Guests – William Beard, Dave Smith, Scott Walter
Tucson's Regional Transportation Authority: A $400-600 Million Problem
The Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) in Tucson faces a crisis that exemplifies government accountability failure on a massive scale. After nearly 20 years of collecting sales taxes from Pima County residents, the city of Tucson has failed to complete its promised infrastructure projects, leaving taxpayers holding the bag for hundreds of millions in cost overruns.
The Original Deal and Its Breakdown
In 2006, Pima County voters approved a half-cent sales tax increase for 20 years to fund road improvements and transit expansion across the region. The agreement was straightforward: each jurisdiction would receive a specific allocation for designated projects, with any cost overruns being the responsibility of that jurisdiction alone.
While other regional partners like Marana, Oro Valley, and Pima County have largely fulfilled their obligations, Tucson has consistently delayed projects that should have been completed years ago. Some projects were supposed to start a decade ago and finish five years ago, yet remain incomplete.
The Financial Reality
The numbers paint a stark picture. Tucson's unfinished RTA projects are estimated to be $400-600 million short of completion costs. At the current pace of roughly $50 million in spending per year, completing the work would take an additional eight years beyond the original 20-year timeline.
This delay isn't just about inconvenience—it's about money. Every year of delay adds significant costs due to inflation in materials and labor. What voters approved for $42 million on Broadway Boulevard, for example, now costs far more due to Tucson's own delays and scope changes.
Changing the Rules After the Fact
Perhaps most concerning is Tucson's attempt to unilaterally modify voter-approved projects. On Silverbell Road, voters approved three to four lanes for the entire stretch from Grant Road to Marana. The city now wants to downsize the southern portion to just two or three lanes to stay within budget.
Similarly, the First Avenue project was supposed to run six lanes from Grant Road to River Road. The city now insists it can be done with four lanes without returning to voters for approval.
Under Arizona state law, changing the scope of voter-approved projects requires going back to the voters. Administrative changes after the fact are not permitted, yet Tucson continues to pursue this path.
The Regional Impact
Tucson's failures don't exist in a vacuum. To complete all original RTA projects would require sweeping every Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF) dollar that comes into Pima County for the next 15 years. This would leave no money for basic road maintenance in any community—not just Tucson, but Marana, Oro Valley, Sarita, South Tucson, and unincorporated areas.
This creates an impossible choice: either abandon the voter-approved projects or cannibalize all other road funding for more than a decade.
Leadership Changes and Accountability
The RTA recently terminated its executive director, Farhad Makami, after 13-14 years in the position. The legal counsel, recognizing the board's intent to evaluate both positions, resigned immediately. Mike Ortega was hired as interim director, but these changes may be too little, too late.
The fundamental question remains: has the city of Tucson fulfilled its contractual obligations to voters? From a contracting perspective, the answer appears to be no. When you sign a contract, whether as an elected official or private entity, you have a legal responsibility to fulfill its terms regardless of political preferences or changing circumstances.
Looking Forward: The Tax Extension Debate
With the current half-cent tax expiring in June 2026, discussions are already underway about extension options. Some propose "RTA Next," rolling unfinished projects into a new tax period. Others suggest individual municipal taxes rather than regional cooperation.
The problem with abandoning regional cooperation is the loss of federal and state funding that flows through the RTA mechanism. These funds would revert to federal purposes in other states or be reallocated within Arizona, likely benefiting Phoenix and other areas instead of Southern Arizona.
Before voters consider any extension, they deserve answers about what happened with the first 20 years. The average person paying these taxes for two decades has the right to know whether their money was well spent and whether the entities involved can be trusted with additional funds.
The Tucson RTA situation serves as a cautionary tale about government accountability and the importance of holding elected officials to their contractual commitments. Voters did their part by paying the taxes; now it's time for city leadership to do theirs.
Exposing the Arabella Network: How Leftist Billionaires Secretly Transform America
The average American scrolling through social media has no idea that the political ads they encounter might be funded by billionaires whose names never appear on the content. This hidden influence network represents one of the most sophisticated political operations in modern American history, funneling billions of dollars through a web of interconnected nonprofits designed to shape public opinion and policy.
The Discovery
The Arabella network first came to light during the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court confirmation battle. The primary opposition group, "Demand Justice," appeared to be leading the charge against Kavanaugh's nomination, yet nobody in Washington had heard of this organization before—not even friends on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Investigation revealed that Demand Justice didn't really exist as an independent entity. Instead, it was a fiscally sponsored project of a massive nonprofit in Washington, D.C. Further digging uncovered half a dozen nonprofits operating from the same address, all managed by the same for-profit consulting company.
This discovery opened the door to understanding what has become the largest dark money network on the political left.
The Scale of Operations
The financial scope of Arabella's influence is staggering. During the 2020 election cycle, Arabella's nonprofits raised $2.4 billion. Rather than decreasing in the 2022 off-year cycle, their fundraising actually increased to $3 billion.
To put this in perspective, Arabella's 2022 fundraising exceeded the combined total of the Republican National Committee, Democratic National Committee, and all four congressional campaign committees by roughly half a billion dollars.
How the System Works
Arabella operates like a financial services company for political activism. They fiscally sponsor hundreds of smaller groups, many of which exist only on paper or as websites. These sponsored groups don't have to publicly disclose their names, much less provide information about their activities or funding sources.
The system works like this: A billionaire donor (many you've never heard of, like Swiss national Hans Jörg Wies) contributes hundreds of millions to Arabella's nonprofits. These organizations then distribute funds to various causes and campaigns while maintaining the fiction that they're separate, grassroots entities.
Because these are technically nonprofits rather than political committees, they can accept unlimited donations from foreign nationals who would otherwise be prohibited from participating in American politics.
The Wizard of Oz Effect
The power of networks like Arabella lies partly in their mystery. Like the Wizard of Oz, they appear large and intimidating until you discover they're often just "some 20-something in a DC office" operating multiple fake organizations from the same address.
This revelation is crucial because understanding how these networks operate significantly reduces their influence. When people recognize that the "grassroots" movement they're seeing is actually a billionaire-funded astroturf campaign, the messaging loses much of its persuasive power.
Rapid Response Capabilities
One of Arabella's key advantages is their ability to create new organizations instantly. If a political issue emerges today, they can have a professional-looking advocacy group with a compelling name operating by tomorrow. This gives them the appearance of broad-based support for their positions when it's actually centrally coordinated messaging.
The network also has the infrastructure to organize protests in 100 cities simultaneously if needed. This isn't organic, grassroots activism—it's a sophisticated political operation with the resources to mobilize quickly across the country.
The Funding Sources
While George Soros remains a prominent figure in progressive funding, the Arabella network draws from numerous billionaire sources. Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, and lesser-known figures like Hans Jörg Wies have contributed hundreds of millions to these operations.
Mark Zuckerberg's election-related funding, sometimes called "Zuckbucks," represents another stream of private money influencing public processes. These contributions often support organizations that claim to be nonpartisan while advancing specific political agendas.
Government Funding Concerns
Beyond private billionaire money, many left-wing advocacy groups receive federal funding despite engaging in political activities. This creates a situation where taxpayers are forced to fund political advocacy they may oppose.
The principle should be clear: advocacy organizations shouldn't receive government funding regardless of their political orientation. Conservative groups that refuse government money set the right example—neither liberal nor conservative advocacy should be subsidized by taxpayers.
Legal and Regulatory Gaps
Much of what Arabella does, while ethically questionable, may not be technically illegal under current law. The regulatory framework hasn't kept pace with sophisticated modern influence operations.
Key reforms could include:
Requiring disclosure of fiscally sponsored groups and their activities
Closing loopholes that allow foreign nationals to influence American politics through nonprofits
Strengthening disclosure requirements for political spending by tax-exempt organizations
The Response Strategy
Education remains the most effective counter to these influence networks. When people understand how they're being manipulated, the manipulation becomes less effective.
Resources like InfluenceWatch.org provide detailed information about left-wing donors, organizations, and their interconnections. This "Wikipedia of the left" allows citizens to research the funding and connections behind political messaging they encounter.
Historical Context
While political influence operations aren't new, the scale and sophistication of modern networks like Arabella represent something unprecedented. The ability to instantly create convincing front groups, coordinate messaging across hundreds of organizations, and deploy billions in resources makes this qualitatively different from historical political operations.
The Stakes Moving Forward
As America approaches its 250th anniversary, the battle for the country's direction intensifies. Networks like Arabella don't simply want to win elections—they want to "fundamentally transform" America into something different from what the founders envisioned.
Understanding these operations doesn't require becoming a political expert. It simply requires recognizing that not everything that appears grassroots actually is, and that billionaires are spending unprecedented sums to influence how Americans think about fundamental questions of governance and society.
The antidote to this influence isn't more regulation alone—it's an informed citizenry that can recognize manipulation when they see it and make decisions based on their own values rather than billionaire-funded messaging campaigns.
LA Sheriff's Deputies Killed in Training Explosion
Three Los Angeles County Sheriff's bomb squad officers lost their lives Friday morning in an explosion at a training facility, highlighting the inherent dangers faced by law enforcement personnel even during routine preparation activities.
The Incident
The explosion occurred around 7:25 a.m. at the LA Sheriff's Department's Biscailuz Training Center, which houses the Sheriff's Special Enforcement Units and Bomb Squad. According to reports, the bomb squad was moving explosives when the blast occurred, killing three officers and hospitalizing one additional person.
The FBI and agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives responded to assist with the investigation. Attorney General Pam Bondi released information about the incident, and authorities confirmed there was no immediate threat to the public.
Training Dangers in Law Enforcement
Law enforcement training, particularly for specialized units like SWAT and bomb disposal teams, involves inherent risks that the public rarely considers. Officers use live ammunition, explosive devices, and dangerous equipment in realistic scenarios designed to prepare them for actual emergencies.
Explosive entry techniques, developed jointly by agencies like LAPD and Arizona DPS in the 1980s, require officers to work with devices capable of taking down doors or creating holes in walls. These prefabricated explosives are necessary tools for defeating hardened targets that drug dealers and other criminals use to fortify their positions.
Specialized Training Requirements
Bomb squad officers undergo extensive training in handling various types of explosive devices, from artillery simulators used in training to sophisticated devices designed to defeat specific types of locks and barriers. The work requires both military-level explosive expertise and the ability to make split-second decisions under pressure.
Many bomb squad officers bring military explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) experience to their civilian roles, but the transition from military to civilian contexts creates additional challenges. Urban environments present unique risks and complications not found in military settings.
Historical Context
This tragedy isn't isolated. Law enforcement loses officers regularly in training accidents across the country. Arizona lost Sergeant Tom Hans in Scottsdale years ago when a generator exploded during a SWAT training exercise. These incidents underscore that the job's dangers extend beyond street encounters to preparation and training activities.
The LA Context
The timing of this incident adds another layer of concern. Los Angeles has experienced significant tensions between law enforcement and political leadership over immigration enforcement and other policies. The city has been a focal point for protests and demonstrations, some of which have turned violent.
While authorities indicate this appears to be a training accident rather than an attack, the context matters. Law enforcement officers are operating in an environment where political leaders sometimes fail to support them, creating additional stress and complexity in an already dangerous job.
Training Facility Security
The Biscailuz Training Center serves multiple specialized law enforcement functions, making it a repository for various types of equipment and materials necessary for advanced police work. The facility's evacuation and road closures following the incident demonstrate the seriousness with which authorities are treating the investigation.
Broader Implications
This incident highlights several important realities about modern law enforcement:
First, the job's dangers extend far beyond what the public sees. Officers face risks during training, qualification, and routine maintenance of specialized equipment.
Second, specialized units like bomb squads represent significant investments in expertise and training. Losing experienced officers means losing years of institutional knowledge and capability.
Third, the political climate surrounding law enforcement affects officer morale and public support, which can impact recruitment and retention in these dangerous specialized roles.
Moving Forward
As the investigation continues, the focus should remain on supporting the families of the fallen officers and ensuring that training protocols incorporate the latest safety measures. The law enforcement community will analyze what happened to prevent similar tragedies while maintaining the realistic training necessary to keep officers and communities safe.
The sacrifice of these three officers serves as a reminder that those who choose to wear the uniform accept risks that most citizens never face, whether responding to emergencies or preparing to do so. Their service and sacrifice deserve recognition and respect, regardless of political differences about law enforcement policies.
The incident also reinforces the importance of supporting law enforcement agencies with proper equipment, training, and resources to minimize risks while maintaining operational effectiveness. These officers died serving their community, even in a training capacity, and their loss represents a significant blow to public safety capabilities in Los Angeles County.