#vote 2012 #tucson #arizona

14, 22, 23: bk.gov/vote:
. here is how I chose for this historic 2012 vote .

no prop114:
. there's no opposition to this constitutional amend'?
what about the judge who agreed that
the thief could sue the victim
for having a dangerous house to break into?
something is missing !
. maybe these lawyers are only as smart
as their constitution?
maybe there is no justice in juries?
did we run out of money for juries?

tucsonweekly.com's 114 (Crime-Victim Liability): No
. Criminals shouldn't be able to sue if they're injured
while committing some kind of crime in your home .
Yet with this current Legislature,
all kinds of things could be turned into "felonies"
—such as, perhaps, a form of political protest.
. this is an over-broad measure
that could have unintended consequences.
no prop115:
. the Police union says this will
make judge selection more political;
the League of Women Voters makes that clear:
. prop 115 gives most of the power of choosing judges
exclusively to the governor and the legislature,
and then keeps them in place for much longer
-- just like the (very contentious) supreme court ... .

tucsonweekly.com's 115 (Judiciary Appointments): No
. conservative lawmakers want to make the judiciary
a more-political operation,
in hopes of installing more of their cronies on the bench.
yes prop#116:
. it has no opposition,
roll-back of an absurd capital assets tax?
I think the idea was that
you could save on biz profit tax by
investing in capital gains like fancier furniture
but if you did that too much
then the property tax still hits you;
now you can do that more .
--. just a guess from spot reading it .

tucsonweekly.com's 116 (Property Tax Assessments): Yes
. the loss to state and local governments
will be relatively minor,
and it could help eliminate a barrier to companies
that might be interested in relocating to Arizona.
yes prop#117:
. limits house appraisal increases .
. all of the opposition is deluded:
it's not meant to lower taxes;
it's about simplifying the tax code
and stabilizing the rate changes .
. why should a house with no improvements
increase in value by more than 5% per year?
some say it shifts the tax burden
from the higher to the lower income brackets;
but it's not capping valuations, just increases;
so, if there's no mad bubble in the housing market,
then you wont even notice this bill,
and even in that case,
it will help not only the upper class,
but also the middle class
-- only the slums are not hit by price bubbles .

tucsonweekly.com's 117 (Property Tax Assessment Caps): No
. setting artificial caps instead of
allowing the market to determine the value of property.
It would lead, over time, to inequitable taxation
on similar types of property.
[24: hello?
what is equitable about the current way,
after a housing bubbles has jacked up the cost
of a middle class home?
. if the city thinks your house is worth so much,
why don't they take a share of its ownership
instead of a slice of your income?
why don't they just go for income tax directly?
. and, it's entrapment too:
if the regressive sales tax is suddenly too high,
then I can choose to spend less;
but for these outlandish property taxes
I have to think in advance:
will the potential worth of this house
in 1, 5, or 10 years
match the income I'll likely have at that time?
. owning your own home is the responsible thing to do;
but I can't just rely on savings ability
to get a house for my future generations;
I have to consider how the psychotic "free" markets
and these twisted bureaucrats
will conspire against me .]

yes prop#118:
. stabilized edu funding from land grant dividends .

tucsonweekly.com's 118 (Permanent Funding): Yes
Thanks to the wild swings of the
stock market in recent years,
those annual distributions have been volatile.
yes prop#119:
. legal detail for state control of lands;
protects miltary installation from encoachment .
. no opposition .

tucsonweekly.com's 119 (State Trust Lands): Yes
The state owns a lot of land in trust
for education and other beneficiaries.
That land has to be sold to the highest bidder,
which makes it difficult to protect certain lands.
environmentalists would amend the Constitution
to allow for land swaps that have enough protections
to ensure that the state doesn't get a bad deal.
no prop#120:
. az.state seeks to take possession of fed land
which implies taking over environmental regulations;
and, they seek to deregulate the coal industry .
. they claim the fed is providing unsound mgt,
which has caused many fires and floods;
but the usual cause of all that
is any forest mgt at all:
we've been putting out all small fires
until it builds up the fuel for the big one
that is unstoppable and denudes the landscape
-- and then the floods come ... .
. the governor vetoed this bill;
and the legislature is trying to override her .
. this is an ALEC-supported bill
(of StandYourGround fame).
. it would cost a lot of money to manage this ourselves
when we have to pay those fed taxes anyway, ...
that may be why a repub gov doesn't go with ALEC?
. or: the gov doesn't want to be taken to court
by feds who might just win (again!).

tucsonweekly.com's 120 (State Sovereignty): NO
. the state should declare that it has sovereignty
over all federal lands within the state.
.. as if the federal government is just going to
allow the state to seize property
held for all the residents of the nation ...
Our current Legislature has already shown little interest
in caring for state parks,
so why should lawmakers be put in charge
of the Grand Canyon ?
no prop#121:
. new voting system by azopengov.org .
. the League of Women Voter points out
this is the worst of the options;
what we need is Ranked Choice Voting
-- that's endorsed by Fairvote AZ too .

tucsonweekly.com's 121 (Open Primaries): No
The two top vote-getters would go on to the general election.
The theory here is that
no matter who emerged from the primary,
voters in the general election
would choose the more-moderate candidate,
so radical candidates on both sides of the aisle
would be at a disadvantage.
. if it doesn't increase participation in the primary,
we'd still have the extreme activists
going to the polls in a higher proportion.
. we're open to the idea of reform
but We haven't seen it improve the outcomes in
states like California,
and it could well have the same unintended consequences
that the Clean Elections program has had.
( Clean Elections played a big role in
empowering those Tea Party conservatives
without helping change the state for the better.
— we share concern about the
ever-growing costs of campaigns—
but we'd ask them this question:
Is the Legislature better now
than it was before Clean Elections was in place? ) .
yes prop#204:
. the opponents argue like so:
"( not just a tax increase
    but a program that may cost
    more than the money it's collecting!
); if that was true,
that's the big mistake california made:
voters demanding expensive programming,
without adequately funding them;
but, I'm not seeing how this one is like cali':
more likely I suspect that the arizona's white republicans
have a problem with expansionist hispanics trying to
maximize social services as means to outbreed the Whites;
so the White pushback will increasingly be to
minimize tax-funded social services -- including schools
(middle-class whites can homeschool with internet).

. if they want to deal with overpopulation abuse,
they need to require some direct population inhibition:
eg, pay people to have no more than one child;
and move all other welfare to institutions like charity houses .
. mandate that having 2 children means loss of the free check,
so all subsequent charity must be done by living communally .
. mandate that having 3 children with no job
is felonious child abuse .
. require that education be done via boarding schools
so we really have the kids' full attention,
and can know they are doing their homework,
not doing chores or gang activities .

. this voter initative would override the state's
legislature and governor's reductions
and ensure we'll have the funding
that the state republicans would cut .
. there is no reason to reduce funding levels anyway,
because, the population will always be larger than now;
the purpose of the suspect wording
is to make sure this tax increase only
supplements the currently allowed outlays for edu .
. this bill also ensures funding to our charities
-- the places we will need a lot more of
when romney gets elected:
he will create even more jobs -- all overseas .
. I do directly benefit from this law:
I have family working for edu .

tucsonweekly.com's 204 ("Quality Education and Jobs Act"): Yes
Republicans love to boast that they have balanced the budget
—but it was mostly because voters agreed to
temporarily increase the sales tax.
And worse,
because lawmakers were temporarily flush with that money,
they passed a massive income-tax cut .
. in a few more years, the state will be out
more than a half-billion dollars per year.
Without that money,
future lawmakers may have to cut more out of education,
unless Prop 204 passes this year.
. 80 % is dedicated to K-12 and higher education,
which will protect our public schools
and reduce the pressure to increase tuition at our universities.
. some will maintain our roads
(yet another victim of State republican's cuts).
yes prop#409:
. paves the city roads with property tax .
-- funny story they tell:
we pay the city admin's so much that they
simply couldn't budget road maintenance?
actually, this was because
the state usually helped with roads, but no longer is.
and now has a $Billion surplus?
... but they soon won't .
. it's an extra $18 per year for 20years .

tucsonweekly.com's 409 (Tucson Transportation): Yes
. the sooner we start fixing our roads,
the cheaper it's going to be .
. get started on an aggressive street-repair program
that's desperately needed.
23: pima judges:
. Eckerstrom and Kelly got bad marks by some,
but their oversight reports are all passing .
. I'm not voting on dozens of judges,
because I'm expecting nobody else will either,
unless they want that judge removed .
. if voting is computer-assisted,
then we could check [vote yes to all judges],
and then change a few to no-votes after that .

23: web.gov/vote/TUSD board:

the 12 candidates official info:
Although this is a non-partisan race,
here’s the party registration for these twelve per Pima County Recorder’s Office:
Republican: Alex Sugiyama
Debe Campos-Fleenor, John Hunnicut, Robert Medler,
Democrat: Kristel Foster, Camy Juarez,
Miguel Cuevas, Don Cotton, Ralph Ellinwood, Betts Putnam-Hidalgo, Mark Stegeman
Independent/No Party Preference: Menelik Bakari
. The incumbents in this election are
Miguel Cuevas, Dr. Mark Stegeman,and Dr. Alex Sugiyama.
Cuevas & Stegeman were elected in Nov. 2008.
#1 –Camy Juarez, www.juarezfortusd.com
neighborhood reinvestment project coordinator,
has the endorsement of the Tucson Education Association,
. tucsonweekly for Cam Juarez .
David Safier`Cam Juarez:
Cam is a unique individual in the best sense of the term.
He combines a Hispanic upbringing in the
Yuma farming community, a physical disability,
an education which led to a recent
Masters Degree in Urban Planning,
a Pima County job where he works with the Supervisors
and makes financial decisons,
a sharp intellect, strong analytical skills
and an emotional understanding of
what makes people tick.
If he were only as good as the other candidates,
I think I would support him just because of his
ability to be a role model for TUSD students
due to his story and his accomplishments.
But for my money, he's simply the best candidate running.
[Note: Cam is a strong supporter of the
Mexican American Studies program,
but his opinions are nuanced enough that some of MAS's
most ardent supporters are often upset with him.
He's staked out a position on the issue
that's uniquely his own.]
#2 –Kristel Foster, www.fosterfortusd.com
. former UA clinical assistant professor in education (3 years),
program specialist at Sunnyside School District
language acquisition dept.,
We also like Kristel Foster; she, like Juarez,
has the endorsement of the Tucson Education Association,
and her teaching experience is impressive.
However, her wishy-washy stance on
TUSD's Mexican-American studies program,

and other missteps on the campaign trail,
have left us a bit concerned.
David Safier`Kristel Foster:
Kristel is a public school teacher,
which is worth a whole lot in my book.
Everything I write about education is filtered through
my 30 years of classroom experience,
which give me a much needed reality check.
Kristel will bring that kind of
rubber-meets-the-road perspective to the Board
that none of the other members share.
She will add a much needed dimension to the
Board's discussions and decisions.
It's also important that I agree with
her basic stands on educational issues,
which means I trust her to make good decisions
based on the situations and the facts at hand.
#3 –Alex Sugiyama, www.sugiyamafortusd.com
[no TEA endorsement but they had no 3rd,
and I liked his issues page .]
UA lecturer of economics, current board member,
. from a field of 54 applicants he's chosen
by Superintendent Linda Arzoumanian
when Judy Burns passed away
-- Bakari, Campos-Fleenor, Ellinwood, Foster, Medler, and Putnam-Hidalgo
had also applied for the vacant seat.
Ralph Ellinwood, www.futuretusd.org
Criminal-defense attorney
. will focus on what teachers and students really need .

Elizabeth “Betts” Putnam-Hidalgo,
part-time teacher & activist, www.betts4tusd.com
. some worry about her ability to work with
school officials and other board members .

Miguel Cuevas, current Board member & President;
Project Coach at AFNI, www.votemiguelcuevas.com
Mark Stegeman, current board member & former President,
UA associate professor of economics, www.stegeman4tusd.com
–Don Cotton, www.cottonfortusd.com
–John Hunnicutt, www.johnhunnicutt4tusd.com
–Robert Medler, www.medler4tusd.com
–Menelik Bakari,
–Debe Campos-Fleenor,

23 ... 25: proj.gov/vote/pima cc governing board:

cortez vs {saitta, fridena}:
"( Also challenging Cortez is Francis Saitta,
67, an adjunct PCC instructor who favors
more classroom resources and student aid.
Saitta runs a website called sciencedigest.org
that offers math help while promoting
some contentious personal views.
He's against Israeli statehood, for example,
and calls affirmative action
"a sop to racial minorities."
... [not Saitta] and Fridena
are backed by two employee unions at PCC,
the Pima Community College Education Association
and Local 449 of the American Federation of
State, County and Municipal Employees .
Saitta's sciencedigest.org:

. after reviewing Saitta's sciencedigest.org,
I would say that being "(against Israeli statehood)
is hardly what is most contentious
about what he has to say about zionists .
. he quotes Christ like he believes JC's a good,
eg, love rather than blame your brother;
but instead of just objectively stating
how economically impractical an Israel is,
he has to quote a lot of anti-semitism;
he presents them as evicting Palestinians,
and also terrorizing the Brits;
but he never mentions why
(one book claimed the Brits were in possession,
invited the Jews only to be shocked to find
that Palestinians were violently opposed to this;
so, the Brits armed the Jews,
but when the Islamic resistance snowballed,
the Brits asked the Jews to make new plans;
so the Jews fought off the Brits too ...
. perhaps the reason for the Palestinian evictions
was simply to put some space between self
and this religiously violent mob ?)
. how about conceding that Israel was
a justified repossession,
(although the Palestinian eviction
is a separate issue that needs clarification)
and that USA interests should be presented like so:
Israel's friends have only WWIII to look forward to,
and USA has been spending more on WWIII
than they're making -- with no end in sight !
. how about offering some alternatives,
like providing zionists with another state:
right here in america,
around the Christians who are not terrorists?

. as for "Affirmative Action" being a
"sop to racial minorities ...",
the key phrase was right afterward:
"... that undermines the very nature of our competitive system"
I would like to point out that he was basically saying this:
"(a free pass for minorities entails giving out free passes
) so, what? literally:
what happens when we "undermine the very nature
of our competitive system" ?
did we lower the monstrous white GDP?
turn blood into winoes? what happened ?
. also, how silly that is assuming
the goodness of our competitive system:
just think, if discrimination conspiracies
can happen to subtle shades of color,
how much more likely are they to fall on
those with odd personalities?
-- brilliant minds, wasted:
surrounded by Peter Principles .
. how about controlling the population
to cut down on the extra bodies
for an increase in opportunities
instead of just hot-boxing competitiveness?

. he also complains about schooling quotas
"( When a Racial Classification Scheme is used, ...
there are statistically significant differences
in performance levels among the racial groups;
) . so what?
what if, in addition to being
very liberal about school admissions,
we were also requiring that all parents
must either be college-degreed
or be millionaire-popular (sports stars, etc).
. do you suppose
the racial diff's would then diminish?
. that would also increase opportunity,
and lower the cost of living .
. but that's impossible!
we can't have what works;
lets have our competitive system instead .

. other than that, Saitta is brilliant;
and, his site is generally a great resource,
with about 275 pages, according to google,
so, that's why I thought he should be
on the Pima Community College governing board
-- that's the same college he's teaching at .

. along with his own math pages,
Saitta also points out many others:
. Saitta introduced me to openwetware.org
(a biological engineer's coop).

. here's my summary of his website's
political commentary .
[@] pol/purges/Saitta's sciencedigest.org #pol #purges

thank you, Saitta!
"( Every aspect of our society/economy,
from our Food Supply to Housing,
has been transformed into commodities
which are massed produced, marketed and sold,
in the main, by multi-national Corporations
whose raison d'etre is Profit:
Food is "processed"
so as to maximize "market value"
at the expense of nutritional value ...
[ ways cancer is on the rise ])
other votes:
. I'm voting dem's unless it's not critical to
partison issues(more sharing, less pro-life);
in non-critical cases,
I'd like to give the greens some encouragement
-- they are simply better Democrats,
but they always lose because we don't have
Ranked Choice Voting .