Heritage Calls For The Removal of Criminal Earmarker Ken Calvert From The House Republican Leadership

Two-headed corruption beast

Yesterday Republican sex predator Ken Calvert crawled out from under his rock, tweeted something about Nancy Pelosi not delivering jobs and slithered away again. I wondered what caused the roly poly Inland Empire's crooked congressman to get his mind off his real estate manipulations for a moment to join in the election fray.

Calvert is a notorious shill for Boehner and Cantor and is widely viewed as an ineffectual rubber stamp who rarely strays from the party line. For example, even though the no-strings-attached Wall Street bailout (TARP) was catastrophic for Riverside and Orange counties, and highly unpopular among voters in his district, he stuck with Boehner and Cantor even when a majority of Republican congressmen voted NO. Calvert knew his decision would be unpopular back home but, unlike 108 Republicans, he couldn't say NO to Boehner. He NEVER says no to Boehner... which is why Boehner placed the single most corrupt earmark crook on the Appropriations Committee! In fact he did the exact same thing when it came to voting for taxpayer incentives for U.S. companies to ship jobs to China-- something voters of both parties in the Inland Empire oppose but which Boehner and Calvert supported.

Yesterday, just when Calvert distracted himself from the task always first and foremost on his mind-- using his office to enrich himself personally-- he was blasted by the most influential right-wing think tank in Washington, the Heritage Foundation. They demanded he be removed from the House Republican Steering Committee, which advises Boehner on committee assignments. Citing his horrifying record on spending and earmarks, Heritage Action For America blasted him as part of a group of members "responsible for Republicans losing their way on spending...."

Basically, what they're recommending is removing known criminals like Calvert, Jerry Lewis and Hal Rogers, taking some of the power away from corrupting elements like Boehner, Cantor and Tom Cole and putting in some of the extremist loons who are more ideologically pure (albeit insane) like Jeb Hensarling, Tom Price, Tom McClintock, Scott Garrett, Jeff Flake, and Tom Graves.

"Plain and simple, Ken Calvert was a willing accomplice to President Bush's creation of massive amounts of debt," said Bill Hedrick, Calvert's Democratic challenger, a member of the Corona-Norco Board of Education and the Blue America-endorsed candidate. "From his vote to bail out Wall Street, his abuse of taxpayer-funded franked mail and his profiting $435,000 after increasing the value of his properties through his own earmarks, the guy just cannot be trusted to do the right thing with our money."

Even far right GOP fanatics agree that Calvert's consistent record of crooked self-dealing is a disgrace that needs to be dealt with, even if it means losing his seat to a more honest Democrat. Below is a Fox news report by Chris Wallace on just one aspect of Ken Calvert's shady and criminal behavior. It isn't too late to help Bill Hedrick win this one.

Bush's Greatest Regret-- Progressives' Most Solemn Pledge

Now you could probably rattle off a dozen of Bush's worst blunders and most tragic errors with your eyes closed, right? And I bet one of them wouldn't be his failure, despite gigantic efforts, to privatize Social Security. But speaking to a roomful of bankers and financial lobbyists in Chicago yesterday, Bush said his greatest regret was not having been able to do what Republicans have tried for 75 years: dismantle Social Security. Not to worry, of course, the surging GOP is vowing to try again if they're able to seize power on November 2. And our spine-deficient president is probably frothing at the mouth for some nice bipartisanship on this, especially with the Republican he loves most, Paul Ryan, leading the way.

As we saw the other day, 136 progressives, following the lead of Raúl Grijalva, sent Obama a letter telling him they will not go along with Republican plans to balance the budget on the backs of senior citizens. They served notice to the Republicans and to Obama that if they cobble together a coalition of the Republicans and the conservative Democrats (Blue Dogs in the House and ConservaDems in the Senate), there are enough real Democrats to give them the fight of a lifetime. 

It's a fight Boehner very much wants to fight, and-- unless Justin Coussoule knocks him off in his own Ohio district-- we have to pray that electorally vulnerable stalwart progressives like Alan Grayson, John Hall, Mary Jo Kilroy, Carol Shea-Porter, Raúl Grijalva and Betty Sutton keep their seats. Even if, as looks likely, the Democrats lose as many as two dozen Blue Dogs and fellow travelers (like Suzanne Kosmas and Ann Kirkpatrick), as long as the progressives hold on, Nancy Pelosi will remain Speaker. And, regardless of what kinds of bipartisan compromise Obama works out with Boehner and Ryan and, if he should not be swept away with the rest of the garbage, anti-Social Security Blue Dog Allen Boyd, Pelosi will be a bulwark against any damage to Social Security under any circumstances. She even addressed Bush's stupid Chicago comments on her blog yesterday.

Out plugging his new book, former President George W. Bush today lamented losing his 2005 attempt to privatize Social Security... Just imagine if the Bush-GOP effort to turn Social Security over to the whims of Wall Street had succeeded. When seniors saw trillions of dollars of their own investments wiped out in the Bush financial meltdown on Wall Street, they also would have seen sharp losses in Social Security benefits.

...Three new studies were released examining the impact of the current Ryan/Republican Social Security privatization plans. All three reports find the GOP’s plans to privatize Social Security and turn it over to the whims of Wall Street would cut Social Security benefits for seniors. From the Wall Street Journal article, Social Security Study Finds GOP Plans Would Bring Big Cuts:

Republican proposals to overhaul Social Security would substantially reduce future benefits for people now entering the workforce, according to a new analysis from Social Security Administration’s chief actuary.

…“The new analysis reveals that these proposals result in benefits cuts ranging from 10% to as high as 50%,” said Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D., N.D.), one of the Democrats who requested the study. “That’s not what I’d call ’saving’ Social Security.”

…A worker born in 1985 whose earnings averaged $43,000 would receive 17% less at retirement than current law promises, as a result of Mr. Ryan’s proposal to change the inflation index. His proposed increase in the retirement age would reduce benefits by another 8%, according to the actuary’s analysis.

It is without question that privatizing Social Security and turning it over to Wall Street is very much part of the Congressional Republican agenda, backed by unprecedented amounts of secret money from shadowy special interests.

Last night progressive champion Elaine Marshall, North Carolina's fighting Secretary of State, duked it out with reactionary anti-family radical Richard Burr in the campaign's last debate. Burr, a Wall Street puppet and Chamber of Commerce shill, is one of the most eager of all the right-wing extremists to gut Social Security. He tries buying off seniors by saying it won't affect them, just future generations. He soft-pedaled it during the debates, of course, but he blames Social Security-- rather than bloated military budgets, corporate welfare or billions annually in tax cuts for the wealthiest few Americans-- for the deficit and has said over and over again that the retirement age should be raised and that there shouldn't be cost of living allowances that permit seniors' buying power to keep pace with inflation. 

In August, at a candidates' forum, Burr blurted out, "We gotta raise the retirement age… I think we’re gonna have to look at Social Security recipients above a certain income threshold and say ‘you’re above that threshold, you don’t get a cost of living increase.’ And that's all in an effort to try to get a glide path that's manageable in an entitlement program.” And as much as he struggles to obscure his record just before election time, Burr supported Bush’s plan to privatize Social Security during the 2004 campaign. In 2004, the Charlotte Observer reported that Burr “supports President Bush's proposal to allow younger workers to fund voluntary personal savings accounts with money that now goes to their payroll taxes.” 

In fact, Burr told the Winston-Salem Journal in March 2005 that he was "amazed" that some people opposed privatizing Social Security along the lines Bush was trying to drag the country to. Two years later he voted for an amendment by his guru Jim DeMint to set up personal investment accounts under Social Security, the first step toward dismantling the program. The only other senators facing reelection November 2 who also voted to destroy Social Security are Tom Coburn (R-OK), DeMint, of course, Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Johnny Isakson (R-GA), John McCain (R-AZ), Lisa Murkowsky (R-AK), John Thune (R-SD) and, of course, unrehabilitated sex predator David Vitter (R-LA).

Of course, Elaine Marshall isn't the only progressive Democrat standing up for working families and fighting back against this reactionary crap. She's on our short list of Senate challengers because she does it so well. Over on the House side, all of the Blue America-endorsed candidates have pledged to fight against any and all attempts to disadvantage Social Security, whether that comes from the Republicans or from Obama's Cat Food Commission. Yesterday Bill Hedrick (D-CA) was touring Riverside and Orange counties with DFA Chairman Jim Dean and once again publicly pledged to fight any attempts to privatize Social Security and called on Congress to keep its "hands off" the successful program. "Social Security isn't some sort of lab specimen for career politicians in Washington to experiment with," he said. “My opponent voted to implement President Bush's privatization plan, but I stand with the people in telling Congress and Ken Calvert to keep their hands off Social Security."

Hedrick was referring to a vote on July 25, 2001, on an amendment offered by Bob Filner to prohibit funds for the purpose of implementing the final report of Bush's anti-Social Security Commission. Calvert voted NO, in effect voting to advance the implementation of a Social Security privatization plan developed by Bush. The commission was criticized for being stacked with pro-privatization members, even worse than Obama's, and the plan was never implemented.

"When you're Ken Calvert, profiting hundreds of thousands of dollars on land deals subsidized by taxpayer-funded earmarks, then of course you will never realize how important Social Security is to the nearly 90,000 people in our district who rely on it," Hedrick said.

Ken Calvert-- Caught On Tape Again

Ken Calvert (R-sex predator) is at it again-- using his pet issue of 'illegal immigrants are bad' for political gain while setting a double standard for himself and his supporters. And this time, as you can hear above, we’ve got audio!

Ken Calvert, a notorious Republican racist, was trying to ingratiate himself with Fox viewers after voting for the Bush no-strings-attached Wall Street TARP bailout and for NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO/GATT and every other piece of outsourcing legislation ever proposed, at a Tea Party Rally in Orange County. Happily for Calvert, the focus wasn't on personal corruption (a weak spot of his) or on bailouts for banksters but on the one thing he and the teabaggers have in common: racism, and how “illegals” are voting illegally and destroying America. In the video above, Teabagger #1 says he is from England and has a green card, then clearly tells the Congressman that he committed voter fraud by voting illegally in the primary election earlier this year:

Teabagger: “During the primaries this season, I’m a legal alien from England, so I have a green card, I went to Trabuco Hills High. No problem, for me to vote. Yeah I had a friend of mine who went in Riverside and another one who went in to Santa Ana, no one questioned anything. No I... nothing.”

Calvert’s response to this admission of a non-citizen voting illegally?

Congressman Ken Calvert: “Well, uh, it’s a growing problem, and, uh, especially in my Congressional district which is 42 percent Hispanic. And we’re gonna have to deal with it in an aggressive way. I mean, voting is a privilege and should only be given to American citizens.”

The audio isn't perfect (there’s some teabagging harpy shrieking in the background about illegals and the flag?), so set the volume on your computer to full blast and hear the Congressman ignore a felony admission of voter fraud while taking another opportunity to scapegoat the Latino population that makes up nearly half of his district.

Something tells me Kenny-boy isn't too good under pressure. Like when he got caught by one of Corona's finest in his Ford Taurus getting serviced by a heroin-addicted prostitute. When the officer asked him what was going on, Calvert said "We're just talking, that's all, nothing else," while trying to “cover his unzipped pants with his hand.

By all means, click on Calvert's arrest record to read it

So when this English teabagger tells Calvert he voted illegally and made a mockery of our democracy, Calvert’s brain immediately defaulted to his favorite talking point-- blaming “illegals” for everything. And since, in Calvert’s world view, all brown people are illegal, then the 42% of Hispanic people living in Calvert’s district are a serious problem and, according to Calvert, need to be dealt with “in an aggressive way.”

Fortunately, we have an opportunity to replace a radically racist member of Congress with a true progressive champion-- one who vocally supports real health care reform and bringing all our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan. Bill Hedrick, an educator and School Board member, is running strong against Ken Calvert after almost defeating him in 2008. Bill is a family man with children who are actively serving in the military. Calvert got sued for not paying his alimony. We can also expect more from Bill Hedrick when it comes to representing the Hispanic community in the district-- Bill speaks fluent Spanish and spent many years working in bilingual education.

Bill was one of the first candidates endorsed by Blue America this year. Please help him get rid of Ken Calvert in November. This is a race that can be won and we can replace a racist, sexually obsessed Republican with a real progressive Democrat who has proven he's all about representing middle class working families, not special interests and Big Business. As you know, the elections are in just a few weeks, Bill needs whatever help you can give him-- and you can do that right here. The first 5 donors tonight who give at least $25 will get autographed copies of Russ Baker's spectacular book, Family of Secrets.

Another Labor Day Perspective-- Bill Hedrick Tells Us Where We Go From Here

Bill Hedrick was one of the first candidates Blue America endorsed this cycle. He's running for the southern California seat currently held by serial real estate swindler Ken Calvert. Bill reminds us that Labor Day isn't just about Hot dogs and hamburgers, barbeques, beer, parades and picnics. Since 1894 it's been a day off from work specifically to honor American labor. He writes that "today, working families in California’s 44th District need more than holiday honors. Parades and picnics are not going to change the reality in which we live. Free trade agreements like NAFTA have destroyed jobs and opportunity and gutted our economy. Un-American corporations, quietly working against our national interest, have exported jobs of working families. Manufacturing in the United States is on economic life support, as are our families whose salaries are eroded and benefits battered to swell the corporate 'bottom line'.”

To get us back on track, we need more than Labor Day good wishes-- we need a plan.  The economic agenda for 2010 must be recovery and reinvestment in America. To accomplish this, I propose an aggressive, multifaceted solution:

• Tax credits for private sector job creation

• Tax credits for companies that maintain an American workforce

• Reconstruction of our infrastructure, including roads, bridges, water and sewer systems

• Public/private partnerships to vastly expand and improve efficiency of clean energy technologies

• Mitigate entrepreneurial risk to spur development of the innovation economy


Further reform of the banking/credit system:

• Break up institutions that are “too big to fail”

• Reintroduce firewalls between securities, insurance and lending institutions

• Tax speculative financial transactions

• Pass a 15% cap on credit card interest

Stop bleeding jobs:

• Withdrawal from and/or dramatic renegotiation of trade agreements (NAFTA, WTO, etc.) that favor wealthy and corporate interests at the expense of the middle class and working families

• Create fair trade agreements with partners who support appropriate labor and environmental standards

• Rebuild important manufacturing sectors in America-- stop off-shoring manufacturing that undermines our national security.

A good way to celebrate Labor Day-- above and beyond the picnics and parades... contributing to replacing Ken Calvert with Bill Hedrick. You can do it right here at Blue America.

Maybe President Obama is paying attention to what Bill has been saying-- or maybe someone just stuffed a rag in Tiny Tim Geithner's face-- but according to this morning's NYTimes, the president is about to propose a massive, long-overdue public works program to pump "as much as $50 billion in government spending to start up a long-term public works plan emphasizing transportation projects-- roads, rail and airport runways." This is exactly what hard-pressed areas like the Inland Empire districts need and yet while you have local leaders like Bill Hedrick, Beth Krom, Steve Pougnet and Pat Meagher applauding the effort, Washington political hacks like Ken Calvert, John Campbell, Mary Bono-Mack and Jerry Lewis are reflexively attacking it. Obstructionist orange golfer John Boehner put right-wing opposition into words, posturing: "As the American people, facing near double-digit unemployment, mark Labor Day by asking, where are the jobs, the White House has chosen to double-down on more of the same failed ‘stimulus’ spending... We don’t need more government ‘stimulus’ spending-– we need to end Washington Democrats’ out-of-control spending spree, stop their tax hikes, and create jobs by eliminating the job-killing uncertainty that is hampering our small businesses.”

Mr. Obama’s plan would call for investment over six years, the White House says it would be front-loaded with an initial investment of $50 billion in taxpayer money, to help create jobs in as early as next year. The administration says it would work with Congress to find ways to pay for the plan, so that it would not add to the nation’s rising deficit. One possibility would be to cut existing subsidies for oil and gas exploration and production. Historically, transportation projects have been paid for largely with dedicated taxes such as those on gasoline.

White House officials said Mr. Obama wanted to rebuild 15,000 miles of roads, construct and maintain 4,000 miles of railway – enough track to span the continent-- and rehabilitate or reconstruct 150 miles of airport runways while putting in place a system that would reduce travel time and airport delays.

The president will also call for what the White House is describing as an “infrastructure bank” that would focus on paying for national and regional transportation projects.

The $787 billion economic recovery act passed by Congress at the beginning of Mr. Obama’s presidency already included considerable spending on roads and other transportation infrastructure. But the White House says Mr. Obama’s new plan is different, because it would focus on a “long-term vision” as well as create jobs in the near term.

Since the end of last year, when the long-term surface transportation legislation expired, infrastructure investments have been continued on a temporary basis, even as a trust fund that finances them has fallen into insolvency, the White House said. Mr. Obama’s plan would call on Congress to enact a long-term reauthorization of that bill.

UPDATE: Weekends

God created a day of rest so it was hard for the ruling elite to fight it-- but they certainly did fight against the concept of a 2-day weekend. Labor unions beat them back. Do you like weekends? Vote for union-friendly candidates like Bill Hedrick. Or just give me a sopor:

Fox News' Chris Wallace Takes A Little Look At California Congressman Ken Calvert

It's a mistake to just think about Calvert's arrest record for having sex with a young heroin addict in a parked car in a park as the main reason he's widely considered one of the half dozen most corrupt members of Congress. Remember, Calvert came to Congress as a real estate speculator and swindler, the theme of Fox News' report above. If you live in Southern California it's especially important that you watch it, since his shenanigans are almost typical of GOP members and far more serious than anything Charlie Rangel is being accused of. Short version: he buys nearly worthless properties in the middle of nowhere, then earmarks taxpayer money for highways and other improvements-- exactly what Denny Hastert and Jerry Lewis were infamous for doing-- then sells the land for a hefty personal profit. Republicans don't see anything wrong with this. Do you?

Blue America has endorsed Calvert's progressive opponent, Bill Hedrick, and right now we're running a little contest looking for the most despicable Republican to put in our next There's A Republican For That ad. Calvert hasn't gotten very many votes. But he deserves some. Please watch the video above and see if you want to vote for Calvert as the worst Republican around.

OK, Let's Get To The Bottom Of L'Affaire James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010

Take a look at the now famous-- and lionized-- Anthony Weiner outburst on the House floor yesterday and then let me start this conversation in the most benign possible way. Although I got at least two dozen formal campaign e-mails about this today, including from Weiner's reelection campaign-- the best one came from Bill Hedrick:

On Thursday, Congressman Ken Calvert, representing residents in Riverside an Orange counties, cast a vote against providing health coverage for the heroes of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

With most other Republicans, Calvert voted against the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010, which focused on 9/11 first responders, such as police, paramedics and firefighters. The bill would have ensured health care for those that fell ill from the toxic dust and debris from the falling World Trade Center towers and would have been paid for by closing tax loopholes on foreign businesses operating in the United States.

"This is just another typical example of Congressman Calvert placing the demands of his party bosses before the needs of the American people, in this case the heroes of 9/11," said Kristopher Daams, Communications Director for the Bill Hedrick for Congress campaign. "Apparently, providing care for those who responded to the deadliest terrorist attack on our nation's soil is nothing more than a 'massive new entitlement program' to Ken Calvert, but bailing out Wall Street isn't."

House leadership put the bill up for a vote without opportunities for amendments, requiring a special rule requiring a 2/3 vote in support for passage.

Sounds perfectly reasonable, right? It is. Nancy Pelosi went for it too, but that's where I started feeling a little queasy about the whole thing and started thinking about it as a kind of stunt.

Tonight the House considered the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act (HR 847) under suspension of the rules to provide medical monitoring and treatment to responders and survivors of the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks. It also reopens the September 11 Victim Compensation Fund to provide monetary compensation for those physically injured by the 9/11 terrorist attacks or by response activities and debris removal... The final vote was 255-159 in support of the bill, short of the 2/3 majority needed for passage under suspension of the rules. 155 Republicans voted against the legislation.

"155 Republicans voted against the legislation" with a total of 159 opposed only means one thing: Democrats crossed the aisle. It turns out, so did some Republicans. In fact-- for all Weiner's and Pelosi's yelping about Republicans-- three times more Republicans (12) crossed the aisle to vote with the Democrats on this, than the shameful 4 conservative Democrats crossing in the other direction to join forces, as they often do, with Boehner and Cantor to oppose it.

So, of course, the culprits are all corrupt ConservaDems on their own ego trips: Melissa Bean (IL), leader of Rahm Emanuel's Chamber of Commerce owned New Dems, and 3 mangy old Blue Dogs, Jim Cooper (TN), Bobby Bright (AL) and Obama-hater Marion Berry (AR), drunk as usual. But Weiner just screamed "Republicans" and so did Pelosi and so are all the Democrats making hay out of this today. And what kind of punishment will be meted out to these Boehner Boys? The same kind that was meted out to Democrats who opposed healthcare reform, or Wall Street reform or who voted against women's Choice or who opposed including gays in Hate Crimes legislation. They wind up on the DCCC Front Line list and are given hundreds of thousands of dollars in TV advertising to trick unsuspecting Democrats in their home districts into thinking they actually vote for the Democratic agenda. If you give one dollar to the DCCC, almost every cent of it will go towards supporting ConservaDems who vote against the reason we elect Democrats in the first place! They just announced they would be doing twenty some odd million dollars in campaign ads for most of the worst "Democratic" members of Congress but managed to leave out Alan Grayson.

So two things: don't give the DCCC any money; donate it to Alan Grayson and other progressives instead. And keep in mind that when the Inside the Beltway crew sets something like this up and gets hysterical about "Republicans," they should really be talking about conservatives-- and that's a bipartisan disease. Don't fall for this crap! The money you give them goes to characters like Bobby Bright who voted with the GOP Weiner and Pelosi were railing against on the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010:

Eric Cantor Collecting A Lot Of Dirty Money To Pass Along To Easily Corruptible Republican House Candidates

So far this cycle Eric Cantor's PAC-- ERIC PAC (Every Republican Is Crucial)-- the largest of any political action committee controlled by any member of Congress, has raised $2,640,602. His PAC is a way for big corporations to funnel cash into Republican races and the biggest contributors come from the industries that Democrats have worked on regulating this year:

Wall Street- $251,100
Insurance- $209,750
Real Estate- $118,500
Pharmaceuticals/Health Products- $118,000
Lobbyists- $93,900

The biggest single batch of contributors comes from tobacco giant Altria ($42,250) followed by predatory and shady hedge fund speculators SAC Capital Advisors ($31,500). Toxic corporate entities like Altria and SAC Capital are not just buying influence with an up-and-comer like Cantor, they also get to funnel their cash into campaigns of other GOP pawns without the public knowing they're doing so. This way, for example, California independent voters have no way of knowing that these sleazy operators are behind the $10,000 donations Cantor gave sex predator Ken Calvert, extremist Tom McClintock, dirt bag lobbyist Brian Bilbray and Wall Street bailout queen Mary Bono Mack or the 5 grand pops he doled out to John Campbell, Dan Lungren, Dana Rohrabacher and real estate swindler Gary Miller. Blue America-endorsed Bill Hedrick is running for the Inland Empire congressional seat currently held by Cantor crony Ken Calvert. We reached him yesterday and he wasn't shy about giving us his perspective on these kinds of shenanigans.

What can I say-- Ken Calvert is your classic Washington politician who uses his constituents as a perch to be a player three thousand miles away in DC's lobbyist culture. He's pretty adept at getting special interests to fund his campaigns, but ask anybody here in his district what he's done for them and all they can point to are his shady land dealings and his abuse of the earmark system to fatten his bank account.

Part of the reason why people are so cynical about politics is because of the power special interests have, and Ken Calvert has done nothing to stop that because he benefits from it. He's a typical party-line guy who isn't going to rock the boat. It would probably take an act of god to see a Washington politician like him turn off the spigot of special interest money that gets in the way of solving some of our country's bigger problems.

Cantor has been handing out large sums to Republican incumbents and challengers, making sure dirty money from operators like SAC make their way into the "right" hands. "So far during the 2010 election cycle, his political action committee, Every Republican Is Crucial has donated more than $1 million to 156 Republican candidates. That’s more than hundreds of thousands above what any other such PAC connected to a lawmaker or candidate has reported, according to a CQ MoneyLine study of PACs through the second quarter of 2010. We got in touch with Bethlehem Mayor John Callahan, the Democrat challenging sleazy Wall Street shill Charlie Dent in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley this year. Like Bill Hedrick, he's not surprised by Dent's and Cantor's shady dealings. “Congressman Dent has taken over $2.7 million in PAC money," he told us, "and on the day that the Senate failed to pass the DISCLOSE ACT, Charlie Dent's campaign manager was bragging about all of the money Eric Cantor is raising for him. Wall Street has enough Congressmen working for them like Boehner, Cantor and my opponent Charlie Dent. We need to send a very clear message to the corporate special interests and foreign nationals that we will not allow them to secretly buy Congressmen by going on the offense against their loyalists in these final three months of the election.”

Unemployment Benefits Finally Approved

DCCC begs us to keep shelling out cash so Walt Minnick can keep voting with the GOP on... everything!

Yesterday the House voted one last time-- so that their bill and the one the Senate finally passed this week would be identical and Obama could sign it, retroactively sending missed insurance compensation checks to over 2.6 million Americans thrown out of work by the very policies put forward by the conservatives who voted against unemployment insurance! The final vote in the House yesterday was 272-152, 10 worthless conservative Democrats joining Boehner to form a coalition against working families and 31 Republicans crossing the aisle in the other direction, mostly too scared to vote against their own constituents.

The treacherous Democrats-- exactly the types the DCCC is sure to give the most support in the upcoming midterms-- are retiring Washington shithead Brian Baird, Marion Berry (Blue Dog-AR), Bobby Bright (Blue Dog-AL), Jim Cooper (Blue Dog-TN), Baron Hill (Blue Dog-IN), Betsy Markey (Blue Dog-CO), Mike McIntyre (Blue Dog-NC), Walt Minnick (Blue Dog-ID), Glenn Nye (Blue Dog-VA), Heath Shuler (Blue Dog-NC)... oh, an angry, retiring mentally unbalanced guy and 9 reactionary Blue Dogs. What a shock!

Speaker Pelosi was quick to blame Republicans responsible for causing this mess-- and rightly so-- but it strikes me as a little hypocritical that she rails against them and doesn't say a word about conservative Democrats who did the same-- and who are getting millions of dollars in DCCC re-election funds from a DCCC that she controls.

This emergency legislation will extend unemployment insurance (UI) benefits to millions of Americans families, which Republicans have held up for more than 7 weeks causing an estimated 2.5 million families to lose their lifeline that they have earned through their work... This is urgently needed after weeks of Senate Republicans’ ongoing obstruction of job creating legislation that extended critical unemployment benefits to help Americans who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own make ends meet as they look for a new job. We will not abandon these families.

Note: without the connivance of conservative Democrat Ben Nelson, the bill would have passed weeks ago and averted the tragedy for hundreds of thousands of American families. That said, most conservatives-- and especially most conservative sociopaths without consciences are Republicans. John Campbell, a far right California congressman from Orange County, voted against the unemployment extension once again yesterday. His opponent, former Irvine Mayor Beth Krom, currently on that city's Council, has been endorsed by Blue America-- and, of course, ignored by the DCCC. We called her after the vote yesterday and she told us she was disappointed-- but not surprised-- that Campbell wasn't among the nearly three dozen Republicans who put aside their partisan agenda for a moment to do something for average Americans in a tough spot. “Once again," she said, "as Congress in a rare show of bipartisan support voted to extend jobless benefits for 2.5 million unemployed Americans, John Campbell decided partisanship was more important than leadership. While Mr. Campbell makes excuses that he can’t support something if he doesn’t know exactly where the money is coming from, he conveniently forgets voting to support two wars as well as the bailout of Wall Street and the auto industry without ever concerning himself with how it would be paid for. The truth is, a lot of those 2.5 million unemployed Americans have people like John Campbell to thank for supporting policies that undermined our national economy.”

Just down the road a ways Blue America has another progressive candidate, Bill Hedrick, running against another reactionary shill, corrupt sleazebag Ken Calvert, who also refused to join in the bipartisan support to help the unemployed workers. "While I'm glad Congress finally passed extending unemployment benefits," said Hedrick, "it's sad to see local families being held hostage by the partisan political games Republicans like Ken Calvert are playing in Washington. Congressman Calvert should be ashamed of himself for using local families as pawns to score political points and for turning his back on his constituents when they needed his support the most."

Interestingly, every single Republican the Blue America candidates are running against voted in opposition to the extension: Michele Bachmann, John Boehner, Calvert, Campbell, and, of course, North Carolina crackpot Virginia Foxx. Ah... yes, crackpot Virginia Foxx... I called Billy Kennedy what the folks in western North Carolina think about Foxx's anti-family antics. He told me that around 9,300 of her constituents "have lost their jobs due to outsourcing to cheaper labor in China."

Her reasoning is that the government cannot possibly be expected to help those who are desperate to find jobs because it will add to the deficit.

But Virginia Foxx, the richest House member from North Carolina, doesn't worry about her personal tax cuts breaking the bank. She supports huge tax breaks that are extended to the richest Americans, even if the government has to borrow money to pay for it.

The unemployment benefits extension cost $34 billion. Virginia Foxx opposes it. The tax breaks for the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans cost more than one trillion dollars, all of which is borrowed money. Virginia Foxx supports them.

The big tax break windfall Virginia Foxx supports didn't go to most Americans. It didn't go to Americans who work hard days and long hours. It went to the bankers, big oil executives, crooked Wall Street traders, and... Virginia Foxx.

The way I see it, we just can't afford Virginia Foxx's tax break. And we can't afford Rep. Foxx any more either.

Too few jobs have been created in the past 10 years, and good people looking for jobs can't find them. But why should Virginia Foxx care? She's got hers. And you're paying for it.

I'm calling Virginia Foxx out on this hypocrisy. It's clear that she's out of touch, and it's time she took a peek outside those thick walls of Washington and came home to struggle to make ends meet like the rest of us.

Republicans And Their Blue Dog Allies Fight Disclosure Of Where Big Money In Politics Is Coming From

Ordinary Americans on both sides of the red/blue divide reacted the same way to the recent narrow ruling from the corporatist Supreme Court in Citizens United v. FEC, Virtually everyone would like to see whittling away at democracy dealt with. Virtually. Those who don't want to see it dealt with are corporate executives, lobbyists, and, of course, the Republican and Blue Dog office holders who have built their political power from corporate patronage. The first step towards fixing it, the DISCLOSE Act passed yesterday 219-206, only 2 Republicans voting with the American people-- while 36 mostly corrupt Blue Dogs crossed the aisle to stand with corporate hacks like Boehner and Cantor.

Among the bad Democrats yesterday were many of the usual suspects, Boehner Boys like John Barrow (Blue Dog-GA), Melissa Bean (IL), Dan Boren (Blue Dog-OK), Allen Boyd (Blue Dog-FL), Bobby Bright (Blue Dog-AL), Travis Childers (Blue Dog-MS), Mark Critz (DCCC-PA), Joe Donnelly (Blue Dog-IN), Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (Blue Dog-SD), Baron Hill (Blue Dog-IN), Frank Kratovil (Blue Dog-MD), Jim Marshall (Blue Dog-GA), Walt Minnick (Blue Dog-ID), Harry Mitchell (Blue Dog-AZ), Glenn Nye (Blue Dog-VA)... I think you get the picture. It would be more newsworthy if this crew of corporate shills voted with the Democrats!

Earlier this week People For The American Way released a poll showing that 77% of Americans-- including majorities of Democrats, Independents, and Republicans-- support a Constitutional Amendment to reverse Citizens United, and 74% would be more likely to vote for a congressional candidate who felt the same. Let's hope those voters keep that in mind this November, when a safe bet would be to just vote against every single Republican and every single Blue Dog.

Yesterday the opposition to the legislation was led, as usual, by an annoyed John Boehner who seemed to resent he had to waste time in DC when he could be putting away on one of his favorite Florida golf courses. His clownish negativity about reform had to be contrasted to some of his past statements on the subject-- like on Meet the Press on February 11, 2007: “I think what we ought to do is we ought to have full disclosure, full disclosure of all of the money that we raise and how it is spent. And I think that sunlight is the best disinfectant.” One year before he gave a press conference where he also posed as a reform-minded good government type, maybe a little nervous about the incident with the tobacco lobbyist checks on the floor of the House: “The House is going to take up 527 legislation next week. And there may be several proposals on the floor in terms of how we rein in their activity. I think this was a gaping loophole in the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill. I think it needs to be fixed. To have all of this unregulated campaign cash going to these organizations and allowing them to engage in campaign activities without any disclosure is-- it's wrong. And so we've worked closely with Senator McCain. The House needs to deal with this, and we will next week.”

And just two weeks before that, Boehner was bullshitting about 527s: "The 527s were created out of the bipartisan campaign finance reform, something that many of us foresaw, that we were pushing money out of a regulated system into an unregulated system. You know, most people wanted to get rid of soft money because they didn't think it was regulated, even though soft money had to be disclosed in terms of who gave it, what amounts, and how you spent it-- and there were rules around how you could spend it. And when you look at what happened after campaign reform passed, these 527 organizations erupted. There is no disclosure of where their money comes from or how they spend it or what they do with it. And they're spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to influence federal elections. And I believe that these organizations ought to be covered under the same kind of regulations that govern political parties."

And his response yesterday? Aside from voting against what he himself said should be done in the past, he forced Republican discipline so that even members of his caucus uncomfortable with the notion of being labeled as corrupt so close to an elect, were all forced to toe the party line. The Democrat running for the western Ohio seat currently occupied by Boehner, Justin Coussoule expected no more from Boehner. "Why would anyone doubt that John Boehner would vote against restricting the expected avalanche of corporate contributions to extend their domination of our American political process? The idea, as expressed in the Supreme Court’s Citizen’s United decision was foolhardy enough, pretending that corporations such as BP are to be recognized as 'persons' whose free speech and political contributions should be unlimited, but given the level of big oil, tobacco , insurance and pesticide contributions that Boehner chalks up like clockwork is it any wonder that he refuses to support meaningful restraints that ensure the transparency and keep our democracy on life support? Boehner once again has shown that he stands with faceless corporate power against the interests of citizens in his district and across the nation who often suffer from policies that he supports and for which he is richly rewarded by his big money benefactors."

Contrast Boehner's disingenuous approach to that of Jerry Nadler, chair of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. Nadler, calling the bill "an essential bill to reform the campaign finance system in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s January 21st decision in Citizens United v. FEC," said it has been irresponsible of the Supreme Court to rule that corporations are the same as people and have a constitutional right to pump as much money as they want into elections. "The very real danger now is that corporations, some with wholesome sounding names, will be able to use vast sums of concentrated money to further corrupt our political process. Without action, as a result of this activist Supreme Court decision, our electoral system will once again be at the mercy of large moneyed interests. The DISCLOSE Act will make a vast and substantial difference in protecting the integrity of our elections. The DISCLOSE Act, which is the most far-reaching campaign finance reform since McCain-Feingold, will:

•     Prevent government contractors from spending money on elections;

     •     Prevent corporate beneficiaries of TARP from spending money on elections;

     •     Prevent foreign nations, companies and individuals, or U.S. corporations controlled by foreign governments, from exerting influence on U.S. elections;

     •     Prevent campaign spenders from coordinating their activities with candidates and parties, thereby halting manipulation of elections by fly-by-night hit groups funded by corporations such as BP, special interests, foreign companies, and multimillionaires;

     •     Strengthen disclosure of electioneering communications, exposing Wall Street, Big Oil, insurance companies, and other special interest groups behind last minute attack ads and other election ads, and requiring their CEOs to stand by their ads;

     •     Enhance requirements for public disclosure of political expenditures by corporations, unions and non-profit organizations;

     •     Enhance disclaimers in ads, requiring sponsors and top donors to identify themselves and take responsibility for their ads;

     •     Require organizations that lobby to disclose political expenditures under the Lobbying Disclosure Act; and,

     •     Enhance requirements for disclosure of political expenditures to corporate shareholders and member of other organizations.

Another advocate of this bill-- and someone who helped craft it-- was Orlando congressman Alan Grayson. His was the amendment to limit foreign-owned companies from influencing American elections, which passed unanimously, even Republicans too embarrassed to vote against it. The amendment prohibits campaign spending by corporations who have a majority of their shares owned by foreign nationals and bans spending by foreign entities in which a foreign government, foreign government official, or foreign government-controlled company has more than a 5% ownership stake. “American elections are for Americans," he said. "We cannot put the law up for sale, and award government to the highest bidder. Democracy is for the people by the people-- not something into which foreign interests can buy... Foreigners cannot vote in our elections, so they should not be allowed to spend unlimited money to buy votes either. [It] protects against the threat of a corporate takeover of government in America. By keeping control in the hands of citizens, and away from foreign influences, we are protecting our country. Decisions will be made by those with our best interest in mind."

Several of our Blue America candidates fully agree with Grayson that these kinds of decisions are being made by people who do not have our bets interests in mind-- but their own. Oklahoma state Senator Jim Wilson is running against one of the few Democrats to vote with the Republicans on this, reactionary Blue Dog Dan Boren. This morning Jim told me that Boren's vote makes it "even more obvious that Dan Boren believes in a Bourgeois Society in which the wealthy and their offspring and chosen few control the masses. Could it be he thinks the citizens of Oklahoma Congressional District 2 are his proletariat, the poorest class of working people without the ability to select a representative who is not chosen by class?"

Our two Southern California progressive candidates, Beth Krom and Bill Hedrick-- each of whom is challenging one of the recipients of laundered Texas Freedom Fund money (which neither will return)-- both had serious questions about why their opponents refused to vote for the legislation. Bill Hedrick: "Who could oppose the right of citizens to know who is paying for political ads? Who could oppose limits on corporations with significant foreign ownership from meddling in US elections? No one, with the exception of those candidates like Ken Calvert expecting to benefit form a gush of corporate-funded ads.

"The DISCLOSE Act is a first step toward addressing the wrong committed against the American political process when the Supreme Court opened the floodgates to unlimited corporate influence. It has been said that when the light goes on, the roaches scatter.  The DISCLOSE Act shines a bright light on secretive political ads.  It will be fascinating to watch the scurrying when those paying for ads must be revealed."

Beth's opponent, John Campbell, is the same kind of sleazy operator as Calvert and she couldn't say she was surprised by his vote. By now, everyone knows what he's all about-- himself. Beth:

Once again, my opponent, John Campbell has sided with special interests instead of supporting greater transparency for the American people. Apparently he thinks organizations airing political ads shouldn’t have to disclose where the money to fund the ads is coming from. Since most of his fundraising dollars have come from special interest PACs, it appears self interest has played a large role in his opposition to the DISCLOSE ACT.

Why should special interests be allowed to spend millions of dollars to influence the outcome of elections, without having the same public disclosure requirements American citizens must adhere to? If corporations are granted the same rights as citizens, they should have the same obligations.

Unchecked influence in our political process has undermined our democracy and degraded the quality of our leadership. In light of the recent Supreme Court ruling allowing corporations and unions to freely spend their own funds to influence the outcome of elections, it seems only fair that there should be public disclosure of how that campaign activity was paid for.

In less than one minute on the House floor, Georgia Congressman Hank Johnson summed up the DISCLOSE Act in a way anyone can understand:

Civics 101: Congressional Bribery-- Joe Barton, Of Course... But It Goes Way Beyond Him

Long before the America-haters at the Texas Board of Edumacation decided to expunge Thomas Jefferson and Dolores Huerta from textbooks, conservatives figured out how to save money for the wealthy and continue to dumb down America at the same time-- eliminate civics classes. But back when I was a kid and there were civics classes, they weren't nearly as valuable as Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann, or... Stephen Colbert. We never got anything this good in civics:

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
USA Board of Ophthalmological Freedom
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Fox News

Unfortunately, not every American student is savvy enough to watch Colbert for their civics lesson. And what I remember about civics classes in school is that they were very bland and non-controversial-- except when Ms Hobberman went for a smoke and let me take over the class, being pretty stupid but smart enough to know I knew more about the topic than she did. For example, we were always taught that power accrued to members of Congress based on the seniority system. The longer they managed to get reelected and stay alive, the more institutional power they could wield, in terms of chairmanships, leadership roles, influence, etc. And we did seem to wind up with lots of non-idealistic, elderly conservatives in powerful positions. What they didn't go into in civics class was that even more important than graceful aging was the ability of members to collect large sums of money from special interests and spread it around among their colleagues.

That story is exploding this week because Joe Barton, who has taken more in legalistic bribes from Big Oil than any House member in history-- and spreads it around, wide and far, through his sleazy Texas Freedom Fund-- goofed up in explicitly stating Republican Party policies towards Big Business in general (and Big Oil specifically) when he had the temerity to apologize to BP for them being forced to clean up the catastrophic mess they have made-- through their own selfish and dunderheaded decisions-- in the Gulf.

Of course, Joe Barton may have let the cat out of the bag but he's hardly the only congressional leader acting as a bagman for a powerful special interest. How do you think sleazy characters like Rahm Emanuel ((Wall Street), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (sugar + the anti-Cuba lobby), John Boehner (tobacco), Eric Cantor (Wall Street) and Steny Hoyer (everything under the sun) got into positions of power? It wasn't seniority in any of those cases, although it was at least a factor for Hoyer. These people did exactly what a congressional crook Jerry Lewis did to buy the chairmanship of the ultra-lucrative House Appropriations Committee-- he acted as a bagman for defense contactors, spread the dough around generously among his colleagues, repaid the contractors with eye-popping earmarks worth hundreds of times more than the bribes they paid him. That's the bipartisan reality of our political system. Are the Republicans worse? Absolutely. Are there Democrats equally as bad? Absolutely. Emanuel should be in prison, not the White House. Wasserman Schultz, the female Emanuel, shouldn't be on a fast track to the Speakship; she should be sitting on a backbench learning how to behave within the bounds of basic ethics.

Tuesday the NY Times touched on the systemic problem by whining about the blatant corruption of Boehner and Barton while missing the overarching point about the need for drastic congressional reform-- although the idea of Congress reforming itself is patently absurd.

House Republicans had their chance to do the right thing and remove Joe Barton as the ranking Republican on the energy committee. Instead, they applauded him. Mr. Barton, you will recall, apologized to BP-- saying it was a victim of a “shakedown”-- after President Obama pressed the company to ante up a $20 billion compensation fund for all the people who have lost their jobs and businesses because of the oil spill.

After Mr. Barton tried apologizing again before his party’s private caucus, John Boehner, the Republican leader, said “the issue is closed.” Mr. Boehner showed his clear loyalties-- protecting party hacks and the oil industry-- when he decided that Mr. Barton should keep his central role in the Republican Party’s energy policy.

Mr. Boehner cited Mr. Barton’s “poor choice of words,” as if it were an oratorical gaffe and not a glimpse at deeper outrage that government dared to call Big Oil to account. Mr. Barton of Texas spoke a day after the Republican Study Committee caucus of House conservatives denounced Mr. Obama for applying “Chicago-style shakedown politics” against poor, defenseless BP.

Representative Jo Bonner, a Republican of Alabama whose Gulf Coast constituents are incensed, said it best last week when he called for Mr. Barton to lose his ranking position on the energy panel: “I believe the damage of his comments are beyond repair.” After the party caucus ended with a forgiving round of applause, Mr. Barton’s Twitter feed proclaimed: “Joe Barton Was Right.” But wait, that message was soon deleted; it was a mistake, said the latest apology from Mr. Barton’s office.

Reporting yesterday in the Washington Post Greg Sargent went a bit further along the road, referencing the dustup on Joe Scarborough's morning TV show with GOP ace corporate hack Eric Cantor about how it is possible that Barton is very safely ensconced on the Energy Committee, even if not quite as safely ensconced as the Republican policies he enforces and even embodies on that committee. Sargent has been writing about the deeper problem for years so it's hard to understand why he isn't connecting the dots on this one.

Cantor put up a good fight, repeatedly claiming that Joe Barton is "not the issue," reiterating the Republican line that the real issue that matters is stopping the spill. When Cantor compared Barton's BP apology to gaffes issued by Joe Biden, Scarborough repeatedly pushed back hard, pointing out that Barton's apology came from prepared remarks.

And Scarborough wondered aloud in a mystified tone why Republicans weren't axing Barton:

"This hurts the Republican Party. This hurts the Republican brand. Joe Barton is the most powerful Republican on the Hill when it comes to energy policy, and that shows his mindset. Does it not?"
The question is, Why haven't Republicans removed him? As best as I can determine, Republicans believe there's no political percentage in doing so because Dems will continue attacking them as stooges for Big Oil no matter what they do. Republicans don't appear to think the Barton attack is as effective as, say, attacking them for taking Big Oil's campaign contributions. They think attacks featuring the unknown Barton will sound like so much Beltway white noise.

Republicans appear to think that any discussion of oil has a downside for Dems, because it allows Republicans to keep pointing out that Obama has failed to stop the spill. But judging by the pressure on Cantor, Scarborough, for one, appears worried that Barton is damaging to the GOP.

UPDATE, 12:31 p.m.: DNC spokesman Hari Sevugan responds:

We don't say this often, but Eric Cantor's right-- Joe Barton's not the issue. The issue is a broader Republican culture of not just apologizing to the oil industry, but defending them and their other corporate benefactors at every turn and at the expense of middle class families and small businesses. They proved that in their opposition to the President holding BP to account and in their opposition to the President's call for a new energy policy that ensures we are never again in a position where we are solely reliant on oil and oil companies.

And just as Republicans showed their allegiance in taking the side of oil companies in the wake of the BP disaster, they proved it taking the side of the insurance companies in the health reform debate and big Wall St banks in the financial reform debate. So, Eric Cantor is right-- Joe Barton's not the illness, he's a symptom.

Yes, he is a symptom, but a symptom of a problem far greater than the one Hari Sevugan would ever acknowledge, unless he wanted to lose his job.

By the war, for those wondering, yesterdays expose about who Barton has been funneling Big Oil money too, was just for this year. In 2006, when Barton was directing a gusher of Big Oil cash towards Republicans, among the biggest recipients were patsies for Big Oil like

Michele Bachmann (R-MN)- $10,000
Charlie Bass (R-NH)- $5,000
Brian Bilbray (R-CA)- $12,000
John Campbell (R-CA)- $2,500
Charlie Dent (R-PA)- $5,000
Virginia Foxx (R-NC)- $5,000
Mean Jean Schmidt (R-OH)- $5,000

Barton' Texas Freedom Fund laundered almost $600,000 in Big Oil money into the campaigns of several dozen Republicans. You think they're going to want him off the committee? He's the candyman. Overall, Big Oil has funneled millions of dollars into Republican campaigns surreptitiously. When someone sees a donation to their congressman from the Texas Freedom Fund, there's no reason for them to know that their congressman is selling his or her ass to the Big Oil interests, regardless of how harmful those interests are to ordinary Americans and his own constituents.

Bethlehem Mayor, a Democratic congressional candidate, John Callahan, changed that in a big way in his Pennsylvania district yesterday. He's running against a pious corporate whore, slippery ole Charlie Dent, whose taken $113,047 from Oil and Gas Special Interests even before it was discovered that Joe Barton had slipped him another $10,500 from Big Oil surreptitiously through the Texas Freedom Fund. Callahan challenged Dent to join him in signing a letter that calls on all federal elected officials, regardless of party affiliation, to donate campaign contributions from BP to charities that will help with Gulf Coast recovery efforts. Demonstrating his desire to put people above politics, Callahan today signed and delivered to Dent's office a copy of the letter which in part stated:

We call on federal elected officials at all levels, both Democrats and Republicans, to donate to charity any BP contribution used to win the election in 2008 and to reject or donate BP contributions intended for this year's election in order to demonstrate a commitment to put the interests of workers and their families ahead of the interests of BP.

This is especially interesting because when Callahan first suggested that Dent divest himself of the Texas Freedom Fund cash, Dent's response was “When John sends out a release telling President Obama and Steny Hoyer to give their BP cash to a Gulf charity, then he'll be doing something other than spouting talking points… If John Callahan wants to send a bipartisan letter to President Obama regarding giving his campaign contributions to charity, he knows how to reach us.”

OK, he did, but Dent is still refusing to co-sign the letter or to return his BP donations or even the sneaky money he got from Barton! Bill Hedrick took a similar approach in the Riverside/Orange County district where he's challenging the oily incumbent, Ken Calvert. Calvert has also taken large sums of money from the so-called Texas Freedom Fund-- $4,000 this year alone (as well as another $16,725 is direct payments from Big Oil executives and lobbyists this year). He's circulating petition in the district asking Calvert to donate the dirty money to a charity to to assist small businesse and communities damaged by the oil spill. “Ken Calvert is an oil industry favorite," said Bill. He has received more money from the oil and gas industries than any other current member of Congress in California. He’s the Joe Barton of California! He's been a champion for Big Oil in Congress, and as a result of his policies of less oversight and less accountability, we've got a mess. When I was a first grade teacher, I always told my students ‘If you make a mess, you clean it up.’ Ken Calvert should do his small part to help clean it up. Calvert should take his oily money, do the right thing and return it to the people in the Gulf Coast that have been hurt by his loyalty to Big Oil.”

Memorial Day With Bill Hedrick

Yesterday when I woke up and opened my e-mails I found one from Bill Hedrick urging that Americans using Memorial Day as "a time of reflection on the sacrifices made by members of the military in wars and conflicts at home and around the globe." He noted with regret that "some will merely note it as a day without work or school. Perhaps they will think of it as the beginning of summer.  However, Memorial Day should call our attention with laser-like focus and clarity-- not only on the sacrifices of the past, but on those of the present as well."

Bill is running for Congress in California's Inland Empire (CA-44) against an incumbent so profoundly corrupt that even Fox News, in their special, Porked-- Earmarks For Profit, has been forced to focus on how he has managed to transfer tax payer dollars into his own accounts. He's been endorsed by Blue America and we asked him to share his own ideas about the meaning of Memorial Day. Here's Bill's guest post:

This week marked the 1000th American casualty in the war in the Afghan theatre. It is a somber benchmark for Americans, and follows on the heels of 4,400 US deaths in Iraq. Tens of thousands of service members have suffered severe injuries-- some visible, others invisible, but nevertheless life-changing.
 
Our family members have been asked to make enormous sacrifices at the direction of our political leaders in Washington. For whom are those sacrifices being made? A corrupt Afghan central government whose leader threatens to “join the Taliban?” To protect oil fields or natural gas pipelines for US and European corporations? To maintain contracts for war profiteers who have grown rich from military procurements to support endless occupations?
 
Right now my children are serving in the military, two currently stationed just south of Baghdad on their third deployments. And while my kids put their lives on the line to ‘defend the Constitution’-- the tacit bargain when one enlists-- I am not willing to have their lives in jeopardy to defend profits for Mobil/Exxon or ‘opportunities’ in Iraq for British Petroleum. 
 
Further, it is tremendously offensive for our leaders to verbally wrap themselves in the flag and congratulate themselves for their courageous vote to fund an expansion of an ill-founded war when all they risk is losing the next election. My children, indeed all our sons and daughters, are asked to display genuine courage-- risking an arm, a leg, a life.
 
This week, Washington politicians like Ken Calvert committed billions of dollars more to an on-going war policy that does little to make us safer at home, will certainly result in more deaths and grievous injuries to more military personnel, and drives us as a nation further into debt. After seven years in Iraq and nine years in Afghanistan, it is long past time to bring our men and women safely home.

Notes From The Grassroots- Guest Post From Lori Vandermeir

In politics, it’s not always our enemies who keep us up at night. Sometimes it’s our friends.

That’s one of the tough lessons I learned working on the Bill Hedrick (CA 44) race against Ken Calvert in 2008. We came within 2 points of winning that race. Amazing, considering the district was considered a "safe" Republican seat with a 16 year incumbent and a large registration disadvantage. The Democratic candidate who ran two years earlier lost by 23%.

On paper, that district looked impossible to win, even with an incumbent being investigated for shady land deals and questionable earmarks. As a result, Bill got few endorsements and no support from the national players.

It wasn’t for lack of trying. I spent hours on the phone, trying to convince the Democratic leadership that Bill was the perfect candidate for that solid blue collar district. He was a family man-- a father of five with two sons serving in Iraq-- and an educator and elected school board member with strong credibility and great name recognition. Unemployment in the Riverside portion of the district (which accounted for almost 80% of the vote) was the second highest rate in the nation. Foreclosures were staggering, and the incumbent had voted for everything that had gotten us into this economic mess. The incumbent was vulnerable. It was the perfect storm.
 
Bill raised only $190,000 in that race. But we had an aggressive field campaign, knocking on doors of both Democrats and Republicans. With another $50,000 we could have secured the votes to win. There’s no doubt that Bill’s race in 2008 was seen as “the one that got away.” Hindsight doesn’t help much in politics. That’s why foresight is so important.

Bill is running again, and I hope he wins. [Blue America has endorsed him and is helping him raise funds; the DCCC is still taking a wait-and-see approach.] Unfortunately, Calvert has been awakened to his vulnerability and will not be complacent this time around. An opportunity was missed in 2008 and whatever lessons were learned, there is no way to apply them retroactively.

In this campaign cycle, I am working for Beth Krom who is challenging incumbent John Campbell (CA 48), co-sponsor of the “Birther Bill.” Beth has won five consecutive elections in Irvine-- the largest city in the district-- including two terms as Irvine’s directly elected Mayor. Beth is bright, articulate, engaging, thoughtful, and has a proven track record for winning tough elections. She knows the district better than the incumbent and has built an amazing network across many platforms. [Beth is Blue America's most recently endorsed candidate.]

Beth understands how to connect the dots, she is solution oriented and demonstrates the kind of passion and courage that is desperately needed in Congress today. Unlike Campbell who is rarely seen in the district and who hates the retail side of politics, Beth Krom is seen as both accessible and effective. She is energetic and focused, and respected by almost everyone-- even those who may disagree with her on certain issues.

Consider this: of the more than $400,000 she has raised to date, more than 20% has come from Republicans! THAT has never happened in an Orange County race where a Democrat was challenging a Republican incumbent before. And no district in America has seen registration shift as much over the past decade as CA 48. What was once considered a rock solid Republican district, is now dominated by Democrats and Decline-to-State voters, with Republicans holding only 44% of the vote. People are still amazed to learn that Barack Obama won the district!

Is this a viable race? You bet!

Yet, even with key endorsements from Labor, NEA, Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood and others, the DCCC remains on the sidelines-- at least for the time being. They say that people who do not learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them.

Scott Brown had a 3 to 1 registration deficit when he pulled off his upset in Massachusetts. Charlie Brown ran twice in California and nearly won both times-- despite a 15% registration disadvantage. Through both of these races, as well as Bill Hedrick’s, runs a common thread. The presumed winner was out of touch with constituents, treated public office as an entitlement and upset voters so much that they were willing to vote for a person rather than a party.

The same dynamics are at play in Beth Krom’s race against John Campbell. She points out that, during her term as Mayor, he didn’t once visit City Hall, attend a public event, inquire about the city’s priorities or even send a letter of congratulations when Irvine was named “Safest Big City in America” four years in a row. And despite the fact that CA 48 is one of the “Top 10” districts when it comes to sending tax dollars to Washington, Campbell-- who defines EVERY appropriation as an earmark-- works every day to make sure not one penny comes back.

That pissed off residents in Newport Beach who sought funding to dredge the Back Bay as part of their coastal preservation efforts, not to mention UC Irvine-- a major research university-- which loses out of federal grants because Campbell won’t advocate for them. Throughout the district, local leaders cite occasions when they reached out to Campbell for assistance, only to be rebuffed.

When Beth wins this race-- and I believe she will-- I hope it is with the full support of the DCCC, Emily’s List and other key players. Most of Beth’s current donors have never given to a federal candidate before. That’s impressive. But those who are accustomed to writing checks to national candidates, need the Democratic leadership and the base to openly endorse and urge support for this the winnable race in their own backyard.
 
The “Mrs. Krom Goes to Washington” campaign recognizes that people are still the greatest source of power in our democracy. This will be a game-changing election for Orange County and for America. There are no magic wands or crystal balls, but with a great candidate, active support, an aggressive field campaign and an “anti-incumbent” sentiment growing throughout our country...this is an opportunity we can’t afford to miss.



UPDATE: A Little Note From Howie

I hear testimony from idealistic grassroots activists like Lori-- from all over the country-- constantly. They are frustrated with the Insider game national politicians, and the special interests who finance them, play. This isn't just about corrupted Republicans; it's also about a corrupted Democratic Establishment. The DCCC is no friend of progressives, of grassroots activists, or of ordinary working families. Candidates like Beth Krom and Bill Hedrick are. I'd like to acknowledge Lori's activism today by offering to give away a box of 25 brand new CDs, all genres of music included. Everyone who donates any amount to both Beth Krom and Bill Hedrick (here, at the Blue America page) in the next 24 hours will have their name entered for a Blue America drawing and one winner will be randomly chosen to get the box of CDs.

The Rahm Emanuel Side Of Obama Cynically Pits Teachers Against Troops

If the leaders in Congress were confident that U.S. military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan was purposeful and worthwhile, they would not have to sugar coat a supplemental war appropriation with billions for teacher retention, Haiti reconstruction, and veterans' health care. Americans deserve an honest vote, a real referendum on the trillion-dollar wars that multiply our enemies and squander our treasury. In Congress, I will not only vote against such bribery, I will work hard to organize the Progressive Caucus as a swing block opposed to deceptive war supplementals. With our states facing massive social service cutbacks, we can't afford to spend half of each taxpayer dollar on perpetual war and occupation. Bring the troops home, stop the drones, and invest at home.

-Marcy Winograd, Democratic candidate for Congress (CA-36) 


There was a little celebration at my pal Roland's school the other day. They had had some good news: the one teacher who had been selected as the cutback had somehow gotten a reprieve. She wasn't being "laid off" after all. Somehow the school district found the money to keep her. Her life wasn't ruined. Her own family wasn't in jeopardy. All the weeks of anguish had been for naught. And all the other teachers felt a little safer too. But they don't know John Boehner.

Melody Barnes is the Director of President Obama's Domestic Policy Council. Last week she addressed the serious concern-- in Washington and in America-- about how the economic downturn has caused the kinds of budget cuts on state and local levels that are threatening hundreds of thousands of public school jobs across the country. (Wealthy conservatives, whose political lives are centered around not paying their fair share of taxes-- and their political handmaidens in Congress-- are unconcerned since their own children go to private schools. That's a very narrow, shortsighted point of view since without an educated workforce America would be unable to sustain a growing and a prosperous economy.) Obama gets this in a big way and explained it at this year’s Teacher of the Year Awards at the White House Thursday. "[I]t's why," he explained, through our recovery efforts, we’ve provided emergency aid that saved the jobs of more than 400,000 teachers and other education jobs-- and why I believe these efforts must continue. I believe these efforts must continue as states face severe budget shortfalls that put hundreds of thousands of jobs at risk. We need and our children need our teachers in the classroom. We need your passion and your patience, your skill and experience, your determination to reach every single child."

He had an appreciative audience. Barnes went further:

Now we need swift, bold action from Congress to respond to state and local budget cuts that are placing public education at risk and endangering teacher jobs. Thanks to the leadership of Senator Harkin and Congressmen Miller and Obey, we have legislation to avert this crisis. Today, our Administration wrote to Congressional leaders indicating the President's support for this critical legislation, and urging Congress to include education jobs funding in the supplemental appropriations bills soon to be considered in the House and Senate.

She published a letter from the president to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid about action needed to shore up local governments with between 100,000 and 300,000 education jobs at risk in 2011. "Without swift action," he warns, "millions of children will experience these budget cuts in one way or another through reductions in class time; cuts to early childhood programs, extracurricular activities, and summer school; and reduced course offerings as teachers are laid off. These budget cuts would also undermine the groundbreaking reform efforts underway in states and districts all across the country." And, he goes on, "budget cuts to police and fire departments threaten to undermine public safety and the emergency readiness of first-responders. All of these budget cuts threaten to cause damage that ripples through the economy as a whole.  The layoffs create a new drag on the economy when-- despite the recent encouraging jobs report-- we still have a long way to go." So what do we do, what do we do? 

Give him the billions he requested for the continued occupation of Afghanistan. Huh? That's right. The president who vowed he would never use the disastrous Bush Regime budget tricks that went into funding wars with unaccountable, borrowing-against-future generations "supplementals," is offering reluctant Democrats a deal: give me the endless billions the Pentagon wants for more pointless war and you can tack on money to bolster local governments so they can prevent teachers, policemen and firemen from being laid off.

We applaud Chairmen Harkin, Miller and Obey for crafting legislation in direct response to these challenges. S. 3206, the Keep Our Educators Working Act, H.R. 2847, the Jobs for Main Street Act, and H.R. 4812, the Local Jobs for America Act, each call for $23 billion in emergency support to preserve education jobs modeled after the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (SFSF) established in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). This funding would keep teachers in the classroom while helping to sustain meaningful and necessary reforms in public education across the country.

We urge Congress to include this funding in the supplemental appropriations bills soon to be considered. We also urge Congress to include $2 billion in support to localities for police and firefighters to ensure that our communities remain safe, as well as $1 billion in funds for the Child Care and Development Block Grant to preserve early childhood education jobs and ensure that our youngest children do not lose the supports and services critical to their learning and overall well-being.

Sickening. And he has an easy to find comic book villain to blame: John Boehner, a well-tanned hack whose entire political career is centered around being a bagman for corporate interests and who spent nearly one in three days last year on the golf course. Boehner loves spending money on wars but hates spending money on teachers. In fact, he favors laying them off.

“The American people recognize that Washington’s out-of-control spending is hurting our economy and stifling job creation, and they’re asking their elected leaders to make tough choices on fiscal responsibility. Unfortunately, the Administration’s call for another $23 billion to pad the education bureaucracy will only make state governments more dependent on the federal government and more vulnerable when the federal funding explosion disappears. This latest state bailout proposal promotes the same flawed logic as the failed ‘stimulus’ bill that has contributed to a record $1.5 trillion deficit and left one in every 10 Americans from our workforce out of work. 

“Last year as part of their trillion-dollar “stimulus” bill, Democrats borrowed nearly $100 billion to bail out state governments and education shortfalls. Even though tens of billions remain unspent, Democrats are demanding even more unchecked spending. We continue to see examples of how this ‘stimulus’ education money was wasted or abused. The American people deserve better.

“Giving states another $23 billion in federal education money simply throws more money into taxpayer-funded bailouts when we should be discussing why we aren’t seeing the results we need from the billions in federal dollars that are already being spent. House Republicans stand ready to work with our nation’s Governors to enact education reform that gives states and localities greater flexibility while protecting taxpayers and students at the same time. If Democrats want to debate spending billions more in taxpayer money on education, then they should do it as a stand-alone bill rather than attaching it to a measure that funds our troops.”

Boehner is rarely right about anything-- and his intentions are always malevolent-- but he's correct this time. Congress should reject the war funding, bring the troops home immediately, and double down on rescuing the economy. I reached out to some of the straightest shooting Blue America congressional candidates to ask them where they stand on this incongruous conflict between the clownish Boehner and a president each one of them admires. Marcy Winograd's comments are at the top of the page. Our newest endorsee is Claudia Wright, a progressive Democrat in Salt Lake City who managed to prevent reactionary Blue Dog Jim Matheson from walking away from the Utah Democratic convention with his party's endorsement last weekend. If you think the only commonsense progressive approach to big problems comes from Washington and New York and Chicago, you're completely mistaken. Caludia:

Although I agree with Representative Boehner that the bill for troops funding and education be split, I am afraid that is where our similarities end. We are on a schedule for withdrawal from Iraq and that should be kept. As for Afghanistan, our foreign policy seems to be catching more operatives than our war. Pakistan, using its own forces, have recently captured several more terrorists than our army has been able to find. This eight year war of ours is dangerous for our already struggling economy. Do I need to remind you that an eight year war in Afghanistan helped to bankrupt the USSR? Adding debt to our future without any way of paying it off is courting chaos.

However, the same is not true about public education. Education is primarily funded by property taxes. With record number of bankruptcies, levels of funding for education have also dropped. This is a temporary crisis. Education is an investment in EVERYONE'S future. These are the future taxpayers of America and all of us need to invest in their future. This investment pays off for all of us three-fold. First, education insures higher paying jobs. Second, public education keeps our social classes fluid. Finally, education should produce better informed citizens, all of these are necessary for a Democratic Republic to function. The temporary nature of the education crisis and the permanent demand of these wars are very different. I would suggest that dividing these demands and considering each part carefully would best serve the public good.

UPDATE: Progressive Democrat Bill Hedrick Agrees With Reactionary Shithead John Boehner... Hey, It's Bipartisan!

Boehner wants to defund local governments' ability to provide essential services like education, health and safety, while spending billions on pointless wars that only benefit politically-connected contractors... typical conservative claptrap. But he's right about one thing: tying funding for the war in Afghanistan to support for public education is disgusting and even if this stroke of genius comes straight from sleazy hack Rahm Emanuel, it is not worthy of the Democratic Party leadership. Hedrick:

I am deeply opposed to linking education funding to the war supplemental bill. Those who disagree with the ever-expanding war in Afghanistan yet support vital education funding are left with a “take it or leave it” scenario. As a teacher and school trustee, I have made public education advocacy my life’s work, but I cannot in good conscience support added funding for a war that I am convinced does nothing to make us safer, damages our military capacity, destabilizes Pakistan, and is simply unaffordable.  It is enormously disappointing that leaders have chosen to use schools to leverage support for a fundamentally flawed foreign policy in Afghanistan. It is wrong to hold schools hostage. Separate the votes!

Bill Hedrick and family