Are We Going To Condemn Ourselves To Voting For The Lesser Of Two Evils For Eternity?

New York State has 62 counties. A majority of voters in only 16 of them backed Andrew Cuomo's reelection as governor last week. He beat Republican Rob Astorino 1,919,225 (53.96%) to 1,443,713 (40.59%)-- with 173,606 votes (4.88%) for Green Party candidate Howie Hawkins.

In September Cuomo spent $60.62 per voter to win a 62-35% victory over staunchly progressive icon, Zephyr Teachout, who managed to win 30 counties, several-- like Ulster, Sullivan, Columbia, Schoharie, Saratoga, Otsego, and Tompkins-- with over two thirds of the vote. She took 77.9% of the vote in the Hudson Valley's Columbia County. Tuesday that county voted for obscure Republican Rob Astorino, 48.9- 39.6%. Almost 11% of the voters opted for Hawkins, which is why Cuomo lost it. Hawkins also kept Cuomo from winning in Ulster County, where he polled 41.7% to Astorino's 46.6% (with Hawkins at 11%). In Tompkins County Cuomo won 58.5% to 24.7%, but Hawkins won 16.2% of the vote.

Cuomo raised $45 million for his campaign. Astorino raised just $4.8 million. Cuomo’s average donation was $70,723; the average donation to Hawkins' campaign was $77. Cuomo raised so much money that his campaign account earned $104,000 in interest, almost as much as the $126,425 Hawkins raised in contributions!

As of last month, Mr. Cuomo received 81 percent of his contributions from donors who gave him at least $10,000, according to the Nypirg analysis. Donors giving less than $1,000 accounted for only seven-tenths of 1 percent of his total haul.

Mr. Cuomo has raised money from many businesses and individuals who have a stake in the activities of state government, including real estate interests like Extell Development and the Related Companies, as well as big corporations like Cablevision and Comcast.

New York also has some of the most porous campaign fund-raising laws in the nation, and Mr. Cuomo has proved a master at availing himself of those openings.

In particular, he exploited a loophole that allows donors to sidestep contribution limits by giving donations through a series of limited liability companies. The real estate magnate Leonard Litwin has given $1 million to Mr. Cuomo through limited liability companies tied to his firm, Glenwood Management, according to Nypirg.

When polling for the race began last year, Cuomo was leading 63-24%. As voters focused on the race and their governor's subservience to the finance, real-estate, and fossil-fuel industries, Cuomo kept sinking-- all the way down to the 53% he wound up with. The maximum contribution in progressive New York is $60,800 and that's where Cuomo got most of his money.

New York school teacher Brian Jones was the Green Party candidate for Lt. Governor. He did a perceptive post-election analysis that sounds a lot like what we;'ve been talking about here at DWT in regards to Democrats nationally.

Everything about this election points to widespread dissatisfaction with a rightward-moving Democratic Party. Democratic voters stayed home. The turnout was a record low in New York State, with Cuomo receiving nearly a million fewer votes than he did in 2010. The Working Families Party (WFP) deployed all their resources to maintain their ballot line, but their campaign literature didn’t mention their candidate for governor: Cuomo. Only the Green Party significantly increased their vote.

Our gubernatorial candidate, Howie Hawkins, got 5 percent and 175,000 votes-- nearly triple the number that voted for him in 2010 and quadruple the percentage. Instead of just voting against the Republicans or for a lesser evil, countless people expressed glee at the prospect of voting for someone running on a progressive platform.

Hawkins himself did an exciting and inspiring OpEd, America Just Took A Wrong Turn. It's Time To Take A Hard Left, for The Guardian that lays out a path forward for progressives who see nothing hopeful in what either evil Beltway party is offering.

Sometimes it feels as if Sarah Palin won the last two presidential elections. We’re not quite living in “Drill Baby Drill” America, but by co-opting the other Republican energy slogan, a meaningless plan literally called “All-of-the-Above," President Obama has opened up vast new areas to offshore drilling and pushed hydrofracking for oil and gas onshore. Even as the president says that “we are closer to energy independence than we’ve ever been before”, sometimes it seems like the US is becoming a repressive petrostate.

And then some days, like the day after the midterm elections, it feels like a complete victory for Palinite politics. The Republicans took back the US Senate, and the only Democrats who won major races were those like Andrew Cuomo, who defeated my Green Party campaign for governor of New York with a $45m campaign war chest provided by a few hundred super-rich donors-- Democratic and Republican ones.

But there were real victories this week for progressive alternatives on clean energy, economic security and social justice. The extremist blood bath may have painted the country more red, but there were more than a few important-- and extremely promising-- tea leaves of green. It was even enough to suggest a new, independent, hard-left turn in American politics is still very much possible.

Fracking bans just passed in cities from California to Ohio and even in Denton, Texas-- the town at the heart of America’s oil-and-gas boom. In Richmond, California, progressives beat back a multi-million dollar campaign funded by Chevron to defeat Green and allied candidates. Voters in Alaska, Oregon and Washington DC joined Washington State and Colorado in legalizing marijuana, adding to the growing momentum to call off the failed “war on drugs” that has given the US the highest incarceration rate in the world.

Republicans like Mitch McConnell have already warned that “we will be voting on things the administration is not fond of”-- citing a sure-to-be-caustic conservative energy agenda of which the Keystone XL pipeline is "only part." But true progressives will be using our local political leverage in a continuing campaign for a Green New Deal. We are putting back on the public agenda the economic promises that President Franklin Roosevelt called for back in 1944 but which the Democrats have long since abandoned. Those rights provide the foundations for what FDR called “the true individual freedom [that] cannot exist without economic security and independence”-- rights like a useful job, a living wage for doing it, plus affordable housing, healthcare and education.

The US needs to revive a New Deal-style public jobs program to put unused labor to work, meeting unmet community needs-- like the repair of a crumbling infrastructure for water, sewage, roads and bridges. But the centerpiece of the Green New Deal-- to ban fracking and build a 100% renewable energy system by 2030-- is itself a program for full employment. A peer-reviewed study by Cornell and Stanford researchers found that the 15-year clean energy buildout would create 4.5m middle-income jobs in construction and manufacturing-- in New York state alone.

As Greens educate, demonstrate and lobby during the next legislative session here in New York, we will be preparing to run more progressive candidates across the country. And if Cuomo opens New York to hydrofracking, as we expect he will, we’ll demand that legislatures everywhere keep pushing fracking bans and running new and bolder clean-energy candidates against legislators in 2016.

With Democrats repealing the New Deal and Republicans more or less repealing the Enlightenment with their anti-science stands on climate change and teaching evolution, the independent left is certain to mount a third-party presidential campaign beginning next year. I recently joined Kshama Sawant, the independent socialist elected to the Seattle city council last year, in calling for meetings across the country to begin laying the foundation for a strong left challenge to both parties of big business in 2016.

It may be disruptive-- but disruption is exactly what progressive America is asking for right now.

Public opinion polls show that a majority of Americans support social, economic and energy policies that veer left if not all the way green. The well-documented problem of American politics is that these progressive values do not get turned into progressive policies. It will take a party independent of corporate money and influence to change that. Or else we will be stuck with the Palinites.

If you liked what Bernie Sanders had to say to Bill Moyers up top, think about pitching in here. It can be done... one step at a time.

Mark Pocan Guest Post: Wisconsin’s Governor Election Has National Consequences

Mark Pocan was elected to Congress from Madison, Wisconsin when Tammy Baldwin went on to the U.S. Senate. He beat his Republican rival 265,422 (68%) to 124,683 (32%). Since being elected he's had the best lifetime ProgressivePunch crucial vote score of any Member of Congress, 98.68. With George Miller retiring, Pocan is generally viewed as organized labor's go-to guy in Congress. He's accrued a lot of respect and admiration from his colleagues, especially for a freshman. He's widely considered a shoe-in for reelection and he's been spending his time and energy on helping other Democrats, particularly in Wisconsin. He wrote this guest post for us last night, having spent the day campaigning for Mary Burke.

I often get asked how does Wisconsin elect Ron Johnson and Scott Walker one year, and Tammy Baldwin and Barack Obama the next? Why is Wisconsin such a purple state? I tell them we aren’t a purple state because of our politics. In fact, when Wisconsinites get out to vote, we are a beautiful shade of indigo blue. But if we look purple, it’s because Scott Walker has bruised and damaged our reputation across the nation.

Shortly after being sworn in, Governor Scott Walker launched an all-out assault against collective bargaining rights for workers, followed by massive tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. He also slashed education funding, passed up an opportunity to expand Wisconsin’s Medicaid program, BadgerCare, and gave taxpayer money to corporations that shipped Wisconsin jobs overseas. All while miserably failing to achieve his promise of creating 250,000 jobs in his first term-- he’s on track to barely reach half that goal. Wisconsin is dead last in the Midwest for job creation because Scott Walker’s too busy taking care of Scott Walker’s presidential ambitions to really care about creating jobs.

The failed "Walkernomics" austerity policies have put Wisconsin dead last behind our Midwest neighbors in economic growth and job creation. Wages in Wisconsin have remained stagnant and working class Wisconsin families have struggled under Scott Walker. What is clear to nearly everyone in Wisconsin is sharp cuts in state spending, the assault on public sector unions, and tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations have not meant better jobs and better wages for working folks-- they’ve been a boon for Scott Walker’s donors. Scott Walker has put his political ambitions ahead of helping Wisconsin’s middle class, time and time again.

But don’t think Scott Walker is merely Wisconsin’s problem. The entirety of Scott Walker’s first term as Governor has been about beefing up his Republican resume for his all but certain 2016 run for President. Wisconsin was the test lab for every single Republican dream policy from school vouchers to massive tax cuts-- and we can’t let this experiment out of the lab. If Scott Walker makes it to the White House, we’re all in big trouble. The best way to make sure Scott Walker does not take his failed conservative policies national is to elect Mary Burke in Wisconsin.

Mary Burke is running neck and neck with Scott Walker. The last poll had them dead tie at 47-47. We have a great ground game to get out the vote, but Scott Walker has the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson and every conservative group behind him. Any help in these remaining days will help ensure we don’t let big money beat out our grassroots efforts. If all goes well, Scott Walker will be the first GOP hopeful to fall for the 2016 cycle.

Rep. Mark Pocan
WI-02

A Republican Wave Election? Not For GOP Extremists Scott Walker And Sam Brownback

Scott Walker family portrait

Two of the worst governors in America are extremist ideologues Scott Walker of Wisconsin and San Brownback of Kansas. Both will face the voters a week from tomorrow. Both are being opposed by moderate Democrats, rather than by the kinds of progressives Blue America endorses. However, Walker and Brownback are so extreme that we want to make it clear that progressives in Wisconsin and Kansas need to go to the polls next Tuesday to vote them both out. The latest polling in Kansas shows that most voters want to end the disastrous Brownback experiment. GOP polling firm Rasmussen, which regularly jiggers its findings to favor Republicans reported this week that Paul Davis is beating Brownback 52-45%, in line with a poll conducted by another GOP firm at the same time, Gravis Marketing, for Brownback showing a 49-44% lead for Davis. Both polls showed Davis with momentum and Brownback falling further behind.
v Similarly, Rasmussen's most recent poll showed Mary Burke leading Scott Walker 49-48%, (within the margin of error). The biggest and most influential newspaper in Wisconsin, the conservative-leaning Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, which has always gone to bat for Walker, tilted towards Burke yesterday.

Is it time for a change in the governor's mansion? Voters have to decide that on Nov. 4. But before they do, a few closing thoughts on the election...

Scott Walker

If the electorate is suffering from the virus known as Walker Fatigue, we haven't seen it yet.

This illness normally would be expected to manifest itself with symptoms of declining favorability ratings for the first-term Republican governor. And yet, while Walker's margins between those who say they have a favorable impression of him and those who do not have always been razor thin, those numbers haven't changed much. That's despite the governor running in three statewide races in four years. People know what they're getting; they either like him-- a lot-- or they do not-- a lot.

Walker's decisiveness is refreshing and his resolve and steadiness at the tiller in the face of vicious political attacks is admirable if often misguided. He's sincere: We don't doubt for an instant that Walker really believes that his ideas are right for Wisconsin.

But the governor's take-it-or-leave-it approach to governance wears thin. He has made politics courser in Wisconsin-- needlessly so. The governor "got things done" all right, but he did it by shoving those things through the Legislature with very little debate and with very little Democratic support.


After the GOP took charge of both houses of the Legislature and the governor's office in 2010, the party acted on a long to-do list, aching with pent-up demand for their conservative agenda.

They're not done yet.

While Walker has been cagey on whether he would sign right-to-work legislation, for example, Republican lawmakers have not: They're going for it. A second Walker term may not be as contentious as the first-- but we could be wrong about that. Brace yourself, Wisconsin.

In such an evenly divided state, even if only a few independents are done with Walker, it could make a difference. Walker's challenge is to argue that he's not really as radical as his record shows that he is.

Mary Burke

Mary Burke has a different challenge. The Democratic candidate needs to prove she has the political chops to do the job. She's a rookie who has no statewide experience. That's no advantage; it's a handicap. The job requires political skill-- lots of it.

A political novice in the Madison snake-pit had better be pretty good at either dodging the vipers or grinding them beneath the heel of her boot. We're skeptical about Burke's bona fides in this regard. If the Republicans retain control of both houses, as expected, she'll be squaring off against two of the best politicians in the state, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) and Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau).

Burke points to her experiences running the state Department of Commerce, as an executive at Trek Bicycles, working with the Boys and Girls Clubs and serving on the Madison School Board. "Part of doing that is building up a team around you that brings to the table different skills and experiences, and I will certainly look to have the best possible team around me as governor," she told us during our interview with her.

Burke seems quietly competent-- and very bright. And she has grown enormously as a candidate. There is no reason to believe she will not continue to grow as a politician if she is elected governor. But it's a bigger learning curve than she might expect. Another Democratic politician learned that lesson the hard way-- or perhaps he never learned it. President Barack Obama, whose disdain for performing the duties of the world's No. 1 politician have been apparent from his first day in office, had plenty of brains, guts and drive when he entered the Oval Office but what he didn't have were either good political instincts or the willingness to use them.

If she wins, Burke will need those instincts-- or really good advice-- and she'll need to be willing to get her hands dirty in the day-to-day work of governing the state.

Down in Kansas, the Wichita Eagle has a lot more decisive yesterday. The implored Kansans to dump Brownback and replace him with Davis.

Democrat Paul Davis is the best choice for governor because he would help restore balance, common sense and fiscal responsibility to a state government that has jumped off an ideological cliff.

The biggest issue facing the next governor is pulling the state out of its budget hole. Because of large tax cuts, the state is spending more than it collects. According to current projections, it will burn through its remaining cash reserves this fiscal year. Balancing next year’s budget and restoring the statutorily required ending balance could require more than $700 million in additional tax revenue, budget cuts or a combination of both.


As a first step, Davis proposes freezing future tax cuts. That makes sense; when you are in a hole you need to stop digging. Davis won’t specify what spending cuts also might be necessary, other than saying he wants to protect public education funding.

“Schools have taken all the cuts they can,” he said.

Davis wants to restore as soon as possible the state base aid that was cut to public education, arguing that good schools are important to growing the state’s economy. He also hopes to develop a multiyear funding plan for higher education that includes performance goals and commitments to limit tuition increases.

Davis intends to conduct a “top-to-bottom” review of KanCare, the state’s privatized Medicaid program that has been plagued by complaints. He also wisely supports allowing the federal expansion of Medicaid, noting its importance to low-income Kansans and hospitals. And he would re-establish the Kansas Arts Commission, arguing that arts are a quality-of-life issue, particularly in rural communities.

As House minority leader, Davis showed a willingness and ability to work with others to find practical solutions. He pledges to continue that bipartisan outreach and cooperation as governor.

But this election is less about Davis than about the bad policies and hostile attitudes of the current administration.

This editorial board endorsed Republican Gov. Sam Brownback four years ago, hoping for the best. That’s not what Kansas got.

Brownback pushed through fiscally irresponsible tax cuts on the blind faith that they would act like “a shot of adrenaline into the heart of the Kansas economy.” As many warned, the trickle-down economics hasn’t worked.

Though Kansas has seen some job growth, it trails the nation and most surrounding states (which didn’t cut taxes). And the growth has not been nearly enough to replace the lost tax revenue-- leaving Kansas with deficits at a time when nearly every other state has surpluses.

Brownback won’t admit his tax cuts aren’t delivering as promised (“The sun is shining in Kansas and don’t let anybody tell you any different,” he says in one of his campaign commercials), and still insists that job growth will cover any future shortfalls.

But wishful thinking won’t balance the budget. That’s why the nation’s two leading bond-ratings agencies downgraded Kansas’ credit rating-- which should be an embarrassment to Kansans and an authoritative judgment on Brownback’s “real-live experiment.”

In addition to wrecking the state’s finances, Brownback also enacted policies that punished the poor. His administration raised eligibility requirements for receiving welfare and food stamps and turned down federal funds aimed at helping needy Kansans. It pushed out dedicated social-service professionals, replacing them with inexperienced ideologues.

Brownback and his administration also rejected the desperate pleas of families to keep developmentally disabled Kansans out of KanCare. And his refusal to allow an expansion of Medicaid is costing Kansas hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding (our tax dollars) and denying needed health insurance to more than 75,000 low-income Kansans.

Because of the elimination of certain tax credits, Brownback’s tax cuts financially harmed some low-income Kansans-- particularly after he pushed the Legislature to make permanent part of the state’s temporary sales tax increase.

Brownback also supported some of the worst ideas of the Legislature-- including signing and endorsing a plan for the state to take control of Medicare.

Brownback pushed for more control of the judicial branch and sought to undermine its independence-- leading 14 past presidents of the Kansas Bar Association, Republicans and Democrats, to endorse Davis. And former Sedgwick County District Attorney Nola Foulston is correct: Brownback’s campaign commercial trying to link Davis to a Kansas Supreme Court decision regarding the Carr brothers is “beyond disgraceful.”

In his quest to gain control of the Legislature, Brownback led an ugly campaign to purge moderate GOP state senators. Given this hostility and the wreckage caused by his policies, it’s no wonder so many former GOP officials endorse Davis.

Scott Walker Disputes Ronald Reagan's Admonitions Against Starting A GOP War Against Women

Now that the Republican primary is over, Scott Brown is trying to present himself to New Hampshire voters as more moderate and more mainstream than his record shows he is— particularly on issues important to women voters (and to men who like and respect women). Brown has been lying, claiming he has always supported women having the ability to get contraception easily. He recently said he has supported that "since I was 18 years old." In light of his anti-women voting record from he was a senator from Massachusetts, Politifact rates Brown’s claims “mostly false.” And even a far more radical right-wing Republican, Wisconsin Governor Rick Scott, has tried to close the gaping gender gap by making the absurd claim— in an ad no less— that he’s stayed out of women’s health care decisions. The ad from NARAL Pro-Choice at the bottom, which will start running in the Madison, Milwaukee, Green Bay and LaCrosse/Eau Claire media markets tomorrow is the response to his dishonesty.

The most current polling shows his neck and neck with Democrat Mary Burke, Burke leading by one point. Among women, Burke leads by 10 points. Most Wisconsin women know how toxic Walker’s agenda has been for them and for their families. In Elizabeth Warren’s words, “No governor has done more to hurt working families than Scott Walker. He started by gutting Wisconsin's labor unions— the very organizations that built America's middle class and that would fight back hardest against his radical agenda. When he succeeded, he cut $800 million from the state's education budget, starving schools and laying off teachers. Then he rejected federal funding under the Affordable Care Act, leaving tens of thousands of people shut out of the health care system…This week, I'm headed to Wisconsin to endorse Mary Burke, the smart, tough, and experienced Democratic nominee for Governor of Wisconsin.” She continued: 

For a long time, the political pundits said Scott Walker couldn't be beat. There has been plenty of money flowing in from powerful interests, and they said it would be just too much to overcome— don't even try.

What did Mary take from that? That she needed to fight hard and build one of the best grassroots teams in the country to go door to door, person to person, to talk about why this campaign is so important for Wisconsin families.

That's what she did, and here's what she found: the people of Wisconsin were ready to fight back, too. Now the race is officially a tossup. In every single poll conducted in September, Scott Walker and Mary Burke were virtually tied.

And there's one more issue Mary has taken on: she is not afraid to talk about how Scott Walker's record shows he's just another Republican acting like it's 1954, not 2014.

This is a governor who defunded Planned Parenthood, repealed equal-pay-for-equal-work laws, and even removed the requirement for public schools to teach comprehensive sex ed.

And since we're talking about Wisconsin, let's listen to a few words from the most influential thinker and spokesperson of American conservatism in our lifetimes, Paul Ryan's patron saint:



Being anti-Choice— and generally anti-women— has long been a marker go belonging to the right-wing tribe. It’s sometimes been a difficult one for the Greed and Selfishness wing of the Republican Party to deal with. Many conservatives who don’t care about anything but evading taxes are confused by the Republican Party’s relentless war on women by fanatics like Walker. In his new book, The Invisible Bridge, Rick Perlstein looked at the verbal gymnastics Ronald Reagan had to perform to keep from alienating the crazed anti-Choice fanatics in his party.

In 1967, while governor of California, Reagan signed the most liberal abortion law in the country. He defended it, in a very different way than Ayn Rand would, by claiming that “[i]n our Judeo-Christian religion, we recognize the right to take life in defense of our own. Therefore an abortion is justified when it is done in self-defense. My belief is that a woman has the right to protect her own life and health against even her own unborn child. I believe also that just as she has the right to defend herself against rape she should not be made to bear a child resulting from the violation of her person and therefore abortion is an act of self-defense.”

Scott Walker and the rest of the kook on the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party find Reagan’s ideas on this abhorrent and would drum him out of their tribe party today as a RINO.

Republicans Know They Can Always Count On DCCC Chair Steve Israel To Never Get The Balance Right

Looks like Sykes won't endorse Rick Scott after all, but he did switch parties

Southern Democrats are trying desperately to figure out how to balance the electoral need to keep up enthusiasm from African-American voters while distancing themselves from President Obama who is extremely unpopular among instinctively racist Southern whites.

In Louisiana, Sen. Mary Landrieu says President Barack Obama’s energy policies are “simply wrong.” In North Carolina, Sen. Kay Hagan has criticized the administration’s handling of veterans’ benefits. And in Georgia, Senate candidate Michelle Nunn won’t say whether she would have voted for the Affordable Care Act.

These Democrats, like others running in races across the country, are trying to distance themselves from a president who is deeply unpopular among white voters. But if they have any hopes of winning, they also must try to lock down the voters most loyal to Mr. Obama: African-Americans.

…Tharon Johnson, a co-chairman of the Democratic campaign in Georgia and regional director for Mr. Obama’s 2012 campaign, describes the party’s delicate balancing act like this: “We’re going to mobilize that core Obama coalition, but without Obama.”

Southern Democrats are counting on targeted advertising, the party’s voter-contact program and rallies headlined by first lady Michelle Obama, the Congressional Black Caucus and, possibly, former President Bill Clinton. On Monday, the last day to register to vote for the Nov. 4 election in Georgia, black elected officials and pastors, including Democratic Rep. John Lewis, a hero of the civil-rights movement, will hold a rally at the state capitol to urge voters to participate.

Three heavily African-American counties in Georgia also will offer early voting on a Sunday for the first time in the state’s history, an effort to get “souls to the polls” after church. Groups including the New Georgia Project are trying to parlay a massive migration of African-Americans from elsewhere in the U.S. into an army of newly registered voters.

…For Democrats, the challenge is to run stronger among white voters than Mr. Obama while matching his support among minorities. Mr. Obama’s approval among white voters has plunged to 31% in September from 54% when he took office, while approval among African-American voters has fallen far less, to 85% from 92%, according to the Wall Street Journal/NBC News polls.

One tactic is to tailor messages for particular audiences. In North Carolina, Ms. Hagan and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee are spending $1 million on radio ads airing on stations with large black audiences. Like her television ads, the spot accuses her opponent, Republican House Speaker Thom Tillis, of cutting state education funding. The black radio spot, however, also mentions “those Republicans rolling back our right to vote,” referring to a new state law that limits early voting and requires voters to show photo identification.

Getting the balance wrong can be disastrous. And getting stuff wrong always brings DCCC chair Steve Israel front and center. FL-13 (Pinellas County) isn’t a “typical” southern district. It’s relatively progressive and Obama won the district against McCain in 2008 and against Romney in 2012. It turns out for Democrats in statewide elections as well. DCCC and EMILY’s List greed-driven incompetence lost a special election to replace forever Congressman Bill Young earlier this year. Israel then compounded that catastrophic loss— he had named FL-13 the #1 Red-to-Blue target in the whole country— by recruiting a mystery meat independent, Ed Jany (not even a Democrat and not even from the district) to run against Republican David Jolly. First Israel had to force grassroots Democratic activist and local NAACP president Manuel Sykes out of the race, which he did in a typically ugly, heavy-handed manner. When Jany— who had already been shoved onto the Red-to-Blue program without any vetting whatsoever— was discovered to have faked his résumé, he withdrew from the race, leaving the Democrats with no candidate running against the ultra-vulnerable Jolly. So Jolly gets a free ride to Congress. Oh, it gets worse— much worse, and far beyond the confines of Pinellas County.

Florida Democrats— and the White House— are desperate to beat Governor Rick Scott in November. Charlie Crist needs a massive turnout in his home base, Pinellas County. He always wins that county big. So what could go wrong? Steve Israel, of course. Manuel Sykes is about to switch parties and endorse Rick Scott. When Pelosi reappointed Israel after his disastrous 2012 performance, she doomed the House Democrats to two more years of Speaker Boehner and his putrid leadership team. But Israel’s incompetence and corruption are infected Democrats on every level. This hit Sunday:

Prominent Democrat and St. Petersburg pastor Manuel Sykes, leader of Bethel Community Baptist Church and head of the St. Petersburg’s NAACP branch, is set to endorse Republican Rick Scott on Monday. Sykes is also likely to switch political parties from Democrat to Republican.

…Sykes’ move is the culmination of an increasingly fractious relationship with Pinellas County’s Democrats after the 57-year-old pastor received a harshly worded voicemail from Party chair Mark Hanisee earlier this year.

Hanisee told the reverend he would become “persona non grata” if Sykes followed through with plans to run for Congress, to fill the seat vacated by the passing of longtime Republican U.S. Rep. C.W. Bill Young.

Sykes told the Tampa Bay Times in April that Hanisee’s comments were disappointing, and “the party needs to be purged of these kinds of hindrances to its progress and progressiveness.”

All candidates must be both allowed and encouraged to run, he added.

Is There Still A Statewide Republican Party In California?

Friday the Republicans' annual 3-day neo-fascist conclave begins at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in DC. Featured speakers include a grab bag of some of the craziest lunatics on the fringes of the far right, from extremist current and former elected officials like Michele Bachmann, Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin, David Brat, Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee, to random freaks-with-a-following like Glenn Beck, Mat Staver, Ollie North, William Boykin, E.W. Jackson, Mark Levin, Erick Erickson, Gary Bauer, and some Duggars and Duck Dynasts. The meeting of the American neo-fascist movement is bound to get a lot more attention than the pathetic Republican Party convention last weekend in Los Angeles. Both conventions were premised on making some hay around an out of place Rand Paul.

The takeaway from the puny Republican convention in L.A., though, was all about the party's mind-boggling dysfunction, disunity and self-loathing. Every single GOP careerist is seeking to step on anyone else if it will help create the illusion they have disassociated themselves from the GOP and the other candidates. Gubernatorial candidate Neel Kashkari was treated like garbage, from the planning sessions right through the end of the whole awful affair. Tow of his statewide running mates refused to endorse him and one said he'd probably vote for Democrat Jerry Brown. And that was at the Republican Party convention! No one wants to touch the biggest point of his toxic résumé, his shameful role in the horrifying TARP bailout.

The gathering opened on a sour note Friday, when the evening's keynote speaker, state controller candidate Ashley Swearengin, told reporters she was still mulling whether to vote for Kashkari or Brown. "I'm looking at the two candidates like other Californians are," she said.

And Pete Peterson, the Republican running for secretary of state, said in an interview that he was not endorsing Kashkari-- or anyone else on the statewide ballot-- and did not plan to vote a straight party ticket.

The extraordinary display of disunity led Ron Nehring, a former state Republican chairman and underdog candidate for lieutenant governor, to vent his fury in a profanity-tinged email to party brass just before midnight Friday, after news organizations began reporting the dust-up.

"This does NOT help the party, and it distracts from the efforts made to convey a positive theme," Nehring wrote. "The coverage is not of a party expanding its reach. It's about a party that isn't unified because its candidates can't get it together and get on the same page."

Party leaders played down the disagreement. "A lot is being made out of a few tea leaves there," said state party vice chair Harmeet Dhillon.

But for both Swearengin and Peterson, distance from the party could prove to be an asset in a state that has largely favored Democrats for two decades.

Swearengin, the mayor of Fresno, said California "needs some independence when it comes to watching the treasury."

Swearengin has rebuffed Kashkari's efforts to campaign together and broken with him on his signature issue, the bullet train that Brown wants to build between Los Angeles and San Francisco. She supports the project as an economic boost for the Central Valley; Kashkari calls it "the crazy train."

The friction is also partly personal: Kashkari irked Swearengin by not giving her advance warning that he was going to spend a week posing as a homeless man in Fresno in an effort to spotlight poverty and joblessness on Brown's watch.

For his part, Peterson said he was declining to publicly back Kashkari because a secretary of state needs to run state elections in a nonpartisan fashion. He also suggested that Republicans should reclaim the progressive reform traditions of the Theodore Roosevelt era.

"I'm not running for a lifeboat," he said.

But befitting tradition, the convention, at a hotel near LAX, was dominated by the party's conservative wing. A tea party caucus ran a $10-a-ticket raffle for a shotgun. A person in a pink pig costume walked the corridors with a "No More Environmental Pork" sign in protest of Proposition 1, a $7.5-billion water bond measure.

…[P]arty leaders omitted Kashkari from a flier promoting the convention. It featured photos of Swearengin, Paul and U.S. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield). McCarthy was the headline speaker Saturday night; Kashkari was relegated to lower-profile proceedings Sunday morning.

"Hopefully you won't be too hung over, and you'll get up in the morning and come," Kashkari told a roomful of volunteers Saturday.

But the conflict among candidates marred the weekend. In his email, Nehring said it was impossible "to elevate the perception of the party while diminishing its top of the ticket."

"The party and its candidates rise together," he wrote. "Or in today's coverage, fall together."

Deigning to mention the non-event for the Washington Post, Philip Bump said the theme of the whole shebang was how to curtail the party's evaporation in the state. "Fifteen years ago, 35 percent of registered voters were Republican. Today, 28 percent are." With all the talk about how Republican racists can no longer win statewide elections, what goes unsaid is the danger some of the congressmen are in-- at least in a post-Steve Israel environment-- from the continuing deterioration of the Republican brand. Although Duncan Hunter, Doug LaMalfa, Tom McClintock, Paulk Cook, Kevin McCarthy, Devin Nunes, and probably Ken Calvert are in red enough/white enough districts to be safe for at least another few cycles, a competent DCCC chairman would have already put a multi-cycle plan together to defeat whichever Republican takes over for McKeon, as well as in swing districts represented by out-of-step politicians David Valadao (D+2), Jeff Denham (R+1), Darrell Issa (R+4), and Ed Royce (R+5) and soon after, Dana Rohrabacher (R+7) and Mimi Walters (R+7). Obama beat McCain in Issa's district, McKeon's district, Valadao's district (where he also beat Romney, 55-44%), and Denham's district (another one where he also beat Romney, 51-47%). It's only the sheer incompetence and corruption of Steve Israel and his floundering DCCC that is keeping these Republicans in office for another term-- despite the top of the state ticket.

By the way, Kashkari, who has already spent $2 million on his vanity campaign, wasn't even given a prime time speaking slot, speaking during the ill-attended hangover session on Sunday morning. And among other Republicans lining up to announce they would not endorse him, has the teabagger who opposed him in the primary, crackpot state Senator Tim Donnelly, a notorious racist:

Meet The Republican Wing Of The Democratic Party-- Still Undermining The Affordable Care Act

Far right extremist and anti-health care fanatic Bill Cassidy (R-LA) is running for Mary Landrieu's Senate seat. Yesterday his bill to allow substandard health insurance policies to be sold on the open market-- even if they are just scams that cheat consumers-- passed the Republican-controlled House 247-167. Every single Republican-- including the fake moderates-- voted for it… and they were joined by the usual suspects from the Democratic side of the Chamber. 25 Blue Dogs and New Dems from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party crossed the aisle and voted with the GOP.

Extremely corrupt New Dem Colleen Hanabusa, who had been trying to portray herself as a mainstream Democrat while she ran for the Senate, was defeated in that run and is now back to voting with the corporate shills against Democratic values and principles. A month ago she would have been a NO vote for sure. But yesterday, true to form, Hanabusa was back to voting with the greed-obsessed conservatives who are well taken care of by insurance companies and Big Pharma. Hanabusa will be out of Congress entirely come January. but you might want to study this list of the 25 Democrats eager to use the Affordable Care Act as an electoral punching bag just before the midterms-- just like a Republican:

• Ron Barber (BlueDog/New Dem-AZ)
• John Barrow (Blue Dog/New Dem-GA)
• Ami Bera (New Dem-CA)
• Julia Brownley (CA)
• Cheri Bustos (Blue Dog-IL)
• Bill Enyart (IL)
• Bill Foster (New Dem-IL)
• Pete Gallego (Blue Dog/New Dem-TX)
• Joe Garcia (New Dem-FL)
• Colleen Hanabusa (New Dem-HI)
• Ann Kuster (New Dem-NH)
• Dave Loebsack (IA)
• Dan Maffei (New Dem-NY)
• Sean Patrick Maloney (New Dem-NY)
• Jim Matheson (Blue Dog-UT)
• Mike McIntyre (Blue Dog/New Dem-NC)
• Patrick Murphy (New Dem-FL)
• Scott Peters (New Dem-CA)
• Gary Peters (New Dem-MI)
• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)
• Nick Rahall (Blue Dog-MN)
• Brad Schneider (New Dem-IL)
• Kyrsten Sinema (Blue Dog/New Dem-AZ)
• Filemon Vela (New Dem-TX)
• Tim Walz (MN)

The health insurance scams they were voting to legalize tend to be cut-rate junk plans that do not include coverage of maternity care, prescription drugs, outpatient services and lab services, leaving consumers up shit's creek without a paddle. The Senate is unlikely to even take the bill up-- unless Republicans take control in November-- and President Obama has already said he would veto the bill if it ever came to his desk.



Among Democrats who are embracing the optics of expanding-- rather than contracting-- healthcare are 5 Democrats running in highly competitive gubernatorial elections: Charlie Crist (FL), Mike Michaud (ME), Mary Burke (WI), Jason Carter (GA) and Paul Davis (KS).

Medicaid expansion is a core issue in Florida, where the state’s one-time Republican governor, Charlie Crist, is now running as a Democrat and embracing Obama as part of his campaign.

Crist has pledged to take every step to capture more Medicaid dollars, even threatening a budget line-item veto against the GOP-controlled legislature that’s already blocked a similar effort. Florida stands to gain $66.1 billion over 10 years with the expansion, which is expected to cost about $5.3 billion over that time, according to the Urban Institute.



The Democrat’s sharp position on expanding Medicaid has called attention to the changing stance of current Republican governor, Rick Scott.



Two years ago, Scott wrote in an op-ed that Medicaid expansion was “bad for states” because “we don't need the federal government telling us what to do when it comes to meeting the needs of the citizens of our states.”



With less than two months until the election, Scott now backs an expansion of Medicaid, at least for the first three years.



“I’m not going to stand in the way of the federal government doing something,” he told the Miami Herald last month.



Medicaid also has emerged as a centerpiece of this fall’s battle between Maine’s Republican governor, Paul LePage, and his Democratic opponent, Rep. Mike Michaud. 

Michaud, who voted to support ObamaCare in 2010, has pledged to expand Medicaid the first day he is sworn into office. LePage has already vetoed five different bills to expand Medicaid.



LePage now holds one of the lowest approval ratings of any governor in the country (41 percent), which a Michaud spokeswoman called proof that voters don’t back his approach to health care.



“The only thing stopping us from being able to expand access to care is one man-- Gov. LePage,” the Democratic candidate’s spokeswoman Lizzy Reinholt said. “There’s no doubt that Republicans have tried to message it in a way that makes folks less likely to support it. But at the same time, the facts are clear.”

  

If Maine moves forward with its expansion, it could accept $3.1 billion in federal dollars over the next decade, according to a report last month by the Urban Institute.

A wild card in the Maine race is an Independent candidate, Eliot Cutler, who some observers think could cost Michaud the race. Cutler has said he also supports expanding Medicaid for Maine residents.

Democrats are able to back expanding Medicaid because it is popular.

In fact, all 5 Democrats running hard on the issue, are polling ahead of their anti-health care Republican opponents.

The Moreland Commission Re-opens With A New Mandate

As corrupt as Chris Christie, Rick Perry, Scott Walker and Bob McDonnell

Our friends at the Accountability Project are about to launch an investigative news site looking into criminals that run rampant inside of our political system. Any day now. But, a staffer there, Cara Dee, put together a pre-launch satirical piece that, in the light of today's primary in New York, seems a complete match for DWT.

ALBANY, NY-- The independent commission that Gov Cuomo created to investigate and root out corruption reopened today with a new mandate to focus on the activities of 1011 named political actors. The list was pre approved by the Governor's office and excluded anyone who the Governor liked or who did business with any of the Governor's friends.

The Commission named former New York State Comptroller, Alan Hevesi as Chair. Former Governor Eliot Spitzer immediately tweeted that he was very disappointed that he was not chosen.

In a statement issued this morning, Chairman Hevesi said, “This makes our work much easier. By being able to focus only on individuals we know the Governor doesn't care about, we can ensure that we will do something meaningful about corruption and not get slowed down wasting time and resources by incorrectly focusing on the Governors friends, who are obviously not corrupt.”

23 members of the state legislature questioned why a number of indicted politicians and business people known widely for corrupt activities were not included on the list.

As a result, the list of 1,011 was expanded immediately to 1,034.

Governor Mario Cuomo remarked to TAP reporters, “While this new list might simplify things, it was really unnecessary. My son is always right. Which is exactly how I raised him.”

Many were surprised to find the names of former President Bill Clinton and Former First Lady, Senator and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on the list. Gov. Cuomo, when asked why they had been selected, replied, “That’s obvious.”

Commission members were selected on a number of independent criteria, including: 1) their support for Governor 2) their support for former Governor Mario Cuomo 3) their opposition of anyone named “Kennedy,” ever, regardless of whether persons named “Kennedy” were actually related to the Kennedy family or whether “Kennedy” was their first or last name.

Candidate for Lieutenant Governor, Kathleen Hochul, replied to press inquiries indicating that she had not yet received her statement from the Governor’s office but promised it would be forthcoming.

Hochul’s challenger, Tim Wu, called the Moreland list a sham and said that he and running mate, Zephyr Teachout had already compiled their own list with the unofficial help of the Working Families Party. The Working Families Party, through their for profit consulting arm, billed Teachout and Wu $1,379 for assembling the list.

One insider close to the activities of the former Moreland Commission complained that, “Everything was off to a good start until Commission members began having sex with members of the Governors office. Not that there’s anything wrong with sex.”

Editorial staff of the New York Times had prepared to comment on the newly formed Moreland Commission but decided that since their opinion was completely irrelevant to what the Governor actually chooses to do, decided instead to re-issue their endorsement of Tim Wu.

The Commission will be given an 18 month timeframe to complete its work by which time Cuomo figures that most New Yorkers will be too high to care or too impoverished from the loss of their life savings from the new casinos slated for development throughout New York State.

Cuomo continued, “My efforts to integrate drug dealers and legalize gambling are clear proof of my crusade against corruption.”

UPDATE: Cuomo/Hochul, Badly Damaged, Win In New York

Low-info Democrats renominated Andrew Cuomo with 62% of the vote. He spent $60.62 per vote he received-- and spent over 40 times more than his opponent, Zephyr Teachout, who took 35%. Cuomo's hand-picked conservative ex-lobbyist Lt Gov. pick, Kathy Hochul fared even worse against Tim Wu, beating him 60-40%. The corporate shill running for governor of Rhode Island, Gina Raimondo, won with 42%, Clay Pell spoiling progressive Angel Taveras' chance to win.

Although Cuomo won all the big Machine counties, where men in back rooms decide on the totals in advance, Teachout won 30 of New York's 62 counties, some in absolute wipeouts:

• Putnam- 53.5%
• Dutchess- 57.5%
• Ulster- 70.0%
• Sullivan- 67.6%
• Delaware- 63.3%
• Greene- 62.1%
• Columbia- 77.9%
• Rensselaer- 63.4%
• Albany- 61.9%
• Schoharie- 71.7%
• Washington- 63.8%
• Saratoga- 67.3%
• Fulton- 54.3%
• Montgomery- 54.5%
• Otsego- 72.7%
• Chenango- 49.9%
• Madison- 46.8%
• Cortland- 60.6%
• Tompkins- 70.9%
• Tioga- 49.7%
• Schuyler- 60.7%
• Yates- 61.5%
• Ontario- 50.8%
• Seneca- 56.3%
• Wayne- 49.1%
• Warren- 56.7%
• Hamilton- 51.7%
• Essex- 48.6%
• Clinton- 49.4%
• St Lawrence- 54.6%

Could November Prove To Be A Wipeout For Kansas Republican Extremists?

Kansas has been nearly a one party state for a very long time. Ravaged by the Republican Party's Great Depression, Kansans voted for Franklin Roosevelt in 1932 (against Hoover) and in 1936 (against Alf Landon, their former governor). After that they went back to their innate conservatism, backing Wendell Willkie against Roosevelt in 1940 and Thomas Dewey against Roosevelt in 1944. There have been 17 presidential elections since then and the only time Kansas voted for a Democrats was in 1964 when they backed LBJ over Goldwater 54.09- 45.06. In 2012 Kansas was one of the only states that failed to give President Obama even 40% of the vote, the rest being primarily bastions of vicious and sick racism. Since 1900 Kansas has elected exactly two Democrats, William Thompson in 1913 (one term) and George McGill in a 1930 special election to replace a Republican. who died in office. Chances are, the only Kansas senators you've ever known of were Republican James Pearson (1962-1978), Republican Bob Dole (1969-1996), Republican Nancy Kassebaum (1978-1997), Republican Sam Brownback (1996-2011), Republican Pat Roberts (current) and Republican Jerry Moran (current). No one imagined that in what's shaping up to be a very Republican year, Kansas might throw out the current Republican, a very senile 78 year old Pat Roberts. And not just Roberts. Kansans may not be ready to embrace Obama but the Koch-owned state has come to realize that the GOP has been absolutely toxic for them.

The state has a lopsided Republican legislature-- 31 Republicans and 9 Democrats in the state Senate and 90 Republicans and 35 Democrats in the House. And it's not all gerrymandering. 790,345 (44.6%) of the voters are registered Republicans and only 446,237 (25.2%) are Democrats-- significantly less than Independents. But then along came Governor Brownback to turn the state into a laboratory for crackpot, extreme right-wing theories.

Brownback's tax cut proposal came as Kansas's revenues were on an upswing. Spending cuts and a one-cent sales tax passed by Brownback's Democratic predecessor had combined with economic growth to give Kansas a surplus. Now, Brownback argued, his tax cuts would lead to even more success. "I firmly believe these reforms will set the stage for strong economic growth in Kansas," he said. The governor proposed to cut income taxes on the state's highest earners from 6.45 percent to 4.9 percent, to simplify tax brackets, and to eliminate state income taxes on most small business income entirely. In a nod to fiscal responsibility, though, he proposed to end several tax deductions and exemptions, including the well-liked home mortgage interest deduction. This would help pay for the cuts. Yet as the bill went through the state Senate, these deductions proved too popular, and legislators voted to keep them all. The bill's estimated price tag rose from about $105 million to $800 million, but Brownback kept supporting it anyway. "I'm gonna sign this bill, I'm excited about the prospects for it, and I'm very thankful for how God has blessed our state," he said.

Democrats, and some Republicans, weren't buying it. "It bankrupts the state within two years," said Rochelle Chronister, a former state GOP chair who helped organize moderate Republicans against Brownback's agenda. And the House Democratic leader, Paul Davis, laid down a marker. "There is no feasible way that private-sector growth can accommodate the price tag of this tax cut," he said. "Our $600 million surplus will become a $2.5 billion deficit within just five years." In return, Brownback's administration claimed the bill would create 23,000 jobs by 2020, and would lead 35,000 more people to move to Kansas.

After the cuts became law, it was undisputed that Kansas's revenue collections would fall. But some supply-side analysts, like economist Arthur Laffer, argued that increased economic growth would deliver more revenue that would help cushion this impact.

Yet it's now clear that the revenue shortfalls are much worse than expected. "State general fund revenue is down over $700 million from last year," Duane Goossen, a former state budget director, told me. "That's a bigger drop than the state had in the whole three years of the recession," he said-- and it's a huge chunk of the state's $6 billion budget. Goossen added that the Kansas's surplus, which had been replenished since the recession, "is now being spent at an alarming, amazing rate."

Kansas has to balance its budget every year, so when that surplus runs out, further spending cuts will be necessary. The declining revenues have necessitated extensive cuts in state education funding, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Moody's cut of the state's bond rating this May was another embarrassment. And the economic benefits Brownback promised haven't materialized either. Chris Ingraham wrote at Wonkblog that Kansas's job growth has lagged behind the rest of the country, "especially in the years following the first round of Brownback tax cuts."

…Brownback's approval rating has plummeted-- in a recent poll by PPP, his 33 percent was actually lower than Barack Obama's 34 percent approval. This is good news for state House Democratic leader Paul Davis, who announced his run for governor last September. "I'm profoundly troubled by the direction our state has been heading over the past three years," he said in his first campaign email. "The wealthiest and well connected have gotten all the breaks, and the Kansas economy feels broken." In the most recent poll of the race, Davis leads Brownback by 6 points.

Yesterday, the first public poll in Kansas was reported since Democrat Chad Taylor dropped out of the race, leaving Roberts to face Independent Greg Orman. The top 3 Republicans on the ballot, Pat Roberts, Sam Brownback and the neo-fascist Secretary of State Chris Kobach are all losing.

As of today, 09/08/14, about 7 in 10 Kansas likely voters are aware that Democrat Chad Taylor has withdrawn from the race, with a formal request that his name be taken off the ballot. About 6 in 10 Kansas likely voters are aware that Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, a Republican in his own tight-fight for re-election (more on that in a moment), has inserted himself into the fray and refuses to remove Democrat Taylor from the ballot. That creates a nightmare for state and national party officials, for Kansas voters, and for public opinion pollsters. At this hour, subject to possible lawsuits and back-room bargains which could further upend the race, Independent Greg Orman and Roberts are effectively tied, 37% for Orman, 36% for Roberts, 10% for Taylor, 6% for Libertarian Randall Batson. The exact wording of the question that SurveyUSA asked respondents is: "If there were an election for US Senate today, and Democrat Chad Taylor's name still appeared on the ballot even though he no longer wants to run, and the other names on the ballot were Republican Pat Roberts, Independent Greg Orman, and Libertarian Randall Batson, who would you vote for?" Orman gets 52% of the Democratic vote, 42% of the independent vote, and 26% of the Republican vote. Roberts holds 59% of the Republican base, and is backed by 11% of Democrats, and 16% of independents. Orman leads among the most educated voters and among the most affluent voters. The contest is effectively tied in Greater Wichita, and effectively tied in greater Kansas City KS. Orman has a slight lead in greater Topeka. Voters focused on the economy back Orman over Roberts 3:2. Voters focused on Obamacare back Roberts over Orman 2:1.

…Kobach's insertion into the Senate contest did nothing, at first blush, to help his own campaign for re-election. 2 weeks ago, KSN-TV and SurveyUSA had Kobach tied with Democratic challenger Jean Schodorf. Today, the contest is still within the theoretical margin of sampling error, but Schodorf now has a nominal 3-point advantage, 46% to 43%. Men don't take kindly to Kobach's interference. 2 weeks ago, Kobach had led by 10 among male likely voters, now by 3. And residents of greater Kansas City KS don't take kindly to Kobach either. In that part of the state, Kobach had been tied with Schodorf, but today the Democrat Schodorf leads by 7.

…Sitting on the sidelines, ostensibly minding his own business, is incumbent Republican Governor Sam Brownback. Brownback could fairly be accused of being, in a "wave-election" year when Republicans are expected to win statehouse and congressional contests coast-to-coast, the falling tide that is sinking all Kansas Republican boats. Brownback was already in trouble long before anyone was worried about Roberts and long before anyone outside of Kansas knew Kobach's name. Now, Brownback is staring at basically the same "upside-down" numbers that he howled about when SurveyUSA released them 2 weeks ago. Today, Brownback is down 7 points to Democratic challenger Paul Davis. The Democratic ticket of Davis and Jill Docking gets 47% today, the Republican ticket of Brownback and Lt. Gov Jeff Colyer gets 40%… Brownback holds 66% of the Republican base and 74% of the conservative vote. Brownback is down 22 points among independents and down 47 points among moderates.

Is Tomorrow's Primary In New York Important At All?

Tomorrow is election day in New York. Reform-minded Democrats are threatening to do the impossible: upend the career of a very powerful conservative Governor, Andrew Cuomo but defeating him and his handpicked right-wing candidate for Lieutenant Gov., banking lobbyist Kathy Hochul. Cuomo-Hochul represent all the worst of an Establishment that has treated the public with disdain and contempt. Predictably, Hillary Clinton is campaigning on their behalf-- making it clear once again that she's, first and foremost every bit as much a servant of Wall Street and Big Business as any Republican hack. It's remarkable that Cuomo/Hochul can hope to get any votes beyond the 1% who they represent and serve. Not even the NY Times could muster the intestinal fortitude and hubris it would have taken to endorse either of them.

Over the weekend, distinguished MIT Economist and Elizabeth Warren economic advisor Simon Johnson, a member of the FDIC’s Systemic Resolution Advisory Committee, and a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington, endorsed Zephyr Teachout, the progressive alternative to Cuomo. "Zephyr Teachout," he wrote, "is a compelling candidate for governor of New York. She understands how corporate capture has taken over too many of our political institutions-- and she has a very real and sensible agenda that would make a difference. She represents for New York exactly the same kind of opportunity that Elizabeth Warren offered-- and was taken up on by-- Massachusetts. Stop complaining and vote for Zephyr Teachout."

This past week, economics Nobel laureate and the former chairman of Bill Clinton's Council of Economic Advisers, Joe Stiglitz explained, once again, how capitalism as a system has been gamed, perverted and twisted out of shape for the benefit of an out-of-control plutocracy. Capital in the Twenty-First Century by Thomas Picketty has done so well-- and aroused the hysterical and impassioned animus of the far right so quickly-- because, he claims, it "lends further weight to the already overwhelming body of evidence concerning the soaring share of income and wealth at the very top." Much to the chagrin of the pet intellectuals employed by the plutocrats, Picketty's book "sheds new light on the 'reforms' sold by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s as growth enhancers from which all would benefit. Their reforms were followed by slower growth and heightened global instability, and what growth did occur benefited mostly those at the top."

[T]he increase in measured wealth does not correspond to an increase in productive capital-- and the data seem consistent with this interpretation. Much of the increase in wealth stemmed from an increase in the value of real estate. Before the 2008 financial crisis, a real-estate bubble was evident in many countries; even now, there may not have been a full "correction." The rise in value also can represent competition among the rich for "positional" goods-- a house on the beach or an apartment on New York City’s Fifth Avenue.

Sometimes an increase in measured financial wealth corresponds to little more than a shift from "unmeasured" wealth to measured wealth-- shifts that can actually reflect deterioration in overall economic performance. If monopoly power increases, or firms (like banks) develop better methods of exploiting ordinary consumers, it will show up as higher profits and, when capitalized, as an increase in financial wealth.

But when this happens, of course, societal wellbeing and economic efficiency fall, even as officially measured wealth rises. We simply do not take into account the corresponding diminution of the value of human capital-- the wealth of workers.

Moreover, if banks succeed in using their political influence to socialize losses and retain more and more of their ill-gotten gains, the measured wealth in the financial sector increases. We do not measure the corresponding diminution of taxpayers’ wealth. Likewise, if corporations convince the government to overpay for their products (as the major drug companies have succeeded in doing), or are given access to public resources at below-market prices (as mining companies have succeeded in doing), reported financial wealth increases, though the wealth of ordinary citizens does not.

What we have been observing-- wage stagnation and rising inequality, even as wealth increases-- does not reflect the workings of a normal market economy, but of what I call “ersatz capitalism.” The problem may not be with how markets should or do work, but with our political system, which has failed to ensure that markets are competitive, and has designed rules that sustain distorted markets in which corporations and the rich can (and unfortunately do) exploit everyone else.

Markets, of course, do not exist in a vacuum. There have to be rules of the game, and these are established through political processes. High levels of economic inequality in countries like the US and, increasingly, those that have followed its economic model, lead to political inequality. In such a system, opportunities for economic advancement become unequal as well, reinforcing low levels of social mobility.

Thus, Piketty’s forecast of still higher levels of inequality does not reflect the inexorable laws of economics. Simple changes-- including higher capital-gains and inheritance taxes, greater spending to broaden access to education, rigorous enforcement of anti-trust laws, corporate-governance reforms that circumscribe executive pay, and financial regulations that rein in banks’ ability to exploit the rest of society-- would reduce inequality and increase equality of opportunity markedly.

If we get the rules of the game right, we might even be able to restore the rapid and shared economic growth that characterized the middle-class societies of the mid-twentieth century. The main question confronting us today is not really about capital in the twenty-first century. It is about democracy in the twenty-first century.

There's a lot more at stake in Tuesday's New York primary than the mass media deigns to cover. And, clearly, Andrew Cuomo and Kathy Hochul are not on the side of the voters who are being asked to promote the careers each has developed in service to the hedge fund managers and financial manipulators of the ersatz capitalism Stiglitz is warning us about. Blue America endorsed Teachout/Wu because they will not be serving the special interests behind Andrew Cuomo and Kathy Hochul, special interests once traditionally assumed to be associated with the Republican Party, rather than the Democratic Party. It's why we talk so much here about the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, the Andrew Cuomo/Kathy Hochul wing. If you're a New York Democrat planning to vote tomorrow, just remember that the $87,000 legalistic bribe David Koch, of the notorious Koch brothers, gave Andrew Cuomo in 2011 did not come without strings attached-- strings around the necks of your children and grandchildren.