Dan Lungren Comes Out Strongly Against Fair Election Reforms

If you've been following the Blue America PAC at all, you may already be aware that we've decided that we won't be endorsing any candidates for the House in 2010 unless they are genuinely enthusiastic about passing John Larson's Fair Elections Now Act (HR 1826). We're not asking for some unenforceable pledge; we want nothing less than heartfelt enthusiasm. Right now Larson has 117 co-sponsors from across the political spectrum-- not just stalwart progressives, but even reactionary Blue Dogs (2) and Republicans (2).

Eleanor Norton [D-DC]
Neil Abercrombie [D-HI1]
Robert Andrews [D-NJ1]
Michael Arcuri [D-NY24]
Tammy Baldwin [D-WI2]
Earl Blumenauer [D-OR3]
John Boccieri [D-OH16]
Bruce Braley [D-IA1]
Michael Capuano [D-MA8]
Ben Chandler [D-KY6]
William Clay [D-MO1]
Steve Cohen [D-TN9]
Gerald Connolly [D-VA11]
John Conyers [D-MI14]
Jim Cooper [D-TN5]
Jerry Costello [D-IL12]
Joe Courtney [D-CT2]
Elijah Cummings [D-MD7]
Kathleen Dahlkemper [D-PA3]
Danny Davis [D-IL7]
Peter DeFazio [D-OR4]
William Delahunt [D-MA10]
Rosa DeLauro [D-CT3]
Lloyd Doggett [D-TX25]
Michael Doyle [D-PA14]
Donna Edwards [D-MD4]
Keith Ellison [D-MN5]
Anna Eshoo [D-CA14]
Sam Farr [D-CA17]
Chaka Fattah [D-PA2]
Bob Filner [D-CA51]
Bill Foster [D-IL14]
Barney Frank [D-MA4]
Alan Grayson [D-FL8]
Raymond Green [D-TX29]
Raul Grijalva [D-AZ7]
Luis Gutiérrez [D-IL4]
Phil Hare [D-IL17]
Jane Harman [D-CA36]
Alcee Hastings [D-FL23]
Martin Heinrich [D-NM1]
James Himes [D-CT4]
Maurice Hinchey [D-NY22]
Mazie Hirono [D-HI2]
Paul Hodes [D-NH2]
Rush Holt [D-NJ12]
Michael Honda [D-CA15]
Steve Israel [D-NY2]
Jesse Jackson [D-IL2]
Sheila Jackson-Lee [D-TX18]
Eddie Johnson [D-TX30]
Henry Johnson [D-GA4]
Walter Jones [R-NC3]
Steve Kagen [D-WI8]
Marcy Kaptur [D-OH9]
Dale Kildee [D-MI5]
Ronald Kind [D-WI3]
Larry Kissell [D-NC8]
Suzanne Kosmas [D-FL24]
Dennis Kucinich [D-OH10]
Barbara Lee [D-CA9]
John Lewis [D-GA5]
David Loebsack [D-IA2]
Zoe Lofgren [D-CA16]
Nita Lowey [D-NY18]
Ben Luján [D-NM3]
Daniel Maffei [D-NY25]
Carolyn Maloney [D-NY14]
Betsy Markey [D-CO4]
Edward Markey [D-MA7]
Eric Massa [D-NY29]
Carolyn McCarthy [D-NY4]
Betty McCollum [D-MN4]
James McDermott [D-WA7]
James McGovern [D-MA3]
Jerry McNerney [D-CA11]
Michael Michaud [D-ME2]
Bradley Miller [D-NC13]
George Miller [D-CA7]
James Moran [D-VA8]
Christopher Murphy [D-CT5]
Scott Murphy [D-NY20]
Jerrold Nadler [D-NY8]
Grace Napolitano [D-CA38]
John Olver [D-MA1]
Solomon Ortiz [D-TX27]
William Pascrell [D-NJ8]
Thomas Perriello [D-VA5]
Gary Peters [D-MI9]
Chellie Pingree [D-ME1]
Todd Platts [R-PA19]
Jared Polis [D-CO2]
David Price [D-NC4]
Charles Rangel [D-NY15]
Silvestre Reyes [D-TX16]
Steven Rothman [D-NJ9]
Dutch Ruppersberger [D-MD2]
Linda Sánchez [D-CA39]
Janice Schakowsky [D-IL9]
Robert Scott [D-VA3]
José Serrano [D-NY16]
Joe Sestak [D-PA7]
Carol Shea-Porter [D-NH1]
Louise Slaughter [D-NY28]
Adam Smith [D-WA9]
Fortney Stark [D-CA13]
Betty Sutton [D-OH13]
Harry Teague [D-NM2]
Bennie Thompson [D-MS2]
Paul Tonko [D-NY21]
Niki Tsongas [D-MA5]
Christopher Van Hollen [D-MD8]
Timothy Walz [D-MN1]

Is your own congresscritter on the list? If not, you should call him or her and ask why not. If you live in the Sacramento suburbs or in Mother Lode Country, don't bother looking. You're congressman, Dan Lungren, is helping to lead the battle against Fair Elections. This week he penned an editorial against reform for USAToday using every deception in the book to try to turn readers away from campaign finance reform. Most Americans have seen what the corrupt campaign financing system we have today has done to our legislative process and how much it has cost all of us-- much to the delight of Big Pharma, the Insurance Industry, the banksters, etc. Responses to Lungren's hackish OpEd, ran 100% opposed to his views. "Lungren misses the point" sums them up:

Campaign financing for public office by private donors is more about influence peddling than it is about First Amendment, freedom of speech rights. The manner in which political campaigns are run requires incredible sums of money.

It is presumed that spending more money guarantees a win because more media time can be purchased.
Further, the wealthy who run for office inject their money to ensure success.

The present system also favors the incumbent because this person is most likely already doing the bidding of his private financiers.

The benefits of using public money far exceed the drawbacks. Political campaigns would be shorter and more focused since fewer dollars would be available.

The perceived, if not actual, buying of influence by lobbyists, industry associations and unions would be eliminated.

This would then give the voter a bigger voice in the selection process. It would likely also reduce the seemingly endless insulting campaign ads that do more to mislead the public than educate it.

As to Lungren's-- and the GOP's-- claim that free speech and the right to bribe members of Congress are one in the same, one respondent asks "Am I the only one who sees that money is not speech, that it is the megaphone through which speech is transmitted? It is like any meeting, if one speaker has a megaphone and the other doesn't, which one gets heard?"

Lungren, of course, has benefited handsomely from the status quo. Widely considered a congressman who will sell his vote to any corporate interest, his voting record corresponds totally to the demands of the special interests that have funded his sleazy political career. Lobbyists figure very prominently in his election efforts-- to the tune of $122,921 so far. Here's what he's taken in from the sectors whose bills he has been voting for:

Finance, Insurance, Real Estate- $590,217
Energy & Natural Resources- $111,600
Medical-Industrial Complex- $197,912

That's closing in on a million dollars, a lot more attractive to a hack like Lungren than appealing to individual donors. What he-- and his crooked colleagues-- fear most is putting the power in the hands of those who can organize lots of people into politics with small checks, rather than those who bundle large contributions. The good news is that the progressive running against Lungren, Dr. Ami Bera, is a proponent of HR 1826. Last year Obama won the district and Lungren only managed to hold onto his seat with 49.5% of the vote. In 2006 he had won re-election with 59.5% and his opponent, Bill Durston, pulled 86,318 votes. Last year Durston surged to 137,971 votes. Next year if Bera manages to make the Fair Elections Now Act a salient issue in the district, it should help him send Lungren into the retirement he's earned.