Arizona's Own Espresso Pundit

Intro. to Journalism

I hear that they actually have a "school" for journalists.  Theoretically, it takes a couple of years to finish journalism school, but students who are currently attending say the teachers spend most of the time whining about the future of the industry and bashing Fox News.

Maybe J school should be like McDonald's "Hamburger University" or Starbucks' Barrista school.  I mean, if you can teach a 17 year old kid with ear studs the size of quarters how to make a double decaf soy machiado, you can train anyone to do anything.

If J School adopted the trade school model and stopped all the whining and bashing, then perhaps their students wouldn't make the completely bone headed mistakes that you wouldn't even find at a high school newspaper. 

Republic reporter Scott Wong wrote this A1 story about the nine initiatives that will be on the November ballot.  Most of his descriptions are pretty fair; here's a good example.

This year's batch of ballot-bound initiatives appears to be a broad mix of tax and transportation issues, social matters, and protections for homeowners and businesses. One measure would revise the state's landmark employer-sanctions law to make it friendlier to businesses.

Then we get to the marriage initiative.

State lawmakers this year referred only one measure to the ballot: a divisive proposal to change the state Constitution to ban gay marriage in Arizona.

Divisive?  That pejorative description should have been eliminated in the first day of J school.  Even calling a initiative "controversial" exposes the reporter as an amateur--all the initiatives are "controversial" or they would have passed on a Legislative consent calendar.  But "divisive" combines the aspects of being controversial with the bad intent of the sponsor.  After all, Napolitano is trying to move the state forward; those nasty legislators are trying to drive us apart.

By way of contrast, here's how Wong described the TIME initiative.

Perhaps the initiative with the most to gain is the $42.6 billion transportation plan, championed by Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano and the business community. The coalition, known as TIME, is seeking a 1 percentage-point statewide sales-tax increase to fund roadway, rail and other transit projects in Arizona.

Let's start with the fact that the sentence makes absolutely no sense.  What does he mean by the "initiative with the most to gain"?  I think he must mean "largest financial impact."  However, it's clear that Wong thinks it would be a good thing if the initiative passes, and he can't get away with saying "largest financial benefit" so he settled on the meaningless "most to gain."

Naturally, I think that raising the sales tax 18% to fund a hodgepodge of environmental remediation, light rail and freeways while exempting the entire $46 billion from the procurement code and rule making process is a bad thing. I would describe it as the "initiative with the most to lose." 

But I have an excuse.  After all, I didn't spend four years at Journalism school.

UPDATE

Howie Fischer provides a good example of how the initiative should be described:

One measure to constitutionally define marriage as between one man and one woman did not require signatures. It was put on the ballot by lawmakers.

By the way, readers thought I was being critical of Howie when I said that he would be the last reporter standing.  Not so.  Howie is a one-man wire service with an expertise in an important beat.  He can generate as much content as the Republic's constantly rotating team of newbies and do so  with more accuracy and sophistication at a fraction of the cost.   

Jacket Required

With gas prices what they are and the kids out of school, I've been trying to work from "home" a day each week.  I put "home" in quotes because we are on APS' Peak/non-peak plan, so we keep the house at about 84 from noon to 7:00.  So I actually work at the Alltel Ice Den on Bell Road.  It has great coffee, fast wi fi and it's colder than an orientation cell at Gitmo. 

My friends are reading this post, rolling their eyes and saying "that's so you."

Picking Winers and...yes, Losers

The Republic Editorial writers are saddened that the "Hotel Monroe" isn't going to make it. 

The door that would open downtown Phoenix to a new, exciting era - private capital - swings both ways. In difficult economic times, the door can shut as quickly as it opened.

That would seem to be the case now regarding the much-anticipated Hotel Monroe, a privately financed boutique hotel project that its developers say was within four months of opening for business.

It was - and, despite the sudden wealth of financial nightmares, continues to be - one of the jewels of central-city development.

Don't be fooled.  This privately funded boutique hotel isn't just a victim of the local economy, the hotel was forced to compete with the 1,000 Sheraton colossus that was built with public money and is owned by the city of Phoenix.

Sure, when the economy was booming it looked like there was room for both.  Even the owners don't blame the Sheraton for their demise.  It looks like the problem is merely a liquidity issue with Mortgages ltd out of the picture.  But the fundamental problem is that puting 1,000 government funded rooms in the downtown core leaves little room for private sector boutiques. 

Perhaps the Republic should have thought of the unintended consequences before they advocated for the City to build its own hotel. 

Here's what the paper said in 2004.

The urban core of Phoenix is on a big-time roll.

A number of major construction projects under way, approved or on the drawing board promises to turn downtown into a vibrant mecca during the day and after dark.

The City Council's approval Wednesday of a $350 million, 1,000-room hotel -- the elusive third major hotel that has stymied Phoenix for more than two decades -- could be the single most important piece of the downtown puzzle.

It's especially sweet that the 8-1 vote came in the same week that construction workers began ripping out the concrete plaza in front of Symphony Hall to make way for a new and expanded Civic Plaza.

So the 70 year old Art Deco Monroe building is going to sink in to ruin while the beige plaster 1,000 room Government owned big box dominates downtown.  The Sheraton has all the charm of, well, a government owned hotel. 

You can see both buildings from the Republic's offices...in fact, the Sheraton towers over the Republic building.  I hope the editorial writers will look out their window at the vacant Monroe and the vacuous Sheraton, contrast the two, and think...there's my legacy. 

No Wonder They are in trouble.

The AP has a story on the LA Times' problems.  This sub head tells the whole story.

LA Times to cut 250 positions, merge print and online departments, print 15 percent less pages

Dude, it's not "less" pages it's "fewer" pages.  I don't want to be picky, but it is a newspaper for crying out loud.

TRIB-ulation

Well they finally admitted it.  Tribune Editor Jim Ripley is seeking feedback on the Tribune's new format and had this admission.

... "If it ain't broke...," they say.  The problem is the business model is broke. The newspaper industry has fallen on financial hard times.

For the last few years I've been pointing out that the newspaper industry's fundamental business model was no longer viable.  Events of the last few weeks made the proposition so obvious that the papers themselves are no longer denying it. 

I focus so much on the Republic that I haven't taken the time to point out that we are witnessing the complete collapse of the Tribune and the Star as well.

One of the comments on the "Retribution" post below indicated that the Tribune laid eight people off yesterday.  (The post was anonymous, but remember that I get to see the underlying IP address and source email, so I can verify that the comment was credible.)  (The number has since been updated to 23.  That plus the numbers from earlier this year takes the total number of layoffs to 42 and the wage freeze that was implemented in January has been extended.)

I don't have much glee over the demise of the Tribune.  In fact I'm saddened.  The Republic needs the competition and the Governor needs the occasional scrutiny. 

I'm sure that Le Templar will be commenting soon.  Coming in like Glenn Campbell at the end of True Grit.  "I ain't dead yet."  And I hope he's right, and even if he's not, it doesn't necessarily signal the end.  After all, the Tucson Citizen has lingered in a persistent vegetative state for years.

As for the Daily Star, things look really bad.  I reported last month that the Star's owner, Lee Enterprises, has written off half of the Star's value since acquiring it a few years ago. 

Now, Lee Enterprises' stock is in free fall.  The stock is down 76% year to date, 50% in the last month and 12% yesterday alone.

I've trumpeted the industry's collapse for several years, however, this last month has the look of a tipping point; the business model is untenable and there will be no capital infusion.  Every staff member at every major paper has his resume on a flash drive and a minimal amount of personal effects in his cubicle.

I don't know what the future business model looks like, but 2500 people sitting in cubicles in the middle of downtown isn't it. 

My guess is that the future business model will be lean with an emphasis on freelance journalists and stringers.  The major papers will be written by hundreds of people, not thousands and the mid size papers will be written by dozens not hundreds. 

The reporter of the future will look like Howie Fischer--self employed, entrepreneurial, an expert in a single field, working without corporate benefits or a corporate retirement.

Ultimately, I knew that it would end this way.  After the Apocalypse, when the seven seals have been broken and the last Mainstream Media trumpet has sounded, there will exist a vast desolate wasteland and the only surviving creatures will be cockroaches, Howie...and, of course, Cher. 

Surprise!

The Attorney General has spent a year investigating allegations of Open Meeting law violations on the Surprise Town Council and the conclusion is serious. 

Disregard for the public's right to know caught up to Surprise City Council on Friday when a yearlong Arizona Attorney General's Office investigation chastised the council for repeatedly violating the state's Open Meeting Law.

Here's part of the accusation.

* Johnson and former Councilmen Danny Arismendez and Gary "Doc" Sullivan admitted having separate but identical conversations outside public meetings with Shafer concerning council business. "This practice violates the Open Meeting Law and directly contradicts the fundamental tenants of the Open Meeting Law , which ensures that the people's business must be conducted in public," the report states.

Excuse me?  When did that become illegal?  Shuttle diplomacy--in which elected officials work out issues in groups that don't constitute a quorum--is extremely common.  What do you think all those legislative budget meetings are about? 

Not only is the practice common, it is encouraged.  In the year 2000, voters expanded the Arizona Corporation Commission from 3 to 5 members.  Here's what key legislators said when they referred the issue to the ballot. 

Sen. John Wettaw, R-Flagstaff, who co-sponsored the resolution with House Speaker Jeff Groscost, R-Mesa, thinks more members would bring stability to the panel and foster improved communication among members . Currently, they're prevented from discussing key topics outside an open meeting because two members of a three- member body constitutes a quorum under the state's Open Meeting Law .

Here's what the Republic said about the Proposition at the time.

We believe these changes merit voter approval.

With only three commissioners, the operations of the commission are occasionally unwieldy and excessively contentious. Two members constitute a majority, and generally a majority requires a posted, public meeting . This largely precludes private discussions between commissioners.

Now we are certainly in favor of governmental decisions being made in public, and are staunch defenders of Arizona's open - meeting laws . But basically prohibiting substantive private conversations between the elected commissioners relegates those discussions to aides, which is less efficient and can lead to misunderstandings.

The Attorney General and the media need to acknowledge that the the AG's opinion is a stark departure from historical practice and that it's unfair to single out the Surprise Town Council for prosecution. 

Of course, that type of professional restraint doesn't sell newspapers--or look good on a 30-second commercial for Governor.   

State Government Marches On.

Well, I was wrong about an inevitable government shutdown.  I've gone back over the time line that I used when I calculated that there was no way to finish the budget in time.  It seems that I had time allocated for the "Republicans in the Legislature" to "negotiate with the Governor."  That part didn't happen and the "Republican Leadership" simply did what the Governor wanted.  Well, I guess that's a good way to save a week.

Let's face it, the Governor and the Democrats enjoy a working majority on fiscal issues.  It looks to me like they kicked the can down the road using accounting gimmicks and deficit financing on the theory that the current revenue drop is temporary and they can hydroplane over it.

My theory is that revenue growth will come back slowly and the Governor's solution--raided funds, accounting tricks and new debt--will devastate the state's finances in the long run.

If the legislature finds itself in the same fiscal mess next year...or later this year...I guess we will know which theory is right. 

ReTRIBution

The Arizona equivalent of the Freedom of Information Act is an important resource for the media and the public to ensure transparency in state and local government.  Want to know what your legislator, mayor or bureaucrat is up to?  Ask for his or her email or correspondence.  Government in Arizona is open and government agents are required to disclose their activities, no matter how "confidential."

Of course, with rights go responsibility.  For example, if you request information you have to indicate that you aren't using it for corporate purposes.  The media ferociously guard their right to government information and policy makers assume that the media will use the law responsibly.

That's why I was shocked to hear a report that the Tribune had abused the Arizona's Public Records law to seek confidential information about...one of its own reporters. 

The Tribune issued a public records request to the town of Gilbert to force the town to disclose who had applied to be the town's Public Information Officer.  We all know who applies for PIO jobs...reporters.  Sources tell me that when the paper learned that one of its reporters had applied, she was immediately transfered to a different department. 

That's as low as it gets folks.    I wonder if the Tribune staffer checked the "not for corporate use" box when he filled out the request form.  The information they sought was obviously for business purposes, not for public purposes. 

Maybe that law needs to be tweaked. 

Feeding the Dog that Bites You

Newspaper revenue continues to decline sharply.

For newspapers, the news has swiftly gone from bad to worse. This year is taking shape as their worst on record, with a double-digit drop in advertising revenue, raising serious questions about the survival of some papers and the solvency of their parent companies.

The ad decline began as a demographic shift as fewer people read the newspaper.  The decline accelerated with a technological shift as ads migrated to Craig's list and Autotrader Online.  It steepened with the rise of the blogs and access to free content. 

The decline has approached freefall with the declining economy.  Homebuilders and car dealers have little incentive to pay for ads in the hope that more customers will trickle into empty model homes and dealerships. 

I have often wondered why homebuilders and car dealers funded newspapers anyway.  After all, Ford wants to sell SUVs and Pulte wants to sell new homes on the perimeter.  They buy ads that are burried in a newpaper that advocates sustainability and rails against sprall.

It's kind of like putting a Hummer ad in a Greenpeace brochure.  It's not the wisest use of cash but more importantly you are funding a message that ultimately hurts your product. 

Sanctions Bill Pays for Itself

The outline of the State budget is taking shape and I thought this line was interesting. 

...a $187 million reduction in education funding made possible by reduced enrollment,

Arizona's population is certainly increasing, so where have all the children gone?  Perhaps...Mexico?  The US Supreme Court has said that illegal aliens under the age of 18 are entitled to a free education.  (I don't remember where in the Constitution that provision is found, but I think it's right after the section about  your fundamental right to birth control and just before the Article that says Congress can control what type of light bulb you buy at your local Home Depot.)

Of course there's no Constitutional right to a job (yet), and while many of the kids in our local schools were legal, obviously their parents weren't.  At $10K a kid, it doesn't take too many parental self deportations to balance the budget. 

(Ironically, Napolitano's biggest accomplishment--the employer sanctions bill, completely pays for her second biggest accomplishment--all-day kindergarten.  It's also a huge transfer of benefits from the poor to the middle class.)

John Dougherty has Passed Away

On April 19th of last year, I provided this update. 

John Dougherty, Vice President of Governmental Affairs for the Tucson Chamber, has been diagnosed with bone cancer.  Last summer, John fought back against melanoma skin cancer, but it has returned in his spine.  He thanks you all for the great support and prayers received from colleagues across the state and wants people to know he’s fighting back and will conquer cancer.

Sadly, John passed away on Tuesday afternoon.  Our prayers are with his family. 

Strong Blogging Skills Required...

Charlie Hendricks has announced that she is not seeking re-election to her seat on the Maricopa Integrated Health System Board.  You are familiar with the MIHS Board:

The Maricopa County Special Health Care District Board of Directors is the governing body for Maricopa Integrated Health System. Each member represents one of the five districts in Maricopa County.

The districts are coterminous with County Supervisor Districts, and they are large; Charlie represented Gilbert, Mesa, Paradise Valley, Fountain Hills, Scottsdale, Carefree and Cave Creek.

Board members have a tough but important job.  Here's a sample of what MIHS covers.

Maricopa Integrated Health System (MIHS) includes Maricopa Medical Center, the Arizona Burn Center, the Comprehensive Healthcare Center, the McDowell Healthcare Clinic, 10 community-oriented family health centers, and an attendant care program.

Someone who runs for the seat would obviously have to live in District 2.  He or she would  need to understand how government functions, how budgets are established and followed, how the private and public sectors work together.  He or she would need to have a government background, a finance background and maybe even a legal background. 

Hmm, you know, that sounds like...me.

Dude, I'm a CPA, I served four years on the House Appropriations Committee, I chaired the House Government Operations Committee as well as the House Banking and Insurance Committee.  I even have some legal training and may actually pass the bar after a couple tries. 

As you know, I've been interested in the Board for quite some time.

It's a non-partisan election, so there's no Primary.  We will all just face off in the General election.  I'll need several hundred signatures by early August.  So if you are interested in circulating a petition, let me know. 

Say, does anyone know where I can borrow a beat up old truck and some gloves?

House Finds Unique Way to Balance Budget

Wow, this is creative.  This afternoon, the Arizona House sent out a press release with this link http://www.azhousetv.org .  Now we know how they are going to balance the budget. 

Here's a link to the original press release.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I have a theory that as political campaigns progress, the probability that they will morph into a Seinfeld episode approaches one. 

The Wall St. Journal has a story about the Obama camp fighting the rumor that he's Muslim...while saying that there's, you know, nothing wrong with being Muslim.

It is inaccurate to call Barack Obama a Muslim. Is it a slur?

The Obama campaign suggests it is. A new campaign Web site designed to air and rebut potentially damaging Internet rumors reads in one part: "Smear: Barack Obama is a Muslim... Truth: Sen. Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised as a Muslim and is a committed Christian."

First Get a Million Dollars...

Sunday's Republic has an article about young lawyer's struggles for jobs.  It included this advice. 

Ted Wimsatt, who finished first in the most recent graduating class from ASU's law school, recommends that potential law-school students do extremely well in class.

Dude, I should have thought of that.

(Ted's an outstanding student.  He and I were Paul Bender's Arizona Constitutional Law class together and he really knows his stuff.   Ted didn't show up for the final and it eventually dawned on everyone that he was only auditing the class.  The class is graded on a curve and there was an audible sigh of relief in the room when everyone realized they weren't competing with him.) 

Face it. Your life Sucks.

We've all heard of the culture wars, but you may not realize that there's also a "perspective" war.   Some members of the media and intelligentsia are determined to foist on the populous the myth that the world has been in steady decline since the Reagan administration.  Here's a great example from the AP.

Is everything spinning out of control?

Midwestern levees are bursting. Polar bears are adrift. Gas prices are skyrocketing. Home values are abysmal. Air fares, college tuition and health care border on unaffordable. Wars without end rage in Iraq, Afghanistan and against terrorism.

The can-do, bootstrap approach embedded in the American psyche is under assault. Eroding it is a dour powerlessness that is chipping away at the country's sturdy conviction that destiny can be commanded with sheer courage and perseverance.

The reality, of course is that things are pretty darn good--especially when compared to other periods in American history. 

The Brookings Institution's Gregg Easterbrook exposed the phenomenon in his book the Progress Paradox.  He continues his theme in this Wall Street Journal article. 

The relentlessly negative impressions of American life presented by the media, including the entertainment media, explain something otherwise puzzling that shows up in psychological data. When asked about the country's economy, schools, health care or community spirit, Americans tell pollsters the situation is dreadful. But when asked about their own jobs, schools, doctors and communities, people tell pollsters the situation is good. Our impressions of ourselves and our neighbors come from personal experience. Our impressions of the nation as a whole come from the media and from political blather, which both exaggerate the negative.

The latter has never been thicker. Democrats insist Republicans are ruining domestic policy, Republicans insist Democrats are ruining foreign policy. Neither claim is true, but both reflect what we've been conditioned to believe: that America is in much worse circumstances than it actually is.

Before nuking me in the comment section with a Hell-in-a-handbasket tale of woe, read the whole Easterbrook article (or preferably the book).  Then tell me when life was better.  Try not to bore me with an overly nostalgic look at the Clinton Administration. 

AZ races viewed from Inside the Beltway.

Here's an interesting analysis. 

With the exception of the annoying choice of "Copper State" instead of "Grand Canyon State" the analysis seems pretty solid.  I think Republicans will do better in the Congressional contests than the author does, but the article is interesting nonetheless.

The Copper State has tilted heavily Republican for sixty years. It was the only non-Southern state to support its favorite son Barry Goldwater in 1964. It has tilted back some to the Democrats over the past two decades. In 1996 it voted for Bill Clinton, its only vote for the Democratic nominee in 60 years. A rapidly growing Hispanic population has proved key to Democratic emergence here. Hard-line immigration positions did not help the Republicans at all in 2006, as they lost two House seats. Arizona would probably be prime battleground territory in 2008, except that Republicans have nominated the state’s senior Senator, John McCain, as their Presidential nominee.