Why Is The DCCC Giving Mario Diaz-Balart A Free Ride?

Last week, the DCCC and the Florida Democratic Party decided to give Mario Diaz-Balart, who was born on September 25, 1961, an early birthday present. They gave him what incumbents love most: an opponent-free election cycle. A relatively poor district in the Miami burbs, CA-25 is 76% Latino (mostly Cuban and Venezuelan) and includes Hialeah, Doral and includes much of the Everglades, Henry County and ends in the suburbs east of Naples in Collier County. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has been protecting Diaz-Balart's seat for decades-- and being caught doing it was part of why she was fired from her job at the DCCC (being caught, not doing it).

Florida is the ultimate swing state and whoever wins 29 electoral votes there, wins it by a hair. In 2016 Trump beat Hillary 4,605,515 (49.1%) to 4,485745 (47.8%) statewide. FL-25, which has been trending purple, gave Hillary better numbers than Obama. Trump beat her in FL-25 by only 49.7% to 47.9%-- the closest result for either candidate in the state. The PVI is R+4, the closest district in the state, occupied by a Republican.

Under conservative moron Cher Bustos, the DCCC is not taking an active role in trying to win new seats this cycle, just protecting incumbents and holding seats for retiring members. They list 13 Red to Blue candidates, although two of them-- Christy Smith (CA-25) and Rita Hart (IA-02)-- are running in Blue districts already. As usually, they're only backing conservative Dems. In IN-05, an open seat, they've endorsed Christina Hale, even though its a competitive primary. The PVI is R+9, so considerably tougher than FL-25. In MN-01 they running Dan Feehan in the first district (PVI is R+5). In MO-02 they're running Jill Schupp (R+8). Eugene DePasquale is their candidate in PA-10 (R+6). In TX-21 and TX-22 they're running , respectively, Wendy Davis and Sri Kulkarni, where both have tough R+10 PVIs. And in WA-03 they're taking on an incumbent with Carolyn Long in an R+4 district, same as FL-25.

A competent DCCC-- or state party-- would have found someone to run against Diaz-Balart for several reasons:

• In an anti-red wave year, there's always a chance
• It's useful to help develop a candidate for future elections, building a bench
• To help other Democrats up and down the ballot

Biden could, literally, lose the election because no one is on the ground turning out the Democratic base. They did the same thing in FL-02 and Neal Dunn, sure a prohibitively red district, but still a district where 96,233 Democrats turned out to vote for an unknown, un-financed Democratic House candidate last cycle. Statewide Florida races get won by far less than 96,000 votes. Are the Democrats that sure that they can just put any turd's name on the ballot against Trump and win? And by the way, Diaz-Balart has raised $1,190,251. Who needs him feeling so completely confident that he gives it to the NRCC or to some of his vulnerable Republican colleagues like Ross Spano or to Republican challengers like one of the 8 clowns running against Matt Cartwright?

Even In The Localest Of Races, It's All About Trumpanzee

There are 3 South Florida districts held by Republicans that are heavily Latino:

• FL-25- Mario Diaz-Balart (70.4% Latino)
• FL-26- Carlos Curbelo (69.5% Latino)
• FL-27- Ileana Ros-Lehtien 72.7% Latino)

Trump fared poorly in all three- losing with 38.9% in FL-27 and with 40.5% in FL-26 while narrowly winning in FL-25 with 49.7%. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has prevented Democrats from contesting the seats held by her old pals Ros-Lehtinen and Diaz-Balart. Ros-Lehtinen (whose district now has a PVI of D+5 and is the second bluest district in the country held by a Republican) is retiring. FL-26 is the absolute bluest district-- PVI is D+6-- held by a Republican and Curbelo is running scared and can sometimes be a former vote for progressive legislation in Congress than Blue Dogs like Kyrsten Sinema (AZ), Josh Gottheimer (NJ), Henry Cuellar (TX), Collin Peterson (MN) and fellow Floridian Stephanie Murphy.

People say it would be hard even for the least competent, most badly run DCCC in recent history to lose these 3 seats this cycle. But that's exactly the kind of challenge the DCCC is best at-- losing sure things. They are entirely ignoring Mary Barzee Flores' race against Diaz-Balart. A former judge, she's too progressive for the DCCC. With no help from the DCCC, she's already raised $728,231 up against Diaz-Balart's $1,118,990. She makes sense as a candidate, being a Latina in a heavily Hispanic district. The DCCC doesn't seem to get that when they don't want to. The DCCC candidate in FL-26 is Debbie Mucarel-Powell, an Ecuadorian immigrant running against Curbelo and the 3 top Democratic candidates running in the open FL-27 seat are non-Hisapnic. The GOP will run either Bruno Barreiro or Maria Elvira Salazar. The DCCC hasn't weighed in but the likeliest Democratic candidates are David Richardson, Donna Shalala and Matt Haggman. No Hispanic-- although number 4, is Kristen Rosen Gonzalez, who had a Latino husband and is using his name for politics. Shalala seems to be way ahead of the pack for the August 28 primary. Her ethnic heritage is Lebanese. Can she win in a heavily Latino district? I didn't think so, but I may be wrong there.

The Miami Herald reported that on Tuesday Eileen Higgins-- not a Latina-- won a seat on the Miami-Dade County Commission, "defeating the better-funded campaign of the former commissioner's wife to scramble the conventional wisdom of who can get elected in a heavily Hispanic district in Miami."

Higgins, a Spanish-speaking Ohio native who adopted the campaign moniker "La Gringa," won by six points over Zoraida Barreiro, the Cuban-born wife of Bruno Barreiro, who resigned to run in a Republican congressional primary [FL-27]. With all 60 precincts reporting, Higgins had 53 percent of the vote, and Barreiro 47 percent.

...With the Democratic Party deploying money, office holders, candidates and volunteers to boost Higgins early on in the special election, an officially nonpartisan contest became a proxy battle with Republicans.


 The GOP used U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, a Republican from Miami, in robo-calls and mailers. Her husband's Republican congressional campaign also became her top donor, with at least $95,000 in contributions.

District 5 straddles parts of Miami and Miami Beach, with a heavy concentration of active voters in Little Havana and other enclaves where older Cuban-American voters are considered vital to win in low-turnout elections.


Turnout was nearly 15 percent, meaning voter interest increased after the four-person primary on May 22, when about 13 percent of the district's voters participated. For the runoff between Barreiro and Higgins, 14,023 ballots were cast, according to results posted after 9 p.m. Higgins took 7,449 and Barreiro 6,494. 
...Democrats outnumber Republicans in the district, and Hillary Clinton carried District 5 by double digits in 2016. But Republicans tend to turn out in low-profile, local elections.

Bruno Barreiro, the only Miami-Dade commissioner to openly support Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential campaign, held the seat for 20 years. He vacated it in March to run in the GOP primary to replace retiring Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Miami Republican, in Florida's District 27.


...Though running for what would be her first political office, Barreiro enjoyed financial support from Miami-Dade's circuit of lobbyists, developers and vendors who dominate fundraising for incumbents. Tuesday represented the second loss for Barreiro in as many years, after she failed to win a Miami commission seat in 2017.

Higgins drew the underdog title throughout the 10-week sprint to replace Bruno Barreiro. In the May 22 primary, she faced two well-known names in the district: Zoraida Barreiro, along with Alex Diaz de la Portilla, a former state senator who used to represent the area in Tallahassee. Higgins pulled off her first upset when she took a narrow first in that contest with 35 percent of the vote to Barreiro's 33 percent. As the top two finishers, they advanced to the June 19 runoff.

Conventional wisdom had Barreiro the favorite, since she was expected to pick up most of Diaz de la Portilla's voters, a fellow Republican Cuban American. But Diaz de la Portilla didn't endorse in the race, and the Higgins ground game appeared to narrow the traditional advantage Republicans enjoy in mail-in balloting, which accounted for six out of every 10 votes cast in the District 5 runoff. While Republicans led Democrats by three points in mail-in ballots and early voting last week, the margin shrank to just a single point by Sunday.

"This is a transformational election," said Fernand Amandi, a Democratic pollster who supported Higgins. "This is an election where you had an unknown defeat two of the titular Cuban dynasties in local politics. and it wasn't even close."


...She also sided with the liberal wing of the commission on a string of issues, including mandatory workforce housing requirements for new developments, ending the acceptance of detention requests from federal immigration authorities, and opposing the extension of the 836 expressway southwest into Kendall.

The District 5 results are a blow for Bruno Barreiro, who transferred $95,000 from his congressional campaign to his wife's election effort. That made him his wife's top donor.

By her own admission, Barrerio is not a strong public speaker. She turned in a halting performance during the single televised debate with Higgins. Her online campaigning was minimal. While Higgins posted multiple daily updates from the campaign trail on her Twitter account, @eyesonmyworld, the @ZBarreiroFL feed hasn't been updated since last August.

In remarks at her Election Night event, Barreiro linked the loss in part to her husband's congressional campaign, saying Democrats targeted her to derail him.

And by the way, there may have been some voters who were offended by the Barreiros playing fast and loose with Florida election law. You cannot move more than $1,000 freely from a federal campaign-- his-- to a state campaign-- hers-- even if both campaigns are for the same candidate, let alone for another candidate, even if it is a spouse. That may come back to but Mr. Barreiro in the ass in November.

 




Trump And Cuba-- And How The DCCC Is Making Sure Diaz-Balart Keeps His FL-25 House Seat

Writing for The Atlantic this morning, Ben Rhodes, the architect of Obama’s Cuba opening—dug down into why Trump’s ill-thought out Cuba policy will fail. Short version: tossing political bones to the reactionary Marco Rubio and Mario Diaz-Balart and their elderly supporters isn’t “policy.” It’s a pointless mistake. Rhodes pointed out that one of the most depressing things about Trump’s decision to partially roll back parts of the Cuba opening is how predictable it was. “A Republican candidate for president makes last-minute campaign promises to a hard-line Cuban American audience in South Florida. Senator Marco Rubio and Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart hold him to those promises. The U.S. government announces changes that will hurt ordinary Cubans, harm the image of the United States, and make it harder for Americans to do business and travel somewhere they want to go.”

While President Obama raised the hopes of Americans and Cubans alike with a forward-looking opening in diplomatic, commercial and people-to-people ties, President Trump is turning back the clock to a tragically failed Cold War mindset by reimposing restrictions on those activities. While not a full reversal of the Obama opening, Trump’s actions have put relations between the United States and Cuba back into the prison of the past—setting back the prospects for reform inside of Cuba, and ignoring the voices of the Cuban people and a majority of Americans just so that he can reward a small and dwindling political constituency.

It didn’t have to be this way, and it won’t stay this way.

…Last month, President Trump travelled to Saudi Arabia-- a country ruled by a family, where people are beheaded and women can’t drive. He announced tens of billions of dollars in arms sales, and said: “We are not here to lecture. We are not here to tell other people how to live.” Can anyone credibly argue that Trump’s Cuba policy is motivated by a commitment to promote human rights around the world? No. Moreover, as a democracy-promotion vehicle, the embargo has been a failure. For more than 50 years, it has been in place; for more than 50 years, a Castro has governed Cuba. If anything, the embargo has provided a justification for the Cuban government to suppress political dissent in the name of protecting Cuban sovereignty.

By breaking with this past, the Obama administration improved the lives of the Cuban people, and brought hope to people who had learned to live without it. The nascent Cuban private sector-- shops, restaurants, taxis-- grew dramatically, fueled by unlimited remittances from the United States. Over a quarter of Cubans today work in the private sector. This represents both an improvement in their quality of life, and in their human rights, as they are no longer reliant on the state for their livelihoods.

…[Trump’s actions] represent a step backwards. By restricting engagement with large swaths of the Cuban economy controlled by the military, Trump is simultaneously demanding that Cuba embrace capitalism while making it harder for them to do so. Cuba will be exposed to less engagement from American companies and less incentives from American revenue. U.S. businesses can only press for reforms in how Cuba structures its economy-- like allowing foreign companies to hire Cubans directly-- if they can actually do business in Cuba. Meanwhile, the Cuban government is not going to let go of their holdings because the U.S tells them to; they’re far more likely to turn to Russia and China. By removing America from the equation, Trump delivered a better deal for Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping.

While Trump did not take dramatic steps to restrict travel, he made it more difficult. U.S. travelers now have to go through the absurd process of figuring out if a hotel they’re staying at is owned by the Cuban military, which applies to most of Old Havana. Ominous language about requiring Americans to document their activities, and warning that they could be audited, will have a chilling effect. Despite rhetoric about supporting Cuban entrepreneurs, any reduction in travel is going to hit them-- common sense suggests that someone who stays at a military-owned hotel will also ride in taxis, eat in restaurants, and shop at stores owned by ordinary Cubans. Those are the Cubans that Trump is hurting--not hotel owners who will still welcome tourists other countries.

So what is gained by these actions? Trump will say he is promoting democracy, but the opposite is true. Cuba is going through its own leadership transition, with Raul Castro set to step aside later this year. What could have been an opportunity for the United States to support an evolution in Cuba’s system through engagement has now become an opportunity for hard-liners to tighten their grip on power. Meanwhile, there is no evidence that the Cuban government is about to collapse and give way to a democratic movement. On the contrary, the Cuban government is comfortable containing the dissidents that the United States supports.

…The instinct for isolation that Trump embraced will fail. Ironically, the hard-liners who pressed Trump to make these changes are only condemning themselves to future irrelevance. Polls show that over 70 percent of Americans-- including a majority of Republicans--support lifting the embargo. Younger Cuban Americans are far more likely to support lifting the embargo than their parents and grandparents. Fifty-five senators have co-sponsored a bill to lift the travel ban, and Republicans from states that depend on agriculture want to promote business in Cuba. Meanwhile, the Washington Post reported that a poll showed 97 percent of the Cuban people supporting normalization with the United States.

Donald Trump is delivering his remarks on Cuba at the Manuel Artime Theater, named for a leader of the Bay of Pigs Invasion. He couldn’t have found a better symbol for the past. But ultimately, the past must give way to the wishes of the people. Fidel Castro is dead. A new generation, in Cuba and the United States, doesn’t want to be defined by quarrels that pre-date their birth. The embargo should--and will-- be discarded. Engagement should-- and will-- prevail. That is why Trump’s announcement should be seen for what it is: not as a step forward for democracy, but as the last illogical gasp of a strain of American politics with a 50-year track record of failure; one that wrongly presumes we can control what happens in Cuba. The future of Cuba will be determined by the Cuban people, and those Americans who want to help them, not hurt them.

In return for the bones Trump threw him, Mario Diaz-Balart, agreed to vote for TrumpCare, a bill that will devastate the healthcare system in South Florida and take away real access to healthcare from tens of thousands of Diaz-Balart’s own constituents. Last year, a year that saw Hillary win overwhelmingly in Miami-Dade (two to one) and come within 2 points of winning FL-25, the DCCC ignored the Democratic candidate, Dr. Alina Valdes running for the seat. “Too progressive,” “too independent-minded,” and “too grassroots” is how the establishment powerbrokers saw her. She’s running again in 2018… but the DCCC has other ideas about how to deal with Diaz-Balart, a close crony of corrupt South Florida political boss Debbie Wassermann Schultz’s, someone whose seat she has endeavored to protect in past election cycles. The DCCC and the Wassermann Schultz establishment are working to insert the man Al Gore famously described as “the single most treacherous and dishonest person I dealt with” in the 2000 election-- Alex Penelas-- as the party’s nominee. Penelas, a corrupt conservative Democrat, has been trying to get back into politics for years and sees a weakened Diaz-Balart as his ticket.

Alina Valdes showed the DCCC and Florida Democrats that defeating Diaz-Balart is within grasp so… leave it too them to turn to a loathed and reviled figure who can’t galvanize energy or support and who can’t win instead of getting behind Valdes’ campaign. Her new campaign website lays out her agenda and the issues motivating her run.

Last year Valdes described Debbie Wasserman Schultz as "hateful and vindictive" towards her candidacy and told me that the then-DNC chair, since forced out after being caught trying to rig elections, was doing all she could behind the scenes to bolster Diaz-Balart. "When I first started this race over a year and a half ago," Valdes told me 11 months ago, "I did not know that I would be maligned by the DNC chair. I naively thought that she would be happy to have a Democrat challenging a career Republican who doesn't do much to help his district. What I have found out since then has been indeed eye opening. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, from what I keep hearing, has blacklisted me so I do not get the support of organizations and unions in order to support her friend Mario Diaz-Balart. How could a DNC chair, tasked with electing Democrats up and down the ticket, as she keeps saying every time she gets interviewed, do something like this? Democrats in South Florida are afraid of her and the amount of damage she could inflict on them by not supporting them. Mario Diaz-Balart has not been challenged by a Democrat in 8 years and I dared do the unthinkable.”

Even In Red Districts GOP Votes For TrumpCare Are Going To Come Back To Bite Them-- Mario Diaz-Balart

Steve Stivers (R-OH), the chair of the NRCC, told the NY Times a few days ago that the Republicans had to pass Ryan's TrumpCare bill to "keep our own base excited." But even the GOP base isn't excited. A new poll shows 78% of Hillary voters strongly opposed to it while just 23% of Trump voters are strongly in favor of it. After Ileana Ros-Lehtinen denounced the Ryan plan to devastate Medicaid in order to further enrich America's wealthiest families, the two other South Florida Republicans, Mario Diaz-Balart and Carlos Curbelo, started making noises to indicate that they were "undecided" about TrumpCare 3.0 and might vote against it. Had they, it would have failed with a 215-215 tie, instead of a 217-213 win (win for Ryan and Trump; loss for the American people).

Last year Dr. Alina Valdes, a dedicated physician for the disenfranchised and marginalized poor, most of whom, she's told us, "have at least two jobs and find it hard to make ends meet, took on Diaz-Balart with no help from the DCCC, no help from the Florida Democratic Party and no help from Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who was busy trying to wipe out all traces of Democrats who backed Bernie and his progressive platform. Diaz-Balart spent $1,512,687 against her $37,074 grassroots campaign. She still managed to take 95,319 votes. She's determined to do much better in 2018. She told us that it's been an honor for her to care for the health for 3 decades of the disadvantaged people who are her patients. "Since the ACA went into effect," she told us, "many of these patients finally had the opportunity to see a doctor for the first time in their lives. Others were finally able to see a doctor for chronic conditions long ignored due to lack of resources and inability to qualify for affordable health insurance. They were either too 'well off' to be eligible for Medicaid but too poor to afford private health insurance." She wrote a guest post for us about her differences with Diaz-Balart on public health policy.

There is nothing wrong with the ACA that can't be fixed; it has provided health insurance for millions Americans since its implementation. Private insurers have been whining about how they cannot continue to provide health care to all with the regulations and fees set up to protect the consumer, but a quick look at the stock market shows that they are raking in record profits.

Now the House Republicans have launched a cruel and vicious attack on the health care for the most vulnerable and needy in our society after having finally garnished enough votes in their quest to repeal and replace the ACA or Obamacare. The AHCA or Trumpcare rolls back just about all the protections that were afforded by the ACA and allows insurance companies to set the rules again about who and what they will cover. They have basically passed a bill that would give massive tax breaks to the wealthy and well connected while denying affordable healthcare to the most needy.

After this vote was taken on Thursday, I decided to run against the same man I challenged in 2016 and one of the supporters of the bill, Mario Diaz-Balart, U.S, Congressman, FL CD-25. He is one of Trump's most ardent supporters and approves of denying healthcare to his constituents, many of whom live in Hialeah, a city in Miami-Dade county with the highest enrollment in the ACA last year. Instead of following the will of his constituents, Diaz-Balart has chosen to follow the Republican Party line of giving to the rich while taking from the poor. Many of these hard working Americans will be left without health insurance yet again so their Representative can take special interest and lobbyist money to line his pockets. This law will also affect Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements making it harder for the elderly to be able to afford added costs to their premiums, co-pays and deductibles.

Diaz-Balart also has another ulterior motive... to have the Trump administration roll back the diplomatic gains the Obama administration made towards Cuba. He is a man with a mission and a family grudge dating back to his father and the Batista regime. He has been hell bent on punishing the Castros for what they have done to his family 58 years ago when Mario was not even a twinkle in his parents' eyes. All he has managed to do in this regard is to hurt the Cuban people by continuing an embargo that has long outlived its usefulness.

My views on healthcare are completely different than those of Diaz-Balart... we need to add the public option back into the ACA and let the free market decide as most Republicans keep saying they want to do. They, however, do not include this as one of the logical choices in any healthcare plan because it will once and for all conclude in a one-payer health system. This is ultimately what we need to work towards... a system that covers all from birth to death regardless of their ability to pay. As I have advocated for over 30 years and reinforced in my treatment of the poor, HEALTH CARE IS A HUMAN RIGHT and should be available to all Americans.

My name is Alina Valdes, MD, a proud American, Cuban immigrant, and physician to the needy and I am running for FL CD-25 as a Democrat for the 2018 elections. I hereby challenge Mr. Diaz-Balart to a debate on healthcare, during which time he will have the opportunity to defend his yes vote on the AHCA. Please support my campaign by donating what you can to help me defeat this incumbent who no longer has his finger on the pulse of his district.

Sugar's Missing From The New Cuba Reforms... Wasserman Schultz Is Smiling... And Counting Her Fat Bribes

By the 1860s Cuba was the chief sugar producer in the world and by the 1880s the US consumed most of Cuba’s exported sugar. In 1898, following the Spanish-American War, the US effectively acquired Cuba. The U.S. came close to annexing Cuba but sugar beet producers in Minnesota, North Dakota, Idaho, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, Wyoming and Colorado were able to prevent it so that Cuban sugar wouldn't destroy their profits. By the time of the Cuban Revolution in 1959 the value of U.S. investments in Cuba was over three times that for all the rest of Latin America, with american companies owning about half of the country's sugar refineries. In the 1960s the embargo ended the sugar trade with the U.S. entirely. Sugarcane is still Cuba's top crop and number 1 export-- but not to the U.S., where Debbie Wasserman Schultz (New Dem-FL), Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL) and Ileana Ros Lehtinen (R-FL) have worked to keep U.S. consumer prices high on behalf of the domestic sugar industry that has financed both of their political careers. The three anti-Cuba reactionaries have effectively kept inexpensive Cuban sugar out of the U.S. and forced American consumers to spend billions of dollars more for food items that includes sugar.

Yesterday, President Obama issued a presidential directive on Cuba that seeks to cement his policy changes toward the island and encourage further engagement even after he leaves office. In another step towards normalization of relations, the administration released a sixth set of regulatory changes designed to enhance business and trade between the United States and Cuba. Under the new rules, which go into effect Monday, travelers can purchase unlimited quantities of Cuban rum and cigars in any country where they are sold so long as they are for personal consumption.

Obama also called on Congress to end the dysfunctional 50-year-old economic embargo, something Wasserman Schultz and Ros-Lehtinen will never allow to happen while they are still wielding any power whatsoever. Anyone who is playing attention to what did and did not happen, will have notcied that there is no change in American policy towards Wasserman Schultz's, Ros-Lehtinen's and Diaz-Balart's financiers in the surf industry. The cartel stands. Obama:

Today, I approved a Presidential Policy Directive that takes another major step forward in our efforts to normalize relations with Cuba. This Directive takes a comprehensive and whole-of-government approach to promote engagement with the Cuban government and people, and make our opening to Cuba irreversible.

In December 2014, following more than 50 years of failed policy, I announced that the United States would begin a process of normalizing relations with Cuba. Since then, we've worked with the people and the government of Cuba to do exactly that-- re-establishing diplomatic relations, opening embassies, expanding travel and commerce, and launching initiatives to help our people cooperate and innovate. This new directive consolidates and builds upon the changes we've already made, promotes transparency by being clear about our policy and intentions, and encourages further engagement between our countries and our people.

Consistent with this approach, the Departments of Treasury and Commerce issued further regulatory changes today, building on the progress made over the last two years, to continue to facilitate more interaction between the Cuban and American people, including through travel and commercial opportunities, and more access to information. This follows previous changes that helped facilitate interconnectivity between our peoples, and to promote economic reforms on the island by providing access to the dollar in international transactions. These changes are representative of the progress I saw firsthand when I visited Havana to personally extend a hand of friendship to the Cuban people. The quick flight over 90 miles of blue water belied the real barriers of the past that were crossed that day, but my interactions with everyday Cubans told a promising story of neighbors working to build broader ties of cooperation across the Americas.

Challenges remain-- and very real differences between our governments persist on issues of democracy and human rights-- but I believe that engagement is the best way to address those differences and make progress on behalf of our interests and values. The progress of the last two years, bolstered by today's action, should remind the world of what's possible when we look to the future together.

By the way Wasserman Schultz has taken $138,450 in direct bribes from Big Sugar since being elected to Congress. She has also been their bag man among Democrats, tell the Fanjul brothers which Democrats to grease and which ones not to pay off. Mario Diaz-Balart has taken $121,350 and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, more cautious about easily stackable bribes, has gobbled up $70,415.

Diaz-Balart has an opponent this cycle, progressive physician Alina Valdes, who Wasserman Schultz has managed to sabotage inside the Florida Democratic Party and inside the DCCC. Blue America is supporting Alina and you can contribute to her grassroots campaign here. Moments ago, she told is that her district (FL-25) "is an enigma. Comprising parts of urban Miami-Dade, suburban east Collier, and rural Hendry counties, it is difficult to represent the interests of some without affecting those of others. One thing that for sure is that the incumbent takes so much special interest money from Big Sugar that he represents the interests of those who pay for his vote and not the constituents of the actual district. There are many sugar fields that go unused because of government subsidies Big Sugar gets to leave them unused. We, as Americans, are paying to have sugar present in just about all of our processed foods and this may explain why the incidence of obesity and diabetes have been going up in this country. While many of the people of Hendry live off of Big Sugar and their influence in the community, the use of fertilizers are causing many problems to the drinking water people to the south depend on. We recently had an algae bloom which affected said waters and, coupled with climate change and its consequences (which is also denied by the incumbent and the Republican governor and legislature)... a delicate balance needs to be worked out between the needs of the working people and their right to clean, safe water.

"We also have to consider the steps that President Obama has been taking towards diplomacy and and advocacy to lifting the Cuban embargo, which will affect Big Sugar in South Florida. It is time that we work on removing a decades-long failed policy and begin trade and travel with our island neighbors to the southeast, with conditions that if broken, will lift the embargo again. Generations of politically exiled Cubans have lived and died without ever seeing their families or their homeland since leaving. I think it is time to end this separation of families which is long overdue and is supported by my opponent. Let us work towards a mutually beneficial agreement that will help the most. If elected to Congress, I will study this issue in detail and work to enact policy that will benefit the people and not the special interests. PEOPLE before PROFITS... COUNTRY before PARTY... ALWAYS!!!"

When It Comes To The GOP's War On Women, Trump Is Right At Home

Doral is a city in Miami-Dade County about a mile from Miami International Airport and it's in the heart of the 25th congressional district. Over 50,000 people live there, many of them Venezuelan immigrants. In fact, the city is sometimes referred to as Doralzuela and there are more Venezuelan-Americans there than in any other city in the country. Doral is 80% Hispanic and the mayor is from Venezuela. It's the home of a lot of people who are fans of 39 year old actress and former Miss Universe, Venezuela born Alicia Machado. She became a U.S. citizen in May and has been helping register Venezuelan-born residents of Doral, a town her former tormenter, Donald J. Trump has a big property.

When the Doral Golf Resort & Spa went bankrupt in 2011. Trump bought it for $150 million, taking out a $125 million mortgage and he's challenged the local property tax assessment every year since buying it. Within months, the resort was ordered by a judge to be foreclosed on because Trump-- as is his habit-- refused to pay his contractors and was fighting dozens of suits. The infamously ugly giant painting of himself by Havi Schanz that he bought illegally with money from his fraudulent charitable foundation hangs on a wall in one of the resort's bars.

The Blue America-endorsed candidate for Congress there, Dr. Alina Valdes, lives nearby. She's running against Mario Diaz-Balart, one of the only Cuban-American elected officials still clinging to Trump, although, presumably, not that Trump's illegal commercial activities in Cuba have been exposed, it may prove even too much for Diaz-Balart. We asked Alina how she feels about Trump's derogatory and sexist statements towards women and she wrote a few paragraphs I want to share. As you read them, please consider contributing to her campaign by tapping the the thermometer on the right.

Men Who Respect Women, Don't Go On TV And Call Them "Miss Piggy"
-by Alina Valdes

In a June 19, 2016 blog titled They're Bringing Drugs, They're Bringing Crime, They're Rapists, DownWithTyranny reported on Alicia Machado, the Venezuelan former Miss Universe, who was belittled by the Republican Party nominee, Donald J. Trump.

She was called "Miss Piggy" because of her weight, and "Miss Housekeeper" because of her Latin roots and accent in front of a room full of people-- an effort to demean and degrade her. She was put on display, like a trophy, working out in a gym with trainers, in order to show the world how a Miss Universe had let herself gain weight. When this was brought up during the last debate, he was astounded and asked where this information was gotten. Well, Donald, it is a matter of public record and you obviously did not care about how you treated her, a woman, a Latina, a Miss Universe.

It would have been very simple for you to apologize, stating that this event happened decades ago but you again doubled down on your hurtful words. You apparently have not learned that insulting people because of their race, their ethnicity, their sexual orientation, or any other differences that make them unique and diverse is not humane let alone "presidential." You live in a country full of immigrants but continue to treat others different from you as fodder, to be used and abused for your amusement, stating that you employ Latinos and African-Americans in your many business ventures. You do this because you can underpay and overwork them to further amass your wealth and many of these are here on work visas... because you dare not take advantage of people who can speak up and have legal recourse to sue you. Miss Machado is not only an American citizen now but is speaking out about the cruelty of your treatment of putting her on display to embarrass her. All you needed to do was speak to her privately but your pattern of disrespect in order to belittle others to elevate your status, has apparently not changed. You continue to insult women when you decide they do not meet your standard of beauty while you have paraded your three trophy wives, two of whom are immigrants, so people can see "what a man" you are. You even allowed your testosterone level, which is a test not routinely done on a physical, to be disclosed for all to see.

Miss Machado has settled into a meaningful life as an American citizen but the words you used to degrade her were very hurtful. As women, we are all expected, for people like you, to fit a certain profile of what is considered beautiful. Men are described as "stocky" while women are labeled "fat" and this double standard persists in describing male/female differences. A man exerting his authority is described as "assertive" and "authoritative" but a woman displaying the same is labeled "aggressive" and "bitchy"; a man cheating on his partner is lauded as "a stud" whereas a woman is labeled "a tramp." There are so many negative labels placed on women, by social throwbacks like yourself, where the same qualities in men are applauded and even dismissed with the phrase "boys will be boys."

I applaud Alicia Machado for taking the high ground, moving on with her life, and speaking out against unfairness and injustice. By so doing, she has shown what a class act she actually is and how low Trump has gone. He apparently has not changed because he regrets nothing and apologizes for nothing. He dares to discuss Bill Clinton’s indiscretions when talking about Hillary but all he needs to do is look in the mirror and see how he has devalued and degraded women his entire life by his actions and his words.

“As my mother always used to say "Dime con quien tu andas y yo te digo quien tu eres," which translated roughly means "Show me who your friends are and I will tell you who you are." Never have these words been truer as they are with the Republican Party 2016 and their presumptive nominee, Donald J. Trump. They have put their party and their careers above the country they have sworn to defend from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Never has a domestic threat been more real than someone named Donald J. Trump, who is one election away from holding one of the most powerful positions in the world...POTUS. May God help us all!!"

Why Are Most Republicans In Congress Afraid To Speak Out About Trump's Psychosis The Way Jeff Flake Does?

Jeff Flake has never been someone with whom we've found much common ground here at DWT. He was a very conservative House member and he is a very conservative senator. But unlike most Republicans in Congress, Flake isn't a coward when it comes to the execrable Señor Trumpanzee. When Flake was asked by Jake Tapper on CNN's State of the Union if Clinton could win his state-- polls show a dead-heat in Arizona, although the most recent shows Hillary beating Trumpanzee 35.1% to 33.5%-- he said he wouldn't vote for either Hillary or Trump and pointed to "the tone and tenor of his campaign" and "the characterizations of many of the state's population" and said that's "put the state in play." Trumpanzee went ape-shit of course, running to his twitter account and declaring that Flake is "very weak and ineffective." Anyone who opposes Señor Trumpanzee is... as anyone who follows him on Twitter knows.

Yesterday Flake struck back at Trump, saying that his electoral woes stem from an unwillingness or inability "to propose serious solutions to the problems facing our state" and that "what Trump has been willing to do is say terrible things about women, mock the disabled, disparage minorities, impugn the character of POWs, and go after the Gold Star parents of a fallen U.S. soldier. I’m not OK with that, and I’m going to keep speaking out until he changes the tone of his campaign. If he refuses to do so, Republicans will lose a lot more than the election in November."

Many Republicans and independents in the congressional district that stretches from downtown Austin into San Antonio and through the suburbs of both cities wish they had a congressman who would call Trump out on his gratuitously insulting and demeaning bullying that way Jeff Flake does. Instead, they have Lamar Smith, the anti-science chairman of the House Science Committee who was the first House committee chairman to endorse Trump and the only member of the House-- from any state-- to donate money to Trump. Many are wondering why Smith has attached himself at the hip to Trump despite all the crazy utterances. We asked the progressive Democrat running for the TX-21 seat, Tom Wakely, a military veteran who won the primary against a conservative Democrat, if he's coming across voters fed up with Lamar Smith's pandering to Trump and all his crackpot, ever-changing positions on serious matters. He sure is-- and here's what he told us:

"I'm finding folks all over the district who are simply sick of Lamar Smith. From the Hill Country to the metro areas of our district, they're not only tired of a congressman who's done nothing for the district in nearly three decades, but they're sick to death of Trump's insane rhetoric and Smith's utter lack of repudiation. Lamar must feel it, too, as he's begun campaigning across the district, which by most local accounts, signals that we're doing far better than anyone would have guessed. It really shows the shortsightedness of my opponent, as Trump barely cracked 30% in the district during the primary, yet it didn't stop Smith from getting greedy in his unwavering support of one of the most dangerous candidates in recent memory.

"And as far as I'm concerned, there's a pretty simple reason for that. Lamar Smith finally found a presidential candidate who really shares his values. Islamophobia, xenophobia, misogyny-- you name it. Smith really only goes further than Trump in his rampant homophobia. Times have changed immensely over the last 30 years, and yet we have the same representative in the House. In my book he'd essentially be unfit to serve on this aspect alone, but when you're willing to go on record as Trump's #1 congressional supporter? It's inexcusable. It should be disqualifying and if you ask any amount of voters in this district, they tend to agree.

"The voters of this district might disagree with me ideologically on several issues, or maybe even every policy issue, but they recognize that I'm here working for them. They didn't take kindly to Trump in the Republican primary and they don't take kindly to Smith now. Local papers are calling out Smith's subpoenas of climate groups and state attorneys general as inexcusable and a waste of taxpayer dollars. Local media is beginning to question how a congressman has gotten away with this kind of arrogance for so long. The voters? The voters are starting to realize there's a chance for change. The voters are ready to wake up Congress."

Moderate Republicans and independents on Long Island may be wondering why their own congressman, Peter King, has stuck with Trump like they're brothers. Nothing seems too much for King and he's always on talk shows defending him. We asked the progressive Democrat running for the South Shore seat, DuWayne Gregory, a veteran Army officer and the presiding officer of the Suffolk County legislature if he's coming across many voters who are noticing King's subservience to Trump and apparent acquiescence to all his crazy, ever-changing positions on serious matters. "My dismay with Washington politics has only grown since I announced my campaign 15 months ago," DuWayne told us. "Peter King is a well heeled member of the Washington establishment, and he's repeatedly put party politics before his country. He once said Donald Trump was 'unfit morally and intellectually' to be president. Since then he has stood by silently as Donald Trump has insulted a POW, women, Muslims, Mexicans, African-Americans, the disabled and... the list goes on. Donald Trump exemplifies the worst of America and no party label can hide that fact. Peter King's lack of leadership has not gone unnoticed."

Alina Valdes is a physician and a dedicated progressive running against an entrenched Republican incumbent, Mario Diaz-Balart, the only South Florida member of Congress who is backing Trump. Miami-Dade neighbors and fellow Republicans Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Carlos Curbelo have both said they wouldn't endorse or even vote for Trump. Diaz-Balart, somewhat desperately, keeps defending him. This morning Dr. Valdes told us she had "come across many constituents who are frankly fed up with Diaz-Balart and his policies. He supports the Cuban embargo despite changing opinion in the Cuban community where more than half now support lifting the embargo. He also has voted over 60 times with his Republican colleagues to repeal Obamacare while having people in the district living in Hialeah with the highest enrollment anywhere in the country last year. He also follows the party line when it comes to privatizing and cutting back on Social Security benefits despite the large population of retired elderly living in this community. It comes as no surprise that he puts his party above country when he will support the Republican Presidential nominee, Trump, despite the horrible things he has said about Latinos, who make up about 70% of this district.  By supporting Trump and his vitriol, he is essentially agreeing with his policies and condoning his hatred towards anything not white and male. This man does not deserve to represent the good, hard-working people of Florida's 25th district since he does not listen to their wants and does not fight for their needs. At least the other two Republican Cuban Americans representing South Florida had enough sense to disavow Trump and what he represents, which is certainly not what the people in the district expect from someone who wishes to represent them for another term."

Arizona Republican Jeff Flake hasn't been allowing Trump to spew his hatred and his crazy and divisive statements without being called out. The Republicans being challenged by Democratic nominees DuWayne Gregory, Alina Valdes and Tom Wakely aren't holding Trump accountable for anything. These three candidates would make great replacements for Peter King, Mario Diaz-Balart and Lamar Smith. The DCCC isn't helping any of them... but we can. Please tap the thermometer below and consider helping them make Congress a more progressive and accountable body:

Hillary Makes It Easy For Anti-Trump Republicans

Billionaire hedge fund manager Mike Fernandez tossed around those million dollar checks the way you might tip someone really exceptional with a twenty. He gave superPACs for Mitt Romney and Rick Scott million dollar pops-- and, more recently, put over three million in for Jeb Bush. And he's given hundreds of thousands more to the RNC and other Republican committees. Although he gives primarily to right-wing Republicans, this year he also maxed out to right-wing Democrat Patrick Murphy (a so-called "former" Republican. He's given thousands and thousands to every garden variety GOP nutcase who's ever asked for money but he's been especially generous to Mario Diaz-Balart. In 2007, though, he contributed to another former Republican, Hillary Clinton. Yesterday, in an OpEd for the Miami Herald, he made it clear that, almost a decade later, he's back with Hillary.

He has been a #NeverTrump guy and had paid for some ineffective anti-Trump ads earlier this year but now he's endeavored to explain why he's voting for Hillary, as so many Republicans are. "I am a firm believer," he wrote, "in the fundamental tenets of the Republican Party: individual freedom, small government, local control of issues, free speech, strong national defense and the broad vision that America is an exceptional country that gives exceptional opportunities to everyone." He asserted that Trump doesn't represent those values, but Hillary works for him just fine.

Of all the elections in which I have participated, none has become more transcendental to the definition of “We the people” and the very nature of our democracy than the one we face today.

No longer can we seek solace in wishful thinking or the illusion that this is just an election cycle and that by divine intervention all will be better after we vote. There is no basis in thinking that our democracy is so strong, our checks and balances so finely hedged, that no single person can lead us off the precipice. Trump can.

No longer can we hide behind the excuse that party loyalty is paramount, and that a bad candidate of our own is always better than any candidate of theirs. Blind loyalty in this case is the ultimate definition of disloyalty to our beliefs. Loyalty to our nation must be the ultimate arbiter of our choice.

I have watched this election unfold, from that first press conference where the population of an entire country was cast as insulting to our core. This led to a neverending spiral of vulgarity, intellectual dishonesty, invective, abuse, misogyny, racism, intolerance, bullying, ignorance and downright cruelty. The fact that the person unleashing these forces, reflecting beliefs and biases that we had long ago identified as at odds with the Founding Fathers’ principle of ordered liberty was a member of my party, was at first cause for irritation evolving into alarm and frustration and finally arriving at a sobering moment of embarrassment for my party, and beyond that, of profound concern for my beloved country.

We have seen him attack our institutions and receive cheering adoration. At rallies he has implied that if his wish to lead the nation is not granted by popular vote, that the national system is rigged and deserving of attack. This is insanity and dictatorial machinations at best.

As a Republican who has contributed millions of dollars to the party’s causes, I ask: Why has our party not sought a psychological evaluation of its nominee?”

This abysmally unfit candidate has unleased racist and violent acts. There has been no need for dog whistles. The call to brand entire religions and countries as unworthy and despicable, and the call for profoundly un-American practices, including asking the honorable men and women serving our country in the military to engage in the profoundly dishonorable task of torturing human beings and killing innocent families, has been open and unequivocal. The very worst in our society, the Klan and the neo-Nazis, revel in this horrific rhetoric.

I have arrived at this difficult moment. A moment that may define leaders and followers. I harbor no illusion that Hillary Clinton is perfect; none of us is. I do not see eye to eye on some issues with the former senator from New York. However, Clinton is, without doubt, a superior choice to Donald Trump.

Balancing any of her shortcomings are intelligence, experience, as well as the humility to accept that she does not have all the answers. She has delegated effectively over the decades in public service. These attributes will serve her well as president.

The republic should outlast any party. Our democratic spirit will ensure that we do and that this shining city on the hill eventually will shine even brighter.

I am equally convinced that our republic will be placed in fundamental peril if we are foolish enough to elect a person who has made it clear that he does not share in our democratic values and that the only idol in his temple is himself. And he is willing to pull down the glorious edifice of our American democracy.

And so my fellow Republicans, swallow hard, look into your heart-- and your gut. Vote for Hillary Clinton and then every single Republican on the ticket.

Do that, and rest assured that you will have served your country well.

This paragraph seemed aimed especially towards Mario Diaz-Balart, the only South Florida congressmember of either party supporting Señor Trumpanzee. (Carlos Curbelo and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen have been big recipients of Fernandez's generosity and both have said they oppose Trump and will not vote for him.):

No longer can we hide behind the excuse that party loyalty is paramount, and that a bad candidate of our own is always better than any candidate of theirs. Blind loyalty in this case is the ultimate definition of disloyalty to our beliefs. Loyalty to our nation must be the ultimate arbiter of our choice.

So far this cycle, Fernandez has been writing significant checks to Curbelo but hasn't given anything to the Trump-supporting Diaz-Balart yet. Nor has he given any money to the progressive physician who's running against Diaz-Balart, Alina Valdes. He should. You can, here. Of course, unlike Hillary and Murphy, Valdes wasn't a Republican in the past and doesn't jive with the kinds of Republican values that work against the interests of ordinary working families. We asked Alina Valdes to weigh in on how it's possible for the overwhelming majority of Hispanics in South Florida to recognize the Trumpist danger but for Mario Diaz-Balart to be blind to it. This is what she told us last night:

I am in agreement with Mr. Fernandez on many of his issues, especially lifting the embargo on Cuba, which is decades overdo. This particular ideology, which transcends party lines, shows us that we have more in common as Cuban-Americans than we have differences. Like Mr. Fernandez, I was born in Cuba and came to this country in the early 1960's. Like Mr. Fernandez, I have been fortunate to prosper in this country, becoming the first doctor in my family. Like Mr. Fernandez, I long for the day when I can travel freely in Cuba, knowing that her people have all the opportunities the Cuban Americans have had in the US. It makes no sense that Cuba, which is no threat to the U.S., remains on the same list as North Korea.

Though I am a registered Democrat and am running against Diaz-Balart in the predominantly Latino CD-25, I do not understand how the current incumbent could still support and vote for Donald Trump with all the vitriol and hatred he seems to have towards Hispanics, and specifically Cubans, a large group of his constituents and a group I am a proud member of. As a physician, I have spent my entire life serving in largely Latino communities with the uninsured, the poor, and the homeless, which are all communities that have been largely under-served not only in medicine but in many other aspects of American life. It has been my privilege and my duty to have the opportunity to help other Latinos and now it is my intention to do the same in FL CD-25, where the polling has shown a trend towards lifting the Cuban embargo since the present policy has been an abysmal failure. Many Cuban Americans still have family and friends on the island and find themselves working to help their people in Cuba, who would otherwise suffer further the injustice of this embargo.

Like Mr. Fernandez, I will also be voting for Hillary Clinton not out of party loyalty but because I must do all I can to prevent "The Donald" from taking control of a country which I love and which has given many of us the opportunity to excel and succeed. Mr. Fernandez, we do indeed have quite a bit in common and our core principles and ideology do transcend party lines for we both have an allegiance to our people and want to see our beloved Cuba free again and for her people to have choice and opportunity as the rest of us have had and it is indeed way past time.

Yesterday House Republicans + 10 Corrupt Blue Dogs And New Dems Voted For The 64th Time To Kill The Affordable Care Act

And he meant it

Yesterday the House passed H.R. 1270, which the Republicans had cutely called the Restoring Access to Medication Act 243-164. Although unheralded, it was the 64th GOP attempt to repeal or undermine the Affordable Care Act. Every single Republican voted YES-- even the ones who try to pass themselves off as vaguely mainstream-- and 164 Democrats voted NO. Obama said he would veto it if it got through the Senate, which isn't likely.

It's really another GOP tax cut for the wealthy, which forces working families to pay more and would result, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation in something like 130,000 Americans losing health coverage. Pelosi's office pointed out that Ryan wanted to expand Health Savings Accounts since they tend to benefit the wealthy and shift costs to consumers through high deductible plans, are are a centerpiece of his ACA Replacement Plan. She said that "the legislation seems designed to benefit higher-income families, who can afford both contributions to HSAs and the higher out-of-pocket costs to access care that come with this proposal [and] is typical of Republican legislation over the last few years-- passing provisions that would have the result of dramatically expanding health tax shelters for high-income people, PAID FOR by increasing taxes on working families in the ACA Marketplaces-- working families with incomes starting at 250 percent of poverty... In order to pay for its high-income tax breaks, the bill raises taxes on working families in the Marketplaces by substantially increasing the amount that these families could owe at the end of the year in connection with the premium tax credits they receive under the ACA.

Below are 10 anti-healthcare Democrats who ignored the White House and Pelosi and crossed the aisle to vote with the Republicans. The amount next to each name is how much the DCCC and Pelosi's Democratic Majority PAC wasted to get them elected in 2014:

• Brad Ashford (Blue Dog-NE)- $1,522,408
• Ami Bera (New Dem-CA)- $5,857,853
• John Carney (New Dem-DE)
• Jim Costa (Blue Dog-CA)
• Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX)
• Ron Kind (New Dem-WI)
• Dan Lipinski (Blue Dog-IL)
• Scott Peters (New Dem-CA)- $3,399,795
• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)- $3,943,723
• Kyrsten Sinema (Blue Dog-AZ)- $696,408

Although his constituents have been enjoying the benefits of the Affordable Care Act, Republican Wasserman Schultz crony Mario Diaz-Balart has voted with the Republicans to repeal and curtail Obamacare every time it's been brought up; kind of mindlessly. His opponent this year is a medical doctor, Alina Valdes, who sees right through what the Republicans and their conservaDem allies are up to. "Voting to repeal a portion of Obamacare in order to weaken the law," she told us this morning, "is just another example of the definition of insanity or expecting a different result after 60+ such attempts with the same results. The Republicans all voted for this as they have the countless other times, knowing full well that even if the bill passes the Senate, the President will veto it. This is just a further waste of taxpayer money and time that could be used by this do-nothing Congress to discuss and attempt meaningful legislation to help the people hurting in their districts. In Florida's CD-25, which contains Hialeah and the highest enrollment in the ACA last year, Republican career politician Mario Diaz-Balart followed along with the plan to reward the wealthy while penalizing those who benefit the most from having healthcare for the first time in their lives. He knows what his constituents want and need but continues to vote against the people just to maintain his favorability with his contributors and wealthy supporters. The way to finalize this debate is to support and pass a one-payer health care system that works for all from birth until death and thereby removes the special interests groups out to cut a profit from the misery of others. This will never happen with the elected officials in office now because they have too much to lose in kickbacks to make any meaningful legislation happen. It is time for a major change since it should be all about the people and not the profits."

This year Pelosi and the DCCC expect to spend in the neighborhood of $17 million protecting these worthless fake Democrats. If you contribute to the DCCC, you are contributing not to real Democrats who share your values, but to these Blue Dogs and New Dems who want to abolish healthcare and who hold other conservative Republican values and vote that way again and again. Never contribute to the DCCC, the DSCC or the DNC, or to any of their front groups, like End Citizens United, no matter what line of bullshit they feed you. Instead contribute directly to worthy, proven candidates like Alina Valdes and the others on this list:

Debbie Wasserman Schultz Still Helping Her Republican Cronies Against Democratic Candidates In South Florida

2 of Florida's most corrupt congressmembers, Mario and #DebtTrapDebbie

Debbie Wasserman Schultz got into a lot of trouble with Democratic voters in 2008 when she was head of the DCCC's Red to Blue committee. She had the temerity to announce-- and to recruit one of her puppets-- Kendrick Meek-- to join her in announcing that she would support 3 Miami-Dade Republicans, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and the Diaz-Balart brothers-- over the 3 Democrats she was charged by the DCCC with helping elect. The controversy eventually caused DCCC chair Chris Van Hollen to fire her as Red to Blue chair and sideline her with a less sensitive post. (Meek quickly bailed on her and then went on to run for the Senate, losing badly to two Republicans, Marco Rubio and "independent" Charlie Crist. But Wasserman Schultz went on to worm her way back into power within the party, ending up as the controversial and widely despised DNC head.

In 2008 Wasserman Schultz sabotaged and undermined Joe Garcia and Raul Martinez to help the reelection efforts of reactionary Republicans Mario and Lincoln Diaz-Balart. Mario's district had basically turned blue and when Lincoln decided to devote his energies to plotting to become president of Cuba, Mario skipped across the district to claim Lincoln's redder seat. Today he's been challenged in that seat by Alina Valdes, a physician and a dedicated progressive. And-- wouldn't you know it-- Wasserman Schultz hasn't learned her lesson and is up to her old tricks again... working against Valdes on behalf of Diaz-Balart! Outrageously, she still hasn't been removed as chair of the DNC.

Valdez has described Wasserman Schultz as "hateful and vindictive" towards her candidacy and has told me that the DNC chair is doing all she can behind the scenes to bolster Diaz-Balart. "When I first started this race over a year and a half ago," Valdes told me yesterday, "I did not know that I would be maligned by the DNC chair. I naively thought that she would be happy to have a Democrat challenging a career Republican who doesn't do much to help his district. What I have found out since then has been indeed eye opening. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, from what I keep hearing, has blacklisted me so I do not get the support of organizations and unions in order to support her friend Mario Diaz-Balart. How could a DNC chair, tasked with electing Democrats up and down the ticket, as she keeps saying every time she gets interviewed, do something like this?" Someone should ask Barack Obama, who has refused to fire her and has even, shamefully gone to Miami to campaign for her and help her raise money.

"If she wants to support Republicans," continued Valdes, "then she should not be the head of a committee responsible for electing their opponents... Democrats in South Florida are afraid of her and the amount of damage she could inflict on them by not supporting them. Mario Diaz-Balart has not been challenged by a Democrat in 8 years and I dared do the unthinkable.

Wasserman Schultz has aided Ros-Lehtinen in every single reelection battle & is doing it again this year

Wasserman Schultz, who originally helped the Republicans gerrymander Florida to their advantage when she was still just a corrupt state senator, tampered with the gerrymandering process again to assist Diaz-Balart, letting it be known that she wanted blue Broward County excised from FL-25, making the district a bit more GOP-friendly-- and changing the boundaries to put Alina Valdes' home just outside the new lines. "No one," she told me, "should have this much power and be supported by the very people she claims she wants to get rid of... the special interests, the lobbyists, the well connected, and the wealthy. The time has come to get them all out, especially this vindictive, spiteful career politician who is no different that the rest... They are in it for themselves only and couldn't care less about their constituents who are hurting and need help."

By having the district boundaries shifted to help Diaz-Balart, Wasserman Schultz had the Valdes household put into FL-23, her own district. Valdez will have to move a few blocks into FL-25 after she's elected to replace Diaz-Balart but meanwhile she's excited to be voting for Tim Canova, the progressive candidate running to replace Wasserman Schultz. Please consider contributing to both Alina Valdes' campaign and to Tim Canova's campaign here at the thermometer:

Ryan's Better Way May Be Better For Wealthy People Who Hate Paying Their Fair Share Of Taxes, But It's Devastating For Seniors

Paul Ryan's political raison d'être has been clear since he was first elected to Congress-- slashing the New Deal and subsequent social insurance policies to ribbons. That's what he got from reading Ayn Rand's books when he was just a little right-wing nut in high school. Now he's a big right-wing nut in the House of Representatives and every year-- without fail-- he comes up with new ways of packaging and marketing his never-changing austerity goals.

Last week, when he presented his plan to kill Obamacare, he, somewhat predictably threw in a proposal to raise the age of eligibility for Medicare by two years, to age 67, in the hopes that enough people will die in those two years that taxes on his wealthy supporters can be further reduced.

I know from personal experience-- having been diagnosed with a rare form of cancer at age 65-- what that means to people on Social Security. My treatments cost well over $2 million. The way Republicans want to change the insurance system, that means, in effect, I wouldn't have been treated and instead of writing this post about Paul Ryan today, I'd be dead or dying, despite having paid substantial taxes for half a century. (Well, in the early part of my career, the taxes I paid we're very substantial but I made up for that in later years when I did very well and paid large sums.)

Ryan, who survived a prematurely dead father because of Social Security, is now positively obsessed with lowering the meager standard of living of Social Security recipients. There are no Republicans running for Congress who don't back Ryan's "Better Way" proposals to diminish social insurance for the elderly. Extremists may be celebrating it, but even Republicans who try to pass themselves off as "mainstream," want to cut Social Security and Medicare benefits and regularly vote for Ryan's annual plans to do just that.

Our old friend, Carol Shea-Porter, running in New Hampshire's first district to win back her seat from teabagger Frank Guinta also comes at this from a personal experience, the way most Americans do. "I grew up in a three generation household, she told us. "My wonderful parents sheltered and cared for my great uncle and my grandmother in their old age. Medicare was essential to my dad's uncle and my mom's mother because they both had medical problems. If Congress had raised the eligibility age then, nobody else could have covered their bills. Paul Ryan knows that. Frank Guinta knows that. They have very cruel agendas, but delaying medical care to those who have no way to earn enough to pay without Medicare is despicable."

The progressive Democrat running in PA-07 in the Philly suburbs is Mary Ellen Balchunis. Her opponent, Rep Pat Meehan is one of those fake "moderates" the media always looks to to save the day, though they are only interested in saving their only careers. Last night Mary Ellen told us that Meehan claims to have "supported the Background Check bill, knowing full well the Republicans would not be calling it for a vote. If he were serious about the bill, he would call for a discharge petition to get a vote on the floor. He has just told Delaware County United for Sensible Gun Laws that the events of Orlando did not change his mind;  and he would not support a ban on assault weapons. (Meehan has received two A ratings from the NRA; and he is the fourth highest recipient in PA Congressional delegation of NRA money.) He is no different on Medicare and Social Security. His rhetoric does not match his action. The Republican party put out literature saying that Congressman Meehan would never vote to privatize Medicare and Social Security; but every chance that Meehan has gotten, he has voted to privitize both. We actually filed a complaint with the FEC. Of course, it did not go anywhere. Meehan has gotten booed at a senior center when he announced that he wanted to increase the retirement age. He told the audience that it would not apply to them, but they told him that they care what happens to their children and grandchildren too. When there was a vote that gave a tax break to the less than 1%, Meehan voted to give them another break. He is no moderate.

Speaker Paul Ryan was chair of the House and Ways Committee before becoming Speaker. You don't get put on the Ways and Means Committee if you are a moderate; Congressman Meehan was appointed the the House and Ways Committee. Meehan can sell himself how ever he wants, but when he gets the opportunity to help the elderly over the wealthy, money wins."

Alina Valdes is the official canddiate of the Democratic Party taking on Mario Diaz-Balart, a South Florida old line reactionary posing, from time to time, as a mainstream politician. He isn't. And because Alina is a medical doctor, we were eager to hear her take on what Ryan, Diaz-Balart and the rets of the Republicans are hoping to do to the system. A berniecrat, she's an avid advocate for expanding the New Deal programs and adamantly opposes cutting them:

As a country, we have traditionally expanded benefits for our seniors, our poor, and our disabled but lately, it has seemed that this Republican-controlled Congress is more concerned about entitlements for the wealthy and corporate welfare. They continue to cut programs that feed the hungry and help shelter and clothe the working poor, who are trying hard to maintain low wage jobs just to pay their bills. As a consequence, we have a high rate of poverty, including about 40% of our children, while income inequality continues to increase as the wealthy are rewarded with tax breaks and loopholes. In order to attempt to balance the budget, the Republican hard-line has been to cut benefits to seniors, who are barely getting by on their Social Security. This same Congress also wants to cut the ability of seniors to qualify or use their Medicare benefits by increasing the age to qualify for both programs and adding higher copays and deductibles so their health insurance corporate friends benefit with even higher profits at the expense of the elderly and sick. My Republican opponent in Florida's CD-25 supports and votes for these cuts that will adversely affect a large majority of the middle class and poor, the same people who he is supposed to represent and who have worked their entire lives to reach retirement only to find that they need to continue to work low level jobs to stay alive and make sure that they manage to stay healthy. There is no more security in growing old anymore as benefits are cut time and time again while the cost of living continues to rise. The Republican solution to getting sick is to hurry up and die, especially with people living longer because of technological advances. They mean to deny people who are not fortunate enough to be well-endowed financially these very same advances by cutting their earned benefits so they do just that.

As a physician who has worked my entire life with these very populations the Republicans are trying to undermine, I have seen for myself and heard many stories of people struggling to provide for their families while staying healthy since any illness is catastrophic for themselves and their families. In the homeless shelter clinic, I am seeing more and more seniors unable to maintain an abode or buy nutritious food so they end up on the streets homeless and hungry. This is not the future that I want to see or live in. We can increase benefits for our seniors by cutting corporate welfare and having the wealthy pay their fair share into the system they have benefitted from but now seem to be taking advantage of with the laws this Republican-controlled Congress continues to pass. Everyone deserves a fair chance at living with dignity and decency and it is time that these corporate-controlled shills are fired by the people for not doing their jobs. It is time to elect new faces with fresh minds who will truly work hard to make lives better for everyone and one of those people is me.

Paul Clements, running in southwest Michigan for the seat occupied by fake-moderate Fred Upton, summed it up well. "This November Americans face a choice. Will economic insecurity continue to increase for most Americans? Will access to health care be reduced? And will the super-rich who have gained so spectacularly in recent decades see their taxes cut even further? Or will we return to the New Deal trajectory to an economy that supports the life and liberty of all Americans? Yet another Paul Ryan budget plan, supported once again by my opponent Fred Upton, would take us further down the path of insecurity for most and ever greater wealth for the few. It is basic to American democracy that we support dignity for our seniors. In Congress I will work to strengthen Social Security and expand health benefits for the elderly."

Let's help make sure Ryan's dystopian vision is never enacted, by replacing stooges of his like Guinta, Meehan, Diaz-Balart and Upton with committed progressives Carol Shea-Porter, Mary Ellen Balchunis, Alina Valdes and Paul Clements. You can find all four of them at this thermometer: