Democratic Senators Who Need to Be Lobbyists in 2017

Each of these Democrats need to be turned into lobbyists at the earliest opportunity. For three of them, that's January 2017 (click to enlarge and share).

The Senate held its final cloture vote on Fast Track, and after a lot of wheeling and dealing over amendments — whose will get a vote and whose won't — the Democrats above voted to help grease the next NAFTA treaty's passage into law.

Pro-TPP writer Alex Rogers, in the National Journal (Ex-Im means "Export-Import"; my emphasis throughout):

Ex-Im Bank Deal Gets Trade Bill Moving

Last-minute floor trading on reauthorizing the bank secured the votes to proceed on fast-track measure.

The Senate advanced a major trade bill Thursday, after a last-minute deal on a vote to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank prompted Sen. Maria Cantwell and others to break away from a powwow on the chamber floor to say, "Aye." ...

The vote, 62 to 38, came over the objections of [anti-TPP] senators, who claimed that the Senate GOP leadership—President Obama's strange bedfellows on free trade—had throttled debate, allowing only two votes so far despite around 200 amendments filed.

"The last time we did fast-track legislation on the Senate floor it was three weeks of debate," said Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown. "This is about three days."

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell had set up the procedural vote Thursday despite other time-sensitive deadlines determining the National Security Agency's bulk-collection authority and highway funding. But he seemed aware of the possibility of failing on Wednesday afternoon. "Well we're going to grind on and finish TPA," he said, "if those who say they're for it end up voting for it."

Those members included Washington state Sens. Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray as well as Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who formed a tight circle with McConnell on the floor to hash out an agreement for a future vote on authorizing the Export Import bank, whose charter expires at the end of next month.

What's the Export-Import bank? A slush fund for companies like Boeing and the CEOs who draw their pay from them:

The bank, which helps finances U.S. businesses' exports, is synonymous with "crony capitalism" by conservatives and many House Republicans who wish to kill it. But the bank is also popular with many Senate Republicans, including Graham, who—like the Washington state senators—represents a state with a significant stake in the success of Boeing.

Fast Track is as good as done in the Senate. On to the House.

The Democrats' Trade — Your Rich People for Mine

So here's the trade Maria Cantwell, Patty Murray and the other pro-TPP Democrats made. They will vote to give money to rich people who will benefit from TPP. In exchange other senators will vote to give money to rich people who run companies like Boeing. There were a bunch of trades like this in the Yes-on-TPP camp. Who said there's gridlock in DC?

What did we get? If Fast Track passes the House, we get TPP, the next NAFTA, and the one after that, TPIP, the same bad deal on the Atlantic side. These senators, of course, will do quite well in any case.

A Tale of the Rich and the Rest

The TPP story isn't about the U.S. and the world. It's about the rich and the rest, also known as "capital and labor," as this excellent piece by Harold Meyerson explains:

A trade deal at what cost?

So what gives with the American people? Don’t they realize, as my colleague Charles Krauthammer argued last week, “that free trade is advantageous to both sides”?

The sides to which Krauthammer referred, of course, are nations. But perhaps those who’ve experienced such free-trade consequences as factory closings and lower-paying jobs are thinking about two entirely different sides — capital and labor. ...

When advocates make the case for Congress expanding free trade with Pacific Rim nations by passing the “fast-track bill” currently before it, they cite the U.S. industries that the deal will benefit. A recent Wall Street Journal editorial, for instance, acknowledges that, while U.S. exports to South Korea have hardly increased since we signed a trade accord with that nation in 2011, our service-sector growth there has been substantial. Our international law firms can now practice there, the Journal proclaims, and “American investors can now own telecom operations in that country.”

A great deal for international lawyers and investors — two groups of embattled U.S. proletarians who clearly needed our government’s help.

For other American workers, not so great. The treaty was promoted as benefiting the U.S. auto industry, but since its enactment Korean auto imports to the United States have boomed while sales of U.S.-made cars to South Korea remain all but nonexistent.

Is it any wonder, then, that virtually the entire base of the Democratic Party opposes the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the fast-track bill that would ease its enactment? From coast to coast, Democrats are doing their damnedest to raise the very wages that globalized capital has depressed.

But what about restraining the power of China? Meyerson delivers the knockout blow:

Of all the developments that led to the increase in China’s power and the diminution of ours, the one that definitively did both was Congress’s enactment of permanent normal trade relations with China in 2000. That led to a flood of U.S. companies shuttering their domestic plants and shifting production to China. When Beijing insisted that the price of doing business there was the transfer of proprietary high-technology techniques to China, many of those companies complied.

So a trade deal benefiting U.S. investors at the expense of U.S. workers created the rise in Chinese power, and now, we’re told, a trade deal benefiting U.S. investors at the expense of U.S. workers will help us keep Chinese power in check.

"A trade deal benefiting U.S. investors at the expense of U.S. workers" — an apt description in both cases. A tale of the rich and the rest (meaning us).

If Democrats Want to Lobby for Rich People, They Should Register

And you can help by moving them out of their current job and putting them on the labor market. These TPP Democrats are up for reelection in 2016:

▪ Patty Murray — 202-224-2621 — Now deep in Senate "leadership" and apparently hungry for more of that Schumer-Murray magic.

 

▪ Michael Bennet — 202-224-5852 — Mr. Bipartisan. As chair of the DSCC, he oversaw the 2014 election losses, then afterward said he worried that Republicans would be mad at him.

 

▪ Ron Wyden — 202-224-5244 — The worst. As Ranking Member of the Finance Committee, he was lead perp in the Senate, patient zero for the fatal infection. He deserves an expensive lobbyist office filled with very uncomfortable chairs — soon.

Their phone numbers are above. Do you vote in Washington, Colorado or Oregon ? Are you a donor to senatorial campaigns? Feel free to pick up the phone and speak your mind. They've certainly spoken theirs, or the minds of their "investors," to borrow Meyerson's phrase.

But What About the Senate?

But what about "the Senate," you ask? First, is this a Senate worth fighting for? Second, with votes like these, do you think candidates like these are more likely or less likely to continue the party debranding that led to the 2014 results?

U.S. trade deficit since 1960. That "steep NAFTA slide" starts in 1994, one of Bill Clinton's signature accomplishments.

Frankly, if you really want a better Senate (I do), abandon all twelve names on the graphic above — let their "investors" take care of them — and elect Blue America candidates like Alan Grayson, Donna Edwards, Russ Feingold and P.G. Sittenfeld. You can help by contributing here.

GP

Marcy Winograd Keynotes The Southern California Junior State Convention-- A Guest Post

Are the socialists in the house?

You bet. A boy unfurls a red flag with a hammer and sickle and races across the room amid Oh my God’s and robust laughter.

Are the Democrats in the house?

Cheers. Thumps. Hurrahs! We rule.

Republicans?

Rival cheers. Teens in suits, pressed white shirts, dark ties shoot up from their seats. We’re coming back!

Greens?

A plenty.

Libertarians.

Present.

Pirates?
 
Like a giant sea creature, several rows of chairs emit a boisterous collective “Aaargh” for the party formed solely to protect our Open Internet waters. One teen in a pirate hat is particularly enthusiastic.

Welcome to the bubbling-over southern California Junior State convention, held in Long Beach last weekend, where six-hundred politicos from dozens of high schools converged to hold a mock congress, parliamentary-style, with multiple parties represented, caucusing, debating bills, and wrestling with our nation’s future.

I was honored to be invited as the keynote speaker, though I was a bit mystified as to how this choice unfolded. I'm not exactly your "safe" lawmaker. 

I rock the boat.

Apparently, I came highly recommended by fellow anti-war activist Frank Dorrel, distributor of the serious comic book, Addicted to War, friend of one of the high school convention organizers, my escort who told me proudly, “I’m a Green” and would have kept on talking, eyes wide about politics and caucuses and bills had I not been summoned to the microphone to deliver my speech. Below is an excerpt:

I am a public school teacher, an anti-war leader, a health care activist running for Congress to work with others, like yourselves, to transform America, into a country where we put education before incarceration, where health care is a right, not a privilege, where, as Helen Keller, the blind woman who saw it all, once said, armies of destruction become armies of construction.

I cannot work alone to safeguard Social Security, to protect the right of states to enact single-payer health care, to end our multiple perpetual wars, to make education relevant, to ensure the Internet remains open and free, to reform our immigration laws, to make it easier for workers to organize a union, to defend the New Deal against those who are chomping at the bit to destroy or privatize Medicare.

I need you, to work with you, to work with my base, and to work with the Congressional Progressive Caucus for progressive change, for a shift in our way of thinking-- America: an equal partner, not a global dominator. Domination, occupation-- these are not sustainable choices. This is how the Roman Empire collapsed -- by spending all of its capital on the military and very little on its people.
 
These are difficult times

Unemployment

Foreclosures

Health care crisis

An insurgent racism, the Tea Party, cloaked in populism

A realization that one man in the White House cannot deliver on all our dreams.

In difficult times, we need courage-- because it takes courage to overcome the fear of failure, of impotence.

What if the world does not change?

What if I cannot make a difference?

What if, for all my protests, the masters of war get richer, the banks bigger, the gulf between the rich and the poor wider, the forests fewer, the earth hotter until we all burn in our own hell?

What if …

There will always be whispering what if’s to paralyze us, to make us complacent, to shrug our shoulders, to leave us disengaged.

To put others in charge of our fate.

Our challenge is to consider our fate a collective one and our role in creating our fate collaborative.
For as much as the American Dream caresses our notion of individualism & seduces us into narcissism, my struggle, my success, my dream … me …

The real love story is between us, what we create together.

I’m talking about movements for social change.

I’m talking about …

A tipping point.

A critical mass.

A moment when the world pivots.

Because of the words we dare utter, the marches we organize, the ideas we unveil, the boycotts we launch, the candidates we elect, the actions we embrace, not as individuals, but as a community, a silhouette of clasped hands ...

After my speech, a young member of the Tea Party movement, ran up to confront me.

She was offended by suggestion, no my accusation that the Tea Party, though its name sounds benign, patriotic, is really an insurgent racist movement seizing the mantle of populism from a too-quiet left.

"Why do you say we are racists?, she asked, looking angelic, so petite, hair all curls.

"Because," I said, "you scapegoat immigrants, vilify Obama, talk about returning to the real America. That’s just code for white America."

"No, it’s not."

"Yes, it is."

"No , it’s not."

I wanted to get away from this angle-devil-- and so I turned to talk to the parliamentarian, who told me, “My father is a die-hard Republican and he disagreed with everything you said, but he loved the way you said it. He loved your passion.”

It was easy to be passionate among passionate people. 

I mean this was my Nirvana, a room full of young people who love politics, who want to go to Washington, to Sacramento, to the United Nations, to the Streets to make a difference; a congress that isn’t just a two-party middle-finger fest but a parliamentary affair where everyone has a voice, where there is always the possibility that exotic and interesting alliances will forge something unexpected and monumental.

The parliamentarian gave me a gavel, engraved, “JSA Best Speaker.” 

It now sits proudly on my desk.

-----

It isn't a coincidence that Marcy Winograd was the first challenger endorsed by the Blue America PAC for the 2010 congressional cycle. She empitimizes our quest for "Better Democrats" and I hope the above post helps you grok who she is and what she's all about and what she would add to a Congress that has become a bulwark for conservatism through virtual ownsership by Wall Street and Big Business. Marcy's got something that we're wishing President Obama had. Help her get her message out to voters in southwest Los Angeles' 36th CD.

BIPAC Rears Its Ugly Head Again-- Endorses Reactionary Democrats

BIPAC buys a stake in the Democratic Party

Last July when Blue America was trying to help Georgia state Senator Regina Thomas challenge right-wing Democrat John Barrow in the primary, we found ourselves being undercut from the left. The main culprit, who did the most damage to Regina's chances was Obama, who, for his own electoral strategies, endorsed a congressman who will vote against Obama's agenda of change if Obama makes it to the White House. But there were also a number of clueless and dysfunctional labor unions who were endorsing and donating to Barrow because they are, first and foremost pawns in the Democratic Party incumbent protection game.

We were able to stop one major union from endorsing Barrow by breaking the story that Barrow had accepted the endorsement of BIPAC, the Business Industry Political Action Committee. BIPAC is generally thought of as a Republican front group funded by executives of special interest corporations like Exxon Mobil, Caterpillar, Halliburton, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Verizon, W.R. Grace, the National Beer Wholesalers Association, Goodyear Tire, Southern Co, Rolls Royce, Occidental, Data Recognition Corp., HSBC, Kinsey, Intel, Weyerhaeuser, Boeing, General Motors, Devon Energy, Blessing Petroleum, Sun Microsystems, etc. In 2006 85% of their donations went to Republicans. The only exception in the Senate being the most conservative Democrat in that body, Ben Nelson (D-NE). Every single one of their Republican Senate candidates lost.

BIPAC found it awkward that all their Republican Senate endorsees-- James Talent, Rick Santoum, Tom Keane, Mark Kennedy, Michael McGavick, and Michael Steele-- were defeated, as were most of the House picks. They found their influence severely diminished in the new Congress. So this year the anti-union PAC has been endorsing Blue Dogs and other nominal Democrats from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. Aside from Obama's pal Barrow, a Democrat who votes more frequently with the GOP on crucial contested matters than with the Democrats, BIPAC has picked out a rogues gallery of far right House Democrats in difficult races: Melissa Bean (IL), Nick Lampson (TX), Jim Marshall (GA), Ciro Rodriguez (TX), Bobby Bright (AL), Kurt Schrader (OR). They had previously endorsed Mark Warner in the Virginia Senate race, Barrow and Adam Cote, who was decisively defeated in the Maine Democratic primary by a progressive, Chellie Pingree.

Today BIPAC also announced that it would help fund campaigns against Democrats who have been friendly to unions and working families, particularly Jerry McNerney (D-CA) and Dina Titus (D-NV).

This puts unions is an awkward position in several races. Melissa Bean, for example, a virulent Blue Dog, and no friend of working families by any stretch of the imagination, has collected over a million dollars from some of the worst union-busting PACs even before her endorsement from BIPAC. Although the bulk of her money comes from Republican-leaning PACs, she rakes in the dough from non-strategic thinking outfits like Human Rights Campaign (HRC), Emily's List, the League of Conservation Voters, and Planned Parenthood. 9% of her PAC contributions ($126,750) come from labor unions, money they would actually be better off flushing down the toilet. It's funny to see $10,000 contributions from Phil Gramm's Credit Suisse PAC next to $10,000 donations from the Plumbers/Pipefitters Union and from the Sheet Metal Workers Union. And now BIPAC. Her voting record in Congress reflects her devotion to business interests, especially on trade policy, where she's been a gung ho advocate for the most destruction positions that have resulted in shipping American jobs overseas. Good to know labor union executives pay close attention when they squander their members' dues on candidates who vote against their basic interests.

And it's not just Bean. Nick Lampson's PAC money has come from business ($339,925) and labor ($209,500) and so has Jim Marshall's, $392,515 from business and $170,000 from labor. Alabama "Democrat" Bobby Bright was plucked right out of the deepest bowels of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. He's against virtually everything Democrats stand for-- other than having more Democrats in the House. If Democratic activists have adopted "More and Better Democrats" as a slogan, Bright's would be "More and Worse-- Much Worse-- Democrats." And yet, his bid for the open seat is being financed more by labor ($47,000) than by business ($26,500), mostly because business is still hoping to get Jay Love, a far right reactionary Republican elected (and his donated $77,750 in PAC money towards that effort). They know that if Bright wins, he'll vote how they want him to anyway.

This might be a good time to mention that you will never find an anti-union Democrat on the Blue America endorsed candidates list and that the day will never come when BIPAC and Blue America are canceling out each other's contributions by donating to the same candidate. This Saturday we'll begin a one week promotional competition for our five progressive candidates running for the U.S. Senate, Tom Allen (D-ME), Mark Begich (D-AK), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Rick Noriega (D-TX) and Andrew Rice (D-OK). One thing all five of these Democrats have in common is that they are all champions of working families and will not ever be putting special interests above the interests of ordinary American families. BIPAC isn't supporting any of them. It sure would have been nice to see all those union dues that have been wasted on the Melissa Beans and Nick Lampsons have gone to real friends of labor like the five candidates above.

Russ Feingold Is Looking For BETTER Democrats

This morning Russ Feingold's Progressive Patriots Fund launched a new effort to spotlight and support 9 Democratic challengers, only one of whom are on Debbie Wasserman Schultz' corrupt and widely discredited Red to Blue list. Senator Feingold-- unlike most of the behind-the-scenes power brokers in the DCCC Establishment voted against retroactive immunity for Telecom executives. These lawbreakers have been huge campaign donors for corrupt Republicans and for corrupt Democrats-- of course, McCain was their # 1 recipient, but, aside from presidential candidates, this year's biggest Telecom bribes went to immunity proponents Jay Rockefeller (D-WV- $53,000), Rahm Emanuel (D-IL- $49,950), and Ted Stevens (R-AK- $41,400)-- and the legislation was only able to pass because corrupt Democratic leaders like Steny Hoyer, Rahm Emanuel, Jim Clyburn and Nancy Pelosi skulked across the aisle with enough Democrats so that Bush's FISA bill could be enacted.

Feingold seems to understand that what America needs is not just more Democrats to take orders from a hideous monstrosity like Rahm Emanuel but better Democrats who are capable of thinking for themselves and serving the interests of working families, not of the special interests that finance the political careers of the Hoyers and Emanuels of the Beltway Establishment. Although, in the interests of self perpetuation, the crooked DCCC power brokers have included some progressive and grassroots candidates on their list of recommended candidates-- Victoria Wulsin, Jim Himes, Tom Perriello, Joe Garcia, Eric Massa, Judy Baker, Martin Heinrich, Jon Powers, Mark Schauer, Bob Lord, Charlie Brown, Darcy Burner, Judy Feder, Larry Kissell, Dan Maffei, Ashwin Madia, and Gary Peters are commendable standouts-- much of the list reads like a hall of shame from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. It is stuffed full of shills and reactionaries like Paul Carmouche (LA), Ethan Berkowitz (AK), Christine Jennings (FL), Gerry Connolly (VA), Suzanne Kosmas (FL), Bobby Bright (AL), Michael McMahon (NY), Kathy Dahlkemper (PA), Steve Dreihaus (OH), Don Cravins (LA), Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ), Harry Teague (NM) and Frank Kratovil (MD), Blue Dogs and corporatists who are as likely to vote against the interests of every day folks as any Republican.

You hear Democratic Party apologists whining that the districts these people are running in are "so conservative" and "so backward" that we have to run reactionary quasi-Republicans. That was Emanuel's lame excuse last cycle for opposing John Hall, Jerry McNerney, Carol Shea-Porter-- all of whom are members of Congress today, voting against Emanuel's and Hoyer's rightist diktats, after having beaten back their puppet primary candidates and entrenched Republican incumbents. Had Emanuel not interfered we would have had Representatives Larry Kissell, Christine Cegelis, Jan Schneider, and Dave Lutrin voting against the war and against disgraces like FISA instead of Republicans (and a proto-Republican in the case of Tim Mahoney) voting with Emanuel and Hoyer and against the Democratic majority for the war and for the FISA bill.

Feingold gets it; Van Hollen and Wasserman Schultz don't. Please go vote in Feingold's contest. There are five great Blue America candidates included:

Sam Bennett (PA-15)
Larry Joe Doherty (TX-10)
Judy Feder (VA-10)
Dennis Shulman (NJ-05)
Annette Taddeo (FL-18)

Each is a fantastic choice and each can use the $5,000 prize Feingold is offering.

IN REAL LIFE, WHAT DO WE MEAN BY "BETTER DEMOCRATS?" LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT ONE: HOWARD SHANKER

From left: Actor Rodney Grant, who played Wind in His Hair in the movie Dances with Wolves, Howard Shanker (center), and Donovan Brown, attorney with the Navajo Department of Justice.

I can't predict what Congress will be voting on starting in January, 2009 when Donna Edwards takes her seat. But I can predict that she will base her votes and the work she does in Congress on progressive values and principles, not on the slippery slope of bribes from special interests that are disguised as campaign contributions. Please watch this 39 second clip Donna shot right after being declared the winner yesterday. It will give you a good idea about where she is headed as a member of Congress.



Another Blue America-endorsed candidate, Howard Shanker in AZ-01-- a district being abandoned by the corrupt Republican incumbent, Rick Renzi, so he can spent all his time and energy in keeping out of prison-- has responded today to the so-called economic stimulus bill Bush signed yesterday. Like Donna, Howard is facing an Establishment hack backed by the worst elements of the Democratic Inside the Beltway careerist community. She has no issues, just a lust for a good job in Washington. Howard, like Donna, is an independent-minded, grassroots activist with a forthright and progressive approach to problem-solving. When we talk about BETTER Democrats, we're talking about people like Donna Edwards, Darcy Burner, Jim Himes, Victoria Wulsin, Dennis Shulman, Andrew Rice, Sam Bennett, Alan Grayson, Howard Shanker and the other Blue America candidates.

Here's Howard's response to this flawed legislation and the context in which it needs to be examined:

A POLITICALLY DRIVEN ECONOMIC STIMULUS PACKAGE CANNOT TAKE THE PLACE OF REASONED ECONOMIC POLICY AND PLANNING

-by Howard Shanker

The bi-partisan stimulus package that President Bush signed with much fanfare yesterday says more about what is wrong with our political process than what it is wrong with our economy. The $168 billion package is a triumph of political expediency over economic basics and common sense.
 
We are faced with a unique situation. After seven years of reckless government spending and a protracted war, our economy should be booming. Instead, consumer confidence in our economic future is at an all time low and we appear to be sliding into recession. The nation’s unemployment rate has jumped. Retail sales are down. Manufacturing activity is down. And our housing and credit markets are flailing-- largely as a result of our banking institutions gambling on sub-prime mortgages.
 
Any stimulus package should have considered our dire fiscal situation. Under President Bush we have gone from record budget surpluses to record deficits.  We will all have to pay for this. My family’s share alone of the increase in our national debt under President Bush is nearly $60,000. We cannot afford to do anything but make sure any stimulus package is narrowly tailored to put money where it is needed for maximum effect. 
 
Instead, our government will spend about $168 billion it does not have on programs that will have questionable, if any, impact on stimulating our economy. Sending checks to people, as planned, will simply increase the deficit with no assurance of any economic boost. Direct rebates may make sense when there is a surplus, but under the current circumstances, it is fiscally irresponsible. The same is true for the business tax credits included in the package. Similar credits were part of the last stimulus package and had no discernable short term economic impact. Indeed, rather than providing tax credits, Congress should have considered creating disincentives for companies shipping jobs overseas.
 
It is telling that the most effective part of the pending stimulus package, is not even part of the package. By reducing interest rates, the Federal Reserve has done its part to help stabilize the housing market and the economy. There are, however, two other things that could have had an immediate impact on the economy without increasing the deficit. Neither of which made it into the package: (1) extend unemployment and food stamp benefits; and (2) release strategic petroleum reserves or at least stop filling them. This could have reduced fuel prices and provided immediate relief to the entire economy. It could have also helped those struggling to pay home heating costs.     
We also need to begin to think about the economy over the longer term. Instead of eliminating estate taxes for the largest estates, why not create jobs by investing in our aging infrastructure. As many as one-quarter of our highway bridges are structurally deficient and we simply lose about 20% of our water supply nationally because of aging and inadequate distribution systems. Reliable estimates have shown that every $1 billion spent on construction and maintenance of our nation’s infrastructure creates approximately 47,500 jobs.
 
We also need to provide tax incentives for the generation of power through renewable resources like wind and solar. Such incentives are necessary to influence the shift away from a carbon based economy and to provide sustainable energy and jobs over the longer term. Given our reliance on foreign oil and our concern over reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it would make sense that such incentives would have been kept in place and increased as warranted. In Washington, however, these items were specifically rejected for inclusion in the stimulus package.
 
Since for the foreseeable future any spending the government does will be deficit spending, as taxpayers it is our responsibility to, at least, insist that the government spend the money it does not have, in a meaningful way. Although a short term boost to the economy would be nice, turning our economy around is not going to happen overnight. We need a systemic change that considers long term growth and sustainability, as opposed to greed and short term economic gain, as the basis for our economic policies. We need an informed electorate who understand that immediate gratification is sometimes beyond our reach-- a lesson we teach our children every day. We can weather the purely cyclical aspects of any economic downturn, if we start putting strategies into place that help maximize the potential for economic growth and prosperity into the future.  
 
Thomas Edison said that three essentials to achieving anything worthwhile were hard work, perseverance, and common sense. Unfortunately, the stimulus package demonstrates that common sense is not very common in Washington these days.

DONNA EDWARDS-- A VOICE FOR POST-BUSH AMERICA

Let me lay it right on the line. A couple of months ago when Bush flew to Seattle to do a fundraiser for rubber stamp hack Dave Reichert, the blogosphere dug deep and helped Darcy Burner outraise Bush and Reichert. How different is it for another creature from Inside the Beltway, Madam Off the Table, to be headlining a fundraiser for one of the most treacherous and sleazy Democrats in Congress, Al Wynn? Wynn has no Republican challenge. Pelosi is shameless-- and quickly losing all credibility. She is there to make sure Wynn can beat a brilliant, energetic and progressive real Democrat, Donna Edwards. If Donna Edwards were in Congress instead of Al Wynn, Maryland would have one of the nation's sharpest public policy minds at work for it. And America would have someone who understands what a progressive is and understands that the role of government is not just self-enrichment for officials.

Democrats like Donna Edwards, Mark Pera, and John Laesch are all in primary battles against reactionary hacks. They are battling the Insider socialization and the Democratic Establishment mindset that worked hand in glove to present our country with, and perpetuate, the foul Regime of George W. Bush. At best, Madam Off the Table has turned from a true blue progressive to a George Bush co-dependent. At worst she is a full-fledged collaborator.

George Bush will finally be gone in January of 2009, in all likelihood replaced by Hillary Clinton who will have to be a lot more progressive-- and a lot less a part of establishment insider corruption-- than her husband ever was to even begin to tackle the real mess being left by 8 years of the toxic Bush Regime. I have my doubts that she will measure up to the job; I hope I'm wrong. And that makes it even more essential to elect men and women like Donna Edwards, Mark Pera and John Laesch. Imagine being rid of the likes of Bush Dogs Al Wynn and Dan Lipinski, not to mention ultimate rubber stamp Denny Hastert-- 3 of the root causes of all that is wrong in Washington-- and replacing them with the best and the brightest!

We have seen this year that it is not good enough to just replace horrible Republicans with mediocre-- or worse than mediocre-- Democrats. There is probably little we can do, at least right now, to rid ourselves of Republican-lite garbage like John Barrow and Jim Marshall in Georgia, Gene Taylor in Mississippi or Chris Carney and Jason Altmire in Pennsylvania-- let alone Steny Hoyer or Rahm Emanuel. But Al Wynn and Dan Lipinski are weak and faltering and Donna Edwards and Mark Pera are strong and ascending. Simultaneously, the insider millionaire shill in IL-14, Blue Dog Bill Foster, is a laughing stock everywhere west of DCCC headquarters (not counting those whose fealty he has purchased) and John Laesch is poised to stomp his Blue Dog ass into the ground. Laesch is a natural and energetic leader for serious progressives who understands there is a real job to do in this country.

Saturday Nancy Pelosi Madam Off the Table will be in Silver Spring to help a reactionary and corrupt tool of the Bush Regime raise money to fight a strong and vibrant progressive voice. Pelosi knows no shame. She is owned by Hoyer and Emanuel and the Clinton Machine. She is them and not us. Let's give some special help over the next few days to Donna Edwards' campaign. Matt Stoller put together a special Act Blue page, Better Democrats that I want to invite you to visit. Matt also has a powerful explanation of what we're trying to accomplish over at OpenLeft, as does Jane at FDL. Donna's campaign put together a special Halloween video for today I thought you might enjoy:



And let me leave you with a statement from James Rucker of Color of Change:

"Black Americans have long relied on Black elected officials like Al Wynn to represent their interests in Washington, and far too often, they find those leaders unaccountable and compromised. Al Wynn has repeatedly worked against the interests of his Black constituents, siding instead with big business and the wealthy special interests that fund his campaigns.

Today, we're saying enough is enough. Donna Edwards, Wynn's opponent in the Democratic primary, has been a powerful advocate for policies that benefit the Black community, especially low-income Black folks. She has an excellent record of public service, and we are confident that once in office she will serve her constituents with integrity and accountability.

While Nancy Pelosi holds a fundraiser this weekend in support of one of the least accountable members of the Congressional Black Caucus, we're asking Black folks to stand up, demand better representation, and support Donna Edwards for Congress."