Des Moines Register: Joni Ernst Is Too Extreme For The U.S. Senate

Friday morning we were wondering whether or not Joni Ernst's decision to hide from the Des Moine's Register's editorial board endorsement process would matter. Since then, she has also decided to skip editorial board endorsement meetings of the Cedar Rapids Gazette, the Dubuque Telegraph-Herald and the Quad-City Times-- all the major newspapers of Iowa, except for the far right-wing Sioux City Journal, which embraces her outside-the-mainstream, extremist world view. [The Journal's endorsement of Ernst: "Because our vision matches the conservative vision of Ernst in more ways than it does the vision of Braley, the Journal today endorses Ernst to replace retiring Tom Harkin."] Remember, during the primary, she said she opposes even the idea of a minimum wage, supports a personahood amendment that would ban all abortions for any reason-- and would force women who had miscarriages to face trials (yes, she's clearly deranged), called for privatizing Social Security, said she would vote to impeach President Obama, who she called a dictator, voiced crackpot Hate Talk Radio conspiracy theories about the UN confiscating everyone's wealth and advocated arresting any federal officials who tried to implement the Affordable Care Act, which, needless to say, she wants to repeal. Going in fromt of the editorial boards of the state's major newspapers might have caused her to have to account for her strange views. So she told them all the go to hell.

Today the Des Moines Register, which had endorsed Ernst in the primary and had endorsed Mitt Romney against President Obama in 2012, endorsed Braley, calling him a "better choice" than Ernst.

The campaign between Bruce Braley and Joni Ernst for the U.S. Senate has been an exhibition of American politics at its worst. It has been a $28 million parade of dismal attack ads that have reduced the candidates to evil caricatures.

Which is sad because both candidates competing to succeed retiring Sen. Tom Harkin are decent and honorable with strong credentials and compelling biographies.

Braley has served eight years in the U.S. House representing Iowa's 1st District. He grew up in Brooklyn and worked his way through Iowa State University and the University of Iowa law school and practiced law in Waterloo before running for the House in 2006.

Ernst grew up on a family farm near Red Oak, attended Iowa State University with the help of scholarships and money earned working summers with her father's construction business. She is a lieutenant colonel in the Iowa Army National Guard and served as Montgomery County auditor before being elected to the Iowa Senate.

Despite comparable individual strengths, however, there are clear differences between the two on important issues. Based on those differences, we believe Braley is clearly better suited to represent Iowa in the U.S. Senate.

The Register endorsed Ernst in the June Republican primary. We described her then as a smart, well-prepared candidate who can wrestle with the details of public policy from a conservative viewpoint without seeming inflexible. Over the months of campaigning against Braley, however, Ernst has taken and defended positions that we do not believe are right for Iowa or the country.

She has said she would abolish the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Education and the federal minimum wage. She suggested partial privatization of Social Security. She calls for nearly unfettered rights to buy and carry weapons. And she would eliminate the Affordable Care Act without offering a serious alternative to provide for those without health care coverage.

Braley, by contrast, supports a federal role in education to help states improve schools and to make college more affordable. He supports enforcement of the Clean Water Act that was signed into law by a Republican president. He reads both a "right to bear arms" and "well regulated" in the Second Amendment. He would maintain the federal minimum wage and raise it. He rightly defends the Affordable Care Act that now provides health care for millions of previously uninsured Americans.

Braley has a solid record of accomplishment in Congress. He has a demonstrated ability to work with Republicans to get legislation passed. Those legislative achievements range from job training programs at Iowa community colleges to tax credits for families adopting children and helping Iowa military veterans get help with education and housing.

We have long been impressed with Braley's intelligence, passion and hard work in the House. He is unlike too many members of Congress who see the job as throwing sand in the gears of not only Congress but the judiciary and the administrative branch. Braley believes he was elected to go to Washington to work to improve Iowa and the nation.

The nation needs lawmakers like Braley who will work on a long list of unmet challenges this country faces. Among them: dealing with the indisputable consequences of climate change; getting the national debt under control; and taking courageous action to preserve Social Security and Medicare for future generations. Congress must find revenue to build and maintain highways, bridges and other national infrastructure. Education from preschool to post-graduate should be excellent and affordable. The economy should create meaningful jobs and living wages for all, and future generations should have the same economic opportunities as previous generations.

This is a crucial election for Iowa, which will be losing a veteran member of Congress with the retirement of Tom Harkin. Over the past four decades Harkin amassed a remarkable record, including a civil rights act for persons with disabilities, landmark conservation programs that preserve soil and water quality and protecting middle class Americans.

In a recent interview, Harkin said work on these issues is not finished, but he is confident others will take up the cause. Braley is an ideal candidate to carry on Harkin's work in the Senate and to build his own Senate legacy.

UPDATE: Another Big Braley Endorsement

The Cedar Rapids Gazette just endorsed Braley as well.

We’ve been troubled by several of the issue positions Ernst has taken on the campaign trail. This editorial board has, for instance, been supportive of stepped up efforts to clean up dozens of impaired waterways, with an eye on flood mitigation and soil conservation. But Ernst has said she favors not just curtailing but fully eliminating the federal Environmental Protection Agency, while relying on states to police pollution. As we’ve learned in recent years, watersheds and water quality problems don’t respect state boundaries. Ernst’s position strikes us as politically motivated and environmentally unsound.

We’ve favored a modest, incremental, increase in the minimum wage, while Ernst has suggested that there should be no federal minimum at all. In a 2012 questionnaire, Ernst said she favored state action to nullify the federal Affordable Care Act and arrest federal officials who sought to implement it. It’s one thing to oppose the Affordable Care Act as bad policy, but Ernst’s view would seem to fall far beyond the mainstream.

We would have liked to ask Ernst about these and many other positions. It’s possible that the Republican’s views have been misunderstood. But we weren’t given that chance.

So we’re left to conclude that Ernst’s views would make her a poor choice to carry on Iowa’s pragmatic senatorial legacy.

We’re far more familiar with Braley, who has represented much of Eastern Iowa in Congress since 2007. That’s how we know, contrary to TV attack ads, that Braley’s record on veterans’ issues has been solid, regardless of which meetings he did nor did not attend. And we appreciate Braley’s cautious approach to reintroducing ground troops to Iraq.

The congressman also has compiled a positive record on rural issues, from helping dairy farmers to sticking up for renewable fuels, despite his opponents’ efforts to cast him as an urban elitist. He’s called for a national manufacturing strategy, which strikes us as prudent here in a city where the continuing success of manufacturing and processing are vital.

Braley was swift in his response to the 2008 flood, when his district included Waterloo-Cedar Falls but not the Cedar Rapids metro. Since Cedar Rapids became part of his district, Braley has pushed for federal recovery assistance, including funding for Cedar Rapids flood protection. He disagrees with Ernst’s call for eliminating federal environmental oversight, pointing out that President Richard Nixon formed the EPA because states were doing little to protect the environment.

On immigration, Braley favors bipartisan legislation that passed the U.S. Senate, providing more resources to secure the nation’s borders while also creating a long pathway to legal status for millions of undocumented immigrants living and working in the U.S. We’ve supported that legislation, and reject attempts by Ernst and others to simply label it as “amnesty.” We also agree with Braley that although the Affordable Care Act needs significant changes, its overall effort to provide health coverage to millions of Americans is worth continuing.

Braley has demonstrated the ability to work across party lines and make the compromises necessary to govern the country, which is sorely needed in the Senate. He’s experienced, and demonstrates a deep understanding of important issues beyond sound bites, attacks and talking points.

We see Braley as the best choice to carry on Iowa’s bipartisan Senate tradition.

Will Iowa Voters Care That Joni Ernst Snubbed The Des Moines Register Endorsement Interview?

The NRA spent $2,365,568 on behalf of Ernst and their NRA Institute for Legislative Action spent nearly $600,000 more. She's their kind of gal.

In 2012 the Des Moines Register endorsed Mitt Romney for president. Obama still took the state's 6 electoral votes 822,544 (52%) to 730,617 (46%). In fact, almost 6,000 more Iowans voted for Obama against Romney than voted for him against McCain. Maybe Romney would have only scored 40% without the Register endorsement, which claimed to be enthralled by his "fresh economic vision." The Register also endorsed Herbert Hoover, Alf Landon, Wendell Wilkie and Thomas Dewey when each of them ran against FDR-- and Nixon twice, including right after Watergate.

The Senate race in Iowa this year, for the seat liberal lion Tom Harkin is giving up, should have been wrapped up long ago. Joni Ernst is one of the worst-- if not the worst-- Republicans this cycle. She's a crackpot extremist and has had trouble coming off as anything other than a crackpot extremist. The problem is her Democratic opponent, Bruce Braley, has managed to step all over a fine record-- one that should be propelling him into the Senate-- with a bunch of foolish rookie mistakes that are making Iowans uncomfortable. The race is down to the wire with the polling average showing Ernst up by a couple of points. Yesterday he may have had a little lucky though. Ernst ducked out of her editorial board endorsement interview with The Register.

She's still whining because a Register columnist, Rekha Basu, has refused to print Ernst press releases and instead does her own independent analysis of Ernst's extremist agenda, like in this column a few days ago.

As a state senator last year, Joni Ernst voted against expanding Medicaid eligibility to include a family of four with an income below $32,000 a year. She lost. That same session, the Red Oak Republican now seeking election to the U.S. Senate, voted not to raise the state's earned income tax credit for the working poor. That would apply to an unmarried person without children making below $14,600 a year.

To complete the trifecta, she rejects increasing the state's $7.25-an-hour minimum wage. But Ernst, a supporter of low taxes, went farther. She voted against giving tax credits to farmers who donate to food banks for the hungry.

Ernst went ape-shit when the column came out and yesterday she said she wouldn't meet with the paper's editorial board because of it, although she didn't deny that there was anything false or misleading in it. Basu had a good laugh on her Facebook page: "Is Ernst that sensitive to the kinds of criticisms that invariably will come in such a high profile U.S. Senate race? Is she afraid of the scrutiny? Sure, it's stressful, but all the other candidates for Congress are doing it to get their messages out, including Steven King, the target of frequent editorial criticism. Would Ernst similarly thumb her nose at the press while serving in the Senate?"

The publisher of The Register kicked her ass as well:

We were disappointed by the Ernst camp’s decision to not spend an hour with the editorial board and share her vision for our state and the rest of the country. This has been an incredibly nasty, competitive race where both sides have spent millions and aired tens of thousands of TV spots. Undecided voters I talk to want Sen. Ernst to break through the rhetoric and cacophony of campaign ads about hogs, Obamacare and balanced budgets. It’s a time for sharing specifics. It’s a chance to have a serious conversation about vision, priorities, the economy, national security, foreign relations and Social Security. I’m not angry she snubbed the Des Moines Register editorial board, which is in final deliberations about our Senate endorsement. It truly isn’t about us. We wanted to discuss the future of the state and allow Joni Ernst to share insights and specific responses to the concerns and questions of Iowans and voters. It’s unfortunate that cannot happen.

The race in Iowa is pivotal for control of the Senate. According to Harry Enten at the FiveThirtyEight blog, "If Republicans win it, then they can afford to lose Georgia and Kansas and win the majority without pulling off an unexpected victory in New Hampshire or North Carolina." And they find Ernst, who admits her support for the highly unpopular Personhood Amendment was not a mistake and, that given the chance, she would ban all abortions and block access to birth control, has a better than even chance-- 66% in fact-- to win a week from Tuesday.

Congress Has Had Enough Conservative Patrick Murphys Already-- It's Time For A Progressive One… From Iowa

Yesterday, failed right-wing politician Rick Santorum announced that his silly little PAC was endorsing another lunatic fringe candidate, Iowa teabagger Walter Rogers from Cedar Falls. "I can say without hesitation," proclaimed Santorum, "that he would be a terrific congressman to represent northeast Iowa. I am all in, in support of Walt Rogers' candidacy, and I look forward to joining him on the campaign trail soon."

Iowa's first congressional district-- the northeast of the state, including Dubuque, Cedar Rapids, Waterloo, Marshalltown and Decorah-- is an open seat because the current Representative, Bruce Braley, is running for the U.S. Senate. The district has a PVI of D+5 and is considered safe for whomever wins the Democratic primary. (Obama beat McCain with 58% and Romney with 56% there and in Braley's last race, he beat Republican Ben Lange 57-42%, winning 17 of the district's 20 counties, including landslide wins in the two big counties, Black Hawk and Dubuque.) In short, whoever wins the Democratic primary, will be the next congressmember for IA-01.

There's one clear choice for progressive voters, state Rep. Pat Murphy. Murphy was the former Minority leader and then the House Speaker and has proven himself to be a dynamic and capable progressive champion. He managed to raise the minimum wage, block the Republican jihad against LGBT equality and was able to raise the cigarette tax $1 and put it into children's healthcare. He also expanded stem cell research in Iowa, expanded family planning services in Iowa, created universal pre-school for 4-year olds in Iowa and passed open scope collective bargaining for the state, which was vetoed by ConservaDem governor Chet Culver.

Above, I indicated that no Republican could win in IA-01, but that doesn't take into consideration that one of Murphy's top competitor's is a life-long Republican who, for obvious opportunism, switched parties a few years ago. Monica Vernon and her husband, Bill, were GOP stalwarts and contributed thousands of dollars to local and national Republicans, including, last year to Braley's GOP opponent Ben Lange, as well as to clowns like Chuck Grassley, John McCain and $4,000 to the Iowa State Republican Party. So… a Republican can't win in IA-01, but can a Republican disguised as a Democrat? I wonder what's taking EMILY's List so long. Vernon is their kind of candidate.

There's another horrible Democrat is the race, Swati Dandekar, who you may recall, sold out Iowa Democrats when she was a state senator by accepting an appointment from Republican Gov. Branstad to the Iowa Utility Board. Since Republicans held the Iowa State House and Governorship, Swati selfishly put the Senate-- which had a narrow 26-24 Democratic majority-- up for grabs. The special election cost Democrats close to a million dollars to keep the seat, desperately needed to keep Iowa from extreme right, one-party rule. Voters in the district hate her and its hard to believe she has the gumption to run in a Democratic primary.

There's also an ambitious trial lawyer, Dave O'Brien, who wants to run. He has no actual political experience and, unlike Murphy, there's no way of telling where he would be on the key issues confronting Congress. And the 5th candidate is pretty good, but isn't ready for the jump from the state House yet. Anesa Kajtazovic is a 27-year old state Rep who has a good personal story and may develop into a worthwhile lawmaker one day. In the last session, though, she voted with the Republicans and conservative Democrats to give Walmart, Menard, and Home Depot a tax cut. The tax cut will be about $7.5 million for just those 3 companies. Bad instincts. Pat Murphy was one of only 12 Democrats who voted against it. Good instincts. Blue America is still vetting Pat Murphy but so far… everything looks like it's going to be all systems go-- and soon. We'll let you know.

Real Men Stand Up For Women When They're Attacked, Right?

I hope you caught our live blogging session with North Carolina Rep. Patsy Keever yesterday at Crooks and Liars. If you can't read this question and answer, please click on the image to blow it up:


Generally, we've been encouraging people to fight the Republican War Against Women by contributing to the campaigns of progressive women like Keever-- as well as Darcy Burner (WA), Ann Kuster (NH), Carol Shea-Porter (NH) and Franke Wilmer (MT). But all the Blue America candidates, men and women, are committed to fighting this right-wing claptrap-- and fighting it hard. Even a relative moderate like Iowa Congressman Bruce Braley is outraged by the GOP diversion away from a jobs agenda and into the socially divisive crap, targeting women. "Right now," Braley told his supporters, "a war is being waged on women-- on their health care, their reproductive choices, and their bodies. This radical assault is being fought on the radio waves, in state capitols across the country, and in the halls of Congress."

Right now, right-wing extremists in Washington want to turn back the clock on women's health and safety. Republicans want to pass laws prescribing health care to women based on religious and political beliefs. But these private decisions should be made between a woman and her doctor-- not a Washington politician.

You've probably heard about the all-male Congressional birth control panel – the one that refused to allow a courageous young female student, Sandra Fluke, to testify. Then, a few days later, right-wing misogynist and radio host Rush Limbaugh called her names I won't repeat because my mom gets these emails. Seriously, it was sickening.


And it's not only Rush Limbaugh who's taking up arms against women. Republicans in Congress are cutting funding to Planned Parenthood, one of the country's top providers of preventative services, like pap smears and breast exams. And they're attempting to deny women access to contraception and other reproductive services.

And to rub salt in the wound, I just heard that Republicans are planning to oppose the re-authorization of the Violence Against Women Act. I just can’t believe how extreme their agenda has become.

We can't stand for this kind of political posturing and disgusting discourse. We need to make sure Republicans don't turn back the clock.

Today for the first time anywhere you're reading that two of the progressive champions Blue America is sponsoring-- Rob Zerban (D-WI) and Dr. Lee Rogers (D-CA)-- will be campaigning together against two of the Republicans' most persistent warriors against women. (Stay tuned for details.) And if you don't understand how Ryan and McKeon, powerful senior GOP committee chairs, respectively Budget and Armed Services, are waging war against women, Lee explained it succinctly today for his neighbors in southern California when Ryan's budget came out:

Not only have the Republicans assaulted women by fighting to allow employers to withhold vital women's health services, like oral contraception, but now they have doubled-down on their attacks on Medicare. Rep. Buck McKeon just praised Rep. Paul Ryan's new budget plan which ends Medicare as an entitlement and thrusts seniors to the private insurers without caps on premiums. Women live longer than men, and care at the end of life is expensive. I don't want to see a wave of estate bankruptcies to pay off end of life care, when Medicare would have protected them. McKeon wants to use money that would have gone to seniors healthcare to, instead, avoid the slow down in the defense budget, so he can reward his defense industry campaign financiers.

Another candidate, Trevor Thomas in Grand Rapids, Michigan, who's running against right-wing extremist Justin Amash, made the same connection. He's pretty pissed off and took some time out from hammering Amash on jobs, the #1 issue he wants the election to be about.

Republicans in Congress have been doing everything they can to deny women access to healthcare, the right to choose and have now put women at risk to increased violence. I’ve had enough-- that’s why I am running for Congress to be a voice for women’s access to quality and safe healthcare. 

I am the only Pro-Choice candidate running and I own it. I face a Democratic opponent who would side with Republicans attacks on Choice. We know we cannot beat a Republican by challenging him with a conservative Democrat who stands against access to healthcare, we need a champion for our Values. 

Just when you thought the attack could not get any worse, the news is reporting that Republicans in Congress will oppose re-authorizing the Violence Against Women Act!  


This crucial law provides services including
 
• Community violence prevention programs

• Protections for victims who are evicted from their homes because of events related to domestic violence or stalking

• Funding for victim assistance services, like rape crisis centers and hotlines

• Programs and services for victims with disabilities

• Legal aid for survivors of violence

Speaker Boehner and the Republicans in Congress deserve to know that we will not stand by while they work to attack women and put their lives in danger with their disgusting agenda.

You can contribute to Travor's campaign here at our ActBlue page.

Congress' Newest Caucus: The Populists

Last year Iowa Congressman Bruce Braley started work on bringing together a new House caucus that would be focusing on the economic issues most important to America's working families. With the Progressive Caucus unable to get their shit together and stand up to the corporate-oriented Blue Dogs, there has been a real need for a cohesive group of fighting Democrats to counterbalance the toxic-- and growing-- influence of the Republican-lite Blue Dogs, who have been working diligently to drag the Democratic Party in Congress further and further to the right and away from its base. And with allies like White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer aiding and abetting... well the Blue Dogs may be useful idiots but their pro-Big Business agenda is making powerful headway against the interests of America's working families.

Tuesday Braley unveiled the 21 founding members, all good Democrats, along with two confused Blue Dogs. (The Blue Dogs are fellow Iowan Leonard Boswell who nearly lost his seat to an anti-Blue Dog primary opponent in 2008, and Mike Arcuri of New York, a Kirsten Gillibrand type politician looking to be all things to all people-- and who also nearly lost his seat last year.) The rest of the new caucus is made up of Peter DeFazio (D-OR); Betty Sutton (D-OH); Steve Cohen (D-TN); Joe Courney (D-CT); Keith Ellison (D-MN); Bob Filner (D-CA); Phil Hare (D-IL); Mazie Hirono (D-HI); Hank Johnson (D-GA); Steve Kagan (D-WI); Eric Massa (D-NY); Linda Sanchez (D-CA); Jan Schakowsky (D-IL); Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH); Peter Welch (D-VT); and John Yarmouth (D-KY). Pretty great bunch overall. Braley is the chairman and the three vice-chairs are Arcuri, Pete DeFazio and Betty Sutton.

In explaining to his constituents why he joined the new caucus, Eric Massa said it would be "the only caucus in Congress devoted solely to addressing middle class economic issues." He explained the caucuses goals by breaking down their aims into 6 categories:

Creating Good Jobs and Good Retirement: Creating and retaining good-paying jobs in America, providing fair wages, proper benefits, a level playing field at the negotiating table, and ensuring American workers have secure, solvent retirement plans;

Cutting Taxes for the Middle Class: Cutting taxes for the middle class and establishing an equitable tax structure;

Affordable Healthcare: Providing affordable, accessible, quality health care for all Americans;

Quality, Affordable Education: Ensuring quality primary education for all American children, and affordable college education for all who want it;

Fair Trade: Defending American competitiveness by fighting for fair trade principles;

Protecting Consumers: Protecting consumers so that Americans can have faith in the safety and effectiveness of the products they purchase.

"During this time of economic recession, America's middle class needs representation in Washington. I'm proud to join the Populist Caucus because working families deserve a voice. This caucus will work together to find common ground on policies that create good-paying jobs, make healthcare more affordable for all, and put middle class families first again."

Unlike the Blue Dogs, all the members are supporting President Obama's Stimulus legislation and they have also actively pushed for inclusion of the Buy American provisions that Republicans and Blue Dogs have fought against. Constant pressure from populists and progressives have forced some of the worst banksters, like CitiGroup and JPMorgan, to stop foreclosing on homeowners' mortgages-- at least for now.

JPMorgan Chief Executive Jamie Dimon said the New York company plans to halt new foreclosures for owner-occupied home loans through March 6. Dimon made the pledge in a letter to Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, who released it on Friday.

Citigroup's foreclosure moratorium applies to all "Citi owned first mortgage loans that are the principal residence of the customer as well as all loans Citi services where we have reached an understanding with the investor" until President Barack Obama's administration has finalized the details of the loan modification program or March 12, whichever is earlier, according to a company release.

Congressman Bruce Braley, New Chair of The DCCC's Red To Blue Program-- Live Chat Today At Crooks and Liars

One of Blue America's earliest and most heartfelt successes came in 2006 when we helped Bruce Braley turn Iowa's first CD from red to blue. After a stellar first term, Bruce didn't need help being re-elected. His 64% win in November was the highest margin of any candidate in the state (including Senators Harkin and Obama!). His success has been especially sweet because of the way his candidacy started out. You may recall that in 2005 Rahm Emanuel was running around the country sabotaging progressives and bullying anti-war candidates. He managed to ruin Democratic chances in district after district with his wrongheaded insistence that voters backed his own pro-war position in Iraq and that progressive candidates needed to soft-peddle their opposition to Bush's (and his own) agenda. When Emanuel went to candidate Braley with that line Braley didn't buckle; he pushed back and pushed back hard. Emanuel backed down. "I wouldn't change who I am to run for office. I am running to be a strong voice for change and to speak out for people who don't have a voice in Washington," he told us at the time. "I met with Rahm several times and I convinced him that my positions are the mainstream positions in this district. He listened and he understood."

After his initial win, Congressman Braley caught our attention in 2007 when he took the lead in questioning Bush Regime hack/GSA head Lurita Doan and exposed the Regime's illegal use of government resources to target Democrats. (There's a video at the link.) Since then he's established a solidly progressive voting record in the House and has become a leader at the DCCC. Last cycle he was one of 3 co-chairs of the Red to Blue Program. In the 2010 cycle he is the sole Red to Blue Chair.

Before I ask you to surf over to the comments section at Crooks and Liars for a live chat with Rep Braley (at 10am, PT/1pm ET), I want to go over some of the points the congressman made when we spoke on the phone yesterday. After I congratulated him on the personal role he played in helping elect one of this year's Blue America stars, Martin Heinrich (D-NM), I asked him what important lesson he's learned that he would want to share with Democrats just getting into Congress.

There are times when you are going to have strong disagreements within the leadership of your own party. Some new members can be intimidated by the environment but I've learned that speaking out and standing on my principles-- even though it may be contrary to the wishes of Leadership-- helps to gain additional respect for my viewpoints; in some cases it's prompted them to do things they didn't originally plan to do.

Example: I was outraged on Christmas Eve in 2007 when I heard that President Bush had vetoed the Defense Authorization Bill solely because it was going to provide compensation out of Iraqi assets to tortured POWs and human shields. And because of my strong opposition to torture and strong support for Justice, I immediately called my staff-- on Christmas Eve-- and said I want us to work on a letter going out to Leadership expressing my strong disagreement with the president's veto and my desire that our party stand up to him.

When we got back we had our weekly meeting, the freshman class, with the Speaker and other caucus leaders and she explained why the chairman of the Armed Services Committee was going to recommend passing a new bill without that provision in it and how upset she was by that but that there were no options available to us at that time. She invited me to address my concerns and I just unloaded on them. I said there is no better cause for Democrats to rally behind than standing up to this president and this veto and his promotion of torture; this is the type of example that cuts across the political spectrum. When U.S. prisoners of war have been brutally tortured by foreign regimes, that's something this party needs to stand up for. As a result of that conversation they agreed to allow me to run that as a stand alone bill and I worked all year long to get that to the floor and at the last minute it did get to the floor and passed unanimously in the House. The president had lobbied against the bill all weekend long; not one Republican voted against it. I've been working with Senators Menendez and Lautenberg to get it passed in the Senate, where it never came out of committee.

Back to his new job as Red to Blue chair, I asked about the rumors that the DCCC would be devoting virtually all their resources to incumbent retention this cycle and ignoring capturing new seats. "I can assure you that's not going to happen," he answered. He's gung-ho to leave no stone unturned in expanding the Democratic majority in the House.

We'll look at how Obama performed in the district. We'll look at the candidates we'll be able to recruit and we'll look at what type of support those candidates have been able to generate in the past. Sometimes districts look good on paper but... well, you have to have the right candidate. Next week we're going to sit down and look at all the districts in play and try to put together a priority list for the 2010 Red to Blue Program... The challenge for us always is trying to weigh all of the objective data and balance that with subjective input we get and try to make informed decisions that are going to help us expand our majority. Sometimes it's more of an art than a science and that's why I would welcome input from the netroots early on and have that as part of an ongoing conversation as we move forward.

I want to emphasize one more of the exchanges we had in our phone conversation. When I recounted hard feelings in the netroots about how much money the DCCC spent on conservative Democrats like Bobby Bright and Parker Griffith, both of Alabama, who have already started crossing the aisle and voting with the Republicans on issues as basic as equality for women in the workplace, this was Rep. Braley's response:

I can't dispute that characterization. It's extremely frustrating to me. It doesn't seem like one of those defining issues that is going to be used against you to paint you as a tool of the Speaker, which is usually what happens in these races in the Deep South. It does seem like this is an issue that is a defining issue for Democratic voters and I would hope that Democrats in those districts in Alabama and around the country would make their feelings known to help educate these new members to the fact that just because you have received support in the past, to pick up an open seat, does not mean that you can ignore what your party stands for when it comes to basic tenets.

Please consider coming over to Crooks and Liars, again 10am, PT, and meeting Rep. Braley and letting him know what you expect from the DCCC and from our Democratic members in the House.

To The Victors... And One Loser Thinks She Should Jump Ahead Too

House Dems court disaster with DWS

As we've been predicting, the House leadership has made Howdy Doody (R-FL) the scapegoat for their loss of a couple dozen more seats. A big supporter of the bailout-- and of Wall Street special interests in general-- Rep. Doody (aka Adam Putnam) was forced out of his leadership post yesterday, the first casualty in the Republican Civil War of 2008... and not likely to be the last.

Younger, more conservative lawmakers moved yesterday to assert their influence in the House Republican caucus as the GOP began the traditional period of soul-searching that follows a major electoral defeat. Conservatives also began jockeying to fill the post of Republican National Committee chairman early next year.

...The fate of the No. 2 Republican, Minority Whip Roy Blunt (Mo.), was uncertain [UPDATE: not anymore it isn't; he's out], and one of the younger party mavericks, Virginia's Eric Cantor, was poised to replace him amid widespread discontent among party rank-and-file with the Election Day performance.

Way on the other side of the state from Howdy Doody Florida, is the lair of the female version of Rahm Emanuel, Debbie Wasserman Schultz. She did the worst job imaginable of anyone running the red to blue program. In her mind-- and that of the Democratic caucus members she so famously bribes with money laundered from right wing Cuban groups and Big Sugar-- that entitles her to take over the DCCC from Chris Van Hollen, who is trying to muscle Caucus vice chair John Larson (D-CT) out of the way so he can take over Rahm Emanuel's job as Democratic Caucus chair when Emanuel gets kicked upstairs where Obama can keep an eye on him and keep him from undermining the new president's reforms. (I know I'm stretchin' it here, folks, but the honeymoon hasn't even started yet, let alone ended.)

For the record, the cycle ended with 63 candidates in the Red to Blue program, just a few of whom were the recipients of almost all the help and most of whom got... lip-service and bupkis. Of the 63, only 22 were elected (although grassroots-backed Darcy Burner (WA), Tom Perriello (VA) and Charlie Brown (CA) are in races where votes are still being tabulated-- as are Insider-backed Ethan Berkowitz (AK) and Frank Kratovil (MD).

The worst example of Wasserman-Schultz' leadership came at the beginning of the cycle when she petulantly declared, publicly, that the south Florida Democrats running in neighboring districts-- Joe Garcia, Annette Taddeo and Raul Martinez-- would get no help from her because she prefers the 3 right-wing Cuban-American thugs, Mario-Diaz-Balart, his criminal brother Lincoln (who fancies himself entitled to the presidency of a post-Castro Cuba), and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. Her announcement crippled all 3 candidacies and led to their eventual defeat. She was especially active in undermining Annette Taddeo, even after her arm was twisted to support Garcia and Martinez, each of whom wound up with a million and a half dollars in DCCC television buys while Taddeo was pointedly left off the ads.

Wasserman Schultz showed her true colors when she spat in the face-- figuratively-- of the grassroots Democrat running against... yep, Adam Putnam. She was insulting and rude to retired Naval officer Doug Tudor when he had the temerity to approach her for help, thinking for some reason that the DCCC is supposed to help Democratic candidates. No thanks to Wasserman Schultz, Tudor did far better against Putnam than any other Democrat ever.

Bruce Braley (D-IA), who worked tirelessly behind the scenes to elect all Democrats and who is viewed as a straight arrow with impeccable ethics, would be a far better choice than DWS, a self-aggrandizing show boat and someone determined to build her own personal power base.

Mario Diaz-Balart thanking Debbie Wasserman Schultz:

WHY BRUCE BRALEY'S ENDORSEMENT OF JOHN EDWARDS IS MEANINGFUL

A couple months ago we did a short post on the value of celebrity endorsements and it turned out that most endorsements don't have much net positive impact. Exceptions are Oprah, Tom Hanks, George Clooney, John Stewart, Tiger Woods and Angelina Jolie. Other celebrities-- like Donald Trump and Tom Cruise-- have net negative effects. At least in terms of likely Republican caucus goers in Iowa, wrestler Ric Flair and tough guy impersonator Chuck Norris seem to be working well for Mike Huckabee; we'll see how that translates to normal people. (And we'll soon see if Kurt Schilling's shilling for McCain does any good.)

And as for political figures endorsing candidates, well... would you want an endorsement from George Bush? Joe Lieberman? Dick Cheney? Rudy Giuliani? Nancy Pelosi? Rahm Emanuel? I guess how targeted the audience is makes all the difference. A boatload of political figures in Iowa have been endorsing this one or that one. It hasn't meant a great deal to me-- nor is it meant to. I live in California, not Iowa. But today, the first Democrat in Iowa's congressional delegation to endorse came out for John Edwards. Had reactionary Democrat Leonard Boswell endorsed someone-- Biden or Hillary, I'm guessing-- it would serve as a contrary indicator to liberals-- like a celebrity endorsement from Donald Trump. But this endorsement was made by progressive freshman Bruce Braley. What do we know about Braley? He was endorsed by Blue America last year when he stood up to Rahm Emanuel and told him to take a flying leap when Emanuel tried pressuring him to back off his criticism of Bush's Iraq agenda. Since being elected to Congress, Braley has racked up a 100% score on Iraq and an excellent overall progressive voting record. We're glad we endorsed him and raised money for him. I remember watching Bruce brilliantly question Bush's GSA head, Lurita Doan and thinking-- wow! we helped elect this brilliant guy.

Bruce's endorsement of John Edwards means something to me and it should mean something to the folks in his district. “John Edwards has always fought for people who don’t have a voice to speak for themselves,” Braley said in an interview with the Quad-City Times yesterday.

Braley said Edwards’ potential to appeal to states all over the country, as well as his positions on health care, the war in Iraq and poverty, all played a role in his decision to endorse him.

“He has consistently scored high in terms of getting out with ideas early,” Braley said. And he noted much of his district is rural, and that is an area Edwards has given attention to. “I think a lot of people in rural America think they’ve been left out,” he said.

Braley has stood up for progressive values and principles, whether he was fighting Rahm Emanuel or Bush and Doan. He knows Edwards will do the same, which is why he endorsed him.

HOW ROVE AND THE BUSH REGIME PERVERTS ALL FACETS OF THE GOVERNMENT FOR NARROW POLITICAL PURPOSES-- ILLEGALLY

What do Karl Rove's plans to attack Democratic congressmen have to do with the General Services Administration? The politicization of the Department of Justice is apparently not the only department the GOP has been improperly politicizing. Today Henry Waxman's House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform had another GOP hack in front of them as a witness, Lurita Doan, of the General Services Administration. (Doan is on CREW's list of the most corrupt administrators in the Bush Regime.)

Freshman Congressman Bruce Braley (D-IA) asks the key question: "Can you tell us what, if anything, these slides have to do with the GSA's core purpose of procuring supplies and managing federal buildings?" Doan punted and blustered and pleaded ignorance. Braley asked her another question that should be on the mind of every tax-payer who doesn't like seeing his or her money wasted (stolen) for partisan purposes: "Your comment was 'How can we use different GSA projects, building opening and the like, to further aid other Republicans?' and 'How can we use GSA to help our candidates in the next election?'" It's a 10 minute video that will show you how the GOP has been perverting our government for their own purposes. What is the penalty for opposing the Hatch Act?



Christy at Firedoglake is live-blogging this and it appears that the Republicans on the committee-- especially those kooks Burton and Issa-- have degenerated into the only defense they know: Blame everything on Bill Clinton's penis.


UPDATE: HOW ROVE'S MIND WORKS-- THE SLIDES-- AND WHICH REPUBLICANS ROVE THINKS ARE RETIRING

I know it is hard to read the slides in the video. I managed to obtain a pdf file of them so you can examine Rove's strategy at your leisure. The congressmen and women he was urging the GSA bureaucrats to help him target are (in order of vulnerability):

Lampson (TX-22)
Mahoney (FL-16)
McNerney (CA-11)
Space (OH-18)

Let me break here for a moment. Look at the first 4 priorities-- winning back the seats of Republicans who are disgraced felons: racketeer and money-launderer Tom DeLay, child molester Mark Foley, "Mr. Pollution" Dick Pombo, and bribetaker Bob Ney. Something tells me the voters in these four districts have had about enough of Republican hypocrisy. Back to Rove's list of targets:

Hill (IN-09)
Carney (PA-10) (bring back The Choker???)
Murphy (PA-08)
Boyda (KS-02)
Sestak (PA-07)
Ellsworth (IN-08)
Shuler (NC-11)
Rodriguez (TX-23)
Kagen (WI-08)
Marshall (GA-08)
Donnelly (IN-02)
Barrow (GA-12)
Altmire (PA-04)
Hall (NY-19)
Gillibrand (NY-20)
Herseth (SD-AL)

Another slide shows which seats Rove feels the Democrats are most likely to take in 2008 and he was asking the GSA to help him defend those incumbents. Their most vulnerable: Gerlach (PA), Bachmann (the sneaky puker- MN), Hayes (NC), Wilson (NM-- rotflmao), Musgrave (CO), Roskam (IL), Shays (CT), Mean Jean Schmidt (OH), Drake (VA), Cubin* (WY), Doolittle (CA), Porter (NV), Walsh (NY), Pryce** (OH), Kuhl** (NY), Ferguson (NJ), Knollenberg* (MI), Young* (Bridge to Nowhere), Galleghy* (CA), McKeon* (CA), Lewis* (CA), Miller** (CA), Hunter* (CA), Castle* (DE), Young* (FL), Kirk (IL), Hastert* (IL), Lewis (KY), Jindal* (LA), Bartlett* (MD), Ehlers (MI), Walberg (MI), Myrick* (NC), Regula* (OH), Dent (PA) and Davis* (VA). The names with the single asterisk are congressmen Rove believes are sure or likely to not run. The double asterisks are DWT additions to the "may not seek re-election" category.