratings scored 85 votes in the House of Representatives and 13 votes in the Senate.

“We applaud and wholeheartedly thank Reps. Franks and Salmon for their hard work on behalf of the taxpayers while serving in Congress,” said CCAGW President Tom Schatz.  “Their courageous votes to cut wasteful spending and make government more accountable should serve as an example to other members, encouraging them to make good on promises to protect the fiscal interests of American taxpayers.”

“We have no doubt that Reps. Franks and Salmon will continue to help lead the effort to end wasteful spending and reduce the growing national debt,” added Schatz.  “Their constituents should be very proud of them.”

Arizona Congressional Democrats Accepted Money from Big Abortion’s King — Planned Parenthood

During the 2014 election cycle, four Democrats accepted campaign cash from Planned Parenthood — the notorious abortion factory under intense national scrutiny for illegal sales of baby parts and alleged fraud.

Current Congressmen Ann Kirkpatrick, Kyrsten Sinema, Raul Grijalva and former Congressman Ron Barber all accepted money from Planned Parenthood last year.

Kirkpatrick received $10,850, the second-highest total of any Democrat House candidate.

Sinema ranked fourth among House Democrats with $10,300 received from Planned Parenthood.

Incumbent Ron Barber, who lost to conservative Martha McSally, held out his hand for $5,566 in Planned Parenthood cash.

And Cong. Grijalva, also head of the largest socialist organization in Congress, grabbed $1,000 from Planned Parenthood.

Concerned Americans are calling for criminal investigations of Planned Parenthood for selling baby parts.

Several states and Congress are debating de-funding Planned Parenthood, a profit-driven abortion factory that receives more than half a billion tax dollars annually.

Several state audits have revealed that Planned Parenthood makes a regular habit of improperly billing the government for services and products neither requested nor received by citizens.

The late racist Margaret Sanger was instrumental in starting up Planned Parenthood. And a disproportionate number of PP abortion mills are located in minority neighborhoods in Arizona and nationally.

As if that isn’t enough: Planned Parenthood failed to report the rapes of underage girls in Tempe and Colorado, allowing the abusers to continue victimizing young girls. Planned Parenthood is required by law to report the pregnancies of underage girls to legal authorities, but refused to do so in order to maximize profits.

Gov. Ducey arms Arizona National Guard

Governor Doug Ducey today issued an executive order directing the Adjutant General to take actions to enhance and strengthen the safety and security of Arizona National Guard personnel.

The governor’s order, a response to the recent attacks on military recruitment and readiness centers in Chattanooga, Tennessee, authorizes Major General Michael McGuire to:

A. Identify and arm of all appropriately-trained National Guard personnel who he determines reasonably necessary, based upon their duty positions, responsibilities, or locations, to protect themselves and other persons from the threat of deadly physical force;

B. Institute a policy and training requirements that permit Guardsmen to carry personally-owned handguns while on duty at a secured facility or military instillation, in lieu of a government-issued handgun, as specified by the Adjutant General. This policy should allow Guard personnel to carry these handguns on unsecured facilities while on duty if a government-issued handgun is not reasonably accessible.

C. Consult with the Director of the Arizona Department of Public Safety to review the security measures and protocols in place at Arizona National Guard facilities, including without limitation recruiting offices, and make any recommendations necessary to further protect Soldiers, Airmen, and the public against attacks on military personnel.

“What happened in Chattanooga was shocking and saddening, and it took the lives of five American servicemen,” said Governor Ducey. “With the number of tragic shootings that have occurred on military installations in recent years, it’s imperative that our soldiers and airmen – people who put their lives on the line every day to protect our state and nation – have at least the same level of self-defense as the citizens they’re fighting for. We’re committed to doing whatever is reasonably necessary to ensure the safety and security of these men and women, and of all Arizonans.”

“The safety and security of our Soldiers, Airmen and civilian employees is our highest priority,” said Maj. Gen. Michael McGuire, the Adjutant General, Arizona National Guard. “We are developing a plan that fulfills Governor Ducey’s executive order and best protects our service members and our fellow Arizonans.”

At least eight other governors have issued a similar order, with several others ramping up efforts to increase the safety and security of military personnel in their states.

The complete executive order can be viewed, here.

State Leaders Put Planned Parenthood on Notice

In light of recent allegations of unlawful practices and procedures being performed by Planned Parenthood, Governor Doug Ducey today directed the Arizona Department of Health Services to conduct a thorough review of current law and immediately promulgate emergency rules designed to prohibit the illegal sale of any tissue from an unborn child. The governor also issued this statement:

“The footage released by The Center for Medical Progress regarding the alleged sale and trafficking of aborted fetal tissue and body parts by Planned Parenthood is horrifying and has no place in a civilized society.  I am calling on the Department of Health Services to conduct a thorough review of the law and immediately promulgate emergency rules designed to prohibit the illegal sale of any tissue from an unborn child.  This is consistent with federal law and will deter action that we all agree is abhorrent.  Further, I have instructed ADHS to provide any and all assistance required to Attorney General Brnovich in any efforts conducted by his office.”

###

Center for Arizona Policy President Cathi Herrod lauded the governor and attorney general for their swift responses:

“Today, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey and Attorney General Mark Brnovich both publicly responded to the shocking undercover video exposing the horrifying practices of the country’s largest abortion provider.

The video, released last week, captures Planned Parenthood’s senior medical director discussing how their doctors can manipulate an abortion in order to preserve vital organs of preborn children for medical experimentation and possibly sale. Troublingly, the state of Arizona is referenced multiple times in the unedited version of the video as a potential state in which to carry out these abhorrent transactions.

We appreciate and are thankful for Governor Ducey and Attorney General Brnovich taking steps to protect preborn children and ensure baby tissue is not a commodity for sale in our state.”

###

AG Mark Brnovich said:

“Like many others I was deeply disturbed by a recently released video that may show a Planned Parenthood executive discussing profiteering on the sale of tissue from aborted children.  As prosecutors, it is critical for this office not to rush to immediate judgment or determinations before facts can be established.  While we cannot comment on the status of any possible investigation, this type of allegation is something we take very seriously.”

Arizona Senator Kelli Ward Running for U.S. Senate

UPDATE: Dr. Kelli Ward is bravely taking on the deeply entrenched Senator McCain in next year’s Republican Primary. Today she announced:

 “I’m running for the U.S. Senate to give you a real choice! Arizonans deserve a Senator who will fight for their values, and not just go along with the Beltway crowd.”

***

Lake Havasu City, AZ – State Senator Kelli Ward will announce her future political plans in her hometown of Lake Havasu City this Tuesday, July 14th, at Shugrue’s Bridgeview Room, 1425 McCulloch Blvd, Lake Havasu City, AZ 86403. The event will begin at 5:00 PM AST.

Dr. was first elected to the Arizona State Senate in 2012 and re-elected in 2014. She is standing tall on crucial issues such as border security, economic freedom, Second Amendment rights, and healthcare freedom. She has formed an exploratory committee and is considering a primary challenge to Republican Senator John McCain, who is losing popularity for his further distancing from the GOP’s base. McCain’s supporters are already in full and vicious attack mode against Dr. Ward, indicating his contempt for any would-be challenger.

Next year McCain really needs a voter-induced retirement.