Miller interrupting ‘good ol’ boy’ politics

Re: the March 7 column “Why Ally Miller makes for good copy.”

Columnist Tim Steller tries to paint a picture of Supervisor Ally Miller as a wild, tea-party crackpot. Often just turning board meetings into “it’s all about Ally Miller time.”

Based on his observations, Miller is all over the place with unusual topics during board meetings. Her stance is unpredictable on slam dunk agenda items.

The real reason that so much attention has been given to Miller by Steller, other pundits and fellow board members over the past couple of weeks is she has dared to interrupt the “good ol’ boy” politics that have been going on in Pima County for the past 20 years.

The business-as-usual rubber stamp format of the board is suddenly being challenged. Her fellow board members do not like to be held accountable for the tax-and-spend mentality that has pushed Pima County into debt.

John Commissaris

Crime scene investigator, Tucson

Star columnists both conservative, liberal

Re: the March 14 letter to the editor “Political agenda is showing.”

Are you kidding me? Has the letter writer ever bothered to read the regular op-ed columns?

When George Will and Charles Krauthammer are willing to say one single positive thing about the current administration, then I’ll encourage Fitz to say something nice about the Republicans — even if he has to employ his total creative and imaginative arsenal in order to do that.

Anne Lane

Retired teacher, Tucson

Pitts is a reason to subscribe to the Star

Re: the March 8 letter to the editor “Pitts spins history; Star should drop column.”

In regard to the letter writer’s request to discontinue Leonard Pitts Jr. and his column. People like her have nothing to base her allegations. Pitts is the biggest reason I subscribe (besides news on my Arizona Wildcats).

Conservative America hates to itself exposed and Leonard does it brilliantly. Get rid of him and I would cancel my subscription.

Gabe R. Molina

Utility worker, Tucson

Wants McSally’s stand on other So. AZ issues

Re: the March 10 guest column “Leadership needed to save A-10 and D-M.”

Martha McSally’s column confirms that she has credentials to put up a fight to save both, although she obviously can’t guarantee the outcome. It also provided a good vehicle to attack Ron Barber by pointing out her main strength.

However, this is only one issue facing Arizona.

Before she gets my vote I need to know where she stands on the following issues: SB 1070, SB 1062, the Affordable Care Act, gun control, Rosemont Mine, abortion, raising the minimum wage, poverty in Tucson and land conservation.

In addition, is she a member of the traditional Republican party or the tea party?

Perhaps McSally can write another guest opinion covering these issues.

Arnold Kerman

Retired executive, Tucson

For what are we paying state legislators?

Re: the March 10 article “Brewer aides met with creators of SB 1062 early to make changes.”

I wonder if anyone else wonders, as I do, why we pay our state legislators a salary, when all they do is vote on bills that some outside entity has written and submitted?

Not only is it the American Legislative Exchange Council, now it’s the Center for Arizona Policy. If it weren’t for the Star, CNN and others, SB 1062 would now be law. On its website, the Center for Arizona Policy claims 122 supported bills became law, two bills were referred to a ballot and 28 bills have been vetoed by the governor.

I think our state representatives should all stay home and vote from their computers. That way we wouldn’t have to pay them per diem and hopefully no pension.

I think Gov. Jan Brewer was left no choice but to veto SB 1062. The Legislature forgot the old truth, that you do not embarrass the governor.

Clyde Steele

Retired printer, SaddleBrooke