What's Hot Oct 8

BEWARE OF NATIONAL GROUPS: Here is further evidence of how much money national groups deplete from this movement, despite their track records of accomplishing little of importance. This money then goes for salaries, travel/ expense accounts, huge pensions, office staffs, etc., and what little is left gets misdirected. The irony is that most state and local groups don't have any of this overhead, and if they had even a fraction of the funds these national groups suck out of philanthropic sources, could tackle state and local problems more successfully, as well as be larger and more organized to pressure their own congressmen to effect changes nationally. For instance, one of the oldest and largest groups in this movement supported the 1986 Immigration Reform Act that gave us the largest amnesty in history. Why would any rational person think sending money to groups in Washington, D.C. (of all places), which have millions o f dollars in overhead, somehow produces verified results or meaningful success? Many people say the anti-illegal immigration movement just has no money, but the fact is, there's plenty of money -- millions just get misdirected to corporate groups who are better at self-serving P.R. than they are at actually accomplishing anything. Since some of these groups have been around over two decades, if these observations and conclusions are not right, then why have we been pushed over the cliff in a free-fall without a rappelling rope?

October 6, 2004

Palmer Stacy, Esq.
Americans for Immigration Control
P.O. Box 738
Monterey, VA 24465

Dear Mr. Stacy:

Thank you for AIC's past donations to Protect Arizona NOW. When you sent the $3,000 toward the $17,0000 in legal fees PAN incurred defending the lawsuit filed by SEIU to keep our initiative off the ballot, you promised Protect Arizona NOW that you would send "substantially more" once there was no additional threat of a lawsuit. This was the third promise, the first two promises having hinged on our initiative qualifying for ballot status. You may recall that the lawsuit arose, largely, on account of the petition gatherers FAIR hired -- but to whose defense they contributed not one single cent. In view of your promises to Protect Arizona NOW, and your being cognizant of the clear evidence of how wisely spent the previous funds were that you gave – as well as the monumental results PAN has achieved with hardly any money – we are all disappointed and horrified at the disposition of your most recent largesse of $67,000 to FAIR's front group here, Yes on 200, while sending $1,000 to PAN.

The Arizona Secretary of State's website gives respective campaign finance reports -- which show that Yes on 200 now has a grand total of 10 individual contributors in Arizona, compared to our hundreds and hundreds (if not thousands) of individual contributors. The contrast should enlighten you as to whom the people in this state trust.

I also sent you a report of all the free PR/media coverage that I have worked my heart out to get for Protect Arizona NOW's Proposition 200. The free publicity includes coverage by: Lou Dobbs (multiple shows including the recent 15-minute segment, some of which was filmed in my home), this week's TIME Magazine, Hannity & Colmes, Scarborough Country (multiple shows), Bill O'Reilly (multiple shows), Jim Lehrer News Hour (2 shows), Britt Hume, Sheppard Smith, Neal Cavuto, Jesse Ventura, The New York Times, Denver Post (numerous), Washington Times (multiple front-page articles), The Dallas Morning News, Boston Globe, Seattle Times, Chicago Tribune, and other newspapers around the country; Mike Savage and Rusty Humphries (countless times), radio stations in Utah (6 hours), North Carolina, Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Washington, California, Ohio, and others; over 200 pages of print media throughout Arizona; and immeasurable coverage by every major radio and TV station in Arizona.

So whom do the media trust for information on our initiative? And where do you think they will be on election night? Despite FAIR's spending - and wasting - hundreds of thousands of dollars in its unsuccessful hostile takeover attempt of PAN, not to mention embarrassingly whining to the media all over this state and this country about both the amount of coverage PAN gets and what FAIR feels has been shabby treatment of themselves by the media here and elsewhere, it should be quite clear to all where the dynamic action is – with Protect Arizona NOW, the grassroots initiators of Prop 200 – and why that's so.

You already knew most of this, as well as the fact that FAIR never accounted for the almost half-million dollars they say they and their other front groups donated pre-ballot status (despite their promises in news releases to do so and despite the request from our Washington attorney). Nevertheless, you still reneged on your promises to "substantially fund" the wonderful advertising program we had lined up but had to can because I was naive enough to trust and believe you. I am so sad that somewhere along the way, even you/AIC/AICF fell off the high road. Why you'd want to be mentioned in future legal proceedings against FAIR I can't imagine. But you've certainly convinced us that in this arena, we are down to two national groups that have a scintilla of ethics. Is this the place to mention Population-Environment BALANCE and Carrying Capacity Network? Perhaps not. But distinctions are deserved and should be made.

Sincerely,

Kathy McKee, Founder and Chairman
Protect Arizona NOW