Over the last few weeks there has been a lot of talk about endorsements for candidates aiming to take office after the Nov. 6 General Election.
In the Primary Election, The Explorer said we would not be endorsing, but one race begs further scrutiny.
So, this is an analysis. Take it as endorsement, take it as some points in the campaign, or just toss it aside – it’s up to you.
My position remains the same on the importance of local races compared to the national races that seem to get most of the media spotlight this time of year.
Remember, those candidates you elect to offices such as the Pima County Board of Supervisors, local school boards, sheriff’s office, recorder’s office and so on, set our tax rates, they decide the course of education for our children, then basically decide a lot of our immediate day-to-day activities, voting options and so much more. These races should never be overlooked just because the national stage in the presidential election is heating up.
Let’s start with the Pima County Board of Supervisors. For the most part in the Northwest, the District 1 race is getting a lot of attention, and why shouldn’t it, given the incumbent, Ann Day, has opted to retire. The race is between Tea Party Republican Ally Miller and Democrat Nancy Young Wright.
In the Primary Election, Miller beat out her Republican opponents because she hit the streets and got her name out there. Nice signs, and door-to-door campaigning pushed her past State Rep. Vic Williams, Stuart McDaniel and Mike Hellon.
However, after listening to Miller in several debates, her behavior with the press and her attacks on her opponent, there are so many red flags going up that one might wonder what she’s going to be like as an elected official.
This “Hulk angry” attitude she campaigns with will get old real fast once she’s in office and reality sets in.
Start with her attacks on Wright, which revolve around the pygmy owl, the construction of Ironwood Ridge High School in 2001, and an assertion than Wright would take an owl’s side over students.
The fact that this is the issue Miller continues to bring up in debates, advertising and radio shows has become nothing short of annoying.
If environment is a key issue, then talk more about your differences on the Rosemont Mine, which is today’s issue.
The news articles from the 11-year-old issue continuously brought up by Miller don’t necessarily prove the claims she’s making against Wright.
Also, Wright seems more than willing to address the accusations from Miller, which is a good sign.
Meanwhile, Miller ignores answering to accusations against her own campaign for violating election laws (she had a great opportunity to do so in the radio debate hosted by Bill Buckmaster.) Tell voters what happened here. Are charges from three separate candidates false, or is being quiet an admission of guilt? Voters don’t know one way or the other when you’re too busy talking about a pygmy owl from 2001.
Having that extra funding from independent contributors is nice for any candidate, but there are strict laws and guidelines on how the funding and products (advertising) can be used.
Tagline Media has been more than ready to claim no wrongdoing. Ms. Miller, why haven’t you?
Accountability is a two-way street, and if Miller can’t figure that out when trying to earn votes, she may struggle once the power of office sets in and it’s time for her to live up to the promise of holding all accountable.
Miller also had those problems with being proven wrong, as she was when it was proven that her assertions that the county had misspent millions were inccorrect. Many may not agree with the funding allocations, but they weren’t “misspent.”
Instead of addressing it, she called the publication that reported it a “rag.” Your opinion of the Tucson Weekly aside, it is candidates like Miller calling for more investigative news in Tucson, but when something comes out that doesn’t go your way, it just mean it’s a bad publication. Again, a two-way street Ms. Miller.