In a letter to the editor last Friday, Lew Levenson puts down Elaine Bohlmeyer, Prescott Winslow and Bill Shumway as “nice people ... really likeable individuals” advocating “sensible solutions” and focusing on “statement of the goal rather than what it takes to achieve the goal.” He advocates for the other candidates as “those prepared with some tough love, clear thinking, and principles rather than platitudes.” Well let’s see about that. At the candidate forum referenced by Levenson, one of these “clear thinking” women advocated the Berlin Wall and the Chinese economy as examples of how to solve Arizona’s pressing problems. Are these good examples of what “clear thinking” candidates would want for our country?
Let’s look at some specifics on Sylvia Allen. She voted for over a billion dollars in cuts to Arizona schools and to eliminate health coverage for 33,000 Arizona children. She also voted to increase the House and Senate budgets and to make it easier for ousted legislators to become lobbyists. She refused to discuss eliminating special tax breaks the Legislature has given for country club memberships, purchase of golf carts, and huge tax credits for scholarships to students at private schools. She backed propositions to overturn citizen initiatives for early childhood education, health services, and environmental protection. She voted against bringing high-tech renewable energy jobs to Arizona. All of this does not exhibit either “clear thinking” or “principles rather than platitudes.” It is “tough” but not “love.” It is self-serving and mean-spirited.
Payson candidate for State Senate, Elaine Bohlmeyer, understands what must be done to restore Arizona’s economy. She advocates funding so the Department of Revenue can collect back taxes and to repeal special interest tax breaks to create more revenue to fund state government. She supports legislation to attract clean energy and high-tech jobs to Arizona, early childhood education, health services and adequate funding of education at all levels to produce the educated work force needed to attract high-paying jobs. She wants to really balance the budget instead of using the gimmicks that current legislators use to “balance the budget.”
I ask the reader, which of the above candidates is “much better grounded, prepared and ready, willing and able to represent us” in the Legislature? It is clear to me that it is the “nice” one.