The NRCC Is Dishonoring The Memory Of John McCain Already

MI-08 is an iffy seat for a Democrat to win without a wave. But this cycle there is a wave. The R+4 district includes Democratic Ingraham County (Lansing), Republican Livingston County and then red parts of Oakland County. in the suburbs north of Detroit. Although Obama won the district in 2008, Romney took it in 2012 and Trump beat Hillary 50.6% to 43.9%. The incumbent, Mike Bishop, was majority leader of the Michigan state Senate but has been a hapless, anonymous backbencher in Congress, a Trump rubber-stamp and enabler. His Trump affinity score is an eye-popping 97.8%, way out of synch with his district. The 538 website shows a pretty classic toss-up, forecasting Bishop will get 48.8% of the votes against 48.2% for Elissa Slotkin, a conservative New Dem.

As of the July 18 FEC reporting deadline in Michigan, Slotkin was doing far better than Bishop in the money race. She had raised $3,022,226, spent $644,848 and was sitting on $2,377,378. Bishop had only raised $2,187,217 ($1,444,121 from PACs), spent $581,498 and had just $1,706,307 left on hand. At that time, Paul Ryan's sleaze SuperPAC hadn't really begun to spend much on him; they're just getting started and will more than make up for her fundraising advantage. The ad up top, though, was paid for by the NRCC.

The DCCC recruited Slotkin because they had a theory that it would be advantageous to run hawkish, conservative women with military and intelligence backgrounds. She's a former Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense. She worked in both Democratic and Republican administrations-- she just picked up endorsements from 3 big name GOP military industrial complex types (Chuck Hagel, John Negroponte and Stephen Hadley)-- in the CIA, primarily on Middle East matters. Judging by her website, she has nothing to offer MI-08 voters (except her interesting biography). On the issues that are motivating voters? Crickets... except her claim that she'll take "a common sense approach." She's as terrible a candidate as the DCCC routinely spits out and her only chance to win is if the anti-red wave sweeps Bishop away for her. It's a classic lesser of two evil race. She put out a strong TV today-- but it would be stronger if she supported Medicare-for-All.



Back to the anti-Slotkin ad up top, for a moment though, the one made and put on TV by the NRCC. John McCain's family isn't pleased that the NRCC used him in it. A family spokesperson told NBC News that "the McCain family believes it's unfortunate that the senator's image is being weaponized this election season. They hope that there would be more respect, especially so soon after his passing." Nor is it just the Michigan ad that they're pissed off about.

Here's another one the NRCC is running against another shitty DCCC candidate, New Dem Ann Kirkpatrick. The McCain part of the ad was from when he and she were locked in a U.S. Senate battle 2 years ago.



The NRCC is refusing to take either ad down, despitee the McCain family's requests. The chances of their weak candidate beating Kirkpatrick as the anti-red wave sweeps over Arizona is practically zero. Actually it's 1 in 15, not a very good bet for the NRCC-- and a stupid waste of money when they're already using triage to write off incumbents an other weak challengers in open seats like AZ-02.

Did you watch Samantha Bee talking about how the GOP uses gerrymandering and other techniques to win elections even when they get fewer votes? If you appreciate her style of comedy (I do), it's worth taking a look:

Have You Voted Today?

Hundreds of thousands of dollars-- certainly well over a million by this morning-- have gushed into the FL-09 Democratic primary from conservative billionaires-- primary from the Murdoch family and assorted Wall Street banksters. The money is laundered through a network of slimy SuperPACs controlled by Nancy Jacobson's No Labels and has gone entirely to smear progressive icon Alan Grayson. The goal is to keep conservative New Dem, Darren Soto, in Congress. Why? Watch the video up top? That's the big prize for No Labels and their financiers... phasing out Social Security and Medicare. The other primary today where No Labels is financing attacks against a progressive to bolster a right wing Democrat is in Tucson (AZ-02), where conservatives are trying to get another New Dem, Ann Kirkpatrick, back into Congress. So the smear machine-- operated by both No Labels and EMILY's List-- has been working overtime against progressive Democrat Matt Heinz.

With that much right-wing interest in Democratic primaries, you've got to think those are the two most important congressional races in the country today. And they are:

• FL-09- Alan Grayson
• AZ-02- Matt Heinz

Are there other races important for progressives today? Oh yes. Let's start in Florida and work our way west. The biggest news story in Florida is the gubernatorial race. On the Republican side 2 conservatives are battling it out-- establishment Howdy Doody character, Adam Putnam, who was the front-runner, and a neo-fascist, Trump-backed congressman: Ron DeSantis, the current front-runner after multiple Trump endorsements. DeSantis would probably be a gift for Democrats since he is so far right that independent voters will probably not vote for him in November-- and independents decide who wins in Florida statewide races.

On the Democratic side, we've endorsed Tallahassee mayor Andrew Gillum, the progressive in the race. His two right-of-center opponents, an ex-governor's daughter and failed one-term Blue Dog congresswoman Gwen Graham and wealthy former Miami Beach mayor Philip Levine, are favored by the Democratic establishment. Although insipid Republican-lite candidates like Graham and Levine keep losing in Florida, the hope of the establishment is that the wave would drag either of these worthless candidates to victory. With Jeff Greene all but withdrawn from the race, Gillum is the only candidate representing the Eleanor and Franklin wing of the party-- or what you could call, the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. Graham and Levine are the kind of careerist characters who define the Republican wing of the party.

Aside from the Grayson-Soto race, progressives should be looking at the open seat in FL-15, where Dennis Ross is retiring. The district includes Tampa suburbs and agricultural parts of Polk County. Trump beat Hillary there by 10 points (53-43%) and the PVI is R+6. There are two Democrats running today, a conservative EMILY's List attorney, Kristen Carlson, a real nothing-burger, and a progressive Navy Vet, Andrew Learned, who backs Medicare-For-All. Carlson is Republican-lite candidate who doesn't.

With Ileana Ros-Lehtinen retiring, FL-27 in Miami is another open seat and a near-certain Democratic pick-up. Hillary trounced Trump by 20 points-- 59-39% and the PVI is listed as D+5 by is effectively D+7 (Cook is slow). Of the 3 top candidates, the front-runner is elderly establishment status quo rich person, Donna Shalala, terrible candidate. There are two progressives, state Rep. David Richardson and former Miami Herald reporter Matt Haggman. Haggman would make the best member if Congress of the three. Yesterday, the Tampa Bay Times reported that "fired-up Democrats flocked to early voting sites over the weekend to give the party an early voting advantage over Republicans and close the gap in turnout between the parties two days before election day." Today, polls in Florida are open from 7am 'til 7pm.

In Oklahoma there's a run-off in the 5th district (Oklahoma City) between a pointless establishment hack, Kendra Horn, and a dedicated progressive and Berniecrat, Tom Guild (endorsed by Blue America). The winner faces far right congressman Steve Russell in November. Electing Republican-lite Horn is the same as handing Russell reelection.

And now Arizona. Republican Doug Ducey is seeking reelection. There are 3 Democrats vying for a chance to defeat him-- former Department of Education official David Garcia, the progressive in the race, plus state Sen. Steve Farley and a YMCA employee named Kelly Fryer. Garcia is polling well and is the only chance the Democrats have to take out Ducey.

The race to replace Jeff Flake in the Senate will be between very right-wing Blue Dog Kyrsten Sinema, a corrupt, pretend Democrat who is ahead in the polls, and one of 3 Republicans, mainstream conservative congresswoman Martha McSally, the establishment pick and two extremist lunatics, Kelli Ward, and controversial ex-Sheriff Joe Arpaio. McConnell has persuaded Trump not to endorse either of the two Trumpists and just keep his mouth shut so McSally can win the primary since she's seen as the only chance the GOP will have to defeat Sinema.

There are really no exciting House primaries in Arizona other than the one in Tucson pitting the very conservative carpetbagger Kirkpatrick against local progressive doctor, Matt Heinz. Aside from the GOP billionaires and EMILY's List pumping money into the race smearing Heinz, the DCCC is also backing Kirkpatrick. Polling shows Heinz ahead, in large part because of Kirkpatrick's record as a die-hard NRA supporter, an opponent of Wall Street reform-- she voted with the GOP against Dodd-Frank-- and because of her support, along with the Republicans, to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.

There's A Big Primary In The Tucson Area Tomorrow-- And it Could Be Waterloo For Another DCCC Candidate

The DCCC didn't have the decency wait for local Democratic voters to pick a candidate to run for the AZ-02 nomination. They just barreled in and endorsed-- and spent tons of money on-- the most conservative of the 7 Democrats in the race, Ann Kirkpatrick. Kirpatrick isn't from southern Arizona but she "moved" down to Tucson-- if she even did (she seems to live in Phoenix and just goes down to Tucson to visit her grandchildren and to campaign)-- to get back into Congress.

The 2 most recent polls-- one done for Kirkpatrick's campaign and one done for Matt Heinz's campaign-- both show Heinz slightly ahead, although a source inside the DCCC told me their own poll shows Heinz beating their candidate by 5 points. She's outspent him two-to-one and money has poured into the district, not just from the DCCC, mostly to introduce her to the locals, but from the contemptible No Labels network of dirty money SuperPACs funded by conservative billionaires (particularly the Murdoch family.) Why would wealthy Republicans be spending so much money in a Democratic primary?

Easy: whichever Democrat wins the primary is going to be the next AZ-02 member of Congress. The day Martha McSally announced she was running for the seat, Paul Ryan's SuperPAC folded up it's tent, shut down the Tucson campaign office and snuck out of town in the dead of night. They know very well that Republican Lea Marquez Peterson isn't going to win. She's not just like Trump policy-wise; she's brags incessantly about what a great businesswoman she is-- the way he did-- and then ignores questions about her gigantic bankruptcy-- like he did. Knowing that a Democrat has a 90% chance, Republican donors looked at Kirkpatrick's record and Heinz's record; it was no contest. Kirkpatrick is the best Republican running in the AZ-02 Democratic primary.

Matt Heinz is a progressive. Kirkpatrick, a New Dem, was an NRA star-- who publicly boasted she would protect them from Obama and who got an "A" rating from them. (As part of her campaign of lies and deception, she and her unscrupulous allies have been sending out mailers calling Heinz the NRA candidate to confuse voters. But that isn't the real reason why she's getting so much money from rich Republican contributors. What the Murdochs and their pals are most excited about is that Kirkpatrick voted with the GOP against Wall Street reform (Dodd-Frank), with the GOP on extending the Bush tax cuts, with the GOP on turning Medicare into a voucher program and, in general, voting with the GOP far more frequently than most Democrats. If you can't get a real Republican, you go for someone from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. And that's Ann Kirkpatrick... always has been; always will be.

Her GOP allies are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars smearing Heinz. She has been moaning that Heinz's policy-oriented compare-and-contrast ads are "negative" but her negative mailers-- 3 on Friday alone-- are part of a tidal wave of slime and negativity. One of Politico's worst fools, Elena Schneider, wrote a lazy, misleading piece yesterday that doesn't even mention that Kirkpatrick is getting help from billionaire Republicans, like the Murdochs (which you'd think her editor and readers might be confused about). She also seems to have not bothered to explain where the negativity started in this race. Schneider also kept hammering home that Kirkpatrick, an arch conservative, is "a moderate." The word "moderate" is the most admired political description in U.S. politics. The opposite of "moderate" is what... radical? extremist? fanatical? What? Matt Heinz's policy agenda is in tune with what Americans want-- nice and moderate. Ann Kirkpatrick is way to the right of what Americans want-- positions so so conservative that the Murdochs and their Wall Street allies are bankrolling her (ironically, along with the DCCC-- yes, strange bed-fellows indeed). Elena needs to go back for some emergency journalism courses... stat.

How much like a Republican does she sound, especially at the end of this video where she brags about her "A" from the NRA? In fact this is how she greeted the NRA when they held their convention in Phoenix. "I am not going to allow Washington to ignore the values of Arizonans' and the traditions of four generations of my family in District One, and I am proud to be pushing back against the federal government to stop our Constitutional rights from being infringed. Every time the anti-gun rights groups propose legislation that restricts our freedoms, I am going to make sure they know millions of Americans will fight them every inch of the way." (And she lies right to the voters and says Heinz is the NRA candidate!) Don't forget to vote tomorrow. Washington is already too full of politicians just like Ann Kirkpatrick.

Conservative Billionaires Think They Can Buy Democratic Primaries-- Can They?

The day after the New York congressional primaries, geniuses in the mass media, including in New York City, were running around asking how Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez spells her name. They missed the boat on that one-- missed it entirely. Now they're missing the boat on another big story-- that Republican billionaires are spending heavily in Democratic primaries. They want to pick the Democratic nominees, just the way they pick the Republican nominees. I sent one of the smartest mainstream media guys a tip-off about it. His response was "hey man, will def take a look and give it some thought! maybe not today, buried. but this week. will be in touch." Let's see, that was on August 8 so it's no longer "this week," nor even the week after.

The money is being funneled into Democratic primaries by one of the shadiest conservative operatives in American politics, Nancy Jacobson who controls a network of SuperPACs through her No Labels/Problem Solvers outfits. I first noticed when she was up to when she dumped a ton of last minute sewer money into the IL-03 race pitting progressive Marie Newman against right-wing Blue Dog Dan Lipinski. Marie was winning the race when a tidal wave of Jacobson slime flooded the district, one smear after another. In the end all the No Labels garbage ads saved Lipinski's neck. He beat Newman 48,675 (51.1%) to 46,530 (48.9%). Who put up the millions of dollars for a Democratic primary? Republicans and conservative Democrats. One name I noticed today was in a letter from progressive candidate for Rhode Island Lt. Governor, Aaron Regunberg, running against a conservative Republican with a "D" next to his name, Dan McKee (who took $150,000 from the Walton family and from Jonathan Sackler, the big Bobby Jindal and Joe Lieberman financial backer and the pharmaceutical billionaire behind the nation’s OxyContin crisis. The name I recognized from the Wall Sreet billionaire campaign to save Lipinski was Tony Davis, a Rahm Emanuel ally who founded and is president of Linden Capital Partners. He just dumped $50,000 into the relatively low-profile Rhode Island race.

"We think," wrote Regunberg, "this is just the beginning of the corporate dark money coming into our state to support Dan McKee... I’m proud to run a campaign that doesn’t take money from Wall Street, corporate PACs, fossil fuel interests, drug manufacturers or the gun lobby. We don’t have out-of-state millionaires and billionaires, because we have something more powerful-- the people. And in a fight with Big Money, the people can win."

I hope he's right because billionaire Republicans are spending big to defeat progressive Democrats in every part of the country. And that trend is accelerating right now. James Rupert Murdoch-- yeah, the Fox guy-- gave Jacobson SuperPACs to support conservative Democrat Darren Soto against Alan Grayson in their primary. Jacobson is also spending dark money in favor of Arizona conservative Democrat Ann Kirkpatrick in her primary against Matt Heinz. Sad Horrifying that the DCCC and EMILY's List and the Republican billionaires-- including James Murdoch-- behind the Progress Tomorrow right-wing PAC, are all spending money against the progressive in the Tucson primary, Matt Heinz, and trying to bolster Kirkpatrick. So far they've spent half a million dollars to make sure the Democratic nominee is a conservative. Ironically, the ugliest and most vicious and untruthful of all the ads are from EMILY's List, a group that never used to but now absolutely hates progressive men even more than the DCCC or the GOP does.

Jacobson's web of sleazoid SuperPACs include innocuous-sounding outfits like United for Progress, United Together, Forward Not Back, Progress Tomorrow, Patriotic Americans PAC, Citizens for a Strong America, etc, but they are entirely funded by contributions from 5 and 6-figure right wing donors, such as Rupert Murdoch and his son, Chicago White Sox and Bulls owner Jerry Reinsdorf, hedge fund manager Louis Bacon, former Major League Baseball Commissioner Allan Selig and Wheels Inc. executive Jim Frank. As of Friday they had poured almost $600,000 into the smear campaign against Grayson. Jacobson has already lost in primary races for right-wing Democrats John Morganelli (PA) against Susan Wild (PA) and against Debra Haaland for No Labels DINO, Damon Martinez in Albuquerque.

Darren Soto is exactly the kind of fake Democrat Jacobson, the Murdochs and other GOP billionaires want to see beat progressives like Grayson. Soto voted to prosecute all abortions as murder and voted to force women who want an abortion to undergo a humiliating procedure called "transvaginal ultrasound." Since being primaried by Grayson he's been apologizing for those votes, saying he "made a mistake." He hasn't apologized for the votes that earned him "A" ratings from the NRA-- twice. And because of those hair-raising votes, the NRA endorsed him. He voted for Trump-sponsored laws 58 times in Congress and both times impeaching Trump came up in Congress, Soto voted NO. The reason No Labels is so enthusiastic about him is because he has said that he is "open-minded" about phasing out Social Security benefits or eliminating them altogether, No Labels' top issue.

Meanwhile, Soto is one of Congress' most corrupt Democrats, well known for partying with lobbyists, spending taxpayer money and campaign money illegally on personal items for himself and his wife. He has even accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign support from Trump’s Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and her charter school allies. Generally speaking he's been a big waste of a solidly blue seat in Congress, accomplishing nothing for anyone... but himself. That compares badly with Grayson's record:

During a debate with Grayson two weeks ago, Soto claimed "to be a great champion of women’s rights," a lie Grayson directly challenged, bringing up the specifics of Soto's shameful voting record-- like voting twice to criminalize abortion so that doctors could be charged with murder for performing one. Soto had no answer... except to say he regrets those votes. He doesn't regret them enough to turn down the help he's getting now from the anti-Choice extremists who are flooding central Florida with lies against Grayson and nonsensical assertions of Soto's grandeur.

Blue America members have been helping Grayson with his election campaigns since 2006. And he's never let us down-- always one of the 2 or 3 best members of Congress and living up to his promises. He needs us again now. The primary is August 28 and he really needs to get on the air and respond to the lies Jacobson and Murdock are flooding TV and radio with. Please consider contributing what you can by clicking on the Blue America 2018 congressional elections thermometer on the right. As of yesterday another dark money PAC had bought ads on one of the big Spanish language radio stations-- one ad every hour until election day! That's called brain-washing. It's what fascists do; it's what Republicans do. Republican billionaires know their party is going to lose control of Congress in November. So they are working to defeat progressives and make certain friendly conservative DINOs become the nominees of the Democratic Party. We can't let this happen. It's our party, not theirs.

The Sludge Known As Conventional Wisdom-- From Bulgaria To The Cook Report

After college, I spent a couple years on the "Hippie Trail," the overland route from London to New Delhi and Kathmandu. There were places, primarily in western Turkey and eastern Iran where the idea of "road" was theoretical. But overall, a few hundred of us made it through every year from the late '50s into the mid '70s. Someone's coming over either this weekend or next weekend or soon-- I forgot to write it in my calendar-- to film me for a documentary biopic. I think this Hippie Trail stuff is mostly what the producer is interested in. So I've been thinking about it lately. The 2 years were fundamental to everything that has happened to me in the ensuing 5 decades. One lesson I learned early on-- first in Bulgaria and quickly confirmed in Turkey-- was about conventional wisdom. Forget it. It's not ever where you want to start.

One of my traveling companions was a hitchhiker, Joël, I picked up outside of Niš, then the biggest town in eastern Yugoslavia on the road to Sofia, now the third largest city in Serbia. Joël was following his older brother-- who had been back and forth a couple of times and was now in Kathmandu. So Joël had a lot of useful info about what was before us. But he also had, as it turned out a lot of useless conventional wisdom. Just because it was hippie convention wisdom, it wasn't any more accurate. "Let's just skip Bulgaria," was his advise. "Take the A1 straight to Svilengrad on to Edirne and into Istanbul... There's nothing in Bulgaria."

I thought that was strange. But it was absolutely conventional wisdom for the Hippie Trail: there's nothing in Bulgaria. I didn't come all the way from New York to not see places. It was my VW van and anyone was free to offer their advice, but I was the captain of the ship. A few miles outside of Plovdiv, the A1 offers you a choice, the southeast A1 goes to Turkey and the northeast A1 goes Burgas on the Black Sea. A lot of grumbling from the peanut gallery when I headed off to the Black Sea. I spent a couple fantastic weeks between Burgas and Varna with some kids my age I met in Burgas. We were a novelty and everyone wanted to meet us. There were no tourists back then. Everyone was on their way to Istanbul. But this was a beautiful, friendly area and we stayed at communal farms and in small towns and it was a great trip. The fruits and vegetables we were given by farmers lasted us through Turley, Iran and into Afghanistan. Conventional wisdom was wrong, wrong, wrong. But I didn't know it yet.

A couple of days ago I was having an endless kerfuffle with Google's advertising department. You know how hard Google makes it to speak to an actual human being on the phone? And when you finally break through it's invariably someone in India who can't help unless they can put you in a predetermined box. However... eventually I wound up with someone in Boulder. He solved the problem and it only took 3 days. He was 25 and his grandmother had once taken the family on a Mediterranean cruise that had included Istanbul, which he loved. Something we had in common. Istanbul in 1969, my first time there, and 2012, when he went is pretty different, But we were both attracted to the same part of town, Sultanahmet-- which includes the Grand Bazaar, the Blue Mosque, Hagia Sohia and Topkapi Palace. I told him to watch Midnight Express, a film made in 1978 about what happened in 1969. I was there-- in the Pudding Shop-- when it happened.



Part of conventional wisdom was that the Sultanahmet area of Turkey was fabulous and cool but that the rest of Turkey was horrible and should be gotten through as fast as Bulgaria. As usual-- ass-backwards. Imagine you're from Europe and you go to America... but never get beyond, say Times Square. And then say "America sucks." Like Times Square at the time, Sultanahmet-- and the Pudding Shop in particular-- was a place where hippies came to buy hash, where crooks came to rip off hippies and where the cops came to extort or arrest everyone.

That's when it finally added up to me. I realized how Sultanahmet was the worst place in Turkey to be-- it's gentrified and fine now-- and how every other place in Turkey was way better. I loved Turkey. I've been back a dozen times-- sans conventional wisdom.

I could write about Turkey for hours but I've done that for my travel blog and when I started writing today it was supposed to be about political conventional wisdom. So... let me get into that. Political conventional wisdom is created by the party committees-- like the NRCC and the DCCC-- feeding their versions of reality to David Wasserman at Cook. It gets worse from there, especially when the mainstream media starts regurgitating it as wisdom handed down from on high. The DCCC and David Wasserman are why Alexandria Ocasio's race came as such a surprise to everyone-- even to lunkheads like Joe Crowley, Ben Ray Lujan, Ann Kuster and Nancy Pelosi. Those 4 were charged with keeping Crowley in his seat but now of them knew this young woman who wasn't born when he first started "winning" elections had already eviscerated him. And if they didn't know-- believe me, David Wasserman didn't know. Didn't know, as in "never heard of." Is the Bronx north of Queens or is Queens on Long Island. NY-14, why I we never heard of that before?

Yesterday, Wasserman defined the big anti-red wave that's headed to DC by prognosticating that "Democrats remain substantial favorites for House control." You think? "A"-- at least he was smart enough not to say "the"-- big reason: Republicans are defending 42 open or vacant seats, a record since at least 1930. The retirements of Speaker Paul Ryan (WI-01), as well as powerful committee chairs like Reps. Ed Royce (CA-39) and Rodney Frelinghuysen (NJ-11) and popular moderates like Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-27) and Frank LoBiondo (NJ-02), have given Democrats stellar pickup opportunities." No mention of why these gents and Ileans are retiring. Just a coincidence. Ryan's seat was already lost before he "decided." So was Royce's, LoBiondo's Ros Lehtinen's and, probably, Frelinghuysen's.

Wasserman would rather talk about hocus pocus-- like historical trends and fundraising. "Of Republicans' 42 incumbent-less seats, eight are in districts that voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, and an additional 13 are in districts where President Trump received less than 55 percent. History is working against the GOP in many of those seats: we found that since 1992, in situations when a president's party was stuck defending an open seat two years after the president failed to carry it, that party has batted zero for 23 keeping it in their column."

He's caught on to the Blue Wave-- just when smarter people have realized what's happening is more an anti-red wave than an actual blue wave. He'll get there... by January.

To some extent, the focus on a "blue wave" has overshadowed an equally important 2018 trend: the steady purge of Trump skeptics from the congressional GOP. Retirements are the single biggest factor, but so are GOP primaries. Not only did Rep. Mark Sanford (SC-01) lose his, but loyalty to the president has emerged as the dominant theme in primaries for dozens of safely GOP open seats. November losses promise to further thin the moderate herd.

Fundraising deficits are a growing GOP problem: in 20 of the 42 seats, the leading Democrat raised more than the leading Republican between April and June, including in seven of eight Clinton-carried districts (Rep. Dave Reichert's open WA-08 was the only exception) and 13 of 34 Trump-carried seats. That's especially problematic because the NRCC and Congressional Leadership Fund are already stuck defending dozens of vulnerable incumbents.

The most immediate open seat test is the August 7 special election in Ohio's 12th CD, north of Columbus. It's in the Toss Up column, and if Democrat Danny O'Connor defeats Republican Troy Balderson in a seat Trump carried by 11 points in 2016 (R+7 PVI), it would be another piece of evidence that Democrats are pushing the House battleground deeper into Trump territory.

Funniest lines in Wasserman's reports:

Unabashed

Talking about AZ-02 and carpetbagger Ann Kirkpatrick, one of the most far right Democrats running anywhere: "Kirkpatrick is an unabashed liberal, who proudly voted for Nancy Pelosi and Obamacare, and she's running with the support of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly." Only in DC would anyone define "unabashed liberal" as someone who "proudly voted for Nancy Pelosi." Certainly in 2002. But in 2018? Uh... no. Obamacare? Kirkpatrick broke ranks with the Democrats and voted with the GOP to kill it, which is why she lost her seat and then lost a Senate race. And support from Gabby Giffords? I'm sorry Gabby got shot but she was a right-of-center Blue Dog before that tragic incident and to this day always bends over backwards to support right-of-center Democrats from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, not progressives. Do "unabashed liberals" have A+ ratings from the NRA? How about being the only AZ-02 candidate to support ICE? Is that what Wasserman meant? Dave... today we use Medicare-For-All, Job Guarantee, free state universities, green energy transition, living wage... to define "unabashed liberals." It's 2018; you should give it a try. It won't hurt you.

His column is filled with DCCC/NRCC junk. Kansas-- Bernie and Alexandria were just in Wichita and Kansas City campaigning for James Thompson and Brent Welder, progressives who have caught fire. Wasserman instead sticks to the DCCC script, promoting the race with the DCCC's vomitous GOP-lite Blue Dog, Blue Dog instead. Wisconsin-01... maybe he was taking a crap and someone from the NRCC logged onto his computer and wrote that section of his post. Sure sounds like that. Anyway... warning about Wasserman: conventional wisdom is junk, whether if it's about Bulgaria or congressional politics.

Ann Kirkpatrick Sucks-- And She Has Always Sucked... Which Is Why Fox News Loves Her

We've been writing about Arizona New Dem Ann Kirkpatrick for years-- here are some of the most recent. She's awful and always has been. So while everyone has been talking about how Fox and Friends accidentally put a real Democrat on the air, Barbara L'Italien by accident, I want to make sure people know why Fox and Friends recognized Kirkpatrick as a friend and how eager they were to get her on the air to bash Democratic values.

First as couple off words about Massachusetts state Senator Barbara L'Italien, a candidate for Congress in the open-- and very crowded-- Niki Tsongas seat, which stretches along the northern border of the state from Haverhill, Lawrence, Andover and Lowell through Groten Acton and Concord out to Fitchburg and Winchendon. The PVI is D+9 andTrump only took 35% of the vote there. Of the 14 Democrats vying to replace Tsongas, 3 have significantly outraised L'Italien ($701,881)-- Dan Koh ($2,989,826), Rufus Gifford ($1,343,897) and Lori Trahan ($1,133,585). Whichever Democrat wins the September 4 primary might as well start packing for Congress September 5.

Monday morning Fox and Friends called the L'Italien campaign by accident, looking for the cruddy conservative Democrat who always agrees with the Fox perspective. A L'Italien staffer, Joe Katz, saw his opportunity to get his candidate on the air and grabbed it resulting in the awesome video at the top of the page. Knowing that Fox and Friends is Trumpanzee's favorite early morning viewing, L'Italian ignored the hosts' inane question (for Kirkpatrick) and looked into the camera and said "I'm actually here to speak directly to Donald Trump. I feel that what's happening at the border is wrong. I believe that separating kids from their parents is illegal and inhumane." She said who she is and continued: "We have to stop abducting children and ripping them from their parents’ arms, stop putting kids in cages, and stop making 3-year-olds defend themselves in court," very much not the messaging Fox hosts Jillian Mele and Rob Schmitt wanted on the air, nor the message Ann Kirkpatrick is interested in being put out either. She admits she would have voted with the handful of right-wing and racist Democrats who went along with the GOP last week in backing ICE. That's always been Kirkpatrick-- and always will be... a Republican with a "D" next to her name. The DCCC backs her all the way and has been spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to make sure she-- and not progressives Matt Heinz or Mary Matiella-- wins the August 28 primary.



AZ-02 is the Tucson-based southern Arizona district Ann Kirkpatrick is trying to win. She's from northern Arizona and represented a district up there. She doesn't live in southern Arizona but visits her grandchildren in Tucson from time to time. She was the poster child for the NRA, who has always graded her an "A" and it doesn't surprise anyone that she backs ICE. She's always been at the very heart of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party.



This morning, I spoke with Heinz just as he was getting off his night shift at the hospital he works at. "I was flabbergasted," he told me, "to see Ann raise her hand to support ICE with no additional reform or changes in oversight. But I was in no way surprised to see her once again change her answer the second it wasn't convenient for her. This has become a pattern of hers; she'll say one thing and then immediately try to say the opposite just to further her political agenda. I strongly believe in the need for a massive overhaul of ICE and a change of leadership that starts at the very top with electing a new president. To allow the status-quo to continue is simply unacceptable to me and to the voters of Southern Arizona. The people don't have faith in our political system because politicians flip-flop between answers to whichever is most convenient in the moment. This is exactly why national entities, and the DCCC in particular, need to let the voters decide who can best represent their community before coming in to back a particular candidate. DC insiders just don't understand Southern Arizona and it's becoming increasing clear to anyone paying attention that neither does Ann."

Another District The DCCC Is Stumbling Around In And Screwing Up The Works

Since we write so much about how terrible the DCCC interference in Democratic primaries is, people often ask me which one of the races are they screwing up the most. They've certainly done immense damage in Houston (TX-07), in Austin (TX-21), Dallas (TX-32), Omaha (NE-02), Orange County (CA-39), South Jersey (NJ-02), the Denver suburbs (CO-06), Syracuse (NY-24), and South Texas (TX-23), but the race in Tucson (AZ-02) may well be the most disgusting. Ann Kirkpatrick was already in Congress and accrued really horrible, conservative voting record and a consistent record of fighting tooth and nail for her benefactors at the NRA. Kirkpatrick was a rotgut New Dem and a disgrace to the Democratic Party. There are two viable Democrats in the primary this time and the DCCC has strongly backed Kirkpatrick even though she's not the strongest candidate.

How can I make that assertion? New polling of likely Democratic primary voters from FM3 Research released last week shows that Matt Heinz has a narrow lead despite the fact that Kirkpatrick has huge name recognition from her failed 2016 Senate race and has already spent $458,729 to Heinz's $220,032. (The DCCC has helped her corral $234,667 in PAC contributes-- compared to just $7,500 that Heinz has brought in from PACs.)

While Democratic primary voters are familiar with both candidates, they are more likely to hold a favorable opinion of Heinz, and after hearing equal positive nformation about these two candidates, support for Heinz increases. Furthermore, the survey shows that many aspects of Kirkpatrick’s voting record in Congress pose a serious problem for her among Democratic primary voters, particularly her support of Republican tax cuts, cuts to Medicare, and her former “A” rating from the NRA.

...In an initial Democratic primary ballot test, Matt Heinz currently leads the field with 27%, giving him a four-point edge over Ann Kirkpatrick (23%). These results show the highly competitive nature of the Democratic primary, and despite her high-profile and well-financed statewide candidacy for the U.S. Senate in 2016, 2nd District Democrats have not embraced Kirkpatrick. The contest is very much a two-person race, as the other candidates generate only mid-single digit support.

Heinz doubles his initial lead over Kirkpatrick after voters hear positive profile statements about both candidates. After learning more positive information about the candidates’ backgrounds, including their professional experience, Heinz increases his vote by 13 points and moves to an eight-point advantage (40%-32%) over Kirkpatrick.

The survey data also show significant primary voter concern about many aspects of Kirkpatrick’s record. Survey respondents were read a series of descriptive phrases, and were asked if they would be more or less likely to vote for a candidate who matched such a description. As Figure 3 shows, votes for Congressional Republicans’ legislation to cut Medicare and the support for Bush-era tax cuts elicited severe negative reactions-- more than eight in ten Democratic primary voters would be less likely to vote for a candidate-- like Kirkpatrick-- who took those positions. Voters also responded negatively to the idea that a candidate failed to vote on the DREAM Act, as six in ten (62%) said they would be less likely to vote for that person for Congress. Voters in the survey also reacted negatively to Kirkpatrick’s having received an “A” rating from the NRA.

Meanwhile, Kirkpatrick made such an ass out of herself at the last forum that she's started skipping subsequent ones... just like Martha McSally, the Republican incumbent does. What a clown. She's probably hoping the New Dems, the DCCC and EMILY's List will get her through. Meanwhile Heinz has pledged to voters that if he's elected he will join the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

The DCCC is Petrified The Parkland Students Are Going To Find Out About Ann Kirkpatrick's Record On Guns

DCCC endorsed NRA ally Ann Kirkpatrick instead of any of the progressives in AZ-02

Arizona's second district is one of the most competitive in the country. McCain beat Obama 50-49% and Romney beat him 50-48%. But then Hillary beat Trump 49.6% to 44.7%. In 2015 the PVI was R+3. Now it's R+1. The district includes most of Tucson-- everything but the Latino neighborhoods in the west and southern parts of the city and the whole southeast corner of the state, bordering on New Mexico and Mexico. Although all of Cochise County is included in the district, virtually all of the voters live in much bluer Pima County.

Both parties' primaries for Congress this year are also very komptetibe, especially since incumbent Martha McSally decided to run for the open U.S. Seante seat. The 5 Republicans running are Lea Peterson, Danny Morales, Brandon Martin, Casey Welch and Marilyn Wiles. There are also 6 Democrats running: Matt Heinz, Ann Kirkpatrick, Billy Kovacs, Mary Matiella, Barbara Sherry, and Bruce Wheeler. (There may be 2 other candidates running as Democrats running as well, Yahya Yuksel and William Foster but no one seems to know for sure. The filing deadline is May 30for the August 28th primary.)

Saturday, the Democrats all attended the March for our Lives rallies in either Tucson, except Barbara Sherry who went to the rally in Sierra Vista, while all the Republicans shared a stage at a candidates forum in private club, the Mountain Oyster Club, charging $7.50 to get in. Reporters were banned.

As of the December 31 FEC reporting deadline, the only Republican who had raised any significant money was Peterson ($218,266). Three Democrats had raised serious money: Kirkpatrick ($749,533), Heinz ($343,119) and Matiella ($151,425).

Platform-wise, all the Democrats are in sync on most issues, although Kirkpatrick, the most conservative of the 6, opposes Medicare-for-All. She's also a flip-floppy candidate who changes her mind to please whomever she's speaking to. She went from being one of the NRA's strongest allies in Congress-- keynoting their events and earning an "A"-- to claiming she now opposes them. Many Arizonans remember that Kirkpatrick was a co-sponsor for the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act which allows those authorized to carry firearms in their home state to travel with their weapons. The DCCC has endorsed her. They always pick the most conservative candidate in contested races. Funny how their Red tie Blue page on Kirkpatrick doesn't say a word about her record as an NRA ally. Don't Democratic voters have a right to know?



There is no other Democrat running in AZ-02 who could have ever said this except Kirkpatrick:

"I am not going to allow Washington to ignore the values of Arizonans and the traditions of four generations of my family in District One, and I am proud to be pushing back against the federal government to stop our Constitutional rights from being infringed. Every time the anti-gun rights groups propose legislation that restricts our freedoms, I am going to make sure they know millions of Americans will fight them every inch of the way."

Nor this-- when she welcomed the NRA, which she referred to "one of the country’s oldest continuously operating civil liberties organizations," to Phoenix:

"As a gun owner myself, I firmly believe in the right of all Americans to keep and bear arms, and I am proud that my state is hosting the group that has protected that right for 138 years. This is a chance for Arizonans to show our nation’s leaders we will not let them take away our freedoms... People in Washington need to stop undermining the Second Amendment. That’s why I took on the Attorney General for his proposal to ban so-called 'assault weapons.' I will continue to work vigilantly to maintain and protect our Second Amendment rights against every challenge they face."

This is a truly disgusting person whose hands are dripping in the blood of school children. And Kirkpatrick is a carpetbagging careerist from the northern part of the state who has one of the most vile spam campaigns of any candidate for Congress in the whole country-- just an unrelenting shit-stream of banal, insipid and utterly insincere e-mails every single day. Yesterday, Sunday, was not exception:

I don’t have the words to describe just how grateful I am to have your support. We’re already being called one of the top 10 House races to watch by the Washington Post AND we’re one of four must-win seats for Democrats. And it’s only March!

I’ve seen all the birthday love from this past week. So many of you chipped in-- it truly warms my heart.

As we begin the second half of our campaign and march to November, I’m excited to see what we will accomplish together.

Mary Matiella and Matt Heinz are both far better candidates and either would make a better member of Congress. When we spoke with Mary recently she told us that "The DCCC is right about AZ-02 being a great pickup opportunity but they're wrong if they think an establishment/corporate Dem is the way to win. Southern Arizonans are a fiercely independent bunch and ultimately it's the voters, not the establishment who will decide who best represents their values." She followed with a statement for DWT readers about her stand on immigration reform:

I'm sick and tired of the Trump-McSally machine demonizing our immigrant communities to score political points with their most narrow-minded supporters. We are a nation of immigrants and dehumanizing communities of color in the name of border security is wrong. Militarizing our border sends the wrong message to the world and is an ineffective strategy for dealing with border security.

What I believe is simple: secure the border at the border. We need more Customs Officers at the ports of entry, rather than more agents combing the desert. Over 80% of the narcotics and violent criminals that come across our border do so through our ports of entry. And that's where we need to focus resources. Not miles away at checkpoints the narcos and the coyotes know how to avoid. And, $1.6 billion budgeted for border walls-- what a waste of money!

I believe in comprehensive immigration reform that includes protecting DREAMers, providing a pathway to citizenship for undocumented workers, and reducing the current visa backlog. Breaking up families, racially profiling in our communities, and strong-arm tactics are morally repugnant practices that only serve to divide our community.

This issue is deeply personal to me. I am a Latina who grew up in southern Arizona. Many members of my family, including my husband were born on the other side of the line. We must do better to deal with the economic and humanitarian issues along our border.

Ann Kirkpatrick-- This Is What It Means To Be A Careerist Politician With No Core Values

Later Kirkpatrick changed almost all her answers

When a candidate for office has no core values other than their own craven careerism, they'll flip-flop all over the griddle like a fish out of water. Ann Kirkpatrick is one of the worst candidates running for election anywhere in the country. At the urging of the DCCC, EMILY's List and the New Dems, she migrated down to Tucson from Flagstaff to run in the now-open second congressional district. But carpetbagging, although perhaps important to the folks in southern Arizona, isn't the worst thing about Kirkpatrick.

On Sunday there was a Democrats candidate forum at the Quail Creek retirement community just outside Green Valley. It was a disaster for Kirkpatrick, a disaster because she's torn in every direction... basically because there's no there there. On camera she pledged to not support Pelosi for Speaker, which seems odd, since it's Pelosi's DCCC that is the only thing that's propping up-- financially and otherwise-- her absurd campaign. [Her staff later said she didn't understand the question and that she would indeed support Pelosi.] Also laughable was her pledge to support term limits-- after going back on her own pledge to serve only three 2-year terms in the House. If elected again, this would be her 4th term! [She later tried "clarifing" that one too, but no one knows where she stands on the issue now-- probably exactly what she wants.]

She also pledged to co-sponsor Raul Grijalva's locally popular bill to restore protections for Oak Flat-- a sacred tribal area for San Carlos Apache that she and Paul Gosar (R-AZ) teamed up to STEAL from them a couple years ago on behalf of mining interests. She's so slimy that you have to be completely brain-dead to consider voting for her-- or not care about truth at all. She also pledged to oppose the Rosemont mine, even though when she was in Congress she was always publicly for mining projects, including, of course, this one. [She later said she didn't understand that question either and that she would continue supporting the mine.]

And then the gun issue and her close mutually-supportive relationship with the NRA.Take a look at this news segment from her election campaign in 2010:



An untrustworthy political hack, she smells which way the wind is blowing and on Monday she pledged to support an assault weapons ban-- after loudly leading the opposition to such a ban for her entire grimy political career. She also told the forum attendees show will now oppose her old allies in the NRA in all possible ways-- despite her A rating that she bragged about until very recently. She defines the term "dishonest politician," perfect for the DCCC, perfect for EMILY's List, perfect for the New Dems. Ann Kirkpatrick is the quintessential candidate for the Republican wing of the Democratic Party.

Green Valley was really quite the show. When she figured out that there was a GOP tracker present and filming her, she made sure to state emphatically that "I do not support single payer health care. And I do not support Medicare for All," claiming it is too expensive. Of course that was met by 400 blank stares from the perplexed audience of mostly progressive Democrats. She then described a Medicare buy in plan-- stolen almost word-for word from other Democratic candidates-- which is an expansion of an existing single payer system.

She was all over the place... again a politician that stands for nothing but her own career. So pathetic!

Mary Matiela is one of the progressives in the primary and she also took part in Quail Creek the forum Sunday. "I think the differences between my candidacy and Congresswoman Kirkpatrick's are really coming into focus," she told us. "While she's been talking to the donor class I've been out talking with the voters. I've heard what issues they care about. Voters want single payer healthcare, they support the regulation of marijuana for adult use, and they want our public lands protected from wealthy corporations. These are issues I will fight for, and that Ann will continue to fight against. Ours is a grassroots campaign, so we'll rely on the people spreading the message, not corporate PACs-- but if we can spread that message, we'll prevail. There's growing momentum from progressive leaders like Congressman Raul Grijalva and national progressive groups like Democracy for America, Justice Democrats, Demand Universal Healthcare, Project 100, and Common Defense. This race is shaping up to be the moderate vs. the progressive and I'm thrilled to be the latter."

Get To Know Concealed Carry Reciprocity-- Paul Ryan Just Rammed It Through Congress

Ready for more gun mayhem-- even if you live in a state with rational gun laws? Yesterday afternoon, Congress took a procedural vote providing for consideration of H.R. 38, Richard Hudson's Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, which happens to be the NRA's #1 priority for the current session of Congress. The procedural motion passed 232-194, four Blue Dogs crossing the aisle to vote with the Republicans: Henry Cuellar (TX), Collin Peterson (MN), Vicente Gonzalez (TX) and Sanford Bishop (GA). The underlying bill itself has three Democratic cosponsors: Cuellar, Peterson and Bishop. There were 10 Republican NO votes, all kooks and nuts like Louie Gohmert, Jim Jordan and Steve King who didn't feel the bill went far enough. A few hours later the bill itself passed 231-198 with fully 6 NRA-lovin' Democrats on board:

• Sanford Bishop (Blue Dog-GA)
• Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX)
• Vicente Gonzalez (Blue Dog-TX)
• Ron Kind (New Dem-WI)
• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)
• Kurt Schrader (Blue Dog-OR)

It's worth mentioning-- for the umpteenth time-- that if the DCCC gets its way, 2019 will see many more NRA-supporting Democrats in Congress. Ben Ray Lujan and Nancy Pelosi have freely and publicly admitted that the DCCC is now working with the Blue Dog Caucus to recruit more Blue Dogs into Congress. I spoke to one of them a few months ago, Andrew Janz, and, after saying he doesn't know what "single payer" is and professing to have never heard of the phrase "Medicare For All," he offered to tell me what is motivating his run for the Central Valley district seat held by Devin Nunes. I was stunned when he told me-- unprompted-- that there are two over-arching reasons he's running-- to protect the 2nd Amendment and to make sure the death penalty is more widely used. Ah, yes, another DCCC-type fake Democrat, taking a firm stand against the energy that is propelling a Democratic take-over of Congress.

The L.A. Times editorial yesterday, No matter how they dress it up, the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act is really bad policy, was a warning that wasn't needed by L.A. area Democrats and was ignored by all the L.A. area Republicans (like Ed Royce, Steve Knight, Mimi Walters, Dana Rohrabacher and Darrell Issa). The Times editors noted that the bill is "a spectacularly stupid and dangerous piece of legislation intended to undercut the right of states to determine what qualifications a person must meet before being allowed to carry a concealed firearm."

Under the proposed reciprocity law, anyone with a valid permit from another state would be able to carry a concealed firearm in California, even if they do not meet California’s more stringent standards. This is a highly objectionable infringement on the responsibilities of state and local law enforcement to maintain public safety, and is clearly aimed at undermining gun control efforts nationally. What’s more, it will put guns into the hands of more people who shouldn’t have them.

Gabby Giffords' gun control organization released some radio and TV ads in a few swingy GOP districts urging voters to contact their members of Congress and urge them vote NO. It's just a partisan election ad, not one meant to change any votes. This is the radio ad and here's the TV ad, These are the targeted congressmembers:

• Jason Lewis, MN-02
• Rodney Frelinghuysen, NJ-11
• Steve Knight, CA-25
• Ed Royce, CA-39
• Mimi Walters, CA-45
• Mike Coffman, CO-06
• Lee Zeldin, NY-01
• Barbara Comstock, VA-10

The irony here isn't the Giffords was an Arizona Blue Dog who supported the NRA before she was shot but that she recently backed another NRA-supporting gun nut, Ann Kirkpatrick, who's running against several normal gun control-supporting Democrats in Giffords' own old Tucson-area district. I guess that helps explain why Giffords' ad didn't run in any of the Democratic districts with NRA congressmen or candidates. Here's how Kirkpatrick talks about the NRA and their agenda. Keep in mind when you read these quotes, that Kirkpatrick, who isn't even from anywhere near this district, is being relentlessly pushed not just by Giffords but by the DCCC and the New Dems as well.

"I am not going to allow Washington to ignore the values of Arizonans and the traditions of four generations of my family in District One, and I am proud to be pushing back against the federal government to stop our Constitutional rights from being infringed. Every time the anti-gun rights groups propose legislation that restricts our freedoms, I am going to make sure they know millions of Americans will fight them every inch of the way." [Congressional Documents and Publications. May 13, 2010. "Rep. Kirkpatrick Updates Greater Arizonans on Her Fight to Defend Second Amendment Rights in Tele-Town Hall."]

Kirkpatrick welcomed the NRA to Phoenix for its annual convention, calling it "one of the country’s oldest continuously operating civil liberties organizations" in a press release.

"As a gun owner myself, I firmly believe in the right of all Americans to keep and bear arms, and I am proud that my state is hosting the group that has protected that right for 138 years. This is a chance for Arizonans to show our nation’s leaders we will not let them take away our freedoms."

"People in Washington need to stop undermining the Second Amendment. That’s why I took on the Attorney General for his proposal to ban so-called 'assault weapons.' I will continue to work vigilantly to maintain and protect our Second Amendment rights against every challenge they face."  [States News Service. July 22, 2009. "Rep Kirkpatrick Reaffirms Support for Critical Second Amendment Protections, Continues 'Defending Arizona Values' Campaign."]

Kirkpatrick was a co-sponsor for the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act which allows those authorized to carry firearms in their home state to travel with their weapons. [Congressional Documents and Publications. November 20, 2009. "Rep. Kirkpatrick Emphasizes Importance of Protecting Second Amendment Rights to Greater Arizonans in Tele-Town Hall."]

Kirkpatrick agreed with a radio caller in 2010 that citizens should be able to buy and own fully automatic firearms. "I agree with you, I think people should be able to legally purchase and carry the gun they want." She also stated that she opposed bans on some types of firearms, opposed DC and Chicago laws barring private ownership of some gun types, and supported allowing guns in national parks.[Arizona Daily Sun. January 10, 013. “Kirkpatrick pivots on guns.”]

Kirkpatrick did not support President Obama’s call to reinstitute the assault weapons ban and limit magazine size. [Eastern Arizona Courier (Safford, Arizona). February 5, 2013. “Kirkpatrick talks guns, jobs, water.”]

Kirkpatrick continued her opposition to limiting extended magazines.

Kirkpatrick was the only Congressional Democrat in Arizona to receive an "A" rating from the NRA in the last decade which she maintained through Fall 2012. [The Arizona Republic April 5, 2013. Final Chaser Edition. "Arizona’s Gun Divide."]

Not that I'm saying Giffords' organization is completely useless, quite the contrary. Despite her shocking and hypocritical endorsement of Kirkpatrick, which would have added another Democratic vote to the Concealed Carry Reciprocity win for the NRA today, Resist the Gun Lobby debunked 7 myths perpetrated by the NRA and their allies (like Kirkpatrick):

MYTH 1: Concealed carry reciprocity will make it easy for people to travel with their permits nationwide, similar to how driver’s licenses work.

MYTH BUSTED!

Unlike concealed carry permits, driver’s licenses are standard, verifiable documents that meet almost the same criteria in every state. In fact, in order to be recognized by federal agencies, driver’s licenses must meet federal criteria established by the REAL ID Act that contain physical security features including a photo of its holder and uniform data such as identity, date of birth, principal residence address, etc.

Concealed carry permits, on the other hand, do not contain uniform information or standard security features. Permits’ appearances vary significantly among states: some states issue permits that resemble paper library cards, while others issue permits that lack photo identification. In order to verify the authenticity and validity of a permit, law enforcement would have to contact the issuing agency in the permit holder’s state because no national database--  and sometimes no statewide database-- containing concealed carry permit information exists.

Furthermore, to obtain a driver’s license, people must also undergo several forms of testing--  including a vision exam, exams that test knowledge of driving and relevant laws, and an in-person driving test. Underage applicants in most states must also fulfill practice hours or complete driver’s education classes. Training to obtain a concealed carry permit, however, varies widely throughout the states. A number of states require classroom instruction and live-fire training to obtain a permit to carry concealed. In 19 states, however, individuals do not need to undergo any training to carry concealed. In 12 states, individuals do not even need a permit-- no less any training-- to carry concealed, loaded firearms in public.

If concealed carry reciprocity becomes law, untrained individuals could carry concealed, loaded firearms nationwide. The lack of identifying data and divergent information on concealed carry permits would present a serious challenge for a law enforcement officers seeking to determine if an individual is lawfully carrying a concealed gun. This would create a lengthy, complicated process that would take law enforcement away from critical policing duties. In many cases, law enforcement could lack the ability to verify if concealed carry permits are forged or stolen, allowing guns to fall into dangerous hands.

MYTH 2: People with concealed carry permits are law-abiding and highly trained.

MYTH BUSTED!

While many states require concealed carry permit applicants to demonstrate that they have received firearm safety training, the gun lobby has worked aggressively in state capitols to weaken or eliminate training requirements for permit holders.

The most drastic example of the erosion of state standards is the proliferation of “permitless” carry states. In 2011, the last time the U.S. House of Representatives took up a concealed carry reciprocity proposal, three states did not require a permit to carry concealed. In 2013, the last time the U.S. Senate voted on this proposal, four states did not require a permit to carry concealed. Today, 12 states do not require a permit or any training to carry a concealed, loaded handgun in public and 19 additional states do not require any training to obtain a permit. Law enforcement in the 12 “permitless” carry states have no way to know who is carrying concealed guns, let alone if these are trained or law-abiding individuals.

Additionally, many states poorly manage their concealed carry permitting systems. Dangerous flaws in permitting systems in North Carolina, Tennessee, Colorado, and other states have allowed individuals disqualified by criminal convictions, including convicted felons and individuals with outstanding arrest warrants, to nevertheless maintain concealed carry permits. Many of these permit holders go on to commit further crimes.

MYTH 3: Laws that make it easier for people to carry concealed guns will reduce crime. Every year, millions of gun owners and concealed carry permit holders use firearms defensively, thwarting crime and attackers.

MYTH BUSTED!

There is no credible statistical evidence that shows that weak concealed carry laws reduce crime. In fact, the evidence suggests that permissive concealed carry laws may actually increase the frequency of some types of crime, such as assault. One recent study found that states that award concealed carry permits to anyone who meets minimum standards experience 13 to 15 percent more violent crime than states with stronger laws. Overall, research confirms the commonsense conclusion that more guns create more opportunities for injury and death, not fewer.

Claims that firearms are used defensively millions time every year have also been widely discredited. Even when a firearm is used in self-defense, which is rare, research shows that a firearm is no more likely to reduce a person’s chance of being injured during a crime than other various forms of protection. One study suggests that carrying a firearm may actually increase a victim’s risk of firearm injury during the commission of a crime.

Few Americans believe the U.S. would be safer if more people carried guns. Just 35 percent of voters surveyed by a June 2017 Quinnipiac Poll believe that the country would be a safer place to live if more people carried guns.

MYTH 4: Concealed carry permit holders who are lawfully able to carry in their state are often considered “accidental criminals” just because they are traveling to another state with a concealed firearm.

MYTH BUSTED!

Currently, each state decides whether it will recognize concealed carry permits issued by other states. Through reciprocity agreements, states ensure that permit holders from one state can travel to another state with a loaded, concealed firearm without endangering public safety. Concealed carry permit holders can easily check to determine whether their permits are recognized in other states, as states make this information directly available online. Furthermore, if a permit holder wants to travel with a gun through a state that does not recognize his or her permit, the permit holder only needs to properly lock the gun in the trunk of the car-- federal law already guarantees the permit holder that authority.

Concealed carry reciprocity would not create a national permitting standard. Instead it would require states to accept all permits and permissions to carry from all other states even if they don’t meet the requirements in that state. The wide array of state laws would remain intact and concealed carry reciprocity would only reinforce the confusing patchwork of state laws that currently exists.

MYTH 5: Concealed carry reciprocity would NOT override existing state and local gun laws governing where people can carry.

MYTH BUSTED!

The House version of concealed carry reciprocity would override a host of state and local laws that currently prohibit permit holders from carrying guns in places like bars, daycare centers, places of worship, athletic events, and near polling places. These laws allow private property owners to prohibit guns on their property, and enable law enforcement to anticipate where they are most and least likely to encounter armed individuals. For example:

• In Florida and many other states, a concealed handgun license doesn’t authorize the license holder to carry a concealed handgun into a bar.
• Administrative regulations in Indiana prohibit the carrying of guns in certain casinos and childcare centers.
• Louisiana prohibits the carrying of concealed handguns in churches, synagogues, mosques, and other places of worship, unless special requirements are met.

These kinds of laws are common across the country, and law enforcement, private property owners, and the public rely on them. Concealed carry reciprocity would override these laws, allowing guns in spaces most people assume are gun-free.

MYTH 6: Concealed carry reciprocity doesn’t make it any easier to buy a gun.

MYTH BUSTED!

Gun traffickers frequently cross state lines to obtain guns from states with the weakest laws. Concealed carry reciprocity would make it easier for them to do that. It would tie the hands of law enforcement officers who encounter armed, out-of-state residents, who may be trafficking guns.

Under the House version of concealed carry reciprocity, the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017, a law enforcement officer who pulls over a person with a permit could face a lawsuit for questioning the person. An unscrupulous concealed carry permit holder would be able to gather large number of guns in states with weak gun laws, and then cross state lines unencumbered by questioning at traffic stops. Those guns would then be available in the criminal market, making us all less safe.

MYTH 7: Law enforcement officers support concealed carry reciprocity.

MYTH BUSTED!

Major law enforcement groups, including Major Cities Chiefs Association, Police Foundation, and Police Executive Research Forum, oppose concealed carry legislation. The House version of concealed carry reciprocity goes a step beyond the Senate version and exposes law enforcement to personal litigation if officers mistakenly question a person’s legal authority to possess a firearm. As a result, officers would fear conducting thorough investigations and would be deterred from effectively doing their jobs.

In a letter urging Congress to oppose the House bill, 9 national law enforcement organizations, including the groups referenced above, state that “The lack of consistent and in many cases the absence of training standards coupled with the exposure of agencies and police officers to tort claims present an unacceptable risk to the public, specifically our law enforcement personnel. We reject the idea that one state’s approach to carrying a concealed firearm will work across every state, city or community. States and localities should have the right to legislate concealed carry.”

Carol Shea-Porter explained her vote against this yesterday to her New Hampshire constituents. "Today I voted against the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act because it would undermine states’ rights and would expose law enforcement officers to lawsuits and an increased risk of harm. That’s why leading law enforcement organizations, including the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Police Executive Research Forum, are opposing this bill. Moreover, at a time when the majority of Americans want Congress to work on bipartisan solutions that address the national epidemic of gun violence, passing the NRA’s top legislative priority to loosen gun safety laws takes us in the wrong direction."