If you're a Republican in this state, you ought to be embarrassed. No, not by the governor's recent finger wag - who knows what actually went on there?
No, you should be embarrassed by what we do know that goes on - the behavior of your fellow Republicans in the state Legislature.
They consistently make fools not only of themselves but of the Republicans who consistently return them to office.
Let me just cite a few of the idiocies so far in this session.
Your Republican appropriations chair, Don Shooter, says he won't take public comment when his committee meets on this year's budget.
His reasoning? "I heard it last year."
The arrogance of that is matched only by its insipidness. The budget has the most profound effect on Arizona citizens each year. That one of the most powerful Republican committee chairs in the Legislature won't deign to hear from the public is shameful. Equally shameful is that he will get away with it and be reelected later this year. Why? Because enough of your fellow Republicans will vote for him.
Then there's the newest Birther Bill, soon to be introduced by Judy Burges and Carl Seel. That's right, these two still want to keep the "Obama's-not-really-an-American" myth alive. Forget that the president presented the long form certificate almost a year ago, effectively ending a phony subject. Except here in Arizona, where Republicans Burges and Seel still have a sneaky suspicion that Obama the Socialist/Closet Muslim Just Ain't a Real American. Sadly enough, that belief is firmly set in more than a few of your fellow Republicans' minds.
Next you have the most powerful Republican in the Legislature trying to reverse existing law because, well, he just doesn't like it. Speaker of the House Andy Tobin has introduced legislation designed to reverse the redistricting of the Independent Redistricting Commission and hold a special election in May to vote on another map.
At a cost of $8 million. On a map created by? Tobin himself. Without input from either fellow legislators or the public. The last time we went through this process, the Democrats didn't like the results, and sued. And lost in court. But they didn't try to reverse the process legislatively, nor did one powerful Democrat attempt to usurp the law voters approved a decade ago. Will you and your fellow Republicans object to Tobin's power grab? Probably not.
Finally, you have to deal with John Kavanagh's proposed $2,000 surtax on college students. His plan, according to the Tribune, "stipulates state university students must pay at least $2,000 towards their tuition unless they have a full-rde scholarship based on athletics or academics."
This from a man who has conspired with other Republicans to consistently cut funding to higher education over the last five years, the result of which has been a rocketed acceleration in tuition for Arizona students. Our younger daughter's senior year at the University of Arizona cost us $5,000 in tuition five years ago. Next year, our son's freshman tuition is at almost $9,500. And now Kavanagh wants to add to college costs (which when other costs are factored in, are estimated to be almost $22,000 a year for an Arizona student to live on campus).
And his rationale for exempting athletes? His argument is that they "generate a lot of extra money." Yes, mostly plowed back into the athletic programs. As he well knows, only two programs make money for the universities - football and men's basketball. And at the community college level, I doubt either one of those pays for itself. So using Kavanagh's argument, all athletes except university football and men's basketball players should have the $2,000 charged to them.
Though Kavanagh doesn't seem to think that $2,000 a year added to the cost of education is much of a burden, your blue-collar Republican friends whose kids have to find all kinds of ways to finance their way through school might find it to be a bit more than the slight nuisance Kavanagh sees it as.
There you have it, Arizona Republicans: a series of absurdities and abuses perpetrated on Arizona by your legislators, men and women you consistently return to office only to see them do the same thing over again. And I've only scratched the surface.
It's tiring and sad. And you only have yourselves to blame.
Mike McClellan is a Gilbert resident and former English teacher at Dobson High School in Mesa.
State Rep John Kavanagh posted at 9:27 am on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Mr. McClennan does not understand my bill. It only requires students who did not earn a full academic or athletic scholarship to pay $2,000 of their roughly $9,000 tuition. The university currently subsidizes about half the in-state undergrads to the point where nearly half pay NO tuition at all. I just want them to pay about 20% of the tuition.
In addition, they can use any non-university aid to pay the $2,000, including loans.
Finally, if Mr. McClellan's paid $5,000 for his child's tuition, he would have paid the minimum $2,000 and my bill would have no affect on his situation.
gilbertgrandma posted at 9:45 am on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Another column full of snarky comments from the liberal former teacher.....
gilbertgrandma posted at 9:47 am on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Oh, and Mike - in the headline of your column, it's "trying TOO hard" not "TO hard"
Mike McClellan posted at 9:56 am on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
No, Rep. Kavanaugh, I understand your bill -- if, for example, we had a need-based scholarship or financial aid provided by the U of A of $2,500/ a year that supplemented the tuition cost for my daughter's senior year tuition of $5,000, your bill would charge us $2,000. Fortunately, we didn't need that assistance, but there are many families, especially in these hard times combined with your actions that have led to increasing tuition costs, who do find $2,000 a year a burden.
And why are the athletes of non-revenue producing sports also tagged with your $2,000? They don't generate either revenue or school spirit, since their contests are hardly publicized and are sparsely attended.
Finally, when you say "the university currently subsidizes about half the in-state undergrads to the point where nearly half pay NO tuition at all," you don't want us to believe that half of all in-state undergrads at any Arizona college or university pay no tuition, do you? As I understand it, the figure you mention above is from President Crow's comment about ASU. Do you have any figures to prove that when you take into account the community colleges in the state, along with ASU, U of A, and NAU, that the figure still applies? And is that 48% figure a consistent number or is it something that's more recent?
Mike McClellan posted at 10:17 am on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Oh, and Gilbert Grandma -- I don't write the headlines. Talk to the Trib.
gilbertgrandma posted at 10:33 am on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Okay, Mike, fair enough - but being a former English teacher, I thought you might have caught that headline and told them to correct it. I have to admit that I'm pretty discouraged with the spelling and grammar mistakes I see in print and online articles these days - sometimes it seems like no one is even editing.
Arizona Willie posted at 10:46 am on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
There's one of the major problems with American society as well as our educational system.
We worship athletes.
It is grossly unfair to give a kid on a football scholarship a pass on paying $2000 of his tuition based on the fact the football team raises money for the school.
That individual may, or may not, make the highlight reels in his games. If he even plays. Just because he gets a scholarship because he was good in high school doesn't mean he will make the cut at the college level.
We spend far far too much on athletic programs and encourage every parent to dream that their kid is going to be a star athlete.
Drive by any ( public ) school and check out the space devoted to athletics compared to the space devoted to classes. The school down the road has acres and acres of athletic fields. Football, baseball, soccer.
All that money spent creating the fields, maintaining them, paying coaches, building locker rooms is basically wasted in that the odds are that NOT ONE KID WHO EVER WENT TO THAT SCHOOL EVER BECAME A PRO ATHLETE.
All that money COULD have been spent on hiring better teachers and for school supplies and perhaps we would have a few more doctors.
We certainly didn't get any pro quarterbacks from it.
Not even a lowly defensive lineman.
What we need in the way of education legislation is a bill that requires each school to publish yearly figures on how much it spends on athletic programs and how much it spends on class expenses ( teachers and supplies ).
In many schools the football / basketball coach is paid more than any teacher.
Every year they should have to publish the salaries of teachers and coaches.
In some places the ratio of money spent on athletics to money spent on teaching expenses is so out of whack they should take down the sign out front that calls it **** school and call it **** training camp.
Disclaimer ... as you can tell, I think all school athletic programs should be discontinued.
First, they create unfulfilled dreams that will never happen.
Second, the money could be better utilized for EDUCATION after all it's still called SCHOOL.
Third, employers are constantly complaining they can't find qualified skilled employees.
They have no use for an inside linebacker or a point guard.
Fourth, parents who want their kids to try to be athletes should pay for their own kids in private after school athletic programs ... no reason for Fred ( who's kids don't participate in athletics ) to pay with his taxes for Joe's kids to play sports.
Accuracy posted at 10:52 am on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Mike McClellan wrote: "Then there's the newest Birther Bill, soon to be introduced by Judy Burges and Carl Seel. That's right, these two still want to keep the "Obama's-not-really-an-American" myth alive. Forget that the president presented the long form certificate almost a year ago, effectively ending a phony subject."
-----------------------------------
And what Americns have learned from the Hawaii birth certificate is that Barack Hussein Obama's father was not a citizen of the United States. His mother was, but he doesn't qualify as a natural born citizen for the office of president.
Obama's ballot eligibility has not ended in Arizona and other states.
Barack Obama ballot challenge hearing case in Atlanta, Georgia was just held, January 26, 2012, before a packed courtroom – except for those at Obama’s attorneys table facing Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi.
During the hearing, three lawyers, for David Weldon (a citizen living in Georgia) brought witnesses and evidence before Judge Malihi's court strongly suggesting Mr. Obama does not meet the Constitutional requirements to hold the Office of President of the United States of America.
Lawyers told Judge Malihi that Obama should be found in contempt of court for not appearing when under subpoena to do so. After the hearing was concluded, Judge Malihi asked all pleading attorneys to present summaries of their cases to him.
Rich posted at 12:04 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
"Then there's the newest Birther Bill, soon to be introduced by Judy Burges and Carl Seel. That's right, these two still want to keep the "Obama's-not-really-an-American" myth alive. Forget that the president presented the long form certificate almost a year ago, effectively ending a phony subject."
While a state legislature probably can't do much so in effect the legislation is a bit silly in that it is ineffectual, however the subject is hardly phony to even a casual skeptic. Obama's 'long form' birth certificate was produced two years after he had been in control of several organizations, such as the CIA, that forge documents constantly. In fact it is rather naive to take it at face value because of how it was produced, and the time it took to produce it.
Mike McClellan posted at 1:33 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Of course it's naive. It's much more pragmatic to believe that
A. It's all phony;
B. The birth announcement in the Honolulu newspaper was somehow forged 50 years after the fact, even though it's been in the paper's archives for, oh, 50 years;
C. Donald Trump's crack investigators have the "truth" about Obama's birth, but he doesn't want to reveal it;
D. Sheriff Arpaio's team of investigators has found something but he doesn't want to reveal it, either;
E. C and D are the result of CIA operatives in some kind of less than violent Black Ops move that has frightened Trump and Arpaio, keeping them from revealing the truth.
Arizona Willie posted at 2:20 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Mr. McClellan ... it is a good idea to keep in mind the fact that the average American IQ is only 100. :(
Which means that 50% of the people are below 100.
A very high percentage of that 50% votes Republican.
Logic is something they are not familiar with.
Racism is right down their alley though.
Obama could eliminate the National Debt, create 100% employment with everyone making over $30 / hr, end all wars and eliminate the Taliban, and STILL he would be the worst President in history ... in their opinion. After all -- he didn't cure cancer.
Probably 80% or more of the tea-partiers and various assorted right - wingers make less than $20 / hr.
Envy is their middle name.
They have H A T E tattoed on their knuckles.
They tried to just put it on with a Sharpie but it kept rubbing off on the ground.
Their right-wing radio guru told them that the Dems have a time machine and they went back in time and altered the newspaper and stuck the birth certificate in the files.
Everybody knows the Dems have time travel -- that's what the flying saucers are --- Dems from the future come back to mess with events in our time.
Didn't you hear that on Fox too?
Rich posted at 3:08 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Mike, you have an obsession with arguing off topic. I said simply that there is certainly reason for skepticism and you take flight. Black Ops and such. What an imagination. From what has been seen, and from when it was presented, I really couldn't say where Obama was born. My own birth announcement was published in Long Island, NY where my grandparents lived when I was born in Los Angeles. Does that mean I was born in two places at the same time? As I said there is reason for skepticism, I didn't go into flights of fancy about 'Black Ops'. If you are not skeptical, you probably should acquire a little of it if you are going into journalism, because journalists are the most consistently lied to people on Earth and the only way it is worthwhile reading is that the journalist takes it all with a grain of salt.
IceCat posted at 3:20 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
[sad]Hussein Obama's father was not a citizen of the United States. His mother was, but he doesn't qualify as a natural born citizen for the office of president.
Neither was Mitt Romney father. George Romney as born in Galeana, Chihuahua Mexico.
Mike McClellan posted at 3:26 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Did your birth announcement indicate the hospital where you were born? Obama's did. Maybe the CIA was able to doctor a 5-year-old newspaper birth announcement before Obama was even elected. Of course, that is not a flight of fancy.
Rich posted at 3:47 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
No Mike, once again you take flight. A birth announcement in a paper is a paid ad that says whatever the person advertising wants it to say. And grandparents who just had a grandchild born out of the country have a tremendous motive not to admit it. That's just human and understandable, No CIA doctoring old newspaper files, Black Ops sneaking around or fanciful notions. You keep trying to make something fanciful, when it's not. I have not even taken a position on it. All I said is that there is reason for doubt. You are the one digging into fantasies to support your position.
Mike McClellan posted at 5:27 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Great point, Rich, except one thing: As the paper who published it originally noted, "Such vital statistics, however, were not sent to the newspapers by the general public but by the Health Department, which received the information directly from hospitals."
So I guess you can make the argument that 50 years ago the paper was somehow in cahoots with the State Of Hawaii and Obama's grandparents.
Or not.
Pick your flight.
Accuracy posted at 5:30 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
There is much determination today to have the truth revealed about Barack Hussein Obama’s ballot eligibility in state elections.
Besides Obama's ballot challenge hearing case in Georgia, most of the newest round of court actions (Arizona, Alabama, New Hampshire, and Illinois) are not trying to have a judge determine Obama is not qualified . . . But they are simply challenging his eligibility for the 2012 election.
Yes, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has launched a formal law enforcement investigation into concerns Obama may submit fraudulent documentation to be put on the state’s election ballot in 2012.
As Rich has clearly pointed out, Mike McClellan’s issues are irrelevant to Obama’s ballot eligibility.
Most of the state lawsuits simply point out that the Supreme Court has defined “natural-born citizen” as a person born to two parents who were both U.S. citizens at the time of the natural-born citizen’s birth. Even with the birth announcement in the old Honolulu newspaper, Obama’s father, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., was never a U.S. citizen. Therefore, Obama can never be a natural-born citizen.
Dale Whiting posted at 5:46 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Mike,
Where 12 of these 17 comments come from others, 5 being your response to five of the usual comments that miss the point entirely, 12 is still a great response to your voice of moderation and reason.
Keep up the good work.
JMJ posted at 6:49 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Add to the latest list the fact that our Republican legislature is trying to completely eviscerate whatever rights workers have to be heard during collective bargaining. Tenure was already taken away, last year, from teachers. This is a right to work state where the right works over the state.
Rich posted at 7:00 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Sure Mike it wasn't an ad. The good people at The Advertiser just used the ink and paper for free. Just like the EVT fact checks your column. I realize that until last year you were in High School, but really, the world isn't anything at all like a high school class. Anything published in a newspaper is in question, William Randolph Hearst sent Fredrick Remington to cover a war in Cuba, when there wasn't a war, Hearst said he'd supply that, Remington just the drawings. Just grow up.
Cerulean posted at 7:05 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Good column Mike, thank you. [smile]
Add, Lori Klein's bill as described in this weeks guest column ‘Responsible dog owners should have more freedom”.
IS THIS THE BEST REPUBLICANT’S CAN DO?
Rich posted at 8:08 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
Cerulean,
It should never be the BEST THEY CAN DO. It should be the BEST YOU CAN DO. What I am learning about Liberals, Conservatives, Democrats and Republicans is that they all play off of the people who believe the first proposition to bleed those who live off of the second.
Mike McClellan posted at 10:56 pm on Fri, Feb 3, 2012.
FYI, Obama's parents could've been born on Mars; as long as Obama himself was born in America, he's qualified to be President.
As to Rich and his "anything in the newspaper is in question," yep, we should be sniffing for bias and half-stories. However, that doesn't quite explain the conspiracy-thought behind thinking a birth announcement issued from a hospital and published in a newspaper was somehow something other than it appears to be.
Cerulean posted at 9:31 am on Sat, Feb 4, 2012.
You’re right Rich, we should all do our best. The story about Remington was interesting; however, it was commonly known that William Hearst’s publications would fabricate stories. His papers were popular like the National Inquirer or even Faux News are popular today. To rehash Mike's comment, because some papers are overtly sensational does not make dishonest interlocutor all. (I hope I said that right?)
It is true – we live in a country of taxes and for that I am thankful. It is always a balancing act of who, how much and when to tax. I might disagree with Rep. Kavanagh on the principal that he is proposing a rate hike, by 20%, on low income students and families while cutting tax rates on the corporations who need an educated pool to hire from. $2000.00 is a lot of money for the working poor. Maybe Kavanagh could refine his bill so that the tuition is based on income. Or, better yet, it seems to me that most of the current law makers in Arizona would better serve the public if they followed the ‘Conservative ‘ motto of ‘less government’ and do nothing.
chatmandu002 posted at 9:54 am on Sat, Feb 4, 2012.
At least our so called "embarrassing" republican legislators balanced the budget. Now it's time to take on the abused public employees pension plans.
Rich posted at 7:43 pm on Sat, Feb 4, 2012.
Cerulean, William Randolph was a piker compared with most of them. Pulitzer was nearly a fiction publisher. Hearst was more a a manipulator than an outright fabulist. Public opinion is one of the most powerful things in existence. If you believe Lord Acton, those who deal in it are by nature corrupt.
College educations are now much too cheap and too easy to attain, thereby we lose plumbers, electricians and mechanics, because a BA or BS is easier than learning a trade. I worked for all my degrees, don't see why they can't all cough up 2K a year, they should want it badly enough to mow lawns, flip burgers or sell that much on eBay. They should want it that much, if they don't they really don't belong there.
Cerulean posted at 9:17 pm on Sun, Feb 5, 2012.
Rich,
Ok, you believe that hard work reflects desire. ‘Desire’, should this be criteria for the students who have no financial concerns?
Rich posted at 9:49 pm on Sun, Feb 5, 2012.
Cerulean
Yes, it should. One of the biggest problems with education is that we have removed it from the equation.
samkat posted at 6:02 pm on Mon, Feb 6, 2012.
Mike: It seems that you should be running for public office as a liberal. That way, you can resolve all of our problems.
By the way, I am not a birther but my youngest son was born in Honolulu a short time after Obama and we have an original birth certificate in our possession to this day for the world to see.