In the recent light of the presidential election, Arizona's county Maricopa is seeing voting patterns that deviate from patterns in the past.  There has been a large growth of Latino voters in Maricopa county, in part due to anger from presidential candidate Donald Trump and because many Latino citizens in Arizona have turned 18 since the previous presidential election.  A lot of the issue in the past had to do with many eligible Latino voters that were not registered.  However, what seems to be the biggest motivating factor increasing Latino votes is Trump's tough stance on immigration.  Trump targeting immigrants and speaking about building a wall has caused anger and backlash among the Latino community who are now ready to cast their vote against Trump.  This is very interesting in which it shows that a single candidate, not a political party, can influence an entire group of voters to change their ways and make it to the polls.   

Alex Rezutek 

http://www.caller.com/news/politics/elections/national/In-an-Arizona-county-anger-at-Trump-spurs-Latinos-to-vote-394870001.html

Presidential Campaign and AZ

I, like many others in our country, watched the presidential debate this past Monday night. While I mostly just felt sadness at the state of our country's political arena, there were some key takeaways that I noticed. One of course was Clinton's proficiency at debates. She wiped the floor with Donald and that made it quite clear that she has done 15 debates to his one. This is important to recognize that without his loud crowds, Donald's showmanship will not help him win debates. This could drastically alter the polls throughout the country, due to our reliance on the debates in the home stretch of the campaign. Another was that both candidates failed to press their advantage when given the opportunity. Both candidates were rude, smug and constantly interrupting each other and the moderator. But the most surprising thing was that neither candidate mentioned or discussed immigration. Besides Trump's offhand comment that ICE supports him, immigration reform was not even mentioned. This, being a cornerstone of both candidates platforms, is a hugely controversial topic that will dramatically alter AZ. Arizona has the second longest border with Mexico and has a huge immigrant population who would be directly affected by any and all future immigration policies. But both candidates neglected to mention, much less debate this issue. Due to this neglect, I believe that AZ is still in the battleground because of immigration reform issues that will profoundly impact this state.

Joe Engels

Politics of Public Education

In my experience as a student in Wisconsin's finest public school system (Madison Metropolitan School District represent!!!!), I received a great, challenging eduction that fostered a enjoyable learning environment. And in my humble opinion, public schooling was the best route for me because of the opportunities to meet a variety of people, and the opportunities to take a variety of different classes. However,  the politics of public education in the United States varies: some states place high value on publicly funded schools through citizens' tax dollars (typically a liberal stance), while other states place high value on more school choice through voucher programs (typically a conservative stance). For those that don't know, school voucher programs allow students to use tax-payer dollars to attend charter/private schools, utilize home-schooling, obtain special tutoring, and other services. Parents generally choose to take advantage of voucher programs due to a multitude of reasons: maybe their child has a learning disability and wants more special attention to adequately meet their needs; maybe their child is failing and needs more localized attention; maybe the parents just want their child to attend a private school because they don't like the publicly zoned school, but can't afford the private-school tuition. 

The voucher program relates to Arizona because a Washington DC-based group called American Federation for Children is funding local Arizona candidates who supported a bill purposed in March expanding the school voucher program. Usually voucher programs are limited to certain people--like students with special learning needs--however with this new bill, Arizona's voucher program would expand so over 1 million students could take advantage of using taxpayer dollars to attend whatever school they wanted, public or private. Whether or not the voucher program is a good or bad idea, I don't know. I know in Milwaukee it messed up their public school system because of all of the unqualified charter schools that opened, and the poor educational attainment it created. However, Milwaukee is its own case, and even though public schooling was the best option for me, taking advantage of the voucher program to attend a private school may be the best option for another person. 

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/09/25/group-aids-arizona-allies-fight-expand-public-money-private-schools/90718618/

Pre-emption in Arizona

Pre-emption in this context is referring to the overruling of local ordinances by the statehouse.  This is common in states when used with issues like gun control and smoking restrictions.  Arizona on the other hand is going slightly overboard with overruling local ordinances, and this is upsetting the mayor of Phoenix.  Mayor Greg Stanton is a Democrat and he is mayor of Phoenix, Arizona, the country's six largest city.  He was interviewed and discussed how the Legislature is extremely polarized and that it is extremely difficult to pass policies in his city.  Policies on climate change are at constant threat of being pre-empted, due to the Legislature being a majority climate deniers.  Phoenix tried to ban plastic bags as well but was immediately pre-empted.  Mayor Greg Stanton also discussed how constantly pre-empting large public policies completely erases the opportunity for experimentation and possible progress.  He states this opinion with the quote "You kill it before it begins."  This issue shows how there is major conflict between local and state legislatures in some states, especially Arizona.

Alex Rezutek


http://www.slate.com/articles/business/metropolis/2016/09/phoenix_mayor_greg_stanton_is_fed_up_with_arizona_pre_empting_his_city_s.html

Legalizing Mariana, Minimum Wage Increase, and other Factors Could Increase Voter Turnout in November.

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/09/14/marijuana-minimum-wage-hillary-clinton-arizona/89122482/

Arizona is entering the race as an unheard of battleground state. This state has gone Republican in the all presidential elections since 1952, except for Bill Clinton's 1996 election. This state has historically been a conservative stronghold, but due to the divisiveness of our candidates this year, that may change. Many issues, such as legalizing marijuana and raising the minimum wage has made it possible that AZ will again be captured by a Clinton. According to azcentral, a local affiliate of USA Today, these issues are bringing more young and disenfranchised voters to the polls. These younger voters are often more progressive than their older, more conservative counterparts. With these younger progressives showing up to cast the ballot, that could help the Clinton campaign and seriously undermine Donald Trump.

There has been a high level of media attention in Arizona on two ballot measures, one that would raise minimum wage to $12 dollars and hour and one that would completely legalize marijuana. These issues have sparked enthusiasm and participation from the younger generation of Arizona voters. This has implications not only for the presidential race, but also for the U.S. Senate race between sitting Senator John McCain (R) and challenger Ann Kirkpatrick (D). McCain has not commented on the legalization process, while Kirkpatrick said the issue should be left for the electorate to decide. If either candidate for this race came out in support of marijuana, that could be a major game change in the race.

Even voters who are not proud of their candidates say that they could change their mind on how each candidate stands on minimum wage and legalization. Republicans and conservatives usually are against legalization, but that might change due to the pressure of these elections. This could be an area where the Democrat party, which supports a pathway towards legalization, could pick up enough voters to carry the state, Minimum wage is a thornier issue. While it is technically in the hands of the state, federal laws and restrictions can be passed to raise the absolute minimum. An example of this is that the federal minimum wage is $7.25 while AZ minimum wage is currently $8.05. (Wisconsin's minimum wage is $7.25) Hillary Clinton supports a national raise to 15 dollars an hour, while the Republicans believe it is up to the the states to decide and Donald Trump has been far from clear on the topic.

These issues and more, such as immigration and gun rights will ultimately decide if Arizona stays red or is once again painted blue. This election is historic in that the dislike of the candidates far outweigh the like. This is an election for the lesser evil, and I believe that many Americans will continue to feel conflicted until Election Day.

Joe Engels

Maricopa County Sheriff Election

What may be more interesting in Arizona other than the upcoming presidential election is the election for Maricopa Country sheriff. Maricopa County—home to roughly 55% of Arizona residents and one of the most populous counties in the United States—has experienced the reign of Sheriff Joe Arpaio since 1993. The self-proclaimed “toughest man on crime” is up for reelection this November, and this could be the year he loses his throne. 

Why is this election important? With all of the illegal immigration rhetoric sweeping the nation, whoever is elected will determine how law-enforcement in Maricopa County will tackle the issue of illegal immigration. Throughout Arpaio’s tenure, he has tackled the immigration issue with an iron fist, usually by ordering law-enforcement to sweep through predominantly-latino neighborhoods in order to round-up potential illegal immigrants. 

But no way, no way Sheriff Joe loses in his 7th reelection bid, he’s been in office since 1993, his campaign spending is too powerful, the citizens of Maricopa County love him too much to let him go. But sometimes, change is inevitable. And with a surge in the donations from billionaire hedge-fund manager George Soros to Arpaio’s democratic opponent Paul Penzone, and continued criticisms of Arpaio targeting latino citizens in anti-immigration roundups, the tides may be a-turnin for old Sheriff Joe. Which I don’t know if Sheriff Joe losing the reelection bid is a good or bad thing. For people who view illegal immigration as a problem and strive for law-enforcement to crack-down on crime, Sheriff Joe is their candidate (as evident by serving six-straight terms). However, Arpaio has a history of violating the civil rights of his constituents—especially the latino population in Maricopa County—which expectantly turns off a majority of latino voters. 

Usually, Sheriff Joe’s opponents have a hard time competing with his campaign spending (according to this FoxNews article, Arpaio has already spent 8.9 million on his reelection campaign), but with the large donation from Soros, Penzone might have a fighting chance against  pulling a shocking upset win over the undefeated incumbent. 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/14/phoenix-sheriff-joe-arpaio-may-have-new-foe-george-soros.html