Its surprising how much you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit
With the arrival of early ballots, it's time to get serious about how to vote. After seeing another demonstration of how rabid the left has become and how in-our-face they are about taking America to the socialist woodhouse, Republicans should find it very easy to just pull the lever for all Republicans.
OK, we know there will be a lot of nose-holding going on with that Vote for ALL Republicans method. The past few weeks surrounding the Kavanaugh hearings should make it much easier. Can anyone think of a single reason to vote for a democrat, even at the local level? It's a sad fact that there are instances where only democrats are on the ballot. True especially in school board and city council elects where the office is non-partisan. Today, virtually every informed person is partisan so the idea of a non-partisan race is just a pipe dream.
We don't have the greatest candidates on the Republican side in some races. The time to address that is in the primary. There, we have multiple choices most of the time and many times, it comes down to who is a conservative and who is a liberal Republican. Sometimes, it comes down to whether the conservative can defeat the democrat opponent in the General. That should be a decision maker for any race that is lopsidedly on the side of the liberal in the general election.
What good is it to have nominated a conservative Republican in the primary that doesn't have the resources, both human and financial, to take the seat in the general? If you don't know the answer to that question, just check out the winners of Maricopa County Sheriff and Maricopa County Recorder's elections from 2016! Could it be more disastrous than to have these two very important seats to have gone to the democrats due to having the wrong candidates on Republican side as their opponents? If you find an argument with that logic, just check out who won those seats.
Let's take a stroll through that ballot:
Straight ticket through the entire top of the ballot: Governor Ducey, Secretary of State Gaynor, Attorney General Brnovich, Treasurer Yee and Superintendent Riggs. Mine Inspector Hart, Corporation Commission Olson and Glassman. Every single democrat challenger in these races are not just democrats, they are rabid in their thinking, not unlike what we have seen during the Kavanaugh hearings, both in the chambers and outside!
For down ballot races, be sure you know who the Republicans are in those more local races: legislature, Clerk of the Court, Maricopa County College Board, Arizona Supreme Court. Don't worry if you know nothing about these candidates. All you need to know is that they are NOT democrats. The worst Republican is still better than the best democrat. For Maricopa County Community College at-Large Kathleen Winn. If you don't know who is running in the legislature, go to azsos.gov, click Elections then 2018 General Candidates to get a list of those running.
For federal races, Senator McSally, CD1 Rogers, CD2 Peterson, CD3 Pierson, CD4 Gosar, CD5 Biggs, CD6 Schweikert, CD8 Lesko, CD9 Ferrara. Would it not be a good thing to send all of these candidates to Washington if only to help hold the House and Senate for the Rs and President Trump?
Now to those pesky ballot questions. First, know what each ballot can do.
Propositions are numbered specially, like this:
Starting with a one (1) means it changes, adds to or otherwise modifies the Arizona Constitution. They are nearly impossible to ever get rid of. Citizen's initiatives that pass can only be repealed or modified by another citizen's initiative. They can also be repealed by 3/4 vote of the legislature. Imagine any circumstance where 3/4 agreeable votes can happen. The Republicans and the democrats can't even agree that fire is hot, or at least, warm. The Republicans and republicans can't either.
Starting with a two (2) is a legislative resolution or amends state statute or creates a new statute (law). Can be amended by the legislature.
Starting with a three (3) is referred to the ballot by a vote of the legislature and can be amended at any time by the legislature. Can be amended by the legislature.
Starting with a four (4) is a local proposition.
Keep this information in mind when you decide how to vote on propositions. We recommend the following:
Prop 125: Changes pensions for new hires of corrections officer and elected officer retirees to Cost Of Living Adjustment & to defined contribution plans – worker contributes to their own plan. There is already a constitutional measure instituting pensions for these government employees that is more expensive now. YES
Prop 126: Stops imposition of sales taxes on services. If this doesn't pass, a sales tax can be imposed by state and local governments on all services such as hair cuts, facials, manicures, tax preparation, attorney services, consulting services, architectural and design services, etc. Do we need more taxes? We recommend YES but some believe the same government taxing authorities should make these decisions. Of course, those who give can take away! You can read the full language on azsos.gov click Elections tab and click Ballot Measures,
Prop 127: YIKES! This should not even need discussion. This is a NO or else, this will mandate that renewable energy sources like wind and sun must make up 50% of all energy by 2030, causing rates to skyrocket. Remember when Obama said this type energy that he wanted would "necessarily make energy rates skyrocket?" NO NO NO
Prop 305: A “YES” vote would allow Senate Bill 1431 (2017) to go into effect, which would gradually increase for four years the percentage of students in kindergarten through twelfth grade eligible to receive an empowerment scholarship account to spend on tuition, textbooks, educational therapies, tutoring, or other qualified forms of instructional assistance at a private or home-based school in an amount equal to 90% of the allotted funding. Some say this is unconstitutional under the equal protection clause because it limits the number of students who can participate. That question is countered by some who say that can be easily fixed in the legislature. After careful thought, we recommend a YES.
Prop 306: This proposition corrects-a major flaw in the Clean Elections Act. Candidates who qualify to use clean elections funding must refund back to Clean Elections any unused money after all expenses have been paid. This is not, by the way, taxpayer money but the funding comes from other sources such as fines, etc. We recommend a YES.
Ahhh, no one really has a clue about these judges. Unless you consistently thoughout every year follow every judge and see how they rule on every case, it's nearly impossible to find valid information on these judges. Said one judge to us, "Don't rely on the Judicial Review to give adequate information. It is put together by the judges themselves." Unless a judge has committed some egregious offense, they all get a good review. Here, you pays your money and takes your chances. Some of us just vote NO on all of them. That might be extreme, but maybe not.
Here is more info you can use to convince the holdouts about 127:
I received my ballot info guide today and read about Prop 127, the “Clean Air Mandate”. I urge everyone to read it and see for yourself what a bad idea this would be.
Starting out with making a constitutional amendment, this mandate, if passed, will change the Constitution of Arizona. This is no small matter. Changes to the constitution need to be thoroughly vetted by all means as the consequences of a bad or unforeseen result could be disastrous yet unchangeable.
This mandate is not just a mandate on APS, it is a mandate on ALL public service corporations that deliver energy to Arizonans. It is not just a mandate on Maricopa county, but all of Arizona, including the smaller utilities that supply energy from Yuma to Flagstaff, Winslow to Sierra Vista. The measure seeks to enshrine very specific energy mandates dealing with how utilities generate power for their customers.
Article 3 of the brochure defines “Conventional Energy Source” as any non-renewable source which included uranium, obviously the lifeblood of the Palo Verde Nuclear plant in the west valley.
Because solar only generates energy when the sun is shining, utilities would be forced to maximize their solar generation during the day in order to meet the 50% mandate, leaving little room for energy from “base load” power plants like Palo Verde.
This analysis by the State of Arizona confirmed that Palo Verde will close in 2029 if Proposition 127 passes. Then utility rates in Maricopa County will skyrocket to unimaginable costs to consumers.
Pay attention to articles 7-9 in the brochure, which lays out the definition for how this mandate can be offset via carbon credits or “Renewable Energy Credit”.
Section D lays out the REC or carbon credits required each year by the affected utility.
Folks, this is basically a carbon credit scam perpetuated by a California billionaire who wrote and is financing Prop 127 and WILL PROFIT from utilities being forced to buy carbon credits from HIS companies. And where will our utilities get the billions to buy these credits? From you the consumer of course, in the form of higher, even double, utility rates. It won’t just be APS that will raise their rates to buy credits, it will be every utility, especially the smaller ones who can’t afford to buy clean energy infrastructure. And again, it will be you the consumer who will pay.
The idea that this will help clean our air and environment by mandating renewable energy is laughable at best. For one, vehicle emissions, not energy plants, are responsible for over 90% of pollution that affects people with ailments such as asthma. Utilities are only 1% of the total emissions produced in Arizona.
The utilities know they cannot possibly comply within this short time period and will simply purchase the carbon credits- which is what California billionaire Tom Steyer is banking on. It would not be just building new solar or wind plants, but it would require more back-up generating plants such as natural gas in case of failure. The redundancy alone to protect consumers from solar and wind plant failures would be in the billions. Giants like the Central Arizona Project, the highest utility user in the state, cannot afford disruption of the water supply and they alone would require millions in redundancy measures. Tom Steyer knows this and that’s exactly why he has spent over 2 million in our state to get it on the ballot. Steyer got California to implement a similar renewable energy standard a number of years ago and their utility rates are 3 times the national average as a result. We should not be importing California’s failed energy policy into our state.
Arizona is already working towards a clean, renewable energy policy which the Corporation Commission can attest.
Arizonans have always done things our way. Let’s not let a California billionaire sink the Palo Verde Plant and double or even triple our rates for his personal benefit.
Vote No! On Prop 127 and let’s go into the renewable future with our own cost effective measures at our own cost effective pace.
I don't believe this affects SRP, since it's an agency of the state.
Word around is APSs' CEO was called to the table by the board (owners) to explain the reason APS is opposed to this. Since APS will make tons more money if it passes. They supposedly stated it's the 'right thing to do for customers'. Of course that 'tons of money' will come from consumers.
I've been told that California produces so much energy they sometimes pay APS to take it and get it off their grid. We may have to pay for something similar here.
Of course the problem has always been you can't really store it for distribution later.
Technology will out pace this legislation anyway.
IMHO, constitutions are for people, not business control.
So many of you asked so here you go: Judges
You paid your money, so take your chances