Robert Graham And Prop 121: The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly

THE GOOD:  Prop 121 was defeated 63% to 33%.

We watched the debate on Tuesday night between Robert Graham and Doug Little, two candidates who want to lead the Arizona Republican Party.
 
In the debate, Mr. Graham stated about the No on Prop 121 campaign, "I raised the money.  I was very instrumental in putting together the message, the targeting."
 
Bill Montgomery, the front man for "No on Prop 121" said back in July,"the other person involved in marshaling opposition to the initiative is former GOP Congressman John Shadegg." 

THE BAD:  Was it a poor use of resources and funds?

Regardless of who wants to   gets to take credit, it was pretty clear that Prop 121 was headed for defeat almost from the beginning.  Prop 121 was unpopular amongst not just Republicans but also Democrats, Libertarians and even members of the Green Party. 
 
 
For example:

Political Parties united on Prop 121
October 1, 2012

They don’t agree on much, but a plan to create “top two” primaries has Arizona’s major and minor political parties on the same page – or at least close to it.  Their responses range from outright opposition from Republican, Libertarian and Green leaders to noncommittal dislike from the Arizona Democratic Party.

The state Democratic Party hasn’t taken an official stand on the measure, but Executive Director Luis Heredia said there is little support for it.

 

Leaders of Arizona’s Libertarian and Green parties argue that the initiative would make it virtually impossible for their candidates to make it onto the general election ballot.

 

“There is a reason we have partisan primaries in Arizona,” said Angel Torres, co-chair of Arizona’s Green Party and a candidate for state House in a Phoenix-area district.

The day after this article was posted, Mr. Graham put out a youtube video opposing Prop 121.  The credit at the end of the video states it was paid for by "GrahamforArizona" and encourages viewers to visit the Saveourvote.org website. 

Graham for Arizona?

Another "thank you to the grassroots" video published on November 15th also showed "paid for by GrahamforArizona."  Was Graham's personal $5800 donation to Save Our Vote on August 17th used to create these videos with the intent of using them later as campaign material?  Graham conveniently announced his run for Chairman about 10 days prior to the release of the first video.  Graham responded to a question at the recent debate saying that the only money he spent on his State Party Chairman campaign was his own $4500 to cover the cost of t-shirts, buttons and signs. 

So who paid for the GrahamforArizona youtube videos?

His "targeted message" was seen a total of 1,100 times. To put this into context, there were 1,340,286 votes cast opposing Prop 121.  Not exactly a "targeted" audience.


Lake Havasu's News-Herald
October 17, 2012

Arizona State Senate, Dist. 5, candidates Republican Kelli Ward and Democrat Beth Weisser ...agreed again in opposition to Prop 121 citing reasons that everyone should have a voice, no matter the popularity of their political party affiliation.


During this same time, an article in the Tucson Sentinel said,
 
An obscure political group based in the Valley injected another $350,000 this week into the effort to defeat Proposition 121...
 
In all, Americans for Responsible Leadership has donated $450,000 to Save Our Vote, accounting for nearly all of the latter's fundraising reported to the Arizona Secretary of State's Office.
 
Americans for Responsible Leadership also contributed $500,000 in mid-September to No New Taxes, No on 204...That contribution accounts for nearly all of that group's funding listed with the state.


In the recent debate, Mr. Graham stated that "he" raised the money for Prop 121 between September and November.  According to the article above, by mid-October, $450,000 had been donated to Save Our Vote by the Americans for Responsible Leadership which lists Graham as a Director since July 2011. 

Also, the article tells us that at least $100,000 to oppose Prop 121 and another $500,000 in opposition to Prop 204 had been received within the first 2 weeks of September.  This leads us to assume that Mr. Graham was able to somehow raise at least $600,000 in just two weeks time while also running his own company AND attending vigorous weekend-long MBA classes every other weekend at the Thunderbird School of Global Management.  

It becomes even more unbelieveable   impressive when we are told that he personally was able to raise $1M to oppose two propositions in less than a month while doing all of the things listed above PLUS attend a required Thunderbird study abroad in India during mid-October.  An amazing feat from someone who didn't raise a dime in the five months he ran for Governor. 

He must have found some new connections friends with deep pockets...


And finally just before the election, there was STILL very little support:

Western Free Press
October 26, 2012
 
Both major parties are opposed to the initiative, as are third parties...Only 37% of Arizona voters said they would vote in favor of open primaries in the latest Rasmussen survey.

 

THE UGLY:   Where did the money go?

Let's look a little closer at the donations from the Americans for Responsible Leadership PAC to the Save Our Vote campaign. 

The first thing we noticed was that the treasurer is our familiar friend, Hieu Tran, from the Republican Victory Fund/Republican House Victory fiasco as well as other endeavors such as Steve Chucri and Bob Worsley's campaigns.
 
We also discovered that less than $8000 of the $575,000 received came from individual donors.  The rest came from the Americans for Responsible Leadership PAC.
 

Now let's take a look to see where the money was spent:

$3,500 for website design

$2,000 to Hieu Tran for bookkeeping

$15,000 to Sign King for signs

$70,000 to Americans for Responsible Leadership for mailers


Reasonable expenses.  Here's where it gets less "grass-rooty":


$18,000 for sign installation (the signs cost more to install than they did to make? Couldn't this have been a grassroots, ground game effort instead of paying one guy to install signs?)

$40,000 to Jess Yescalis for consulting (Yescalis owns a fundraising firm that is connected to Sean Noble's Center to Protect Patient Rights who was involved in the money "laundering" accusation in California.  Noble was John Shadegg's former Chief of Staff.  Remember, it was Shadegg who Bill Montgomery cited in July as the other person involved in "marshaling opposition.")

$208,000  to Larry John Wright for "advertising." Mr. Wright has been busy over the last year producing videos for other candidates such as Bob Worsley and Jerry Lewis.   We were only able to locate one TV commercial created for Save Our Vote. 
 
The Chairman of Save Our Vote is Tony Bradley who formed a consulting company in 2009 called Roundtable Strategies.  Mr. Bradley's company was paid by the Save Our Vote campaign for communications and mailers.  Bradley consulted on previous campaigns for Paul Gosar, Amanda Reeve (LD 28 House candidate who was one of the few candidates directly supported by the ARL PAC...and lost) and Phoenix City Councilman Bill Gates. 


One of the debate questions asked on Tuesday night was, "Will you take a pledge that you will not pay a penny to a political consultant that is not a paid full-time employee of the Arizona State Republican party?"

Graham responded by saying, "We want to be frugal.  We want to be smart.  We want our dollars to stretch as far as we can.  Now remember, we're part of the Republican party, right?  We're supposed to do that.  When it comes to consultants, it's interesting to be asked to make a pledge like this because in my organization I PERSONALLY have gone to consultants and asked for help on how to be better with organizational skills...so to pledge that you won't use consultants is like a pledge that you won't get expertise (sic) advice at some time.  I'm not saying that we're going to go line the pockets of people...so I'm not going to take the pledge."

Doug Little responded by saying he feels the political consultant community in Arizona is toxic for our party and was willing to take the pledge.



How capable IS Mr. Graham if he admits to relying on expensive political consultants for advice on how to do the job that many grassroots people already know how to do?

 

 

 Other races which the ARL donated directly to included, ironically, $11,500 in the primary election to help union-supported Andy Tobin defeat Lori Klein.  Another $21,000 to help Amanda Reeve and Kate McGee and a measly $800 to "help" Frank Antenori. 

On August 15th, the ARL donated $7500 to the Republican Victory Fund.  Between August 16th and the primary election, the RVF spent over $40,000 to support Rich Crandall over John Fillmore.  Almost 1/4 of the money used during that time period came from Robert Graham's Americans for "Responsible Leadership" PAC. 

Did we mention that in the debate, Mr. Graham claimed he would never endorse one Republican candidate over another in a primary election?  Did he bother to ask where the money would be spent before he sent in the donation?  Or did he know?

 

 

Finally, there was a $5,300 head-scratching donation by the ARL that went to support Senator Orrin Hatch, R-Utah during the primary race when he ran against TEA Party backed candidate, Dan Liljenquist.

While Mr. Graham refused to answer the debate question regarding which slate he supported during the Maricopa County Republican Committee race two weeks ago, it would appear that he did manage to set up a table at the County meeting to advertise his book  candidacy. 

On a completely different topic, it would appear that Mr. Graham has ventured into the "green" demolition business by creating a new company called Green Steel along with his ARL PAC buddy, Eric Wnuck.  They quickly came across their first project this last fall in New Hampshire of all places to "recycle" an old paper mill which they purchased, sight unseen.  We wonder if they both know the former New Hampshire GOP Executive Director, Stephen DeMaura who is the current director of Americans for Job Security.... because that would be a very small world!

Republican Victory Fund/Republican House Victory

A few months ago during the primary elections, we brought your attention to the Independent Expenditure called the Republican Victory Fund. This was a fund set up by Republicans in the legislature for the purpose of maintaining a Republican majority.  The money was never intended to be used during a primary election to support one Republican candidate over another.  However, the fund which is overseen by Senate President Steve Pierce and his campaign manager, Camilla Strongin, chose to donate upwards of $80,000 to support establishment candidate Rich Crandall over John Fillmore in the primary. 

A gross misuse of the fund's intent.

In an article from AZ Central titled "Primary Puts Arizona Senate On A More Centrist Path," Senate President Steve Pierce said,

"Sen. Rich Crandall's 4-point win over Rep. John Fillmore in the East Valley was key to ensuring the next Senate will remain focused on job creation and the economy...retaining Crandall was important, not only because of the Mesa lawmaker's focus on education, but because Crandall has focused on economic issues."

Makes you wonder exactly what kind of education and economic bills Pierce would introduce in the next session should he maintain his position as Senate President.  Would the bills have anything to do with Medicaid exchanges for ObamaCare?

As we pointed out in our previous entry, wasting $80,000 on Crandall during a primary meant that there would be $80,000 less to help elect Republican candidates in the general election.


What we have recently discovered is that Senate President Pierce and his counterpart, House Speaker Andy Tobin, are once again being very selective as to who they have chosen to help in the general election.  Are they only supporting those who would be a "vote" for them to retain their leadership positions in the legislature?

Again, a gross misuse of the fund's intent.

As a reminder, Senator Pierce's campaign manager, Camilla Strongin, is the Chairman of the Republican Victory Fund.  Also, Strongin's company, The Engaging Company, has received an astounding $137,000 in consulting fees which is more than a quarter of the total funds raised.  The Engaging Company has also received over $86,000 for "consulting" on Pierce's campaign.

The Treasurer of the Victory Fund is Hieu Tran.  Tran is also listed as the Treasurer for Steve Pierce's campaign and is the contact (email and address) for the House Victory Fund.  Tran has been paid over $1100 for accounting services from the House Victory Fund. 

We're sure that these connections are merely an odd coincidence.

Here are the abbreviations for the various Republican and Democrat Independent Expenditures who have poured an eye-raising amount of money into the election.  The ones in RED are the Republican funds and show how much money was spend in SUPPORT of the Republican candidate/s.  The ones in BLUE are the Democrat funds which show how much money was spent to DEFEAT the Republican candidate/s.  We are only going to show the Republican candidates.

RHV - Republican House Victory
RVF - Republican Victory Fund
AAP - Arizona Accountability Project (organization headed by Linda Somo who helped elect Bob Worsley)
AV - America Votes (organization affiliated with Campaign For Community Change who helped Jerry Lewis during the LD18 recall election)
RA - Revitalize Arizona (received help from Anita Dunn and Hilary Rosen's Company)


DISTRICT 6
The Democrats are clearly targeting the Senate seat for District 6.  Considering the money Crandell has received from both the House and Senate IEs, will he (and the House candidates) be beholden to support the current leadership?

House - Barton/Thorpe
RHV - $32,600
RVF - $5400
AV - $6800

Senate - Crandell
RHV - $2700
RVF - $118,000
AAP - $146,000
AV - $14,400
RA - $20,700


DISTRICT 8
Why is the Senate candidate not receiving ANY help from the Republican funds to counter the $110,000 spent by the Democrats to defeat Ortiz? Clearly, this seems to be a "win-able" district in the House given the lack of Democratic funding and strong RHV support, so why is the Senate candidate not receiving any aide?

House - Pratt/Shope
RHV - $57,200
AV - $8800

Senate - Ortiz
AAP - $116,000
AV - $14,000


DISTRICT 9
Why would the ONE Republican candidate running for the House against 2 Democrat candidates receive $38,000  from the RHV (which is more than twice the amount of money Orr has raised for his campaign) while the Senate candidate has received nothing?  It's not as if the Senate Democrat candidate, Steve Farley, has had a lot of outside help.  He has only received $1800 in support from the IE America Votes. 

House - Orr
RHV - $38,900

Senate - Mott
-0-
AV - $3000


DISTRICT 10
Why would the RHV fund outspend their Democratic opponents by a 5-1 margin in the House election while the RVF gave absolutely NOTHING to the incumbent Senator, Frank Antenori, whose opponent has benefitted from over $143,000 in help from outside leftist groups? Is it because Antenori might not be a vote for Pierce should he run again for Senate President?

House - Clodfelter/Vogt
RHV - $37,800
(Vogt also received an additional $20,800 from the RHV....nothing specifically went to help Clodfelter)
AV - $9200

Senate - Antenori
-0-
AAP - $40,000
AV - $14,000
RA - $93,000


DISTRICT 14
The Democrats in this district have outraised the Republicans by almost 2 to 1.  While Democrats have not used any IE money, perhaps this might be a good use of the Republican IEs to counter the additional money the Democrats have raised.  Unless, perhaps, they would not be a vote for Pierce or Tobin? 

House - Gowan/Stevens
-0-

Senate - Griffin
-0-

DISTRICT 17
Yarbrough had a last minute donation from the RVF on October 26th in the amount of $13,000.  This is curious since his Democrat opponent, Bill Gates, hasn't received any help from IEs nor have any IEs spent money opposing Yarbrough.  Is his vote for Pierce being bought?

Senate - Yarbrough
RVF - $13,000


DISTRICT 18
Why have both the House and Senate candidates received help from the RHV and the RVF in this district? The Democrats spent less than $10k fighting the Republican candidates in the House. However, the Democrats are clearly attempting to defeat McComish.  Pierce knows that a McComish loss would mean one less vote of support.  To Pierce, ensuring a win in District 18 is critical, even if it means sacrificing a seat from, say, a District 10.

House - Dial/Robson
RHV - $40,000
RVF - $6400
AV - $9800

Senate - McComish
RHV - $5000
RVF - $132,000
AAP - $97,000
AV - $15,000
RA - $188,000

DISTRICT 20
Yee just recently received help from the RVF after having already received over $22k from other groups yet the only opposition she has seen is $1400 from Planned Parenthood.  Why would Ms. Yee even NEED help?  The Democrats have another IE called "Building Arizona's Future" whose Chairman is State Senator David Lujan who has spent $70,000 attacking Mr. Seel. The best the RHV can do is $15,000? 

House - Boyer/Seel
RHV - $15,600

Senate - Yee
RVF - $12,000


DISTRICT 21
The Democrats haven't spent any money to help their candidates in this district and the Republican candidates have outraised their opponents which implies it should be an easy win for Republicans. So, did the two Republican House candidates need $8000 for their campaigns?  Why has Rick Murphy not received ANY help in his Senate race? Maybe because Murphy complained that Tobin held his union bills?

It is worthy to note that Rick Gray's wife, Lisa Gray, is the Treasurer of his campaign.  She is also running for Maricopa County Republican Chair.  Take a guess what side of the Republican aisle she might represent.

House - Gray/Lesko
RHV - $8000

Senate - Murphy
-0-


DISTRICT 24
If money was spent on a lone Republican House candidate in District 9, why is there no money to help the one Republican running for the House in this district?

House - Kaufman
-0-


DISTRICT 26
Lewis has also received $46,000 from Steve Pierce's IE called the UA Friends for Arizona, $3500 from the Cattlefeeders, $1000 from the Farm Bureau and another $4500 from the Dairymen. Why is Lewis receiving so much help from IEs that generally support candidates who represent rural areas?  Lewis isn't running to represent Prescott.  Why is he receiving help from Pierce's IE whose donors are alumni of the University of Arizona when Lewis is representing a district that is home to ASU?  Why are Speakman or Taylor not receiving any help at all from the RHV?

House - Speakman/Taylor
AV - $9800

Senate - Lewis
RVF - $67,000
AV - $15,500

(We want to take the opportunity to inform and remind our readers that groups who supported Lewis' election during the recall are now shockingly donating to Democrats.  Such as, Las Adelitas who donated $350 to CBA during the recall and has now donated to Democrats in District 8, 9 and 10).

Alex Soto (L), Randy Parraz, Laura Dent (2nd from right)

DISTRICT 28
There are two incumbent Republicans running against one Democrat for the two House seats. Did the RHV REALLY need to give $72k in a House race where the Democrats have spent only $600 in opposition? McGee's campaign finance statements show that she has received donations from the President of the Cattleman as well as countless other lobbyists. McGee was also endorsed by Jon Kyl. I think we know where this is going.

House - McGee/Reeve
RHV - $72,600
AV -  $600

This pattern of donations only makes sense if you were to look at it in the context of Steve Pierce and Andy Tobin's desire to retain their seats of power as President and Speaker of the House.  They are clearly using this money to not just help any Republican get elected, but only to help THEIR Republicans who, in turn, will help THEM maintain power.

They should rename the IE to reflect the REAL purpose:

Pierce Victory Fund and the Tobin House Victory.

We will update the numbers as they are reported.

"Rich" Crandall's Personal Money Tree

Arizona Senate President Steve Pierce once said,

"Everything in politics costs money."

He wasn't kidding.



Almost two years ago, the entire Republican Caucus agreed to support a Victory fund on the grounds that the funds raised would ONLY be used in General elections and NOT contested Republican Primary races. 
 
The Republican Victory Fund was established to maintain and expand Republican majorities in the legislature.  The funds raised on behalf of the Republican Victory fund were ostensibly raised in the name of the Arizona State Senate.
 
In February of this year, the Republican House Victory Fund transferred $7200 over to the RVF.  In May, the Senate Majority Fund transferred another $2000.  A majority of the business contributions to the RVF include:

-The Apollo Group  ($5k)
-Arizona Business Coalition ($30k) This group has donated to Kirk Adams and Rich Crandall in the past.  They are currently supporting Russ Jones who "struggled mightily" to vote for SB1070  while also sending mailers to "advocate the defeat" of  Conservative Republican, Lori Klein.  The contact name listed for the group is Glenn Hamer, President and CEO of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce.  The Arizona Chamber of Commerce was a plaintiff in a lawsuit filed against the state of Arizona over employer sanctions in 2007. 
-Arizona Cattle Growers ($5k)  Steve Pierce is a member of the Cattle Growers
-Arizona Farm Bureau ($10k)  A Party in the same lawsuit mentioned above against Arizona over employer sanctions as well as an endorser of the "Arizona Compact".
-Arizona Cotton Growers ($10k) Appear to donate to more Democrats than Republicans
-Western Growers ($10k) A group of farmers and ranchers mostly in California
-Country First PAC ($500)  This is John McCain's PAC
-Republican State Leadership  ($50k)  This is a group that operates out of Washington DC


The common denominator for most of the groups listed above?  "cheap labor"

Makes one wonder what the real motivation and goal might be of the Victory Fund.


 
Between July 30th and August 22nd, the RVF spent an astounding $75,000 either "advocating the election of Rich Crandall" or "advocating defeat of John Fillmore" in the LD16 Republican Senate primary race.
 

Ultimately, this means that there will be $75,000 LESS in the Fund to advocate for the election of Republican Senators in the upcoming General Election, particularly in the more hotly contested districts.
 

But wait...there's MORE!  


To further prove that there is no such thing as a coincidence in politics, let's take a closer look at the connections between the Senate President Steve Pierce's personal campaign and the RVF.
 
1.  The Chairman of the RVF is Camilla Strongin.  Ms. Strongin is the principle in the firm The Engaging Company which has been paid more than $77,000 in this election cycle by the RVF.

The Engaging Company has also been paid $84,000 for campaign services in this election cycle by Steve Pierce's campaign. 
 
2.  The Treasurer of the RVF is Hieu Tran.  Ms. Tran is also listed as the campaign Treasurer of Steve Pierce's campaign.  The previous Treasurer for the RVF was Tim Sifert who is a manager at The Engaging Company.
 
 
We're not done yet! 


Another group listed on mailers along with the RVF supporting Rich Crandall is The Senate Majority Fund.
 

The FEC filings for The Senate Majority Fund indicates that the fund is tied to U.S. Senator Jon Kyl.  Another recipient of a $10,000 donation from The Senate Majority Fund was Kirk Adams.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The FEC filings also indicate that the Treasurer for The Senate Majority Fund is Ashley Ragan.  Ashley Ragan's husband is John Ragan who is a manager at...you guessed it...The Engaging Company.

 

 

What is curious to us is why Senator Kyl's fund which FEC records indicate provides financial support for Federal candidates, is being used in a State Senate campaign.  More specifically, in a contested Republican Primary.

 

 

Nope.  Still not done yet.

 

 

Another Independent Expenditure group who has funded some of Rich Crandall's mailers is called the UA Friends for Arizona's Future.  

 

On July 15, 2012, an article discussed the purpose of this fund.  It said:

 

 

Taking advantage of his final months in a leadership position in the Arizona Senate, Steve Pierce, of Prescott, has been visiting Tucson quite often these days collecting for his campaign and wooing donors for friends. Pierce, University of Arizona alumni, (sic) has won the favor of a new Independent Expenditure (IE) Committee called UA Friends for Arizona’s Future.

 

Senate president Pierce, who will most likely lose his leadership spot to Andy Biggs in the upcoming legislative session, is being viewed as a “litmus test in the next election” by the UA Friends” including Tucson’s heavy hitters Fred Boice and Don Diamond.

 

According to the Yellow Sheet, “The committee, which is chaired by former Arizona Board of Regents president Fred Boice, has raised $64,200 since it was formed in late February, and still had $59,200 cash on hand when the reporting period ended May 31. Camilla Strongin, the committee’s consultant, said the group intends to use the money to promote candidates who will support the UofA in the Legislature.”

 

 

The Treasurer, once again, is Hieu Tran and the political consulting firm listed on their financial statements is Camilla Strongin's The Engaging Company.  The Engaging Company has been paid $13,500 in consulting fees through August 15th as well as an additional $30,000 for mailers advocating the election of Rich Crandall.

 

 

In case you are mentally adding up the dollar amounts in your head, Rich Crandall has received over $105,000 from these two funds alone to help finance his primary election campaign.

 

 

It is not a coincidence that all of these funds (Pierce's re-election campaign, the RVF, The Senate Majority Fund and the UA Friends for Arizona's Future) are closely intertwined through The Engaging Company.

 

 

 

Yes, it does appear that everything in politics costs money.  The question is, what does that money buy exactly and what future votes are expected from Rich Crandall in exchange for pumping $105,000 into a

campaign for a position that pays $24,000/year?

 

(Not-so-coincidentally, Hieu Tran is also the Treasurer

on Bob Worsley's campaign)