|
Source
A Goldwater Institute lawyer sets me straight When the Goldwater Institute filed a lawsuit this week trying to scuttle the deal between Glendale and the Phoenix Coyotes I said it was like a high-stakes poker game in which the institute can raise the ante and win the pot without having to gamble any money. The folks at the institute, like many of you (and most of my family) believe that I lack nuance and sophistication, and would like to set me straight on this matter. (Get in line.) With that in mind I had an e-mail exchange with Clint Bolick, director of the institute's Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation. Here are my questions, edited for space, and his complete answers. Me: Why does Goldwater meddle in local concerns when it is a tax exempt organization beholden to out-of-state donors? Bolick: “In a republic, all public officials are subject to the Constitution. When they violate constitutional rights, exceed their limited powers, or heed the call of special interests, the proper recourse is the courts. One of the actions we're challenging in Glendale -- which your newspaper correctly called the least-transparent city in the Valley -- is its decision to subsidize the hockey team as an ‘emergency,’ which deprives voters of their right to refer the decision to the ballot. By that action along with its failure to give the Council and Glendale citizens the details of the deal before the vote, Glendale itself is subverting democracy.” Me: Sen. John McCain noted that while you are challenging the Coyotes deal the wife of Diamondbacks owner Ken Kendrick is on your board. “Hypocrisy,” McCain said. Will you also put the D’backs deal under a microscope? Bolick: “Our senior senator says he opposes pork, but apparently not when it comes to his favorite hockey team. So the H-word applies, but not to us. Just like the great man after whom we're named, the Goldwater Institute calls 'em as we see 'em. We've sued Republicans as well as Democrats, and get lots of angry calls when we ruffle feathers. Yes, we scrutinize every major deal that we find out about.” Me: How do you select which subsidies to challenge? Bolick: “We oppose all subsidies, whether for corporations or unions, and our track record of challenging all types of subsidies proves it. Trouble is, in a state where subsidies are supposed to be illegal, they are abundant. Our limited resources require us to focus on the cases that have the biggest impact and can set the broadest precedent.” Me: When the institute successfully litigates a case it can collect fees. I was told by Clean Elections officials that you got $1 million from the state for your lawsuit on matching funds. How much did you receive in that case? Bolick: “Like all public-interest groups, the vast majority of which are on your side of the spectrum, when we win cases we are sometimes entitled to attorney fees. Such awards serve as a deterrent to illegal conduct. Unlike liberal advocacy groups, most of our successful cases save taxpayers money, including the Clean Elections case, in which millions of dollars were returned to the treasury rather than funneled to politicians.” Me: Finally, what misconceptions do people such as me (OK, me) spread about The Goldwater Institute? Bolick: “Some liberals (like you!) can't accept the fact that the vast majority of our donors are not big companies but hard-working men and women who are glad that we are here to fight for them. We are not ‘beholden’ to anyone. People support us because they believe in the principles of limited government and individual freedom. The reason they support us -- and I suppose the reason you pay so much attention to us -- is that we're good at advancing those principles.” I am most grateful to Bolick for trying to educate me. I learned at least four things: 1. The institute will NOT scrutinize the D’backs deal. 2. It won’t say how much it collects in fees from lawsuits. (Taxpayer money?) 3. If the institute wins the Coyotes case Glendale’s finances could get even worse and the institute could collect more fees. (Taxpayer money?) 4. The Goldwater Institute refers to this as fighting for “hard-working men and women.” |