(Page Contents 1. Press Release 2.Thomas M. Ryan Letter to Attorney General 3.Supporting Documentation)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 23, 2010
Contact: Thomas M. Ryan
Office: 602 285-4444

Campaign Finance Violations – LD 5

PHOENIX – Arizona Legislative District 5 Representative Bill Konopnicki (pronounced KO-puh-nicki) today released the following statement regarding Campaign Finance Violations in the LD 5 races for the legislator. We have reason to believe that Sylvia Allen, State Senate candidate for Legislative District 5 is substantially under-reporting her campaign expenses and income to her campaign. We further believe that Ms. Allen is failing to comply with the obligation of sub-vendor reporting. We also believe that Ms. Allen is financially contributing to the campaigns of Chester Crandell and Brenda Barton in violation of the Clean Elections laws. Lastly, we believe that Chester Crandell and Brenda Barton are receiving financial contributions from Sylvia Allen’s campaign in the form of political flyers without reporting the contributions or expenses associated with the printing and dissemination of these flyers.

Attached to this letter are multi-colored, two-sided campaign mailers for Sylvia Allen’s current campaign for LD5. See Exhibits 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 & 10. Also attached to this letter are multi-colored, two-sided campaign mailers where Allen, Barton and Crandell are running as a “team.” See Exhibits 11, 12 & 13. These are expensive flyers that have been sent to potential Republican voters in LD5 with the obvious intent to persuade electors. These are expensive flyers. We believe that these flyers cost a minimum of $0.45 to design, produce, print and mail. We believe that have been mailed to at least 4,000 “high-efficacy” Republican voters in LD5. If there are TEN (10) multi-colored, two-sided mailers for 4,000 voters, then the cost for all of these mailers would be $18,000 (4,000 pieces x 10 mailers x $0.45 apiece).

In looking at Ms. Allen’s Campaign Finance Report (Exhibit 1) at page 40, there is only one expense item listed and described that would explain the cost of designing, producing and mailing these expensive flyers. There is a listing for “High Noon Campaign Productions” for $6,650 for the reporting period ($7,187.50 total for the election cycle.) There is no plausible explanation for this many mailers costing so little other than to claim fraud in the disclosure.
We also attach two campaign ads which are not appropriately accounted for in the Campaign Finance Report. See Exhibits 14 & 15. Exhibit 14 is an ad that appeared recently in the Payson Roundup and is for all three candidates (Allen, Barton & Crandell.) This ad does not appear anywhere as an expense in Ms. Allen’s Campaign Finance Report. (Exhibit 1.) Exhibit 15 is an ad that appeared recently in The Beehive and again is for all three candidates (Allen, Barton & Crandell.) Again, this ad does not appear anywhere as an expense in Ms. Allen’s Campaign Finance Report. (Exhibit 1.)

There are multiple violations in this matter. First, it is clear that Ms. Allen is substantially under-reporting the cost of mailing these flyers, and not even reporting the costs of these newspaper ads. This is a violation of A.R.S. §§16-901,915 and AAC R2-20-109. Second, it is clear that Ms. Allen has failed to report any sub-vendors for the design and production and mailing of these flyers, all in violation of AAC R2-20-109. Third, it is very difficult – if not downright impossible – to determine who is paying for these ads as the writing used is deceptively small. Fourth, by conflating the three candidates into one flyer or ad, but not requiring the two participating candidates (Barton and Crandell) to pay their proportionate share of these mailers or ads, Ms. Allen is helping these other two candidates to defeat the limits of the Clean Elections laws that Barton and Crandell agreed to be bound by.

This is not a question of under-reporting. This is a question of no reporting whatsoever. By accepting Ms. Allens’ campaigns’ largesse of design, production and mailing of these flyers, without accounting for them on their reports, Ms. Barton and Mr. Crandell have violated A.R.S. §§ 16-913, 915, 941, 948, 952, 958 and A.A.C. R2-20-109.

As for the Payson Roundup ad (Exhibit 14), neither Ms. Barton nor Mr. Crandell accounted for this expense in their respective Campaign Finance Reports. (Exhibits 2 & 3.) Accordingly, the “teeny-weeny” disclaimer on this ad that it was paid for by all three committees is false. Again, Ms. Barton and Mr. Crandell have violated A.R.S. §§ 16-913, 915, 941, 948, 952, 958 and A.A.C. R2-20-109.
Lastly we deal with The Beehive ad (Exhibit 15). This ad IS accounted for in Mr. Crandell’s Campaign Finance Report. (Exhibit 3.) But it is not otherwise accounted for in Ms. Barton’s Campaign Finance Report. (Exhibit 2.) Again, Ms. Barton and Mr. Crandell have violated A.R.S. §§ 16-913, 915, 941, 948, 952, 958 and A.A.C. R2-20-109.

These violations are not insubstantial. These ads are running and these flyers are being mailed to voters during the “early vote by mail” season and are effectively depriving candidate Bill Konopnicki of a fair election process. There will not be a meaningful opportunity for Mr. Konopnicki to timely respond in kind to these flyers. Accordingly, we ask that you act as swiftly as possible, and impose the severest of sanctions allowed by law to send the message that this type of election chicanery will not be allowed in Arizona.

http://www.prlog.org/10879264-az-state-senator-sylvia-allen-breaks-campaign-finance-law-ld-5.html

# # #

August 23, 2010

Mr. Ken Bennett
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE
State of Arizona
1700 W. Washington, 7th Fl.
Phoenix, AZ 85007

Mr.Todd Lang, Director
CITIZENS CLEAN ELECTIONS COMMISSION
1616 W. Adams Street
Phoenix, AZ 85007

Mr. Terry Goddard
Mr. James E. Barton, II
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
State of Arizona
1275 W. Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85007

Re: Campaign Finance Violations – LD 5
Sylvia T. Allen (Comm. No. 201000208) (Non-Participating)
Chester Crandell (Comm. No. 201000320)(Participating)
Brenda Barton (Comm. No. 201000189) (Participating)

Gentlemen:

We have reason to believe that Sylvia Allen, State Senate candidate for Legislative District 5 is substantially under-reporting her campaign expenses. We further believe that Ms. Allen is failing to comply with the obligation of sub-vendor reporting. We also believe that Ms. Allen is financially contributing to the campaigns of Chester Crandell and Brenda Barton in violation of the Clean Elections laws. Lastly, we believe that Chester Crandell and Brenda Barton are receiving financial contributions from Sylvia Allen’s campaign in the form of political flyers without reporting the contributions or expenses associated with the printing and dissemination of these flyers. Our position is set forth more fully below.

CANDIDATE OVERVIEW

Sylvia Allen is a Republican Primary candidate for the office of State Senate for Legislative District 5 (hereafter LD5). The name of her committee is “Committee to Elect Sylvia T. Allen 2010″, Committee #201000208. Her Treasurer is Walter F. Dudley. Chester Crandell is a Republican Primary candidate for the office of State Representative for LD5. The name of his committee is “Committee to Elect Chester Crandell,” Committee # 201000320. His Treasurer is Marcie Lynn Franco. Brenda Barton is a Republican Primary candidate for the office of State Representative for LD5. The name of her committee is “Barton4AZ,” Committee# 201000189. Her Treasurer is Donna Orbegoso.

Sylvia Allen is a “non-participating” candidate. Chester Crandell and Brenda Barton are “participating” candidates. Attached as Exhibit 1 is the Campaign Finance Report for Sylvia Allen filed August 11, 2010, for the Reporting period of June 1, 2010 – August 4, 2010. Attached as Exhibit 2 is the Campaign Finance Report for Brenda Barton filed August 11, 2010, for the Reporting period of June 1, 2010 – August 4, 2010. Attached as Exhibit 3 is the Campaign Finance Report for Chester Crandell filed August 11, 2010, for the Reporting period of June 1, 2010- August 4, 2010.

CAMPAIGN VIOLATIONS: Sylvia Allen

Attached to this letter are multi-colored, two-sided campaign mailers for Sylvia Allen’s current campaign for LD5. See Exhibits 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 & 10. Also attached to this letter are multi-colored, two-sided campaign mailers where Allen, Barton and Crandell are running as a “team.” See Exhibits 11, 12 & 13. These are expensive flyers that have been sent to potential Republican voters in LD5 with the obvious intent to persuade electors. These are expensive flyers. We believe that these flyers cost a minimum of $0.45 to design, produce, print and mail. We believe that have been mailed to at least 4,000 “high-efficacy” Republican voters in LD5. If there are TEN (10) multi-colored, two-sided mailers for 4,000 voters, then the cost for all of these mailers would be $18,000 (4,000 pieces x 10 mailers x $0.45 apiece).

In looking at Ms. Allen’s Campaign Finance Report (Exhibit 1) at page 40, there is only one expense item listed and described that would explain the cost of designing, producing and mailing these expensive flyers. There is a listing for “High Noon Campaign Productions” for $6,650 for the reporting period ($7,187.50 total for the election cycle.) There is no plausible explanation for this many mailers costing so little other than to claim fraud in the disclosure.
We also attach two campaign ads which are not appropriately accounted for in the Campaign Finance Report. See Exhibits 14 & 15. Exhibit 14 is an ad that appeared recently in the Payson Roundup and is for all three candidates (Allen, Barton & Crandell.) This ad does not appear anywhere as an expense in Ms. Allen’s Campaign Finance Report. (Exhibit 1.) Exhibit 15 is an ad that appeared recently in The Beehive and again is for all three candidates (Allen, Barton & Crandell.) Again, this ad does not appear anywhere as an expense in Ms. Allen’s Campaign Finance Report. (Exhibit 1.)

There are multiple violations in this matter. First, it is clear that Ms. Allen is substantially under-reporting the cost of mailing these flyers, and not even reporting the costs of these newspaper ads. This is a violation of A.R.S. §§16-901,915 and AAC R2-20-109. Second, it is clear that Ms. Allen has failed to report any sub-vendors for the design and production and mailing of these flyers, all in violation of AAC R2-20-109. Third, it is very difficult – if not downright impossible – to determine who is paying for these ads as the writing used is deceptively small. Fourth, by conflating the three candidates into one flyer or ad, but not requiring the two participating candidates (Barton and Crandell) to pay their proportionate share of these mailers or ads, Ms. Allen is helping these other two candidates to defeat the limits of the Clean Elections laws that Barton and Crandell agreed to be bound by.

CAMPAIGN VIOLATIONS: Brenda Barton & Chester Crandell

Ms. Barton and Mr. Crandell have both agreed to be “participating” candidates under Arizona’s Clean Elections laws. As such they are given substantial financial benefit by the State in exchange for their agreement to abide by strict financial accounting in their respective campaigns. Search as one might through the Campaign Finance Reports (Exhibits 2 & 3) there is no vendor or sub-vendor listed for either candidate that explains the joint mailers ( Exhibits 11, 12 & 13.)

This is not a question of under-reporting. This is a question of no reporting whatsoever. By accepting Ms. Allens’ campaigns’ largesse of design, production and mailing of these flyers, without accounting for them on their reports, Ms. Barton and Mr. Crandell have violated A.R.S. §§ 16-913, 915, 941, 948, 952, 958 and A.A.C. R2-20-109.

As for the Payson Roundup ad (Exhibit 14), neither Ms. Barton nor Mr. Crandell accounted for this expense in their respective Campaign Finance Reports. (Exhibits 2 & 3.) Accordingly, the “teeny-weeny” disclaimer on this ad that it was paid for by all three committees is false. Again, Ms. Barton and Mr. Crandell have violated A.R.S. §§ 16-913, 915, 941, 948, 952, 958 and A.A.C. R2-20-109.
Lastly we deal with The Beehive ad (Exhibit 15). This ad IS accounted for in Mr. Crandell’s Campaign Finance Report. (Exhibit 3.) But it is not otherwise accounted for in Ms. Barton’s Campaign Finance Report. (Exhibit 2.) Again, Ms. Barton and Mr. Crandell have violated A.R.S. §§ 16-913, 915, 941, 948, 952, 958 and A.A.C. R2-20-109.

CONCLUSION

These violations are not insubstantial. These ads are running and these flyers are being mailed to voters during the “early vote by mail” season and are effectively depriving candidate Bill Konopnicki of a fair election process. There will not be a meaningful opportunity for Mr. Konopnicki to timely respond in kind to these flyers. Accordingly, we ask that you act as swiftly as possible, and impose the severest of sanctions allowed by law to send the message that this type of election chicanery will not be allowed in Arizona. I look forward to hearing from you shortly.

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.

Very truly yours,
TREON, AGUIRRE, NEWMAN & NORRIS

Thomas M. Ryan

###

EXHIBIT 1

EXHIBIT 2

EXHIBIT 3

EXHIBIT20100816102210746

EXHIBIT20100816102240512

EXHIBIT20100816102322772

EXHIBIT20100816102358040

EXHIBIT20100816102441861

EXHIBIT20100816102458816

EXHIBIT20100816102526848

EXHIBIT20100816102556410

EXHIBIT20100816102619682

EXHIBIT20100822202046899

http://www.prlog.org/10879264-az-state-senator-sylvia-allen-breaks-campaign-finance-law-ld-5.html

]]> http://sonoranweeklyreview.com/thomas-m-ryan-sylvia-allen-severe-campaign-finance-violations-ld-5/feed/ 0 http://sonoranweeklyreview.com/arizona-state-senator-sylvia-allen-petty-tactics-petty-cash-and-petty-candidate-2/ http://sonoranweeklyreview.com/arizona-state-senator-sylvia-allen-petty-tactics-petty-cash-and-petty-candidate-2/#comments Mon, 23 Aug 2010 01:58:04 +0000 Editor http://sonoranweeklyreview.com/?p=4825

I wonder If I can Attack A Credible Candidate Today Without Even Getting out of Bed? - S. Jacobson

By AZ Samuel

*update – The Konopnicki campaign is holding a press conference August 23rd at 10:am with a press release concerning the campaign finance violations in LD-5.  That information is now linked to the bottom of this article*

Incumbent State Senator of District 5 Sylvia Allen and her lapdog Susan Jacobson at the Payson Throw-up Roundup have recently been raising quite the brouhaha over campaign contributions and campaign finance. The entire situation only perpetuates the desperate nature of Sylvia’s campaign and is all very petty indeed.  Here is why:

Sylvia and her pals have been attacking Bill Konopnicki (the common sense one that is running, you know the one that doesn’t embarrass our state every time he opens his  mouth) over the contributions sent in to Konopnicki’s campaign.  Ol’ Sylvia is upset that Konopnicki has and is outspending her in the primary.  Konopnicki has also raised more money than Sylvia another stickler for her.  Sylvia and her people claim that nearly all of Konopnicki’s campaign contributions are from evil “outsiders” and “lobbyists” etc.  I know it’s odd that someone like Sylvia who’s violated election law before (2004) and who’s own campaign last cycle was made up of nearly 30% lobbyist money to be complaining about anyone else.  Then again when has common sense ever taken precedent with Sylvia? Exactly.

Bill Konopnicki has secured contributions from across the state, both in and out of his district.  Bill has also received numerous contributions from various organizations and political action committees.  A large portion or at least a significant portion of these org’s and Pac’s membership’s consist of folks from district 5.  However; according to Sylvia that is all evil “outsider” money.  Influential Maricopa county hot-shots trying to wrap their hands around rural Arizona. (you know the folks she accepts her commands from when she needs to do something really hard like cast a vote or . . .  Think.).  The reality is often times simply because a PAC or organization has a presence in a certain area does not mean that is where they are based or HQ’d or have their administrative offices etc.  Very often these checks will be sent from other parties or the official offices wherever they may be located.  To discount it all as being out of district is dishonest and well . . . Petty.

Take for example that in legislative district 5 there are seven hospitals all of which contributed to their hospital PAC.  A PAC that supports Bill Konopnicki’s campaign due in large part to the immense concern, attention, action and initiative Konopnicki has given the area of health care during his time in the legislature.  There are also approximately 500 nurses, 350 doctors, 108 highway patrolmen, 470 members of the FOP and almost 600 realtors all of whom made contributions to various PAC’s.  The realtor’s PAC also made a sizeable contribution to Konopnicki’s campaign.  Sylvia is a realtor, one can only assume she’s contributed to this PAC and using her own logic if she has . . . Does that make her one of these evil out of town contributors that Konopnicki is allegedly beholden to?

Let’s move forward a bit.

As I’ve already mentioned Sylvia was fined back in 2004 for violating clean election laws in Arizona. (Shocking).  Well, it seems she’s continuing the trend.  Sylvia denounces Konopnicki’s “out of town” contributions whether from individuals, organizations or PAC’s but makes no mention of her own.  Odder still is her seemingly low showing in the expenditures category even given the amount of money she’s managed to scrounge together.  One thing in particular strikes the eye right off the bat:  numerous personal withdrawals from her campaign fund under the guise of “Petty Cash.”  Personal withdrawals?  Petty Cash?
I don’t know about you but I can’t wait to hear Sylvia’s befuddling explanation of these withdrawals.  There is no further description of them in her financial report, no ties to any reasonable expenditures, no follow up and no explanation other than she personally took some funds from her campaign for her own personal use on well . . . Whatever.  Looks like someone should’ve supplied her with that “math genius” she asked for during the discussion on HB2370.

Wait . . .it gets better er eh . . . Or worse I should say.

It appears Sylvia is masterminding some type of campaign finance violation mafia in legislative district 5.
I know what you are thinking, Sylvia couldn’t possibly be masterminding anything.  Well you are probably
Right but she is definitely participating.

Take the “ABC Team” as they’ve likened themselves, of Sylvia Allen, Brenda Barton and Chester Crandell (who also has the second worst campaign site ever next to Sylvia Allen. That’s another story).
It appears after looking carefully at Sylvia’s financial reporting, her ads, fliers, hand-outs, radio-spots etc.
That Sylvia is under-reporting her campaign expenses. It also appears she is not complying with the sub-
Vendor reporting.  It also appears ol’ Sylvia is contributing financially to B&C of ABC.  She’s definitely
Contributing to their campaigns in the form of campaign materials such as fliers etc.  Of course there are no
Expenses associated with the printing and dissemination of these materials.

Well it only appears that way right?

In case I’m losing you Sylvia is running for re-election to the LD5 State Senate seat and her committee is “Committee to Elect Sylvia T. Allen 2010.”  Her Treasurer is Walter F. Dudley. Chester Crandell is a Republican primary candidate for State Representative for LD5.  The name of his little committee is “Committee to Elect Chester Crandell” Committee #201000320.  His Treasurer is Marcie Lynn Franco. Last but not least is Brenda Barton another Republican party candidate for State Representative for LD5. The name of her committee is “Barton4AZ” (slightly more original than the other two) Committee #201000189.  Her Treasurer is Donna Orbegoso. Sylvia is a “non-participating” candidate.  Chester and Brenda are both “participating” candidates.

Exhibit 1- The campaign finance report for Sylvia Allen filed August 11, 2010, for the reporting period of June 1, 2010 – August 4, 2010.  Attached as Exhibit 2 is the Campaign Finance Report for Brenda Barton filed August 11, 2010, for the Reporting period of June 1, 2010 – August 4, 2010. Attached as Exhibit 3 is the Campaign Finance Report for Chester Crandell filed August 11, 2010, for the Reporting period of June 1, 2010- August 4, 2010.

This also requires taking a look at the multi-colored, two-sided campaign mailers for Sylvia Allen’s current campaign for LD5.  See Exhibits 4,5 6,7 8,9,10. And of course we can not forget the multi-colored, two-sided campaign mailers where Allen, Barton and Crandell are running as a “team.”  See Exhibits 11,, 12 & ,13.

Now I don’t run a graphics company or a print shop but I’ve ordered more than a few in my day and I know as well as you do that these fliers can get pretty expensive.  These costly little numbers have been sent to potential Republican voters in LD5 with the obvious intent to persuade electors.  Let’s take a conservative estimate here, after-all that’s what we are talking about right . . . A bunch of alleged conservatives?  Let us say that these fliers cost a minimum of $0.45 to design, produce, print and mail.  They were mailed to at least 4,000 “high-efficacy” Republican voters in LD5.  If there are TEN (10) multi-colored, two-sided mailers for 4,000 voters, then the cost for all of these mailers would be $18,000 (4,000 pieces x 10 mailers x $0.45 apiece).

Take a gander back over at Ms. Allen’s Campaign Finance Report (Exhibit 1) at page 40, there is only one expense item listed and described that could possibly come close to explaining the cost of designing, producing and mailing these precious little fliers.  There is a listing for “High Noon Campaign Productions” for $6,650 for the reporting period ($7,187.50 total for the election cycle.)   Now I’ve gone over it a few times and I actually checked with a real math genius (you’re welcome Sylvia) and there is simply no reasonable explanation for getting this many mailers out without paying the actual price.

Maybe they just found the cheapest place on the planet to purchase and mail campaign material from . . . A place no other candidate on earth has access to yet.  Yeah maybe  . . . But then what about these two campaign ads which are not appropriately accounted for in the Campaign Finance Report?

See Exhibits 14& 15.  Exhibit 14 is an ad that appeared recently in the Payson Throwup Roundup and is for all three candidates (Allen, Barton & Crandell.)  Do you see this ad anywhere on Sylvia’s finance report?  Nope, me either.  (Exhibit 1.)   Exhibit 15 is an ad that appeared recently in The Beehive and again is for all three candidates (Allen, Barton & Crandell.)  Once again . . . Nada. (Exhibit 1.)

Staying with me here?  Good because there are multiple violations in this matter. First, it is clear that Sylvia is substantially under-reporting the cost of mailing these fliers, and not even reporting the costs of these newspaper ads.  This is a violation of A.R.S. §§16-901,915 and AAC R2-20-109. (whammy)  Second, it is clear that Sylvia has ALSO failed to report any sub-vendors for the design and production and mailing of these fliers, all in violation of AAC R2-20-109.  WHOLY VIOLATION BATMAN!  But wait boy-wonder! There’s More!  Third, pretty darn hard, even with my trusty side-kick – to determine who is paying for these ads as the writing used is deceptively small or petty heh heh.  Fourth, by ABC‘ing these three candidates into one ad, but not requiring the two participating candidates (Barton and Crandell) to pay their proportionate share of these costly subversives or ads, Sylvia is assisting these other B&C to cheat the limits of the Clean Elections laws (Laws she’s already broken in the past) that Barton and Crandell intentionally agreed to be bound by.

B&C (Barton and Crandell) have both agreed to be “participating” candidates under Arizona’s Clean Elections laws. Now due to this little venture they are given substantial financial benefit by the State in exchange for their agreement to abide by strict financial accounting in their respective campaigns.  However search as one might (and I might . . .a lot.) through the Campaign Finance Reports (Exhibits 2 & 3) there is no vendor or sub-vendor listed for B or C that explains the joint mailers ( Exhibits 11, 12 & 13.)

So we move on from the question of under-reporting to no reporting whatsoever! By accepting Ms. Allens’ campaigns’ largesse of design, production and mailing of these fliers, without accounting for them on their reports, Ms. Barton and Mr. Crandell have violated A.R.S. §§ 16-913, 915, 941, 948, 952, 958 and A.A.C. R2-20-109. (double whammy)

As for the Payson Throwup Roundup ad (Exhibit 14), Baron and Crandell have no mention of it in neither of their financial reports.  Big surprise given the trail we’re following now eh?  (Exhibits 2 & 3.) Accordingly, the “microscopic, its-bitsy wee lil” disclaimer on this ad that it was paid for by all three committees would be and of course is false.  Which means yet again – Ms. Barton and Mr. Crandell have violated A.R.S. §§ 16-913, 915, 941, 948, 952, 958 and A.A.C. R2-20-109. (Are there triple whammy’s?  I don’t remember.)

Now we buzz over to The Beehive ad (Exhibit 15). This ad IS actually accounted for in Mr. Crandell’s Campaign Finance Report.  (Exhibit 3.) But don’t buzz off yet because it is not  accounted for in Ms. Barton’s Campaign Finance Report.  (Exhibit 2.) Which means  . . . Yep you guessed it Quadruple Whammy! (now I know we‘re breaking new ground with that one), Ms. Barton and Mr. Crandell have violated A.R.S. §§ 16-913, 915, 941, 948, 952, 958 and A.A.C. R2-20-109.

What does all this mean?  Why does anyone care?  Does it matter?  Short and sweet of it.  Hell yes it matters!

These aren’t insignificant violations or simple things that were “mistakenly” over-looked. These ads are and have been running in the district and these costly fliers are being mailed to voters during our “early vote by mail” season thusly robbing Konopnicki (and others) of a fair election process.   We are down to the wire folks.  There is not time, at least not enough for Konopnicki or anyone else to respond in kind to these fliers.

You know we make a big deal of our elections and election process here in Arizona.  We typically have some type of law, legislation  or whatever in the works all year ‘round that has to do with our elections and campaigns in one fashion or another.  At the very least we’re always talking about it good bad or indifferent. Clean election law like it or hate it we brought it on ourselves just as we have with all the others.

As over-done as it may be it is vital.  It is important.  And these are significant and severe violations. (Again).  I hope the Konopnicki campaign acts quickly.  I think Mr. Ken Bennett with the Secretary of State,  Mr. Todd Lang the Director of Citizens Clean Elections Commission and Mr. Terry Goddard our ‘beloved’ Attorney General should act swiftly as humanly possible and impose the severest of penalties allowed by our law.  A strong message must be sent that this type of election behavior, this disregard for our process, law and one another will NOT be allowed in Arizona.

Oh and one more thing . . . . EARTH TO SYLVIA!!! Are you there?  Earth To Sylvia! Wake Up!

*UPDATE*

Looks like the opposition campaign will act swiftly: Letter to Mr. Ken Bennett OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE / Mr.Todd Lang, Director
CITIZENS CLEAN ELECTIONS COMMISSION Mr. Terry Goddard, Mr. James E. Barton, II
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

from Thomas M. Ryan

Konopnicki Campaign Exhibits/Press Release Documentation and Letters  CLICK HERE

http://www.prlog.org/10879264-az-state-senator-sylvia-allen-breaks-campaign-finance-law-ld-5.html

DOWNLOADS: (486)

PLAYS: (792)

Ah, there’s nothing like watching Bill O’Reilly bloviate on Fox News to get daily lessons in journalistic ethics — lessons, that is, in how to rather nakedly discard ethics altogether.

On Wednesday, O’Reilly featured a segment on the Justice Department’s threat to sue Sheriff Joe Arpaio over his refusal to cooperate with its investigation of his racial-profiling practices. (Naturally, the feds have so far punked out.)

To do this, he brought on a guest named Rachel Alexander, identified as a “former deputy attorney for Maricopa County, AZ” — and that was it. Alexander then proceeded to assure O’Reilly that the DOJ’s threats, as well as its investigation, were purely “political” — though all she could point to was some coincidental timing around the SB1070 matter, which in fact only arose well after the DOJ began investigating Arpaio.

Cont—>

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Printer-Friendly Version

For a decade, the left owned the streets.  Subsidized by George Soros and energized by the Clinton impeachment in the 90s and the Iraq War since, it dominated the Internet and grass roots campaigning.  Michael Moore’s movies – however misguided – enthused their ranks and catalyzed their efforts.  ACORN worked to commit massive voter fraud in the guise of stimulating voter turnout and the New Black Panthers worked to intimidate those with whom they disagreed.  President Barack Obama was the result.

Now, finally, conservatives are answering with their own grass roots efforts in the Tea Party movement.  Tea Party activists are bringing the battle to stop big government spending and taxes to the streets and parks of America.

And its working!  The Tea Party movement, working closely with Americans for Prosperity (AFP), mobilized people against the Obamacare proposal and, in the end, will cost the Democrats their Congressional majorities – a fitting price for defying the will of the people.

Democrats are so threatened that they are demonizing the Tea Party as eccentric, extreme and racist.  Speaker Pelosi compared them to the Nazis.  These are the cries of those about to lose an election – big time!

Now a new film, The Tea Party Movie, shows the anatomy of the group and explains its motivations.  With almost no funding or paid staff and all decisions made at the local level, the Tea Party people are reshaping American politics.  A bottom-up movement, they are restoring values to our politics.

The film, sometimes moving, sometimes funny, and always interesting is available online at http://www.teapartymovie.com.   Do yourself a favor and watch it!

And, on September 12th, pack your bags and migrate to Sacramento, St. Louis, or Washington DC for the three mega-rallies sponsored by the Tea Party folks.  Its time to get out of the grandstands and onto the playing field.  We need a massive show of participation and enthusiasm to kick-off, animate, and catalyze the effort to throw the big spending socialists out of Congress in November!  Go to http://teapartypatriots.org/Recycle/Recycle.aspx to learn more about the rallies.  Organize your friends and neighbors to go and attend!

The Tea Party is not only electing Republicans, it is cleansing them.  Their victories in intra-party contests in Utah, Colorado, Nevada, and South Carolina shows that they are no happier with big spending Republicans than with Democrats of a similar persuasion.  Many worried that the Tea Party would be a third party movement, splitting the vote and electing the Democrats.  No way.  Instead, they are winning their primaries and purifying the Party.

What a great time to be alive and what a wonderful group to support!

Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick’s columns! __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO FRIENDS AND FAMILY AND TELL THEM THEY CAN GET THESE COLUMNS E-MAILED TO THEM FOR FREE BY SUBSCRIBING AT DICKMORRIS.COM!

THANK YOU!

***COPYRIGHT EILEEN MCGANN AND DICK MORRIS 2010.  REPRINTS WITH PERMISSION ONLY***

The Primary Election is only three days away, Tuesday, August 24th. The polls will be open from 6:00 am to 7:00 pm.

Early Ballots: If you still have an early ballot, drop it off at a polling location on Tuesday, August 24th. Follow the instructions that came with your ballot and take it to the polls, do NOT put it in the mail because it might not arrive in time.

Volunteer for Victory. If you would like to volunteer for the last push to Victory, please call the campaign office at (520) 888-8683 in the Tucson area or call (520) 249-7750 in the Sierra Vista area.

Election Day – Tuesday, August 24th, 6:00 am to 7:00 pm.

ID at the polls. When you vote at the polls on Election Day, remember to bring proper ID (ie driver license). It is also a good idea to have your voter registration card with you. Here is a list of other documents that you can use for ID at the polls.
Election night Victory Celebration: Join the campaign at Viscount Suite Hotel, 4855 E. Broadway Blvd, as we watch the election returns come in from the counties.

National News Coverage: The CD 8 race continues to receive attention in the Washington media. Read this story from today’s edition of Politico for the latest news on the election.

Thank you for your support. You are an important part of Victory this November.

If you would like to receive more frequent updates, please follow the campaign on Facebook or Twitter.