Mohave County Republican Central Committee

We've Moved!

2010-03-30T13:43:00.001-07:00

We have moved our blog onto our own domain name. If you have been directed to this site by mistake and are loooking for the Mohave County Republican Central Committee Blog please click here to be redirected to our new page!

Thank you,

Sarah Markham,
Webmaster for MCRCC

Brief Explanation of Arizona’s Sixth Special Session

2010-02-10T18:14:00.000-08:00

The Senate adjourned the Sixth Special Session sine die today, after the House voted on the last of the special session bills. A brief explanation of each bill and its status is below:

SB 1001: statewide special election (Burns). Calls a statewide special election on May 18th, and includes reimbursement for counties for election costs.
-Approved by the House and Senate and signed by the Governor.

SB 1002: budget reconciliation; appropriations; education (Burns). Authorizes a roll-over of payments to K-12 schools and universities.
-Approved by the Senate last week. Amended in the House to make the rollover conditional upon the enactment of the House jobs package. The Senate opted not to concur and instead adjourned without acting on the amended bill, killing the measure.

SB 1003: revenue bonds; lease-purchase; finance (Burns). Authorizes the sale of up to $300 million in bonds against lottery revenue and authorizes the lease-purchase of additional state buildings.
-Approved by the House and Senate and transmitted to the Governor, awaiting signature

SB 1004: state lottery; authorization (Burns). Re-establishes the State Lottery Fund and the State Lottery Commission and provides for the repayment of bonds.
-Approved by the House and Senate and signed by the Governor.

SB 1005: standard deduction; non-residents; pro-rate (Burns). Prorates the standard income tax deduction for non-resident filers based on the ratio of Arizona gross income to federal adjusted gross income.
-Approved by the House and Senate and signed by the Governor.

SCR1001: temporary sales tax; repeal (Burns). Refers to the ballot a temporary one-cent sales tax increase for three years. The election is set for May 18, 2010.
-Approved by the House and Senate and transmitted to the Secretary of State to be placed on the ballot.

Candidates on Slate for 2010

2010-01-25T17:00:00.000-08:00

After the State G.O.P. meeting I found myself overwhelmed with all the information I'd obtained throughout the day. I talked with a multitude of candidates, and each of them gave me some of their campaign brochures. And because I'd had some very wonderful espresso that day, I was ON TASK and I asked all the right questions. This is a huge year in elections and we've got a lot of qualified and hard working Republican candidates we need to support. If we begin the in-fighting and embarassing behavior, a Democrat is going to swoop in and take the seat. Our state has had it happen many times over. Why do you think we ended up with Harry Mitchell (Maricopa County's Democrat Congressman)?

I have no respect for a Republican candidate that resorts to underhanded, tacky maneuvers to discredit other Republican candidates. We are supposed to be the respectable bunch in all these politics, not the spoiled brats who can't control our behavior.

And now that Dean Martin is leaving the State Treasurer's office to campaign for Governor, we have candidates stumping for his position.. Do we want a Democrat in the Treasurer's office? Do we want a Democrat Attorney General? Uh, heck no. Do we want Democrats to take the open seats at the Corporation Commission? Right now there are two on that board, and if we sit back we could end up with more. If you don't know how important the Corporation Commission is, then you need to get on Wikipedia and start reading. Commissioners decide whether or not our utility rates are going up. They make decisions that RULE OUR LIVES!

I can't type the words Party Unity because those that don't understand it will just blow it off. People are under the assumption that Party Unity means we can't disagree with each other. Not so. We are all thinkers, we all have our favorite candidates, so be it. But when Republicans start beating up on Republicans, we look like asses. We become divided, and our message gets lost in all the tabloid behavior. So I guess I'll start chanting something else. Maybe something from the Rodney King library of famous quotes.

Shawna Thornton

The State GOP Meeting - My Review

2010-01-25T16:59:00.000-08:00

Republicans from around the state gathered in Scottsdale to attend to some Party business and meet Arizona candidates from all districts.
Mohave County was represented with 25 votes, nearly half of which were proxy holders. This was my first chance to attend this particular event in person since I am usually working in Nevada on this day every January, so I was very happy to be able to participate.

The meeting started off strong with Governor Brewer, Senators McCain and Kyl, and Congressman Trent Franks as well as others urging attendees to stay involved and continue to push the Republican agenda. G.O.P. Chairman Randy Pullen ran the meeting and kept things moving quite nicely, and for the most part the program was interesting and inspiring. After all, how do you get people across the state to volunteer their time and donate their money? You inspire them.

Chairman Pullen even set aside quite a bit of time at the podium for statewide candidates (including myself) to step up and announce their candidacy. Very nice!

The new officers were voted on and sworn in, and our very own Buster Johnson was elected 2nd Vice President of the State G.O.P.'s Executive Board..

Now, as with every one of these state level meetings, Resolutions are presented to the voting body and they are debated. I've never seen a meaningful Resolution. The last state level meeting I went to actually had a Resolution congratulating the host hotel for the great food and wonderful service, and that couldn't have been further from the truth!
On Saturday, a total of 13 were on the slate, only two were amended, and the Resolutions all passed. I was surprised at the fact that one of the Resolutions went without discussion; the decision to exclude Independent voters from the Republican primaries.
Whoa, a meaningful Resolution!! Now that this Resolution has been passed, it will go to litigation and possibly by this year's primary on August 24th we will have no Independent voters deciding who the Republican candidates are. I've discussed this possibility with several Independents, some of them didn't care, some of them were extremely upset.
If I were an Independent (and I was, many years ago....in college) I would be rallying the masses to protest this! But here is how organized they are: I visited their website and it hasn't been updated in two years.
www.independentvoting.org

I guess they don't care THAT much.

The fact of the matter is; REPUBLICANS support the candidates. REPUBLICANS contribute to their campaigns. REPUBLICANS knock on doors to get people to vote. REPUBLICANS pay attention and are educated voters. REPUBLICANS sign and circulate petitions to get candidates to the primaries. So why would we want the opinion of the Independents in our primaries, deciding who we're going to spend our time and money on?

Exactly.

Shawna Thorton

The Truth About Clean Elections

2010-01-25T16:58:00.000-08:00

The clean elections process was a voter initiative passed by voters in the late 90's. It was suppose to be meant as a way for the "little people" quote on quote to get into the big league and run for office. You had all these millionaires running for office and winning time after time again because let's face it their wallet was way bigger than your average Joe. So the clean elections process came along to help the little people out. Candidates (depending on if they are running for state or federal) have to get so many signatures and five dollar contributes to qualify but once they do the state matches their funds so your average Joe can REALLY compete against the millionaire candidate running off of private money. Neat idea huh? Well a couple problems - first off there was no income barrier on the program so now you HAVE those millionaires running off of clean election when they frankly don't need to. Or you have those average Joe's running against John McCain for example who has tons of money and the state having to match those funds. Basically - OUR tax dollars are going to fund THEIR campaign! I don't know about you - but I tend to have an issue knowing MY tax dollars are funding certain people's campaigns. If I want to donate to a political campaign I will, but I don't want my tax dollars going to just any particular campaign. Another issue with it is that the money isn't ALWAYS used for legit reasoning. I won't go into detail on that myself. I think the following article does an excellent job of explaining it! Click here to read the article - it's worth the read!

The court right now has stopped the public fund matching of the clean elections campaign but of course it's going to be appealed most likely. Some Republicans are trying to push even further a voter initiative onto the ballot for this November in order to repel the initiative that created Clean Elections in the first place.

My comment : The program may have started out with good intentions but it has proven that you can't mix politics and campaigning with tax payer money! As much as it was started with the right purposes - realistically it's not a worth while program and IS one that needs to be repealed.

Sarah Markham

The Pros & Cons Of Letting Independents In Our Primary

2010-01-13T17:28:00.001-08:00

Because I like to play devil’s advocate, I thought I’d lay out for everyone the pros and cons of letting the Independents vote in the Republican Primary. A lot of states, including Arizona, where open primaries are allowed are finding themselves faced with the question on if letting the Independents vote is a good thing or a bad thing for the two party system. I will be the first to say I do not like our two party systems, but it is what it is and until this country decides that it wants real change it isn’t going to change any time soon. I will also say that I do not think that it’s fair that the Republican Party can put all of the work into supporting Republican candidates for the primary election to only have an independent voter come in, vote in our primary, and vote for the candidate that probably should have been on the Democratic ticket instead of the Republican one (there are a few but I will not mention them in this particular blog). With all that said though – should we deny Independents the right to vote in our primary elections?

Well let’s look at the pros and cons:

The main pro of allowing independents to vote in our primary is voter participation. If one votes in the primary election they are more opt to vote in the general election. If they pulled the Republican ticket in the primary they are more opt to also vote for the Republican candidate in the general as well. So voter participation should be a main factor in allowing independents to vote in the primary election; however, statistics show voter participation is actually a con.

Let’s look at Hawaii for example who went to open primaries in 2006. Prior to changing they had a voter participation of 74% (I’d love to see those numbers again) in 1978 in their primary election. That number fell to 42% in 2006. Many blame the drop on the transition to open primaries. The closed primary system has more of an incentive for people to join one of the major parties. This leads to people being more involved in the voting process. With the open primary, some argue, more voters become independent and are less likely to participate in the nominating or election processes.

Another con of allowing independents to vote in the primary election is based on the assumption that it will cause manipulation and dilution. Let’s take the 2008 Presidential Election for example. In the beginning, no one thought John McCain would be the front runner for the Republican Party going into November, yet he was. Why was that? Some believe it had to do with some states (Arizona was not one of them though) allowing open primaries in the Presidential Preference elections. Most Independent voters who were allowed to pick a party on the day of the Primary chose John McCain. For example in New Hampshire, Mitt Romney won among registered Republicans, but John McCain won overall. Likewise, in South Carolina, Mike Huckabee won among self-identified Republicans, but John McCain won the state. The question has to be asked – if every state went to closed primaries for the Presidential Preference Election would McCain have been our man in the Presidential race for 2008?

Arizona doesn’t allow open primaries in the Presidential Preference Primary but should they allow them at all in any other primary? If you are registered Independent and want to vote in the primary this August – as of right now all you have to do is pick a ticket when you go. Democrat or Republican? And you can vote. Should that change? In California the answer is split – the Democrats allow it and the Republicans do not. Should the Arizona GOP continue to allow the Independents to vote in our primary or should we close our doors?

It’s not an easy question to answer and one that could have consequences either way. Some Independents might view it as the Republican Party turning a blind eye to them. I have a lot of friends who are Independents who I cannot get to switch. They would love to get involved, but they won’t choose a side (I think it’s a younger generation thing that people hate to have to pick a side). Or will the Independents view it as an opportunity to finally switch back to one party over the other? Will it make people pick a side and get more involved or will it come off as us shutting the door in their face?

I don’t have the answer for you. I’m just playing devil’s advocate and laying out the pros and cons. To allow or not allow – that is the question!

Sarah Markham

Lock Me Up & Throw Away The Key – Merry Christmas America

2009-12-24T14:06:00.000-08:00

Well the Democrats in the United States Senate gave America their Christmas gift early this morning – health care reform. Yeahhhh! Right? No!! I have a feeling this is one of those gifts we’ll all be asking to return at the beginning of the New Year, and unlike Walmart there is no return policy when it comes to the United States Government.

I currently have health insurance. Well I have it for another seven days. I will no longer be allowed on my parent’s health insurance due to age starting January 1st, 2010. My employer does not offer me health insurance because I am not considered full time. So the only other option for me is to go and get my own health insurance. I do admit health insurance is expensive, and denying someone coverage because of pre-existing condition is ridicules. So yes in that since health care does need to be reformed, but it needs to be done so in a fiscally responsible and intelligent matter. What the Senate just passed is neither of those two things.

I went shopping for my own health insurance about a month ago. It was going to cost me around $130 dollars a month which is something I can afford. I was all for it until I saw what it covered. It covered nothing!! It covered 20% of all medical expenses occurring through hospitalization, doctor visits, labs, etc etc. Why would I want to pay $130 dollars a month for a health insurance plan that covers in my opinion NOTHING! I don’t get sick that much (knock on wood). I am one of those people who believe most sickness is mental and in your head. I don’t believe in medication (except Tylenol of course). So why would I want to be paying $130 dollars a month for coverage that I probably won’t use much and that pay nothings! So I have decided to be one of many Americans and start the New Year without health insurance. Because to get health insurance that currently pays for anything and is worth while costs upwards to around $300 dollars a month (and that’s if your lucky and healthy like me).

This new Health Care Reform that was passed by the Senate requires every American to have health insurance and it says that if you can’t afford they will offer you subsidies to help pay for it. Okay they are going to offer me financial assistance to help pay for my health insurance. Great! But I probably wouldn’t qualify for that anyway, and I do have to ask – if I didn’t want to shell out $130 dollars to pay for crappy health insurance coverage why would I want tax payers to shell out $130 dollars a month to pay for it? I know the government sure as hell isn’t going to offer to pay that $300+ bill a month for quality health insurance for me.

There are many things wrong with this bill – first off it does not save this country money. The articles all say that this bill will cut the deficit by $130 billion dollars which isn’t technically a lie. Medicare will be cut $130 billion dollars over the course of 10 years to help pay for it. So yes, the deficit will be cut. However read between the lines people – this health insurance reform bill will cost America over $1 Trillion throughout the next ten years. So yes you are cutting $130 billion here and there but you’re paying over $1 trillion in the long run for this bill. Do you even know how many zeros are after the world one trillion? It just amazes me that our government thinks it’s okay to spend spend spend. The state governments have to live within their means. Why is it that the federal government can get away with spending money it does not have and borrowing money like money grows on trees? We don’t have the money to pay for this!! And you are going to ruin health care rather than save it in America!

Let’s keep it real folks – the Senate version of the bill took out the public health option. The House version left it in however; but I see it going to President Obama without the public option in there. Adding the public option is going to sky rocket the costs even more. If you think $1 trillion dollars is a lot to spend over ten years, you can’t even imagine what it would cost with the public option in there. So anyway, so the government is going to be the health care police (or at least that’s what I’m calling it). They are going to make sure that every American has health insurance and that health insurance companies are not denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions. Okay but how does that lower costs in the long run? You are forcing insurance companies to pay for this pre-existing conditions (and I’m not saying that someone should be denied because of them because they shouldn’t. It’s not Mary Jane’s fault she got breast cancer at the age of 25, but the point is …) and that is going to sky rocket costs! How does the federal government plan to keep the costs down? Premiums will be raised, the price of medical treatment alone will sky rocket. If you thinks costs are bade now and health insurance is at the point of ‘why have any’ you just wait until all of this goes into affect. You’re going to see health insurance companies going out of business because of if. Oh but wait there is hope! There is language in the bill that says that health insurance companies cannot charge an individual a higher premium based on their pre-existing condition. Great! Now they are just going to raise everyone’s overall premium to pay for these pre-existing cases. So in the long run, everyone will suffer because of it.

I have heard a lot of people compare forcing Americans to have health insurance is like forcing Americans to have car insurance. I tend to disagree with that statement. You are right every American is forced to have car insurance; however the difference is simply that you can purchase your car insurance across state lines. You can’t do that with health insurance. If I live in Arizona, I have to get Arizona Blue Cross Blue Shield. I can’t go and find a California based company to get my health insurance through. So they are NOT the same thing. There is competition with car insurance. There is not so with health insurance. The Federal Government needs to be open up the state boarders when it comes to health insurance. Competition is a good thing, and opening up state boarders is the only way the costs will even begin to come down. So forcing Americans to have health insurance is not the same thing as forcing us to have car insurance. And I will say this – no government is going to force me to have health insurance. I ask what happens to those who refuse to get health insurance? Are you going to come lock me up and put me in jail?

And I love the wording on this one that has been quoted in every news article I have read online regarding the Senate’s passage of health care reform: “Employers would be induced to cover their employees through a combination of tax credits and penalties.” Induced means they would be encouraged to offer health insurance through tax credits. But once you get into the word “penalties” it’s more like they will be required to cover their employees for health insurance. In a time of an economic recession, small businesses cannot afford that and this will close a lot of small businesses if you want my opinion.

So at the end of it all, I do have to say Merry Christmas America. I hope each and everyone one of you has a wonderful Holiday. I am spending it with family and friends. So I am sure it will be a wonderful occasion.

And when the Holidays are over, the tinsel is put away, and the decorations are taken down – I ask our government – where is the return line because we don’t want nor like your gift!

Happy Holidays Everybody!
Sarah Markham

The Years Pass On But Do We Ever Truly Learn From Them

2009-12-08T16:38:00.001-08:00

Every year I sit down and do an End of the Year Review. It’s what my family and friends expect of me each year, and each year I go all out for it. However if I look back on past reviews – they all have the same theme to them. Saying that the upcoming year will change and things will be different. And in all out reality do they? The 09 Review is no different than the review I did in 02. Sure maybe different events, different people, different town … but how truly different is it?

The same is true in the world of politics. I read the newspaper at my place of employment. It’s one of the many tasks I have. I read the newspaper and cut out articles pertaining to county issues. And this past week, I have been cutting out newspapers from the years 02 thru 06 and I stopped for a moment while cutting them out and asked myself ‘what year is this paper from?’ It was like I was cutting out articles that could very well be in today’s paper only they were dated in the year 2005. How much has truly changed? I am cutting out news articles on the state trying to fix their budget issues and in order to do that are cutting education and social service programs. I am reading articles on how people are losing their job and unemployment is up (granted it may only be at 6% which is nothing compared to our current 10% but the point is still the same). Or how about the articles where gas has risen again (back than paying $1.67 for gas was horrible and now it’s way over $2.50). The prices have changed and the year but the concept is STILL the same. It’s still about a bad economy, it’s still about a broken budget, and it’s still about the same bullshit it’s just a different day.

So maybe it’s time to stop just writing the 09 End of the Year Review. Maybe it’s time to stop just complaining about how gas prices are high and unemployment is rising for another straight month in a row. Maybe it’s time the budget in the state of Arizona ACTUALLY gets fixed instead of year after year complaining how it’s broken yet only putting a band-aid on a wound that needs stitches. Maybe it’s time something ACTUALLY gets done!!

Because I really don’t want to have to pick up a newspaper in the year 2015 and feel like I have read the same article over and over for the past ten years.
Let’s actually CHANGE this country instead of doing nothing but talking about it. Because history and paper trails don’t lie, and I’m tired of feeling like we’re doing nothing but going around in a circle on a train that never ends. It’s almost 2010 folks – 10 years into the new millennium – let’s actually stop complaining for once and stand up and fight.

Sarah Markham

President Lincoln's proclamation establishing Thanksgiving Day

2009-11-26T13:29:00.000-08:00

In 1863, President Abraham Lincoln (R-IL) issued this proclamation:
The year that is drawing towards its close, has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God.

In the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign States to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military conflict; while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union. Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defense, have not arrested the plough, the shuttle or the ship; the axe has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore.

Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege and the battle-field; and the country, rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom.
No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole American People. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens.

And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverance and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquility and Union.

Education Reform

2009-11-25T14:47:00.000-08:00

This past month's poor voter turnout has been criticized by many as an example of "lazy residents" who want to complain about issues but not get out and vote on those issues.

17% of registered voters in Lake Havasu City turned out for the three ballot initiatives; initiatives, I might add, that if passed would have end up costing people in general more money to be in our city. Higher taxes on residential properties, and higher taxes on the lifeblood of our community: the tourists in the hotels.

The increase in bed taxes was slated to go to the tourism promotion for Lake Havasu. But what advertising campaign would coax tourists back to a city that had ever-increasing hotel room costs and marginal customer service? Really, $200 per night for a hotel room built in 1982. Then an increased tax on top of that. Too many of our regular visitors have been burned by this cost. I have to hear it all the time.

If the two budget overrides had passed, the Lake Havasu Unified School District would have kept in place some funding that was originally advertised as a one-time fix for their budget. That's right, when they got these overrides to pass several years ago, the voters were told the school district only needed a few years of extra money to get them back on track. We were told the overrides would expire after a few years and that would be that.
I must add, this is not money for every student in Lake Havasu, just the ones that attend the School District. Does not include the charters, private schools, home schooling students, or faith-based schools.

So then the overrides were placed on our ballots this month. We were told that we wouldn't be seeing an increase in taxes, we would merely be keeping in place, or MAINTAINING the current level of funding. What happened to the original promise? That temporary fix that the schools needed a few years ago?

And in economic times like this, when we're making less money but working twice as hard to earn it, we're all looking for a way to cut down on our spending, taxes, bills, etc.
Why would the citizens vote for more taxes?

I say the dismal 17% voter turnout in Lake Havasu this month was the voter's way of saying, "We are just so burned out on this stuff." The citizens know that the upper level administration of the Unified School District have not suffered the pay cuts that everyone else has. They have not cut the fat. They have put the stress and the cut backs on the front lines, the teachers, so the public will interpret that as a need for more funding. That's their way of doing public relations.

And here's mine: a no vote.

Franksgiving

2009-11-08T10:24:00.000-08:00

I bet a lot of you didn't know about the years where there were two Thanksgivings?

On October 3, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln declared the last Thursday of the month to be a day of "thanksgiving and praise." For the first time, Thanksgiving became a national, annual holiday with a specific date.

However Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1939 moved Thanksgiving to the second to the last Thursday of the month instead of the last to help boost retail sales. In 1939, the last Thursday of November was going to be November 30. Retailers complained to FDR that this only left 24 shopping days to Christmas and begged him to push Thanksgiving just one week earlier. It was determined that most people do their Christmas shopping after Thanksgiving and retailers hoped that with an extra week of shopping, people would buy more.

You can image what controversy this caused. Schools had to change their calendar in order for kids to have Thanksgiving off of school. Tests had to be rescheduled and vacation plans had to be changed. All calendars that were already printed for the year 1940 had to be reprinted with Thanksgiving now falling on the third Thursday of the month. Thanksgiving is a big day for football games, so the game schedule had to be examined. Political opponents of FDR and many others questioned the president's right to change the holiday and stressed the breaking of precedent and disregard for tradition. Many believed that changing a cherished holiday just to appease businesses was not a sufficient reason for change. Atlantic City's mayor derogatorily called November 23, the second to the last Thursday of the month, as "Franksgiving."

In 1939, twenty-three states followed FDR's change and declared Thanksgiving to be November 23. Twenty-three other states disagreed with FDR and kept the traditional date for Thanksgiving, November 30. Two states, Colorado and Texas, decided to honor both dates. In 1940, 31 states followed him with the earlier date and 17 kept the traditional date. It was in 1941, after the debate over the day on which Thanksgiving fell was tearing this country apart, that Congress passed a law declaring that Thanksgiving would occur every year on the fourth Thursday of November.

This Week In Politics

2009-11-08T09:29:00.000-08:00

Well what a week it has been in the world of politics (both locally and nationally).

- First off, the Republican Party won two big seats in the 2009 elections last Tuesday. We won both the governor races in Virgina and New Jersey. We lost the New York race. Well if you honestly think Republican Dede Scozzafava was indeed a TRUE republican. Doug Hoffman ran on the Conservative Party's ticket and got by far more votes than Dede Scozzafava, who many called too liberal to be a Republican. In the end, the battle of the two who claimed to be 'conservative' in the state of New York handed that race over to the Democratic ticket. But either way - the Republican Party did win two seats. However; I can't say it's a major win. This was a non-election year vote. In Virginia for example the overall voter turnout was 39.8 percent. It was actually the lowest voter turnout in Virginia in forty years. So to say it was a major win for the Republican Party in my opinion is not accurate. It was a victory, but it doesn't mean the Republican Party can sit back and just hope the 2010 elections are handed to us on a silver platter. We have to get out there, make our voices heard, and give people a reason to vote for the Republican Party in 2010. As much as Obama digs himself into a hole everyday, we cannot count on that alone to win us the 2010 election! And we need to start now - we need to start making out voices heard. One of the major reasons I believe McCain lost the 2008 election was that he didn't say enough. He sat back and let Obama win. He never really vocally fought back which is something he should have done. We need to make our voices heard because that is the only way we will win in 2010!

- The house passed the Health Care Bill (now onto the Senate). It was a close vote - 220 to 215. Have you looked at this version of the Health Care Bill? Of course not, it's way too long and time consuming to sit there and read every single detail. Who's to say these Representatives who passed this bill even read it? You don't sign on the dotted line unless you have read the contract over thoroughly. Well I supposed the good thing is though that the ban on federal funding for abortion passed.

- Locally, the override and the bed tax did not pass in Lake Havasu. What will the consequences be? Who's to say! I have read newspaper after newspaper since of school teachers fearing for the worst that they might lose their job. I personally voted for it because I was in High School in the year 2005 before the original override passed, and since then I do see the benefits that it brought to the school. But it didn't pass. So now the school must find a way to deal with it. How about cutting salaries and laying off people at the top of the food chain first instead of the body? Does anyone find it ridicules that the X Superintend of Schools, Gail Malay, can not only collect off of her retirement fund but also was rehired by the district and receiving a salary as well? Why don't we make it so people can't double dip like that at the top levels. It would save jobs and money for the school district. Anyway, the school overrides failed and now we sit back and see just what the school district is going to do about it.

- Oh and one more thing - the Sosey's in Havasu got to keep their windmill! : )

Sarah

Happy Halloween From The MCRCC

2009-10-28T15:18:00.000-07:00

More Republican Involvement Needed At Local Level

2009-10-28T15:15:00.000-07:00

After attending several functions and conventions in the Phoenix area, I've determined that there's a reason why in politics people make the "Great State of Maricopa" jokes. It's because people from the rural areas of our state are not involved enough. Only a handful of the dedicated are showing up to represent our communities, and that gives people from the Phoenix and Tucson area the opinion that we must not care very much.
Yes, it's a great distance to travel. And, yes, it can add up in gasoline costs. Lodging can be an issue, because it's difficult at times to find an affordable place to stay.
Some can't break away from their jobs to attend a one-day meeting in Phoenix.

Well, here's some answers to those problems:
We carpool.
We stay at a friend's home or condo in Phoenix.
We have a large number of retired or self employed who can set their own schedules.

There. It's that simple.

I have a job, a small business, a family, and a busy life.
Making time for Republican related activities has become a big priority. Therefore....

I purchased a car that gets 30 miles per gallon, so the drive to Phoenix costs less than dinner. If I carpooled, that cost could be split and would be even less of a burden. Probably the cost of a Happy Meal!

When I traveled to Scottsdale for a Republican function I made arrangements with some dedicated Republicans who have offered for me stay at their home whenever I'm in the city for a meeting or training. No, it wasn't a "hook-up" kind of arrangement, they have families, and they were generous enough to lend me their spare bedroom whenever I'm in the area.
That's the beauty of networking. Make some Republican friends, make the connections you need to.

As for the schedule, it's not rocket science. I plan waaay ahead for these trips out of town and I farm out my work in Havasu. Someone covers for me. As Republicans, and true believers in free enterprise, we should be able to handle this. And if there are those who are lucky enough to have a job with paid time off, well, that's a no brainer.

Party unity, work together, etc, etc. That means we in Mohave County need to get it together and act as one. Support each other and work together to represent the 7th largest county in the U.S. We are important in these elections, and we need to show the "Great State of Maricopa" that we want to be heard!

Shawna Thornton

The Mileage Tax - The Details & Why It's A Scary Thought

2009-10-12T21:26:00.001-07:00

I attended a webinar last week on the mileage tax. I thought I'd write a little blog about it, because it's a very interesting yet scary topic. First off I want to point out that the company that did the webinar, Remi, was actually in favor of the United States adopting a mileage tax.

A mileage tax is a tax on the miles driven. The money collecting from the mileage tax to the DOT departments is supposed to be used to maintain and repair the road systems. There is currently a proposition in the House of Representatives on it. The reason they see a need for a mileage tax is because over the past fifty years the vehicle estimated travel has increased at a rate of 30% where as the gas consumption has only increased by 20%. With fuel efficiency increasing and the miles driven increasing faster than gas consumption there has been a decrease in gas tax revenue which leads to rising construction costs and a blur in state boundary definitions. The problem also is that with a difference in gas prices for example hurts some states. For example – someone who lives in New York may go to New Jersey to purchase gas because it’s cheaper. But the gas tax is going to New Jersey not to New York where this person actually does most of their driving.

Two examples they used of places that have implemented a mileage tax is the Netherlands and Oregon. The Netherlands does not have a gas tax at all and actually have gotten rid of all fixed car taxes for those who buy new cars and pay a mileage tax. So instead of paying taxes right up front when you buy a car you are billed every month on the amount of miles you drive the car.

The thing that scares me about this whole mileage tax is how they plan on doing it. The way the Netherlands determines how many miles you drive is by putting a GPS in your car. That GPS measures how many miles you drive, and in order for the Netherlands to charge you a higher rate for driving during peak hours (for example your charged more if you drive during rush hour traffic or on busy Holiday weekends – basically anytime that they feel the roads are congested) they need to be able to determine where you are driving and when, so the GPS tells them where you are driving and when you are driving. That kind of scares me that the government could have access to where I drive and when I drive, and in a sense no where I am at every given moment (or where my car is at anyway). Another topic that was brought up was the idea of this GPS being able to track how fast one is driving. It’s no longer going to be about photo radar, because technically if they really wanted too they could track how fast you are driving and bill you for speeding. It’s a scary thought in my opinion.

Anyway, in the Netherlands all old cars need to have these GPS’s installed by 2018, and they have to pay for it to be installed. There is an incentive for fuel efficiency with a mileage tax. Those who have a better fuel efficient car for example a Toyota Prius get a better mileage tax rate than those with a Hummer. Motorcycles are exempt from the mileage tax in the Netherlands because there is no place to put a GPS. So they end up paying just flat tax rates when they purchase their vehicle.

Oregon Department of Transportation did a study with two experimental groups and one control group. The study lasted for 12 months and had 299 volunteers. The control group was the group that went about like normal and just paid a gas tax. The two experimental groups paid a mileage tax. One group paid a flat rate mileage tax and the other group paid a peak rate mileage tax. They all paid their taxes at a gas pump that was hooked up to the GPS in their car.

The benefits found of a mileage tax over a gas tax were that they increase DOT revenue, improve roadways, better traffic flows, increase access to labor pools, lower relative labor costs and increase employment. The disadvantage is that it is assumed (no facts actually exist) that it will increase the consumer price of gas and oil. Now because of the price of gas increases within the first year of a mileage tax being implemented the United States would lose over 100,000 jobs, yet 200,000 jobs would be created by 2025 if we implemented the mileage tax next year. All this though is dependent on one factor - that the DOT departments actually put the revenue they collect towards the transportation department. The governor and legislature cannot come in and sweep the funds or else those jobs and the benefits will not be created.

The whole concept still scares me. I’d rather pay a flat tax when I purchase my car than have a GPS put into and have the government know where I am driving. Then again maybe I’m just paranoid, but still I think there is a lot of questions that need to be answered and a lot of what-if’s before this country can even begin to look at implementing a mileage tax. That’s just my two cents worth.

Sarah

Trying To Wrap My Mind Around The States Park Issue

2009-10-07T20:12:00.001-07:00

I understand the state is broke - I think everyone has grasped that concept, but what does not make sense to me is the new start park proposal. I understand raising fees - the state cut their money. The State Parks lost all general fund monies and now only have an operating budget of 19.3 Million. To compensate for these cuts, they are raising fees. The daily entrance fees at Lake Havasu State Park (aka: Windsor beach) will go up to 15 dollars from 10. Raise Over-Sized Parking will go up from 5 to 10 dollars. Camping fees will raise about 5 dollars from what they were. And finally they are talking of getting rid of the Annual Premium Pass.

Out of all the changes the one I do not understand is the eleminiation of the annual premium pass. First off let's face reality here - Lake Havasu State Park is one of the FEW parks that is actually bringing the State's Parks Department revenue. Why? Because it is one of the few places where visitors to Lake Havasu can launch their boat. So here is what the State Park's department is proposing - they say we need to eleminate the premium annual pass (which is 125 dollars and CAN be used on weekends) and replace it with just an annual pass that is going to be 75 dollars (standard annual pass use to be 50) but (and here is what makes no sense to me) it will not be valid at Lake Havasu, Cattail Cove, Buckskin Mountain and River Island State Parks on Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays and State Holidays from March 1 through September 30. Then why in the world would people who come visit Lake Havasu get one?! It is going to KILL tourism to Havasu unless the city or someone else builds another boat launch ramp. No one is ganna buy the annual pass - people come here on weekends and Holidays during those months to boat NOT during the weekday. And to pay 15 dollars a day to launch their boat and enter the park will amount to 75 dollars for a weekend! Sure they may come one weekend but they aren't coming back for more than that. It will ruin our tourism in this town and like I said Lake Havasu State Park is one of the only parks generating the Parks Department revenue and they want to impose this new law?! It makes no sense! I can understand raising fees (not for it but I do understand the logic behind it). Raise fees for those people who come once a year because they probably will still come, but don't raise it and hurt those who are brining revenue to our town every other weekend and bringing also to the state parks for using their facilities. Keep the Premium Pass!! Either that or allow at least Lake Havasu, Cattail Cove, Buckskin Mountain and River Island State Parks to keep the option open if no one else does!! We may be in an economic recession but have we fallen and hid our heads too in the process? Use logic people because it doesn't take rocket science to figure out that eliminating the Premium Annual Pass and implementing the new restrictions on a new anual pass is not only bad for Lake Havasu but for the Parks Department revenue stream as well.

Sarah Markham

Life Without Parole - Cruel and Unusual

2009-09-28T13:16:00.000-07:00

I have always been the person to believe in second chances and that people can change. Maybe it's still the youth inside of me, but I believe in hope and that if people truly want to change they will do so.

In November a case is going before the United States Supreme Court in which the question will be answered if it is cruel and unusual for juveniles to be sentenced to life in prison without parole for a crime that does not involve murder. We are one of the only countries that do sentence those under the age of 18 to life in prison without parole for non-homicidal crimes.

I take the issue of juveniles and crime very personally and seriously not just because it's the field of study I wish to go into, but because I was once a youth who spent time in juvi. Granted I spent two weeks for a crime that doesn't even compare to anything as serious as rape or robbery, but the two weeks I did spend in the Kingman Juvenile Detention Center I saw the flaw in our juvenile system.

The answer is not to lock up these kids and throw away the key. Give them hope. They are still in their teens, some even in their pre-teens. What they need is someone who is going to stand up for them, bring them hope, and make them feel wanted. Most of the teens in there I saw came from broken homes and felt no one cared about them. I'm not saying it's an excuse for what they did, but I do seriously think with the right rehabilitation, juveniles can be saved from committing future crimes. Adults are a different story - they are old enough and they should know better. I just hate to see a juvenile locked away for the rest of his life with no chance of ever getting out when he has his whole life ahead of him.

We said that the death penalty for juveniles was cruel and unusual. Well I think it's also cruel and unusual to lock someone up for the rest of their life with no chance of ever getting out. Let's change it to life with a chance of parole. At least then they have a chance to turn their life around and become productive citizens of this country. Let's have a little faith and hope in our youth. Maybe I am naive, but I've been there and look at me. Ever since I have never once been in contact with the law again, not even for a traffic ticket. Maybe it's because I had that loving family who cared for me. So we need to give these kids who don't have that type of family a chance and show them that there is a reason to turn your life around.

Sarah

Canada - Why Socialized Medicine Is Not The Answer

2009-09-28T12:20:00.000-07:00

I was reading this article on Arizona Central today about a lady who lives in Canada. She started having this pain in her legs that made it so she could no longer hike or ski. She went to her local health care clinic who told her she needed to see a hip specialist. She was referred and told she'd have to wait a year for an appointment. So she waited until January of 2009 when she was then referred yet again to a back specialist because the pain in her leg was caused from a narrowing of her spine. She was told she'd have to wait until September to see that specialist and after that it'd be another year and a half before the surgery could actually be performed. So how long is that? That's almost three and a half years this poor lady would have had to gone before she could get surgery to fix her spine and thus fix the pain in her leg. Three and a half years! Did she wait that long? No, she crossed the boarder into the United States and had the surgery done in 2 days. Granted it cost her $50,000 without health care, but she said it was well worth it.

Canada's health care system is a public run one, where health insurance is provided by the government. Christina Woodkey was not given the option to get private health care. Will Canada change its tune and allow private health care? In British Columbia there are currently 70 private health providers who can perform simple surgeries and MRI's with a waiting period of as little as a week. If Canada were to switch to a system that does allow for private and public health care, it is feared that those who are old, disabled, and poor would suffer the most. As doctors move into the private industry that pays better, the waiting lines for those who are currently on the public system would get longer.

The point being though - Canada is thinking of going to a split system. If Universal Healthcare was so great, the thought of going to a split system wouldn't even be in motion. The risks of doing a split system also lead to similar problems the United States will face if it goes that route as well. Long wait times to see a doctor and years before someone is scheduled for a surgery? Is that what this country wants! Let's look at Canada - their health insurance is paid for through the tax payers. Canada spends about $172 billion on health care a year and the tax payers pay about 33 percent of GDP. It's not a free system and does not offer us better quality. Taxes will rise and quality will go down. Is that what this country wants?

I hope people really research this and look at other countries that have Universal Healthcare. You'll see that it's not the answer to our problem.

Sarah

If We Ban One Does It Mean We Need To Ban More?

2009-09-28T11:17:00.001-07:00

Have you ever tried texting while driving? Very hard task - I personally don't recommend it.

So does that mean we need a national ban on it? I think most do agree that texting while u drive is a distraction. There is no need to text while you drive. If you have something to say - pick up the phone and talk to that person. Seriously, what happened to the days of actually calling someone to talk? Now we get out our cell phone and text something that could have taken us a minute to say, yet we spend ten minutes typing it. I have friends who won't even call me anymore. Our relationship consists of text messages and those occasional facebook wall posts or comments. To each their own, and I would be lying if I didn't say I don't text. But do we really need to be doing it while we drive?

The argument against it is where do we stop? If we ban texting while driving are we going to ban other things, such as eating or putting on makeup, as well? Is texting while driving worse than eating in the car? There are many things that go into consideration on this, and it is not a straight forward answer. Texting while driving is a distraction and personally I don't see the need to do it; however, we can't go all out and start banning everything.

I guess I don't have the answer in the end, but AAA is saying they want texting while driving banned as of 2013 in all states. So are we going to let the law pass or do enough people think it is unnecessary? Maybe this is one law we should leave up to the states. Just a suggestion.

Sarah

MCRCC Commercials

2009-09-28T11:11:00.000-07:00

Let's Decentralize Our School System

2009-09-14T23:17:00.000-07:00

I heard a wonderful speech today by John Munger at the Lake Havasu City Republican Women's Club. John Munger is the chairman of the Imagine Arizona, which is a Political Action Committee with a mission to promote policies based on creating dynamic economic growth through the empowerment of free people and limited government.

He made some very great points about how we can reform Arizona and bring economic growth to our state and how we can reform our educational system. I would like to touch on a few of the topics he discussed today.

First off he talked about our school system and how we should decentralize it. Now what is decentralization and centralization of government organizations? It just so happens I happen to be learning and discussing this in school right now - so here we go:

Centralization is is where the authority to make important decisions is retained by upper management in an organization.
Decentralization is when the authority to make important decisions is delegated to managers at all levels of an organization.

While there can be some good things to centralization, I think at the end of the day decentralization is by far the better organizational structure. Right now we our school systems are set up to be centralized. Let's take Lake Havasu Unified School District for example. Right now, if the principal of LHHS wants to fire a teacher they must do so through the LHUSD. Right now, it is NOT Ms. Cox who makes the budget for LHHS it is the LHUSD that makes the budget for all the schools in the district. Right now - about a quarter of every dollar that your tax dollars spend that go to LHUSD is actually being spent in the class room, the rest goes to the administration. Does anyone see a problem with this? So let's decentralized our school districts. Dear lord I am going to say this (you all know I dislike Ms. Cox ... but here goes) - give Ms. Cox the power to fire and hire teachers at her school. It should be the principles power NOT the school districts. Give her the power to make the budget for LHHS. Take that power away from the school district. Let the principles manage their own school not the administrators and governing board of the school district. I think we should still have a school district as a check on the schools. But let them be the watch dogs not the managers of the schools. We need to put the money back into the classroom. It should be the other way around - a quarter of every tax dollar she be spent on the administration and the rest in the classroom! So come on people - fixing our educational problem is NOT rocket science. Decentralize it & by doing so - you not only help it financially but you strengthen the schools in the process.

Another think John Munger discussed was corporate tax and bringing business into Arizona. Why does Arizona have the highest corporate tax - 6.5% - than the surrounding states? People always say "oh California will bring in industry to Arizona." Well ... they haven't because we tax them too much! And then it takes FOREVER for these industries to pass regulations. We need to put time limits on regulators and lower our corporate tax. We need to give these businesses a reason to come into this state and do business. If we don't, we are never going to have any new growth.

One last thing I want to mention about his speech today is privatization. Government control of things is NEVER the answer. Privatization is. Let's be logical and take the example that Munger used when he said let private industry build our roads. California and Texas have a system set up where private industry built toll roads. They were built to reduce traffic on the public roads. They were built WITHOUT tax paying dollars. Industry came in, hired people to build them, and they are toll roads so u pay five dollars to drive on them. But it's growth, new roads, and being done without a dime of the tax payer dollars. The same goes for prisons - let's get private prisons! Take the burden off of counties and states! Maybe then we can afford to pay probation officers and rehabilitate these people!! My tax dollars should NOT go to pay for a criminal to sit in jail. Give that job to private industry & let the counties and states worry about other things.

Politics is not rocket science. If politicians would sit down and just think ... a lot could be done and a lot could be done a lot cheaper than it is.

We need to put logical people in office in 2010. We need elect leaders NOT followers and we need to take this country back!!

I hope John runs for governor - so far he's got my vote!

Sarah

IDD Tax, Sosey's Windmill & Everything In Between

2009-09-09T22:28:00.001-07:00

This is the last political rant for the day - I promise! There's just so much going on and you know me - I like to voice my opinion on things.

Anyway let's turn away from national politics for a moment and focus on local ones. Let's first look at this IDD Tax Lawsuit Lake Havasu City is facing. Here's the thing - the city council chose to increase the IDD Tax over increasing our water rate by 29% over the next three years. Now don't let that fool ya though - they STILL increased our water rates but only by 9%. The IDD Tax increase is going to help the city in funding their water and wastewater system. So what is the controversy? Well Sam Scarmardo and Harvey Jackson claim increasing the city's IDD Tax is a violation of Prop 201 passed in 1997 which says "no new taxes or increase in existing taxes could be imposed, and no sale of, or commitments of revenue to repay Municipal Property Corporation bonds could occur without approval by more than two-thirds vote at a special election called for the specific purpose." So the city is going to court and debating on how much to spend on it's defense. So the whole reasoning behind increasing the IDD tax is to save the tax payers money. Right? Okay, so the lawsuit itself in the first year will cost the city $60,000, the water rate will still increase 9% over 3 years and the IDD tax is increasing (if the city wins the suit). So the question remains - in the end - does this REALLY save the tax payers money? If there a prop saying you can't increase the tax - then don't increase it and don't waste tax payer money on a lawsuit trying to defend yourself when you know you're going to lose. And even if you are in the right - I have to ask though - is the lawsuit worth it in the end? Because I have to question - are we really saving enough money by increasing the IDD tax to make all this worth while?

So people are still ranting and raving on Sosey's Windmill. It's headed to the Superior Court. So here's the story on that - Sosey was supposedly in violation of an "accessory structure" - the windmill was 30 feet tall city code says it can't go over 15. So the Board of Adjustments for LHC voted against Sosey's Windmill. However Sosey claims the BOA voted against it as a "structure" not an "accessory structure." Either way - who cares? It's NOT being used to produce energy and it's just for decoration. As long as it can fall and NOT hit anybody else's property - who cares!! Move on and stop finding the littlest (okay big in this case but still) things to rant and rave about. Oya!

So I read an interesting editorial in September 1sts edition of the Mohave Valley Daily News on health care and health insurance. First off they are two different things!! No one is denied health care in this country - major misunderstanding! If you go to the ER, have no health insurance, and it's an emergency you WILL be treated!! It's a federal mandate!! Obama wants everyone to have health "insurance" NOT "care." I agree with the editorial - politicians seems to be interchanging the two terms lately when they are NOT the same thing.

And finally I would like to say thanks to all the volunteers who worked more than 3000 hours at Windsor Beach this summer to keep it running! You are appreciated!!

Sarah

My Take On Obama's School Speech Might Surprise Ya

2009-09-09T22:06:00.001-07:00

I think at the end of it all - there would have been far less controversy had Obama addressd the students on a prime time network and not in the class room but nonetheless - I'm ganna take a stance on the topic. Some of my response to the situation might surprise ya. So here goes.

First off - I agree with those who were against the idea of Obama presented a "lesson plan" to schools that the kids were to do following the speech. Leave it up to the teachers if they want a lesson plan or not. The White House should NOT release a lesson plan to follow the speech!! To me - that is mixing politics with education right there!!

Second off - it should be up to the parents if they want their child to watch it or not. NO school should mandate that the children watch the speed. If a parent doesn't want their child to watch the speech - then by all means, that child should not watch it!

Now let's just for a moment focus on the speech itself - the speech in and of itself was NOT as bad as people made it out to be. It was a very well written speech (the end result anyway). I might have left the comment on swine flue out of it (but that's just me), beyond that it did send a good message to the youth of this country. Click here to watch the speech I would have said the same thing in a nut shell if I was given the opportunity to address the nations schools.

It is true at the end of the day you have to believe in yourself and you have to be responsible enough to stay in school. I know far too many classmates from Lake Havasu High School who dropped out four months (FOUR MONTHS PEOPLE) away from graduating! There is no excuse for that!!

So should Obama of addressed our schools? Mmmmm ... now that's debatable ... and I don't know. Do you think by addressing them, Obama, they are more prone to listen to you then their parents, school teachers, or loved ones? -shrugs- Maybe in the end you shouldn't have given the speech but then again - I will say - it was not as bad as people made it out to be.

Sarah

Dear Mr. President - My Reaction To His Speech

2009-09-09T18:29:00.001-07:00

You spoke on health insurance - saying that everyone deserves to be covered and no American should go uncovered due to a pre-existing condition. You talk a good talk - it would be wonderful if EVERY American could have health insurance. If every American - despite some pre-existing condition - didn't have to worry about paying that 10,000 dollar medical bill that just came in the mail. It's a great concept - let's create competition so the private health cares lower their premiums. Okay! Great!!

....

Um, how are we going to afford this again?

I'm sorry - even if my employer did give me health insurance - do u honestly think Americans are going to stick with their health insurance provider if they can get it cheaper through the government? Screw the fact it's probably crap - people don't pay attention to that - they pay attention to the price tag. So what happens when too many Americans go on your health insurance Mr. Obama? How do you plan on paying for this without raising taxes and without adding to our national deficit? I cannot wrap my mind around how you plan on accomplishing this!! The entire program will be paid through tax dollars - why don't you get up there and tell the American people the TRUTH - it's NOT free and it WILL be funded through the people!! So sure maybe someones premium is 100 dollars vs. 200 through private insurance but at the end of the day - I'm still paying for my neighbor to have health insurance.

It's all theoretically a great idea - to cover every American because ur right - no one deserves to be denied health insurance because they have a pre-existing condition. It would be great if we could cover health insurance for America. But I just don't see it as a reality. How? We are trillions in debt and I'm sorry you cannot pass health care without adding to the deficit. Sure I supposed you could if you raise taxes but then again - who wants that during an economic recession?

Great in theory Mr. Obama but at the end of the day -- wake up! Something needs to be done - I don't deny that - health insurance is expensive (I should know - I have private health insurance) and it seriously covers crap, but having a government run system is not going to solve anything. Especially when you can't even get up there and tell the American people the truth on how you plan to pay for it.

Sarah

Tax, Tax, Tax ... You Can ONLY Tax So Much

2009-09-09T16:28:00.000-07:00

Well crap - just when I thought switching over to a more fuel efficient car was worth it!

What do I find out - that the state DOT departments are going to try and tax the drivers now on how many miles they drive! Yes you heard - you could be taxed on how many miles you drive! Why? Well if more people get fuel efficient vehicles they wont be using as much gasoline which in the long the state DOT (department of transportation) loses money through the gas tax.

Just when you thought things couldn't get worse ...

Gatta love taxes!
Sarah

Talking Points on Healthcare

2009-09-07T19:40:00.000-07:00

I thought I'd post this - it is some talking points for Republicans on health care. Obama is set to make his health care speech to Congress this Wednesday, so the Republican National Committee came up with some talking points. Check them out -

• After the outpouring of opposition Democrats heard to their government-run health care experiment the
past month, the president’s address to Congress Wednesday night is a “Hail Mary” pass to try and
salvage his health care reform plan one last time.
• Bill Clinton did the same thing when he addressed a joint session of Congress to try and save Hillary
Clinton’s plan for socialized health care, and it failed miserably.
• The president has “hit the reset button” on his government-run health care experiment 12 times
already.
• We know the president will give a good speech and say things the American public likes to hear – that
they won’t lose their insurance, there will be no rationing, Medicare won’t be cut, and no bureaucrat will
interfere with their health care. But all of those things will happen under the Democrats’ bill.
• Speeches and marketing may win campaigns, but they are no substitute for governing – Americans
don’t want another speech, they want another plan.
• The president should start from scratch on Wednesday night and invite Republicans to the table to talk
about real solutions for America's health care system.
• He should call for tort reform to end frivolous lawsuits that drive up health care costs for everyone.
• He should encourage health care portability so people can take their health coverage with them when
they change jobs.
• And he should make it clear that Americans should be able to get coverage regardless of preexisting
conditions.
• Republicans want to reform our health care system – it costs too much for all Americans.
• Republicans want to work with the president on common-sense, bipartisan health care reforms. The
RNC unveiled a Seniors’ Health Care Bill of Rights that provides a starting point.
• Voters made clear during August that they oppose the Democrats’ government-run health care
experiment, which would increase health care costs, increase taxes, increase the deficit, and reduce
the quality of health care.
• Unless the president is willing to stand up to the left-wing extremists of his party, he will simply push
through his government-run health care experiment that the American people have overwhelmingly
made clear they do not want.

The Truth About Government Control Health Care

2009-09-02T11:13:00.000-07:00

To See The Following In PDF FormatPlease Click Here

You Want Government To Run Health Care??

2009-08-28T16:00:00.001-07:00

Got this in an email - a wonderful editorial by Barry Goldwater Jr. It doesn't matter if your republican, democrat, or independent - the facts are the facts and this folks is facts. Take a minute to read it and in the end ask yourself - why do we want government to run our health care system again? There's gatta be a better solution ...
-------------

Health care? The government can’t even run a railroad

Published: August 28, 2009 at 3:35 pm

Nowhere in the debate regarding health care has anyone asked if the government is able and qualified to run such a system. Before we ask the government to manage universal health care, let’s check them out.

How successful has the federal government been in managing agencies, programs and businesses?

Let’s look at Medicare. The president and Congress propose to extend Medicare to cover the 47 million people who lack health care coverage.

Did anyone remind Congress that Medicare is broke? It’s rampant with fraud and abuse. It is estimated that Medicare and Medicaid fraud cost taxpayers $60 billion per year.

Medicare is required by law to pay full retail prices for drugs that could be obtained for far less in a competitive-bidding system.

Health insurance companies are required by state regulators to maintain a reserve for future liabilities. Every working stiff in this country is required to pay premium taxes into Medicare, which has no reserve. The federal government has been running the largest Ponzi scheme ever created, and it is on the hook for $36 trillion in unfunded liabilities.

And you, Mr. President, want the federal government to run health care?

On Aug. 4, 1977, Jimmy Carter declared war on energy dependence and created the U.S. Department of Energy. Every president since has done the same. Today, 31 years later, the Department of Energy’s budget is $26 billion. It employs 16,000 people and 100,000 contract employees. We are no closer to energy independence than we were in 1977.

And you want the federal government to run health care?

The U.S. Postal Service lost $7 billion last year and is talking about closing hundreds of offices.

And you want the federal government to run health care?

The Federal Reserve was created by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 to maintain a stable financial system. The Federal Reserve gets failing marks for its direct complicity in the economic meltdown and subsequent recession. The Federal Reserve has failed us.

And you want the federal government to run health care?

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were created by Congress as government- sponsored enterprises to provide low-interest funding for the mortgage industry. These government-run mortgage banks were created to provide competition and cheap loans to those who could not afford normal market rates.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac own more than $5 trillion in mortgage paper. On Sept. 7, 2008, they were declared insolvent and were taken over by the Federal Housing Finance Agency and bailed out with more than $400 billion - another government-run mess.

And you, Mr. President, want the federal government to run health care?

Amtrak was created by an act of Congress in October 1970 to run the nation’s railroad system. Amtrak was supposed to reverse over two decades of continuous operating deficits. With a congressional mandate to become profitable, it was given $40 million in initial funding, along with $100 million in loan guarantees. After 38 years, Amtrak has never made a profit and receives a federal subsidy, with no prospect in sight of breaking even.

And you want the federal government to run health care?

The war on drugs was started by President Richard Nixon in 1969. The United States has been spending $69 billion a year worldwide for the past 40 years, for a total of $2.5 trillion, on drug prohibition - with little to show for it. Today, there are more drugs on our streets at cheaper prices than ever before. It is easier for young people to obtain illegal drugs than a six-pack of beer. Why? because sellers of illegal drugs don’t ask kids for IDs.

And you want the federal government to run health care?

The list of government failures is long and telling. I can’t wait for the new “Government Motors” car. Are you waiting anxiously? Are you holding your breath? That car will be on recall for many years.

And you, Mr. President, want the federal government to run health care?

The government has failed for 30 years to achieve energy independence.

The government has bankrupted the Medicare program. The Postal Service is broke. The Federal Reserve was the primary cause of this economic meltdown and recession. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have been taken over and bailed out. We have lost the war on drugs.

Mr. President, our government can’t even run a railroad. How the hell do you think the government will ever manage a universal health care system?

Einstein once said, ‘The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.’

- Barry Goldwater, Jr. is a former Republican member of the United States House of Representatives from California. He is the son of the late Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater.

Frustrated With This Budget Already

2009-08-13T15:40:00.000-07:00

So I get home from work, go to my homepage which is azcentral.com and what is the headline "The Arizona Supreme Court ordered Thursday that the Legislature immediately relinquish to the governor all bills that have received final passage." WHAT!!? And do I DARE ask - why you couldn't have come up with this ruling ... ooo ... I don't know ... hmmm BACK IN JUNE!! Ooooo dear lord!

Here is what is wrong with the Arizona budget (if u wish to call it that) - Revenue was short nearly $479 Million in FY 09 which ended June 30th of this year. The Federal Stimulus money will cover about $250 Million of that, but we're still $229 Million in the red which will have to be dealt with in FY 2010. They did NOT pass a balanced budget.

The legislature missed the time frame to get the sales tax initiative on the budget for the November 3rd election and now are shooting for a December 8th special election which I doubt they'll make that deadline either. And if they do make the December 8th deadline, I am just going to sit here and shake my head because had they of made the November 3rd deadline - it'd be a lot cheaper because most districts are holding some sort of election in November. I know Lake Havasu Unified School District is holding their special election November 3rd. Wouldn't it have been cheaper for everyone to do ONE statewide election on the 3rd? I don't see what the problem is - LET THE VOTERS DECIDE! It shouldn't be up to the legislatures NOR should it be up to Governor Brewer - it should be OUR choice because it's OUR money!!

And one more thing - had the legislature JUST SENT the governor the passed June 4th budget, she could have vetoed it, and negotiations could have started - or is that putting too much hope and faith into both parties that they can actually negotiate?

It's August 12th, 2009 and we have YET to have a balanced budget. Stop playing politics and do what you were all elected to do! At this point - it's neither the republicans nor the democrats fault - it's everyone's fault and it's everyone's issue. So stop playing politics and do your job already.

Sarah (a very frustrated Sarah)

ObamaCare & Everything In Between

2009-08-07T18:07:00.001-07:00

Now I know I haven't blogged a lot lately. Been dealing with some personal matters, but politics still ticks on! A lot has happened this week. Have you been following the news? Let's see -

Bill Clinton took a trip to North Korea to negotiate the release of 2 American journalists. They were captured back in March for entering the country illegally through the Chinese boarders. The two journalists had worked on Al Gore's tv show and reportedly over there doing coverage for it. In June the high court of North Korea sentenced the two girls to 12 years of hard labor. So in came Bill Clinton to the rescue. But what exactly was negotiated? Did Kim Jong II just want the publicity of getting a top U.S. official to North Korea for some tea and photo shoots? Hmm? Makes you wonder but none the less - the girls are safe and at home. There is still the Iranian issue though. Three American's were arrested and detained in Iran after accidently crossing into Iranian territory while on a hiking trip. So who's going to go over and talk to the appointed Iranian President (can't call him elected because the people didn't elect him ... he rigged the election .. or so they say)? Is our president Obama going to sit down and have his open arm talks with the Iranian President like he promised during the 08 campaign and while at it negotiate their safe return? Or maybe we should just send Bill Clinton over there? Who's our president again??
Sorry those girls in North Korea were over there since March - MARCH - and it took until August for a guy who isn't even our president to go over there and get them released!! Makes me ask - how long will these poor tourists be stuck in Iran? Oh sorry - Obama's too worried about his health care plan getting passed. Mmm my bad!

Anyway moving on to the local front - let's see Mohave County Board of Supervisors passed a $287 Million dollar budget on Monday while the state legislature STILL is in special session and STILL debating the sales tax issue. Are we seriously still on that topic? Let the people decide for crying out loud! -eyeroll- The Wal-Mart distribution center got pushed back till 2011. Oh and look Warren Jeffs had to be forced feed food again because he went on yet another hunger strike. In other words ... not much is new.

Now with all that put aside, I'd like to rant on health care. Yes I know I'm sick of hearing about it too but someone has to state the facts about it and not false hope ...

1) How are we going to pay for this again? Medicare? Medicaid? Social security? Hmmm ... I thought medicare and social security (programs already ran by the government) were in or very near bankruptcy? Yet they are going to pay for this trillion dollar program? Yeah right - so um, Obama, how are we going to pay for this again??

2) Why is it that this Obamacare mandates that everyone have health insurance? How in God's name do you plan to pay for EVERYONE? Because under the current Health Care Plan being presented before congress right now - it is mandated not only that people have health coverage but that they have health coverage with certain benefits the government deems 'necessary.' So if your coverage doesn't have that already - you need to up your coverage (which is going to be pricey) or switch to the government run system? Hmm .. which wanna you ganna chose? Which brings me back to my original question - how are you going to pay for this? Taxes will be raised and in the end I see public costing way more than any private health care ever cost.

3) If you actually read the ENTIRE 1018 pages of the bill which is viewable online - http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf - page 30 talks about the creation of a Health Benefits Advisory Committee which is established to help decide what treatment/benefits are going to covered. There will be creation of National Health Care Cards on page 58 and they will be checking your finances periodically to determine your financial responsibility. And what about illegal aliens? Are they covered under this plan? There is a loophole in the bill - it doesn't have any mechanism that keeps illegals off our health care plan. So will we be footing the bill for millions of illegal immigrants? Of course if Obama has his way - they will be on the pathway to citizenship before we know it! -eyeroll

Here's my rash opinion - how about we put this ALL to the a vote of the people? See I have this theory - that if you are going to change or create a policy that is going to drasticly affect the way this country is ran and is going to cost tax payers trillions of dollars - it needs to be left up to the PEOPLE not the politics! But hey that's just my opinion ...

Politics - never a dull moment is there?

Sarah

Are You Trying to Kill Small Business?

2009-07-28T16:27:00.000-07:00

Barack Obama’s Health Care Plan – coined to many as ObamaCare – if passed would require businesses with as few as nine employees to get health insurance for them. Are you trying to kill small business in America?! Small businesses cannot afford to get healthcare for their employees – especially in this economy. If it passes and that is put into the health care plan – I see nearly all of what is coined “main street” in Lake Havasu closing not to mention other small businesses that can’t afford to insure their employees. It’s not that they don’t WANT to its they CAN’T because they simply cannot afford it. Then what is left? Nothing but big business and corporations … and of course – the public sector.

There’s your change people – right there in black and white! Not ALL change is good!

Sarah

What is a mandated service?

2009-07-06T17:39:00.001-07:00

Many Arizonans have sort of gotten used to the services provided by our government during our more successful years, forgetting that a lot of these perks are not mandated services.

What is a mandated service?

Services that are required by law; like fire protection and police protection. Welfare is not a mandated service. It is something created during the Depression to help get those back on their feet who might otherwise wither and die. It was appropriate at the time because people were truly suffering; kids were starving to death and the majority of America's workforce was working itself to an early miserable grave.

But what has happened since then?

Take a look at any welfare worker's case load and you'll see a lot of able-bodied young people who can get out and work but they choose to stay home with the kids. The kids who were born with the assistance of a State program that has become quite overwhelmed. I'm speaking from experience; I was a case worker and 80% of my clients were people who simply did not need to be on the programs.
They did anything and everything to stay on those programs, too!

If we required them to at least work part time, they worked just enough to qualify for the welfare. Then they'd have their hours cut because their welfare was more important. Or they'd quit the job for seemingly no reason; in an effort to stay "just poor enough" for the welfare. Then there were those who actually worked full time and made more money than I did; but they lied about their income and brought me fake pay stubs showing poverty level wages. I had to be a seasoned investigator to figure out which families were defrauding the system.
If I found enough evidence to remove a family from my case load because of their fraud, they would find my home address and come visit me in the middle of the night. Not a friendly visit, either!

This is the majority of the people who are taking advantage of our State's welfare system. This is a system that is not mandated, and it should be overhauled.

Secondly, our school systems have become quite bloated with services and programs that are far from mandated. Is cheerleading a mandatory function? Are sports mandatory? Valuable experiences, yes, but not required for a child to grow up educated and enriched. Schools in Arizona take the majority of the money in our budget. What has happened where our mandated services must suffer so these schools can continue to operate at high dollar pricing? Probation officers are being laid off, police departments are cutting back. But the schools still have all their onsite classes and services. We are in an age of technology, when many students can take their schooling online to fulfill graduation requirements. No paper needed, no buses to drive, quizzes and homework are submitted electronically. If the ailing colleges can do this, so can the public schools.

Our population needs to understand that our State is in serious trouble. We have a budget problem that began a couple of years ago and it looks to be getting worse. Cut back now! Cut the services that aren't mandated! Save our State!!

Shawna Thornton

The History Of The Iranian Conflict – Part 3 – The 2009 Election

2009-07-03T15:10:00.001-07:00

The relationship between Iran and Iraq hasn’t been the most neighborly in the past; however thanks to the 2003 invasion of Iraq by the United States – all that is slowly changing.

What one needs to understand about the geography of Iran is that Iran (prior to the most recent years) use to be completely surrounded by U.S. alleys. You had Iraq that up until the Gulf War was being helped by the United States in the Iraq/Iran war and even after the gulf war Iraq was under containment and U.S. forces were present. It’s surrounded by turkey, Afghanistan (where we currently have U.S. troops), Saudi Arabia … Iran was surrounded and any move it made against Israel would not be helpful to them because of their location. But then the 2003 invasion of Iraq happened and relations slowly changed with Iraq after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein.

CBS Evening News was reported in 2008 as saying “Iran has been called the main beneficiary of the Iraq conflict so often it is almost a cliché.” After the invasion, a new Iraqi government was formed through an election process. Many of the seats taken in the new government were Shiite-dominated. Several of the Shiite’s elected had spent years in excel in Iran. These Shiite’s have become thankful and respectful of Iran’s hospitality. When the Iraqi government under Saddam’s region threw them out, Iran took them in, because of this; the newly elected Shiite’s of Iraq are helping to improve the relationship between Iran and Iraq.

In March of 2008, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visited Iraq and was welcomed with open arms by the new Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. During the visit between Nouri al-Maliki and Ahmadinejad talks were made regarding trade between the two countries. Talks were made regarding free trade barriers between the countries, talks of oil ventures, talks of an airport being built, and even talks of integrating their banking system. A reporter for CBS Evening news said that “Iran-Iraq trade already tops $8 billion per year. ” Iran has even gone as far as exporting nuclear energy to its neighboring country of Iraq.

Now we go into the 2009 elections of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his rival that has caused all the controversy – Mir-Hossein Mousavi.

Mir-Hossein Mousavi is not new to Iranian politics. He served as the fifth and last prime minster of Iran during the years 1981 to 1989 before constitutional changes removed the part of prime minister in Iran. After many years of being out of the political spotlight, he came back to run in the current 2009 elections. Mir-Hossein Mousavi is saying that the 2009 elections were not done properly. He claims that the Interior Minister, Sadegh Mahsouli, an ally of Ahmadinejad, interfered with the election and distorted the votes to keep Ahmadinejad in power. Despite though whatever Mir-Hossein Mousavi believes Ahmadinejad, who first became president in 2005, was officially announced the winner of the election in June of this year.

So all this is nice to know but why do we care?

The Bush Administration, after the 9/11 attacks, imposed sanctions on Iran for their support of terrorism and their failure to stop their nuclear enrichment program. The Iran sanctions forbid U.S. dealings with three Iranian-owned banks and businesses controlled by Iran’s special military units, Other sanctions against Iran also include a total ban on dealings with Iran by U.S. citizens, pressure for the world’s oil companies not to invest in Iranian oil, and in 1995 a ban was placed against aviation companies for selling airplane parts to Iranian companies.

The sanctions the US have imposed on Iran have hurt the people of Iran the most. Sanctions on any country usually never truly hurt the people they are intended to hurt. The sanctions have raised inflation in Iran by nearly 18%. They have also made it harder for business to get supplies they need. A business owner, who wants to get supplies for his or her business from the US, has to go through a middle man to do so. An owner of an electronic-goods store in North Tehran, had goods shipped to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates, from there they were shipped to North Tehran in Iran. It has to be done this way because the U.S. is not allowed to ship goods directly to Iran. This imposes a major financial burden on business owners in Iran who have to pay extra, sometimes upwards to 1,000 U.S. dollars, to get their goods from the U.S.

Ahmadinejad doesn’t seem to care that inflation is at all time records in Iran nor that his people are suffering due to his en-action not to stop his nuclear enrichment program. Ahmadinejad claims the enrichment program is just to create energy so Iran is not dependent on oil. He swears he will not use the nuclear enrichment program for any harm doing to America. Right? This coming from a guy who swore up and down also that the Holocaust was nothing but a myth. He may not hurt America with it – but what about Israel? The country he swears needs to be whipped off of this planet. The growing relationship between Iraq and Iran is something the United States should be questioning. President Barack Obama had mentioned many times during his campaigning for the highest office in the United States government that he wants a plan to get out of Iraq. Would pulling out of Iraq too soon be playing into the hands of the Iranian government? Would they use that to their advantage and turn Iraq against us?

So Ahmadinejad is still president of Iran & the United States still needs to worry! And the victims that I feel sorry for in all of this mess are the Iranian citizens!

Sarah

————–

Resources:

Pizzey, A. (2008, 3 4). Iran Winning Iraqi Hearts And Minds. Retrieved 11 23, 2008, from CBS:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/04/notebook/main3903194.shtml

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir-Hossein_Mousavi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_presidential_election,_2009

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad

Sanctions against Iran. (2008, October 8). Retrieved October 28, 2008, from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iran

The History Of The Iranian Conflict – Part 2 – Iraq Vs Iran

2009-07-03T15:02:00.000-07:00

1980 – Iraq invades Iran.

Now remember Iran right now has a new form of government and it isn’t all that powerful. It’s weak politically. Iran has oil reserves and Saddam wants them. So Iraq invades its neighbor, Iran, in order to obtain their oil and gain economic property with it

At first the United States did not interfere with the conflict. Iraq invaded Iran and it wasn’t until it looked like Iraq could possibly lose did the United States step in. We gave Saddam Hussein biological and chemical weapons. With those weapons Saddam NOT ONLY killed nearly 50,000 Iranians but he killed his own people as well. Iran lost the war. They gave up, they went back home and they came up with a plan so that when someone fights them again they will be ready. Iraq fought them with biological and chemical weapons – something that back then Iran did not have.

So 1990 – Iraq invades Kuwait.

Well when Iran went in and invaded Kuwait, The United States sided with Kuwait because they were our ally. So the United States sent troops over to help fight the war known in history as the ‘gulf war.’ After Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, U.S. President George H. W. Bush deployed U.S. Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard units to Saudi Arabia as a part of Operation Desert Shield, while urging other countries to send their own forces to the scene.

Remember Osama Bin Laden? The guy we helped fight off the Russians from invading Afghanistan during the Cold War? Yeah, well he didn’t like the fact that we were helping Kuwait and doing so by basing our men on Saudi soil.

Saudi Arabia history – . In 1932 Abdul Aziz Ibn Saudi took control of Saudi Arabia. He used fierce fighters to gain control of the land and in return made these fierce fighters part of his government. Now not all of Muslim religion is bad but the sect known as Wahhabism is the worst. They are the fundamentalists. They were NOT nice to any other religion. Anyway, so in 1933 oil is found in Saudi Arabia. So the U.S. in 1945 makes a pact with Saudi that we will protect their county and regime if they in return offer us cheap oil. So we do and we continue to do so. This upsets Osama Bin Laden and others because in Saudi Arabia you have two of the most sacred places in the Muslim religion. They are being controlled and run by this corrupt regime that is taking all of their oil wealth for themselves and letting their people have no reward of it.

During the Gulf War Saudi Arabia paid 40Billion of 60Billion in war costs. The US put a base up there (the government let them while the people of Saudi Arabia did not appreciate our presence) and Osama then grew to hate the United States.
It’s all about politics – Osama hates us for more reasons than just because of that though – there’s the whole Israel conflict but as well but I’ll get to that later.
What one must understand about Iraq is that it is split up into three parts – they have the Shiats, the Kurds, and then the Saddam people. Well the Kurds and Shiats don’t like Saddam. So during the Gulf War we encouraged them to overthrow Saddam YET we didn’t help. We should have defeated Saddam in 1991 by going in there and doing the job ourselves but we didn’t. We went with a policy known as containment. We would fly planes over Iraq and keep Saddam contained. We placed sanctions on Iraq that actually didn’t harm the government of Iraq but the people which is part of the problem we had in the current war with Iraq and why we saw so much resistance from the Iraqi people when we went in during 2003 to overthrow Saddam then.

Without getting into the whole US lead invasion on Iraq – I will just say this – we went into Iraq in 2003 and we took Saddam out of power. So shouldn’t Iran be happy about that? We took Saddam out of power – a guy who attacked them in the 80’s for nothing more than oil and greed.

Well remember I said it wasn’t just about Iraq, it is also about Israel.

History of Israel – One hundred years ago, there was no Israel. The British decided early in the twentieth century that there should be a Jewish state but the UN was actually the one to set it up. In 1947 after WWII the U.N. set up two states: Palestine and Israel because the Jews needed somewhere to go after WWII. The Muslims who occupied that land were not very pleased. The Jews claim that the land of Israel is theirs and has been for over 2000 years, but the Muslims claim they have lived there for 2000 years and it is their land. So whose land is it really? Well depends on which side you believe?

So back the whole point – yes we got rid of Saddam but Israel is still a major problem for Iran! Israel has the power to nuke all of Iran – which is why Iran hasn’t done much in terms of fighting with them. But if Iran gets a nuke and gains that power – who’s to say they won’t nuke Israel?

So now we go into today’s conflict and why the 2009 election will play a major role in the future of the United States relations with Iran as well as Iran’s relations with Israel and Israel’s relations with the U.S

Tune in to the final part to the Iranian Conflict – The 2009 Election & Why We Care.

Sarah

Let The Voters Decide Already

2009-07-01T18:28:00.000-07:00

Governor Brewer is calling the Legislature back into a special session on Monday to discuss the sales tax issue again that was not in the approved Budget sent to her office early this morning and to talk about the K-12 cuts along with cuts to health and social services.

First of all, I am really having a hard time grasping why the legislature withheld the June 4th budget from her in the first place? Yes, she probably would have vetoed it – okay she would have vetoed it – but at least negotiations could have begun way earlier than they did. Now we are facing having some government agencies closing because there is no budget and will state workers be paid this coming Friday? Well that one still seems to be up in the air.

So here’s an idea to all those in the House and Senate who keep saying no to the sales tax idea - Let the voters decide!! Put it on the November ballot and let us decide if we want a sales tax increase or not!

We either vote yes and save education, health and social services from being cut to the bare minimum or we vote no and we cut all services that are not mandated for the state to run.

Let the voters decide because at the end of the day isn’t that who should be the deciding vote? Not the governor and not the legislature!

Stop playing politics & do your job!

Sarah

What Happened To Those Who Signed The Declaration of Independence ?

2009-07-01T17:38:00.000-07:00

I did not write this but I thought it was fitting seeing that it is July 4th this coming Saturday.

Sarah
----
Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men

who signed the Declaration of Independence ?

Five signers were captured by the British as traitors,
and tortured before they died.

Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned.
Two lost their sons serving in the Revolutionary Army;
another had two sons captured.

Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or
hardships of the Revolutionary War.

They signed and they pledged their lives, their fortunes,
and their sacred honor.

What kind of men were they?

Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists.
Eleven were merchants,
nine were farmers and large plantation owners;
men of means, well educated,
but they signed the Declaration of Independence
knowing full well that the penalty would be death if
they were captured.
Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and
trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the
British Navy. He sold his home and properties to
pay his debts, and died in rags.

Thomas McKeam was so hounded by the British
that he was forced to move his family almost constantly.
He served in the Congress without pay, and his family
was kept in hiding. His possessions were taken from him,
and poverty was his reward.

Vandals or soldiers looted the properties of Dillery, Hall, Clymer,
Walton, Gwinnett, Heyward, Ruttledge, and Middleton.

At the battle of Yorktown , Thomas Nelson, Jr., noted that
the British General Cornwallis had taken over the Nelson
home for his headquarters. He quietly urged General
George Washington to open fire. The home was destroyed,
and Nelson died bankrupt.

Francis Lewis had his home and properties destroyed.
The enemy jailed his wife, and she died within a few months.

John Hart was driven from his wife's bedside as she was dying.
Their 13 children fled for their lives. His fields and his gristmill
were laid to waste. For more than a year he lived in forests
and caves, returning home to find his wife dead and his
children vanished.
So, take a few minutes while enjoying your 4th of July holiday and
silently thank these patriots. It's not much to ask for the price they paid.

Remember: freedom is never free!

It's time we get the word out that patriotism
is NOT a sin, and the Fourth of July has more to it than beer,
picnics, and baseball games.

Stop Playing Politics & Do Your Job

2009-07-01T17:34:00.000-07:00

The AZ Republic has a pretty good summation of what our Legislators have done this past session, which is practically nothing. Surely this isn't what we elect people to the State Legislature to do - they are supposed to be governing the State. It is my understanding that even if the Goveror and Legislature get together on the 2009-10 Budget Bill, which they should have finished weeks ago, the State will still be facing a deficit in the 2010-11 budget year of over four billion dollars.

The Legislature has been dominated by Republicans for several years and this year the Governor is Republican - what is going on there? They argue, fight, just can't get it together, spend time on asinine political BS and, in general, don't get the job done. They are killing the Republican Party in Arizona.

With this bunch running the government, the State of Arizona is going right down the well. I'm not the only one who feels this way, lots of folks I talk with seem to think the same way. They are sick of politics. As one person said, "It don't matter which party is in power, we get the same old BS." Why can't wee get people in the Legislature who want to run run the State? Public safety and the Public infrastucture are at the top of the list, and there ain't gonna be any economic development in this State without educated people. Certainly there are other things but the Legislature needs to take care, but they need to addrress the important items first.

Come the next election, all those who are presently in office should be removed for they have proven they can't do the job. That won't happen, but it is a thought.
Yes, I am disgusted....

C.O. "Connie" Blevins
cblevins@rraz.net

==
Arizona Republic, June 29,2009

As Arizona lawmakers enter their 24th week of work, things don't look all that different from when they started Jan. 12: A gargantuan budget deficit. Scores of bills. Difficult relations with the governor. And not much to show for all the time and effort.

With the deadline for a state budget looming Tuesday, Arizona will see if its elected officials can essentially cram six months of work into two days.
If not, there is a possibility of a government shutdown, or, more likely, week-by-week funding to a shrinking number of state services. The governor and Legislature would have to agree to a continuing resolution to fund government services.
So far, the 49th Legislature's tangible achievements have been few in number. It has fixed the current-year budget twice (and it's still upside down), sent seven mostly budget-related bills to Gov. Jan Brewer and continued a scholarship program for foster children and disabled students, even while cutting services to the broader disabled population.

Work on the hundreds of bills that were introduced earlier this year moved at a steady pace in the House, but was non-existent in the Senate until June 8. That's because Senate President Bob Burns, in an effort to focus attention on the state budget, would not allow any work on legislation until a budget was complete.
The result: A blizzard of bills that lawmakers have shoveled through since June 8 as they work toward Tuesday. On Saturday alone, the Senate took action on 35 bills, including measures to legalize certain fireworks and to ban photo enforcement on state highways.

The House is scheduled to debate 44 bills today.

The end of June is the deadline for budget bills only. In theory, the Legislature can continue its session indefinitely to debate other bills. In reality, though, the end of June becomes a deadline for all other bills, too, because many members plan to leave town after then.

Lobbying continued behind the scenes Sunday to line up the needed votes for the $8.4 billion budget compromise that the Republican governor and GOP legislative leaders unveiled Friday. It hasn't been an easy sell. Expectations that the plan would breeze through once Brewer, Burns and House Speaker Kirk Adams had resolved their differences (a dispute that took a detour through the state Supreme Court) evaporated Saturday when a House budget committee halted its consideration of the budget package after nearly six hours of work.

The hang-up: A move to give voters a choice on a temporary sales-tax increase, which Brewer has said is paramount, and an eleventh-hour proposal to convert the state's graduated income-tax system to a modified flat tax. The two elements were a key part of the compromise. Conservative lawmakers oppose the idea of a sales-tax hike; to win them over, leaders added the proposal to start a flat tax in 2012.
Work will formally resume this morning when the Senate Appropriations Committee starts its review of the budget package and its House counterpart completes its disrupted Saturday agenda.

After that, approval from the full House and Senate is needed to enact the budget compromise.

While few were predicting a vote would happen Monday, there was still widespread belief that Arizona won't be pitched into its first government shutdown.
"I'm still cautiously optimistic we can get this done," Adams said Saturday.

Thanks to the City, LHC State Park To Stay Open In Case Of Government Shut Down

2009-06-30T22:30:00.000-07:00

Looks like the state budget will not pass before midnight !! But thankfully the city of Lake Havasu is going to step in and keep the parks open at least through this weekend's 4th of July Holiday. I'd hate to see what would have happened had they of closed Windsor Beach on one of the biggest Holiday's Lake Havasu faces. Anyway here is an article from the AzCentral Website on it:

"Arizona's state parks system says it is closing down most of its parks before a midnight deadline for a new state budget to be enacted.

Parks officials said the decision was made to start asking campers to leave 13 parks late Tuesday.

The park closures also include cave tours at Kartchner Caverns State Park in Benson.

According to officials, state parks in Show Low and Lake Havasu will remain open under special-use agreements signed with those cities to have the cities operate, monitor, maintain and control the parks.

That lasts through July 5th or when the park systems' budget is authorized."

My clock says - 2 and a half hours left until midnight. I'm heading to bed! Guess I'll see in the morning if our government is in shut down or not and how bad it is!

Oh and the 2nd part of the Iranian conflict series is coming - I've just been a little preoccupied with following the state budget. Sorry but I have not forgotten!

Sarah

The History Of The Iranian Conflict – Part 1 – Iran Vs U.S. How It Began

2009-06-28T16:10:00.000-07:00

If you turn on the news, you are more than likely to hear about the Iranian conflict. The 2009 Election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has sparked many reactions not just in Iran itself but around the world. But who really knows the history of Iran? Why does Iran hate the United States? What does Iraq have anything to do with it? And why should WE care about the 2009 Iranian presidential election?

This is the first of a three part blogging series on how the Iranian conflict that we are seeing today started, why we care, and how everyone in the end has somehow played a role in it.

Let’s start at the beginning. Like I always say “that’s where ALL good stories begin.”

1919 – The Britain’s took control of most of Iran. In the early 1900’s Britain got a hold of Iran along with Russia and split up the land. Russia owned part of it and Britain owned the rest. They wanted Iran because it is rich in oil refineries and at the time the automobile was just getting started along with the industrial revolution. Iran still had what they call the Shah which is pretty much their king. So Britain owned the land but they still had their own political structure separate from that of Britain.

1941 – Britain didn’t like the fact that the Shah was getting powerful. Basically they feared if the Shah got too powerful they would kick Britain out and take the oil refineries for themselves. So in 1941 Britain deposed of the Shah.

1951- Iran’s first attempt to form a democracy after the Shah was removed from power. They put into government a prime minster. Iran had five prime ministers from 1951 till 1989. Mohammed Mossaddeq was elected the prime minister of Iran. Mossaddeq nationalized Iran’s oil industry which had been controlled exclusively by the British government-controlled Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, the UK’s largest single investment overseas. The ejection of Western oil companies from their Iranian refineries triggered the Abadan Crisis and nearly caused a war. Britain accused Mosaddeq of violating the legal rights of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company and mobilized a worldwide boycott of Iran’s oil that plunged Iran into financial crisis. The British government tried to enlist the United States in planning a coup, but President Harry S. Truman refused. However, his successor Dwight D. Eisenhower allowed the CIA to embark on its first covert operation against a foreign government. The British and U.S. spy agencies replaced the government of the popular Prime Minister Mosaddeq with an all-powerful monarch, Mohammed Reza Pahlevi who ruled for the next 26 years until he was overthrown in 1979.

Mossaddeq was well liked throughout Iran because he had nationalized the oil reserves in 1952 and made the land of Iran their land and not owned by some other country. Mohammed Reza Pahlevi who replaced Mossaddeq was NOT well liked among the Iranian people. The Iranian people never liked the Shah that was in place before the Prime Ministers took over. So in the Iran’s eyes, the U.S. and Great Britain just destroyed their shot at a democracy by getting rid of Mossaddeq and replacing it with who they viewed just as worse as the Shah.

The Iranian Revolution occurred in Iran in January of 1978. Many Iranians did not like Mohammed Reza Pahlevi that they saw the United States along with Britain helped appoint after the overthrow of Mossaddeq. The Iranians were able to kick Mohammed Reza Pahlevi out of power and instate a theocratic constitution lead by Khomeini. The U.S. embassy seizure occurred in 1979 at the U.S. embassy in Iran when a group of Iranian students seized and held embassy personal in the embassy. They feared the United States would overthrow their new leader like they did back in 1953 with Mossaddeq.

The Iran hostage crisis occurred in 1979 when 52 Americans were held hostage for 444 days from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981, after a group of Islamist students and militants took over the American embassy with the support of the Iranian government. The episode reached a climax when, after failed attempts to negotiate a release, the United States military attempted a rescue operation, Operation Eagle Claw, on April 24, 1980, which resulted in a failed mission, the crash of two aircraft and the deaths of eight American servicemen and one Iranian civilian. It ended with the signing of the Algiers Accords in Algeria on January 19, 1981. The hostages were formally released into United States custody the following day, just minutes after the new American president Ronald Reagan was sworn in.

In Iran, despite freezing of all Iranian assets held in US (Executive Order 12170), the hostage holding was widely seen as a blow against the U.S, and its influence in Iran, its perceived attempts to undermine the Iranian Revolution, and its long-standing support of the recently overthrown autocratic Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

And so began a feud that today still holds true.

Check in tomorrow for the second part of this blogging series – The History Behind the Iran & Iraq war.

Sarah

Resources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_hostage_crisis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax

Science Vs Left Wing Politicians

2009-06-28T13:39:00.000-07:00

CO2 emissions contribute to about 3% to the current climate change suggested by Al Gore in his movie the Inconvenient Truth (however – inconveniently I doubt that was one of his facts pointed out in the movie). Water Vapor contributes to about 96% of the current “green house” effect known to many Americans and liberal politicians as global warming; known to the scientific community as climate change.

The Earth is constantly going through various changes in its global temperature. There was the ice age period which resulted in global temperature reduction for a long period of time. Then starting around 12,000 B.C. there was what is known as the Halocene period which is what we are currently experiencing today. What is different about the Halocene period is that it has both warming and cooling periods. During the period of 10,000 to 8500 BC, there was a slight cooling period known as the Younger-Dryas. Then during the years 5000 and 3000 B.C temperatures increased to a period higher than we have seen in our lifetime. This period was known as Climatic Optimum. During this period scientists claim humanity saw the highest number of humans dying due to the increases in global temperature. But guess what? Humanity survived! Humanity adapted to their surroundings and lived through the Climatic Optimum period. I could go on and on, but you get the point. Climate change is nothing new!

Yet to many democrats in the House, it seems that climate change is something humanity since the industrial revolution has caused because of the increase in CO2 emissions. Why do some politicians still insist that CO2 is the leading contributor to the greenhouse effect when it has been scientifically documented that water vapor contributes to over 96% of it?

The House Democrats with the Obama Administration’s Support on Friday passed what is known as the climate bill (HR 2454). A bill that will change America’s consumption of energy and put higher costs on the American public during a time of hardships for many Americans. One article quoted as saying this:

“The House voted Friday on the biggest environmental bill in decades, after a deal was brokered Tuesday by key Democrats. The deal, which would delay the Environmental Protection Agency from hindering the ethanol industry and give the Agriculture Department control over reducing farm-based greenhouse gas emissions, was made hours after President Obama asked the House to pass the legislation. It would also require factories, power plants and refineries to reduce seven types of greenhouse gas emissions—including carbon monoxide, the biggest contributor to global warming—by 80 percent over the next 40 years. Though the bill’s opponents claim that it will hurt the U.S. economy and cost families thousands of dollars a year, estimates by the EPA show that it would raise the average household’s energy costs from only $80 a year to $111. The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Henry Waxman, said it should pass as a result of support from three important groups: environmentalists, farmers, and a majority of the industries involved. ….
The deal will bar the EPA for five years from including the conversion of forests to crop land when it calculates how ethanol production will contribute to global warming. During that time, the agency will have to conduct a study.”

My favorite part of the article “including carbon monoxide, the biggest contributor to global warmin.”

So my question to you all is this – what are your thoughts on this new climate bill that is heading to the Senate for a vote next week? Do you feel we need to pass a climate bill in a time like this when our country is already in a recession? Can the American public afford the price tag that comes with this bill? And who do we believe – science or politics? What is the biggest contributor to the greenhouse effect or global warming as so many still continue to call it?

Sarah

Resources:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9763 http://www.ourcivilisation.com/aginatur/cycles/chap1.htm http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/06/23/rural_urban_lawmakers_strike_agreement_on_climate?s_campaign=8315

Some Food For Thought

2009-06-28T13:38:00.000-07:00

Does anybody out there have any memory of the reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY during the Carter Administration?

No! Yeah I didn’t think so!

Bottom line we’ve spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency …the reason for which not one person who reads this can remember.

The reasoning for the departments creation was very simple .. and at the time everybody thought it very appropriate…The ‘Department of Energy’ was instituted on8-04-1977TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL.

Hey, pretty efficient, huh? ????

AND NOW IT’S 2009, 32 YEARS LATER … AND THE BUDGET FOR THISNECESSARY DEPARTMENT IS AT$24.2 BILLION A YEARIT HAS16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEESAND APPROXIMATELY100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES
AND LOOK AT THE JOB IT HAS DONE!THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY‘WHAT WAS I THINKING?’

Ah, yes, good old bureaucracy

And NOW we are going to turn the Banking System,Health Care & the Auto Industry over to government?

Oh dear Lord! Help us all!

The Chaos Known As The State Budget

2009-06-28T13:28:00.000-07:00

The state of Arizona is facing anywhere from a 3 to 4 billion dollar deficit (depending on who you ask). There is no doubt that it needs to be fixed and in order to do that services will be cut, money will be borrowed and local governments will hurt because of it.

The legislature is proposing a budget that cuts programs, takes about 150 million from local governments, and takes about 200 million from the K-12 foundation. The legislature also proposes borrowing more money and rolling over higher education dollars. Jan Brewer’s plan is similar – less money is borrowed and taken from local governments in her plan however it is still done. The main difference between Brewer and the legislature’s plans are a sales tax increase. Jan Brewer claims in order to fix the budget deficit we need to enact a one-cent sales tax that she claims will be in place for three years brining the state in over one million dollars. However under her plan services still need to be cut and local governments will still hurt, just maybe not as much. But is it worth it? Is there a lesser of two evils here or should Jan Brewer and the legislature go back to the drawing board all together?

What happens if money is taking from the county? Mohave County right now – without the state coming in and taking anything – has a balanced budget. If the legislature does what it is proposing and takes the 150 million from the local governments, Mohave County won’t have a balanced budget. What will that mean? It means services will be cut here, and I am sure everyone in Lake Havasu City and Bullhead remember what happened when the Treasurer’s office closed. People were upset. Imagine the assessor’s office closing, environmental health, the nurse’s office, etc, etc. It’s not a pretty picture.

Something has to be done to fix the state budget. So what is it? Borrowing more money? Rolling more K-12 funds over year after year in hopes one budget year we have enough to stop rolling them over and actually pay them? A one-cent sales tax increase? Cutting programs that are un-mandated that we simply don’t need even if it is not politically correct? What do we do?
What would you do if you were in Capital Hill right now?

Register, comment & let’s talk politics.