We all know that math scores have been scandalously trending downward for many years, but the folks in the government should at least be able to count.
We’re finding more and more evidence that the statistics the government is releasing to the public are increasingly suspect and unreliable. It seems like the errors are not random but perhaps manipulated for political advantage. Judge for yourself.
Let’s start with crime statistics. Former President Donald Trump said in the debate that crime is out of control, and Vice President Kamala Harris countered by citing government statistics from the FBI indicating that crime rates are falling.
But Jeffrey Anderson, former director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, finds a surge in urban violent crime since 2019. He writes in The Wall Street Journal that “the violent crime rate in 2023 was 19% higher than in 2019.” The urban violent crime rate was up 40%, and urban property crime rate rose 26%.
How can the Left keep saying crime is down? A big reason is the FBI figures are only measuring “crimes reported to the police.” More than half of violent crimes are not reported, thanks to what Anderson calls a new era of “lax law enforcement policies” in urban areas. Police in big cities also have an incentive to undercount crimes to make their performance look better.
Next, we have jobs data. The Bureau of Labor Statistics admitted last month that it has overstated job growth by more than 800,000 positions. And in just the last year the government has also overstated job growth by almost 500,000 from the original monthly headline numbers. This is an overcount of over 1 million. In 10 of the last 13 months, the errors were in the direction of announcing too many jobs.
So President Joe Biden gets the gangbuster headlines, and the whoopsie daisy comes later when no one is paying attention.
Those aren’t just random errors. Was the Biden Labor Department finagling the data? Maybe.
Then there was the decennial Census Bureau population count. The numbers from the 2020 census were wildly wrong, as the bureau admits.
In an analysis issued in 2021 called the “Post-Enumeration Survey Estimation Report,” the Census Bureau reported which states recorded overcounts of their population, and which saw undercounts. Florida, Texas, Tennessee and other red states were undercounted by some 1.5 million residents. The overcounting was in mostly blue states like New York and Minnesota. Again, was this just an accident?
The miscount may have cost Republicans three electoral seats. This means the presidential election and control of the House of Representatives may be decided because of an error in counting heads.
These government agencies are supposed to be politically independent, and historically, they have been filled with professionals devoid of bias. But when we see the errors all bending the data in the direction of benefiting one party, one has to wonder if this is deliberate misrepresentation.
I hope I’m wrong and that these are innocent errors. But we live in an era where everything in Washington is hyper-politicized. Elections have become a blood sport. The saying is that “all is fair in love and war.” And now add politics to that.
Stephen Moore is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation, and a co-founder of the Committee to Unleash Prosperity.He is also an economic advisor to the Trump campaign. His new book, “The Trump Economic Miracle,” coauthored with Arthur Laffer, will be released later this month.
Only United States citizens should be voting in our elections. That shouldn’t be a controversial statement. But of course, it’s 2024, and the Left hasn’t instituted its open border policies under the Biden-Harris administration for nothing.
The fact is that U.S. citizens can’t go into France, Australia, or any other country throughout the world and vote in their elections. Why should citizens from other countries be allowed to vote in our elections?
While it’s certainly illegal for non-citizens to vote here, the law is only as good as the mechanism in place to make sure it’s followed. That’s why it is critical for the integrity of our nation’s elections that voters prove their citizenship prior to voting. And the SAVE Act is a much-needed remedy that would address this issue head on.
Sponsored by Rep. Chip Roy from Texas, who has certainly experienced firsthand the issues that arise from the current surge at the border, the SAVE Act would require individuals to provide documentary proof of citizenship (DPOC) in order to vote in federal elections. It’s a constitutional solution to keep non-citizens from voting.
But given Congress’s propensity for inaction, states should not wait around to see if our federal lawmakers will pass the SAVE Act or another reasonable solution. Arizona has been a leader on this issue for years and has already enacted a comprehensive solution that every state should follow.
In its heyday, Mesa Public Schools (MPS) was the district to attend; the envy of the East Valley. From academics to athletics, from artistic endeavors to award-winning music programs, Mesa provided excellent programming from kindergarten to graduation. So much so, that parents would often bring their own children back to Mesa Schools, often to the same school they attended as children.
In 2011, MPS students were achieving at levels in keeping with the stellar reputation that Mesa had always experienced. But between 2014 and 2015 achievement in MPS, as well as across the state, plummeted, and MPS hasn’t been able to break the 50% achievement rate since that time. There were a few ‘events’ that occurred during this time period, only one in which your school board would have had direct input; unless they were to be extremely courageous and decide to refuse federal education dollars.
The state assessment test switched from AIMS to AZMerit, there was a full implementation of Common Core across the state, and districts began to go down the road of developing a ‘Portrait of a Graduate’. As these took hold, publicly funded schools began to face steep declines in enrollment. MPS, for example, lost a total of 8,979 students as of the 2021/22 school year according to data located here. Consider that our 15-day student count for the school year 2024/25, is 54,339, a loss of 20,610 students since the 2011/12 school year. These trends are not exclusive to MPS, and this is where your vote for school board matters.
I have a friend who has said repeatedly that if an organization, which begins with conservative values, does not hold fast to those values, the organization will ultimately become liberal. The core conservative value which directed education in MPS, as well as many other districts across the state, was focused on developing a solid academic foundation upon which students could build. This value was supported by a few other core values such as individual responsibility, discipline, working hard, perseverance, and merit. These values have been eroding over time, often due to a lack of leadership from a district’s governing board.
The trend in education in Arizona, which has been in works since at least 2014, is the Portrait of a Graduate. This has become the framework upon which other elements have been built into our classrooms such as culturally relevant teaching and social emotional learning (SEL); here is just one example of new ‘science’ curriculum adopted by MPS last spring.
When you really take a look at the Portrait of a Graduate in most, if not all districts which have adopted this framework, there is no indication that we want our graduates to be academically sound in the basics needed in order to participate in society. School boards voted to adopt this framework to develop their strategic plan, and can vote to redirect the district using a different framework; one in which academics and solid, critical thinking is the foundation.
Curriculum adoption is another area in which your school board members are of critical importance. Many curriculum options available today are infused with elements incorporating ideas which are contrary to conservative American values. Rather than using quality literature, which incorporate timeless values, stories are selected that allow students to “see themselves” in the literature. Often the material brings in concepts regarding racism, “white privilege,” oppressed/oppressor, sex, sexuality, sexual orientation, or gender confusion issues. Many examples straddle the edge of pornography and reading the text or displaying the pictures would be deemed offensive and would not be allowed at a school board meeting. Forcing these themes and concepts upon children results in confusion and anxiety. This is clearly evident as we look at the “mental health crisis” within students across Arizona. A strong conservative school board is able to push back against district leadership, and remove that which is not beneficial for our students’ learning.
Policy development is another critical piece in the quality running of a school district over which your school board members have control. Drafting clear, quality policy, and procedures which are not contrary to federal or state law is critical to improving the education students are receiving as they attend our public schools. This is a statutory mandate for school board members, and should not ever be relegated to hired district leadership.
In MPS, there has been much controversy the last few years regarding this very issue as the community became aware of Transgender Guidelines, and the Checklistassociated with the guidelines. Notice, these are guidelines, not policy; no MPS Governing Board has developed or voted on policy regarding gender dysphoria, yet the district has had guidelines in place since 2015. This fact went under the radar for several years, and only became visible because of the social contagion surrounding this topic since 2020. As a result of these guidelines, which in our humble opinion, violate ARS 1-602, and the First Amendment, teachers feel free to introduce concepts of sex and sexuality with minor students, planting seeds of confusion within young minds, which is not acceptable. Voting for a school board which will possess members who uphold parental rights, and the rights of all students will be the only way to reverse this trend, and protect all our students.
Finally, the school board is responsible for hiring the Superintendent, whose responsibility it is on a daily basis, to ensure the will of the elected board members is enacted with fidelity. This is critical, as the elected board members who represent the will of their voters, can do all things right and in alignment with their community, but if the district leadership undermines that, the degradation of our educational system continues. The Board must hire an ethical person of integrity who aligns with the values of the community, as represented by the elected members of the board.
Your vote for school board members may be the most important vote you cast this election season. Being a non-partisan race, it is important to engage with those people who are running and to investigate and research the candidates, so that you are casting an informed vote that represents your values. The future of public education, which still educates a majority of American children, depends upon it.
The academic success of Scottsdale Unified School District (SUSD) students over the past five years is shockingly low. Science scores have plummeted by 24% since 2019. Less than 50% of eighth grade students are proficient in math. In the Coronado Learning Community, that number shrinks to 12%. Yet, the district graduates 94% of students. How is this preparing students for success?
Most would think that SUSD, an organization with nearly a half billion-dollar annual budget, would be laser focused on the root cause of academic decline, but we would be mistaken. The simple fact is that SUSD has not prioritized academics. This can be attributed directly to Superintendent Scott Menzel. Since his tenure started in 2019, Dr. Menzel has implemented his stated plan to “disrupt and dismantle systems,” while academics suffer.
Hired by the decidedly “progressive” school board led by disgraced Jann-Michael Greenburg, the intent of finding a Menzel-like superintendent was clear. That board prioritized a candidate in Menzel who would promote “social justice” and DEI over academic achievement, and we are seeing the results. Class time is spent on shaping students’ feelings and framing a political narrative as opposed to reading, writing, and math.
Under Menzel’s watch, spending on student instruction is at an all-time low as a percent of the district’s budget, dropping 9.1% from 2004 levels of budget allocation. For a point of reference, based on the 2023-2024 budget of $458 million, the redirection of funds away from academics represents a $41.7 million loss to teachers, curriculum, and items that have a direct impact on academics.
Spending on social workers and support staff has increased to historical highs, while teaching positions and academic specialists have seen cuts. The 2024-2025 budget shows spending on support staff has increased as a percent of overall budget by 2.6% over the past five years, including an additional 4.5 social workers in this year alone. At the same time 20 teaching positions, 7 reading specialists, and 4.5 math specialists have been eliminated. How does this lead to providing the “world class education” that SUSD claims?
Recognizing the academic decline, parents are finding alternatives to SUSD schools. Enrollment has decreased by over 2,200 students in the past four years, reducing the federal, state, and local funding allocation by more than $17 million per year. SUSD now serves less than 54% of school-aged students in Scottsdale. Instead of correcting the problems to regain the trust and confidence of the community so that families actually want to send their kids, SUSD continually campaigns for additional funding through bonds, overrides, and new taxes, ignoring the reasons for the shortfalls.
We cannot afford another rubber stamp board for Menzel, who ignores academics and imposes his social justice priorities on our kids.
Instead, we need school board members like Jacobs, Beasley, and Hassler who are focused on improving academic outcomes, supporting teachers, and respecting the voice of parents. If we truly want to see improvements in our school district, let’s make it happen this November.
Rich Hoffecker is a parent and Scottsdale resident.
The Corporation Commission recently unanimously voted to support Tucson Electric Power’s (“TEP”) Midtown Reliability Project (“Midtown”). The Midtown project is a much-needed improvement for the City of Tucson’s antiquated and overloaded 46kV sub-transmission system. The equipment will be upgraded to a 138kV system in the area adjacent to the University of Arizona and Banner University Medical Center. The project would also replace a portion of the 4kV distribution lines located in the Midtown neighborhoods. These systems are over 50 years old and no longer meet the needs and demands of the area as the system has become increasingly overstrained and unstable.
Fragile wooden poles that are susceptible to damage will be replaced with larger capacity metal poles and more powerful transmission lines. Up to eight 46kV existing substations and 19 miles of current 46kV line will be removed, resulting in a reduced number of substations and overhead power lines in Midtown Tucson. The upgrades will benefit all of TEP’s customers; the transmission lines will improve system redundancy and grid resiliency, allowing power to bypass lines and areas that might be down or overloaded. In supporting the proposal, the Commission rejected calls by the City of Tucson leadership and neighborhood groups who demanded the new lines be “undergrounded” as opposed to the standard more affordable above ground installation.
Tucson voters overwhelmingly rejected Prop 412 in March 2023, which was supported by Tucson’s Mayor and TEP. The proposition would have extended TEP’s franchise agreement with the city, and in return would have established additional fees to fund the undergrounding of the Midtown project and establish a “Climate Action Fund.” The defeat left the franchise agreement renewal in limbo, but it also required TEP to move forward with an alternative plan to complete the needed and already delayed improvement. City leaders continued to call for the undergrounding of equipment, a beautification effort where costs would have been picked up by all TEP ratepayers, not just the customers who will benefit from the Midtown project improvements.
During the Commission proceedings, some claimed the incremental cost difference between underground and above ground lines was negligible, and that the historic nature of the area and neighborhoods called for a greater standard of beautification. There are two important responses to those viewpoints. First, the region already has above ground power lines. Any sort of undergrounding would be a luxury the area currently doesn’t enjoy. And as previously noted, the above ground upgrades will actually reduce the total number of transmission lines and substations. Second, there is a huge price difference. Project estimates for the cost difference between underground and above ground are $64 million dollars. An additional $64 million that would have to be funded by all TEP ratepayers, the far majority of whom live nowhere near Midtown.
Last year, the Commission adopted a transmission line policy statement that utilities under the Commission’s jurisdiction should avoid incurring higher costs from underground installation of transmission lines unless it was necessary for reliability or safety purposes. Undergrounding lines for purposes such as stakeholder or community preferences are not valid reasons on their own. And concerned third parties such as cities or neighborhood groups can still seek to cover the cost difference to underground through other means such as forming an improvement district.
With most rate design, there’s a degree of “subsidization” that exists, wherein equipment upgrades or power line installations are spread out across an entire ratepayer base for that utility’s customers. However, when a project or proposal clearly only benefits a small subset of customers, it is our duty as a Commission to look out for all ratepayers. We must ensure the desires of a few do not adversely impact the pocketbooks of the many.
It’s not uncommon for the Commission to review proposals that subscribe to what some refer to as “luxury beliefs.” Ideas and opinions that benefit a group of people who are better off while often inflicting greater costs or more harm on less fortunate classes. We see this most frequently amongst climatism promoters, who advocate to end the use of hydrocarbons and rapidly transform our electric grid, with no concerns for the price tag to ratepayers. It’s akin to advocating for ratepayers to subsidize electric vehicle charging stations that benefit a small set of utility customers, while the far majority of other customers either do not want an electric vehicle or can’t afford one.
During the hearing, proponents of line undergrounding attempted to rationalize the cost increase due to the unique history and beauty of the area. They argued the monthly cost to underground the Midtown project is negligible when spread out across the entire customer base. While I am sympathetic to the preferences of property owners, how can I as an elected official possibly rationalize to ratepayers in South Tucson that their neighborhood isn’t worthy of receiving the same special treatment?
With this vote, the Commission honored the will of Tucson voters and protected the pocketbooks of TEP ratepayers. We also took big steps to improve the long-term reliability and durability for all TEP customers in the Tucson area.
Kevin Thompson was elected as a member of the Arizona Corporation Commission in 2022. He previously served as a member of the Mesa City Council for eight years, representing the fastest-growing area of the city.
When you hear Ruben Gallego’s Senate campaign ads, you might think he’s an outsider taking on the Biden-Harris administration’s policies. In reality, Gallego has been in Congress for ten years, fully backing the Biden-Harris agenda. Over the last four years, he voted with them 100% of the time.
Gallego is now trying to reposition himself for the general election, just like Harris, by running away from his record. But don’t be misled. He is a radical progressive with strong support from Alex Soros, the son of billionaire George Soros.
Gallego shares Soros’s radical views, including being anti-police and soft on crime. He’s even praised those wanting to defund the police, abolish ICE, and eliminate cash bail.
Gallego calls the border wall “stupid” and “useless,” and he mocks those of us who are concerned about 11 million illegals entering our country. According to Gallego, we shouldn’t worry about the hundreds of thousands of drug overdose deaths, the increase in violent crime, sex trafficking, and threats from potential terrorists allowed to enter America. We should look the other way when illegal violent gangs take over apartment buildings and terrorize American citizens in major U.S. cities.
While he decries “right-wing policies” for separating families at the border, Gallego backs Biden-Harris policies that have lost track of over 300,000 unaccompanied minors, with many likely falling into sex trafficking, child labor, or even killed. The Biden-Harris administration has no idea where they are.
Gallego says while in Congress, he has been at the forefront of sensible, comprehensive immigration reform. He claims several bills have passed the House only to be blocked by Senate Republicans. He fails to mention that he voted against H.R.2 – Secure the Border Act of 2023, which passed the House only to be blocked by Schumer in the Senate. He voted for mass amnesty for millions of illegals and for federal funding for sanctuary cities, and Gallego opposes the Remain in Mexico policy.
Ruben Gallego supports the Harris plan to extend Social Security and Medicare benefits to illegal immigrants, which would cost taxpayers millions.
He has had years to address these issues in Congress, but his record shows a consistent push for policies that have worsened the problems. Now he promises change, but with his track record, why should we believe him?
On the economic front, Gallego voted for the Biden-Harris administration’s trillions in reckless spending that fueled inflation and rising prices. Under Biden-Harris, overall inflation is up 19.2%, average gas prices are up 46.6%, grocery prices are up 20.9%, electricity prices are up 29.6%, and real hourly wages are down 2.2%.
Now, despite this record, while running for the Senate after four years of voting for massive spending and billions in higher taxes, he promises to tackle cost-of-living issues and empower workers.
Gallego’s campaign ads say he has pushed back against his own party and has plans to fix all the problems caused by his continued support of the Biden-Harris administration. Does anyone believe that a former congressman, who would be the junior Senator from Arizona, with a track record of voting 100% in support of radical Democrat policies, will somehow become transformed and now vote against the Harris agenda? Not likely.
Just like Harris, the radical Gallego will say anything to get elected.
The overwhelming majority of Americans want a change. Voting for the same people who caused the problems and expecting things to change is foolish.
Radical Ruben Gallego is wrong on the economy and taxes, wrong on crime, and wrong on the border.
Mike Bengert is a husband, father, grandfather, and Scottsdale resident advocating for quality education in SUSD for over 30 years.
