Throwing In The Towel In The Democrats' Great ATM State

Let me start with California and I'll do the rest of the country soon. Obama won big in California in 2008. He beat McCain 8,274,473 (61%) to 5,011,781 (37%). All 51 of the state's incumbent House members were reelected, 34 Democrats and 19 Republicans. However, in 8 congressional districts with Republican incumbents, Obama beat McCain. Some were very close, like in the 48th CD (the heart of Orange County) where Obama edged McCain by just a few votes in a 49-49% finish and in the 3rd (the Sacramento suburbs), where it was almost an identical result. Other districts broke more resoundingly with their Republican pasts, particularly CA-45 (much of Riverside County) where Obama beat McCain 52-47%, a nine point swing after Kerry's dismal 43% in 2004. There were no congressional districts in California with Democratic congressmen where McCain beat Obama.

What this says is that, at least in theory, there are 8 Republican incumbents who should be in jeopardy in November. This is the list, along with Obama's winning percentage:

Dan Lungren (CA-03)- 49%
Elton Gallegly (CA-24)- 51%
Buck McKeon (CA-25)- 49%
David Dreier (CA-26)- 51%
Ken Calvert (CA-44)- 50%
Mary Bono Mack (CA-45)- 52%
John Campbell (CA-49)- 49%
Brian Bilbray (CA-50)- 51%

Each of these Republican congressmen is running again this year and each has a Democratic challenger. These are the races:

Dan Lungren vs Ami Bera
Elton Gallegly vs Tim Allison
Buck McKeon vs Jackie Conaway
David Dreier vs Russ Warner
Ken Calvert vs Bill Hedrick
Mary Bono Mack vs Steve Pougnet
John Campbell vs Beth Krom
Brian Bilbray vs Francine Busby

So is the DCCC seeing California as eight clear pick-up opportunities? Absolutely not. The DCCC is playing defense this year, not offense. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has made it clear the priority is to save seats of Blue Dogs and other conservative Democrats who have voted against Democratic priorities and thereby turned off the Democratic base. Virtually all the money the DCCC is collecting this year is going to shore up the desperate campaigns of reactionaries like Bobby Bright (Blue Dog-AL), Travis Childers (Blue Dog-MS), Chris Carney (Blue Dog-PA), Frank Kratovil (Blue Dog-MD), and Suzanne Kosmas (FL). The DCCC is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars per district-- as much as a million in some cases-- to help reelect members who vote anti-Choice, antigay, anti-healthcare. Some, like Bobby Bright and Walt Minnick, are even refusing to commit to vote for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker if the Democrats win in November.

Now, back to California and to the DCCC support for the challengers there. There's virtually none. Just two of the eight, Ami Bera and Steve Pougnet, are listed on the anemic, mostly ignored Red to Blue page, though neither of them, and none of the others, are getting any substantive help from the DCCC. Bera and Pougnet are, of course, grateful with the little help they are getting, though both campaigns, like the other six, are working hard on the ground and not counting on DC for anything. Like I said above, virtually every dime is going to bolster the conservatives who have caused the enthusiasm gap for the Democratic Party with their lockstep votes with John Boehner on so many crucial issues. So far the DCCC hasn't spent any money at all on media buys for any of the California challengers. Pougnet has raised $5,789 on the Red to Blue page and Bera has raised $1,255. Presumably, some Democratic donors will write checks because they're on that list. And the some media outlets interpret the list to mean they're "serious" candidates.

In 2008 the incumbent who came closest to be ousted was corrupt sex predator Ken Calvert, who beat challenger Bill Hedrick 129,937 (51%) to 123,890 (49%)-- in a district that is trending Democratic and where registered Democrats now outnumber registered Republicans. After Hedrick's shocking totals, the DCCC admitted they had made a mistake by not backing him and promised to not let that happen again. Although that's exactly what they're doing again. Not only haven't they given Hedrick any financial help-- which he can really use; they acknowledged last time that he would have won had they helped him-- but they haven't even given him the symbolic gesture of putting him on their limp Red to Blue list.

Calvert, a Big Business fave for his record of unwavering support for corporate bailouts and corporate welfare, has collected $1,368,747 so far this year. Bill's grassroots supporters have contributed $367,698 towards his campaign. (Blue America has helped him raise just over $10,000 so far and the PCCC is on the ground and working their butts off doing the functions that a less venal and confused and more competent DCCC should be doing.)

In CA-48 Beth Krom, the former Mayor of Irvine, is challenging John Campbell, an avowed “Birther” who is widely regarded as one of the most stridently partisan, do-nothing obstructionists in Congress. Beth is no naïve newcomer. She won five consecutive races as a Democrat in Irvine-- right in the heart of conservative Orange County. And she didn’t just win by a hair; she won her second term as Mayor with almost 60% of the vote. And guess what? Irvine is the largest city in the district, representing almost 30% of voters.

If that alone was not enough to catch the eye of the DCCC, she’s raised almost $600,000 with the vast majority coming from new contributors in the district. At a time when it’s pretty hard to separate people-- if not corporations-- from their money, Beth has built a whole new fundraising base. And get this... I'm hearing that more than 20% of her money has come from Republicans and another 20% from independents. That’s unheard of in Orange County, and demonstrates that Beth-- like Obama-- can get the crossover support necessary to win.

From what virtually every candidate and some Insider sources have told me, there are basically two criteria that guarantee the attention of the DCCC: raise $1 million without their help or run in a safe Democratic district where the minute you have won the primary you are the de facto winner of the general election.

I’ve met Beth Krom; she’s got moxy and Blue America was really proud to endorse her. To her credit, she doesn’t seem to have let the lack of enthusiasm by the power elite in Washington distract her from her goal. She made headlines a few months ago by winning the Democracy for America All-stars competition for grassroots organizing, beating out 99 other candidates nationwide. She’s exactly the kind of person we need in Washington, and if the DCCC or EMILY’s List (I don’t know what EMILY stands for today, but it definitely no longer means Early Money Is Like Yeast) were smart, they would have made Beth’s campaign one of their higher profile races.

I asked Beth how she feels about being ignored by these folks, and here’s what she said:

“Is it frustrating? Of course it’s frustrating. I see Joe Sestak on MSNBC talking about how he raised $4 million in four weeks following his primary win, and I understand the power that these endorsements have. Other than the $25,000 we raised following our DFA All-star win, every penny we’ve raised has been through a phone call or event. I’ve put every friendship and relationship on the line to raise what we need to fund a credible campaign-- I’m still $250,000 short, so tapping into a national network of support would be a dream right now. This is a race we can win. Partisan registration has changed dramatically with Republicans representing only 44% of registered voters, and many of those folks supporting me. We’d love to be put on the DCCC Red to Blue List, and know it would help us immensely, but with or without institutional support, our team is determined to do everything we can to make history in November.

I spoke to over a dozen candidates in districts across the country where Obama won but where the DCCC has just given up and there is tremendous frustration and even anger. Most of the candidates, understandably, were reluctant to go on the record and express their contempt for the party organizations. Russ Warner, however, is a straight-shooter and didn't hold back. He ran against David Dreier in 2008 and lost by approximately 32,000 votes out of around 150,000 cast. Russ has raised around a quarter million dollars this year which isn't bad until you see that Dreier, one of Wall Street bankster's most beloved California shills, has $1,021,140 in his campaign warchest. Needless to say, the DCCC has no interest in Russ' race whatsoever. Russ doesn't seem terribly interested in them either.

"The DCCC is one of the most self-serving organizations in Washington, DC. They only help those candidates in the 'good old boy' system. I'm not part of the good old boy system. They didn't help me much last time and this time they're not helping me at all.

Blue America is trying to help Russ overcome the immense financial wall he has to climb to be competitive with Dreier. If you can help, our DumpDavidDreier page is a good place to start. And what Russ had to say is pretty much what I heard from all the candidates who had run before and from almost all of the first time candidates as well. The feeling is that Obama ran a campaign that inspired hope among people disaffected from 8 years of Bush/Republican/corporate rule-- and then handed power to back to conservatives (an effective governing coalition of Republicans and Blue Dogs). It’s obvious the national Democratic party has chosen to play it’s power in ways that serve the party rather than the people. If incumbents lose their seats this November, they will have only themselves to blame.

The Democratic party used to stand for something more than protectionism. We can only hope the Democratic leadership will learn something from the pummeling that pollsters and pundits are predicting. Failing to embrace opportunities to pick up new seats seems like an obvious misstep. What a shame that with a Democratic President and House majority, the party is too short-sighted and self absorbed to support fresh ideas and help inspiring candidates.

House Committee Passes Domestic Partnership Bill-- With Every Single Republican Voting NO, Even The Gay Ones

Yesterday, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted 23-12 to pass the Domestic Partner Benefits and Obligations Act, which would extend benefits to same-sex partners of federal government workers. Next step: the full House, where it is expected to pass, then the Senate and then the President's desk. All of the "yes" votes were from Democrats and all of the "no" votes were from Republicans, including Illinois closet queen Aaron Schock. Another Illinois member of the committee, Danny Davis (D-IL) mentioned in the debate that “It is unsettling to me to think that because of the way that someone might feel, the way they might act, or the way they might behave-- circumstances that they have no control over-- that the rest of us would sit in some kind of judgment to deny them the very things that we would want for ourselves." He didn't get into the deep psychosis involved when fearful closet cases like Schock and Patrick McHenry (R-NC), who also voted against the bill, factor in their own severe mental problems, trying to balance their own sexual preference against the demands of the extreme right-wing, homophobic political party they belong to. It will be interesting to watch and see what other Republican closet cases like David Dreier (R-CA), Adrian Smith (R-NE), Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) and Trent Franks (R-AZ) do when the bill comes up for a vote in the full House.

Republican California congressman Darrell Issa, the ranking member on the committee, objected to the bill on the grounds that it was fiscally irresponsible.

“We are taking up a bill that casts aside all concerns about fiscal responsibility in order to bestow costly new benefits to a select class of federal employees,” he said.

We're talking about equality and the bill is covered under pay-as-you-go rules. But Issa wasn't the only vicious homophobe from California to object. San Diego Republican always has his own kooky perspective on anything that comes up: his virulent hatred of immigrants, especially immigrants from south of the border. If you thought Lou Dobbs was bad... Bilbray, who made it clear he would vote against the bill no matter what amendments passed, offered one of his own to "prohibit benefits from being awarded unless the applicant has been screened by the E-verify program under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (PL 104-208) and determined to have a lawful presence in the United States." Three conservative Democrats, Steve Dreihaus (OH), Bill Foster (IL) and Paul Kanjorski (PA) joined a dozen Republicans in favor; it lost anyway, 15-20.

I asked Francine Busby, the Democrat who is running against Bilbray next year, to make some sense for me about why Bilbray is bringing up his xenophobia in the middle of a discussion about health care equality. She didn't hold back: "Extending healthcare and other employee benefits to domestic partners of federal employees as a long-overdue giant step toward ending discrimination and assuring that all Americans enjoy their rightful civic and equal rights. Rep. Brian Bilbray's proposed amendment to verify the immigration status of domestic partners proves again that illegal immigration is his one and only issue, whether it is pertinent to the topic or not." Other Democrats were less polite to the whack-job everyone in DC knows Bilbray is. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) came right out and said his amendment amounted to political posturing and was not germane to the legislation. And during the debate Stephen Lynch (D-MA) asked Bilbray point blank if "we now have to be afraid of gay people coming over the border and entering into domestic partnerships with federal employees? This is where it becomes just too incredible to believe. There are concerns we ought to be grappling with... I don't think this is really one of them."

The bill itself, H.R. 2517 defines a domestic partner as an adult unmarried person living with another adult unmarried person in a committed relationship, who intends to live with that person indefinitely. It would apply to individuals in a domestic partnership with a federal employee, former federal employee, member of Congress, former member of Congress, or annuitant. The bill would cover benefits including health care; disability; family, medical and emergency leave; long-term-care insurance; and compensation for work injuries. Domestic partners could also receive benefits from participation in the thrift savings plan and the Federal Employees' Retirement System.

Paul Hodes (D-NH), who is running for the U.S. Senate, feels the bill is just one step on a long road: "Yesterday," he told DWT "I voted for the Domestic Partner Benefits bill, which would extend benefits to same-sex partners of federal government workers. While this is an important step forward towards ensuring equal access to marriage benefits, I am still fighting for full marriage equality. The time has come for all couples to be able to enjoy the benefits of marriage.”

I was proud of my own congresswoman, Diane Watson (D-CA), who-- as usual, did not disappoint. "All this bill does is stop the federal government from playing favorites, based on irrelevant factors, among those who do the work of this nation. But for five hours we were subjected to Republicans waxing self-righteous on the right of Congress to discriminate against federal employees' whose committed relationships they disdain."

Earlier today I noticed a tweet from the right-wing version of the Log Cabin Republicans, a bunch of gay GOP extremists, sort of teabaggers in more ways than one.


They seem happy the bill passed-- and they should. Kumbaya, teabaggers! But they still didn't offer a word of admonition for the homophobic votes cast by every Republican: Brian Bilbray (R-CA) John Burton (R-IN), homophobic fanatic Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE), Darrell Issa (R-CA), Jim Jordan (R-OH), Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO), Patty McHenry (R-NC), Aaron Schock (R-IL), Mark Souder (R-IN), and Steve Turner (R-OH). And not a peep about the two gay Republicans on the committee, McHenry and Schock. Let's keep in mind that even passive homophobia from public officials leads to-- gives permission to-- this kind of thing. Muchas gracias, Aaron and Patty!

It sure is a very different matter for David Dreier's congressional chief-of-staff/domestic partner. Because the powerful Republican closeted congressman was able to get his lover, Brad Smith, a very highly paid job in Congress, they not only traveled the world together, Smith had all the healthcare insurance he needed. The thing I never understand about these Republicans-- and especially not about the closet cases-- is not just that they have no empathy for other people outside their narrow circles, but that they actually hate and fear anyone who does have empathy.

And Now For The Electoral Politics Of Saturday's Health Care Vote

The votes had barely been cast when the fundraising letters started flying. I'm mostly on the lists of progressives so the e-mails I got were celebratory. Yesterday we looked at the e-mails explaining the only two "no" votes from progressives-- Dennis Kucinich and Eric Massa-- who felt the bill didn't go far enough towards their goals: single payer. This morning's CQPolitics tried to answer the question, Who Took A Risk By Voting For The Health Care Bill?, presumably a question framed by the RNC, since it didn't ask, Who Took A Risk By Voting Against The Health Care Bill?"

Dozens of House Democrats bucked their party on Saturday's health care vote. But how about those who might have taken a political risk by siding with their party?

Let's look at the Democrats from Republican-leaning districts who voted for the bill and Republicans from Democratic-friendly districts who opposed it.

Of the 49 House Democrats that represent districts that John McCain won in 2008, 18 of them voted for the bill.

The Democrat from the most pro-McCain district who voted for the health care bill was Marion Berry of Arkansas, who's in his seventh term representing an area that gave McCain 59 percent of the vote. Of the 15 Democrats from the most pro-McCain districts who voted for the measure, Berry was the only "yes" vote. Also voting yes were West Virginia Reps. Alan B. Mollohan and Nick J. Rahall Jr., whose districts gave McCain 57 percent and 56 percent respectively.

Yet Berry, Mollohan and Rahall are veteran members who usually win their elections overwhelmingly; Berry and Mollohan didn't even draw GOP opposition in 2008, and Rahall won a 17th term with two-thirds of the vote. All three districts have median incomes far below the national average.

They posit that less senior members who voted yes, freshmen and sophomores like Ann Kirkpatrick, the Arizona Democrat from the most pro-McCain district who voted for the bill, Blue Dogs Chris Carney (PA), Zack Space (OH) and Kathy Dahlkemper (PA), plus generally progressive Tom Perriello (VA) are the most vulnerable. Adam Blake at The Hill also looked at this today from a similar perspective, At Risk Democrats Defend Their Tough Votes On Health Care. Blake, though, started by talking about the risk that Democrats who voted against the bill took. And the worst of the Democratic shills of the Insurance Industry, Suzanne Kosmas, a Florida conservative, is surely the most likely Democrat to be defeated next year, having done that old Creigh Deeds magic of completely turning off the base. She was trying to back-pedal as fast as she could.

“Though I will not be voting in favor of the House bill, it has improved since first being released last summer, and it shows promise,” said Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-Fla.) before voting no. She was picketed afterward by supporters of the legislation.

Another freshman, Rep. John Boccieri (D-Ohio), said he held out hope.

“I hope when the healthcare reform bill comes back from the Senate, the concerns of my district are addressed,” he said.

Rep. Larry Kissell (D-N.C.) also announced before the vote that he would be opposing the bill. That has irritated the blogosphere, which helped put him on the political map three years ago.

“From the day I announced my candidacy for this office, I promised to protect Medicare,” Kissell said in his statement. “I gave my word I wouldn’t cut it and I intend to keep that promise.”

But for every targeted member voting against the bill, there was another who voted for it. And many of them were happy to pin their names and political futures to the legislation.

Rep. Chris Carney (D-Pa.), who according to the Cook Political Report represents the most Republican district held by a supporter of the bill, said Democrats “stood firm.”

“Today’s legislation is a strong start in the healthcare reform process, and we look forward to working closely with our Senate colleagues to move the issue forward in the coming weeks,” Carney said.

Carney acknowledged that the bill wasn’t perfect, but Rep. Dina Titus (D-Nev.) had nothing but good things to say about it. While many voting against the bill stressed that the cost was too high, Titus said the bill will help small businesses and Americans.

“The House took a giant step toward making healthcare reform affordable and accessible for more people in southern Nevada and across the country,” she said.

Rep. Steve Driehaus (D-Ohio) said Monday that he would campaign on  the vote.

...But several Democrats appear dead-set against the bill, including many of the 15 who voted against bringing the bill to the floor — a procedural motion that in general breaks solidly along party lines.

In that group were vulnerable Reps. Bobby Bright (D-Ala.), Travis Childers (D-Miss.), Frank Kratovil (D-Md.), Parker Griffith (D-Ala.) and Walt Minnick (D-Idaho), as well as Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-La.), who is running for Senate in deep-red Louisiana.

Those six members all represent districts that went by double digits for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in last year’s presidential race, and most of them have broken with their party on other big-ticket items this year, including the stimulus package and the energy bill.

Hard to imagine how any of them expect to turn out Democrats-- who overwhelmingly favor meaningful health care reform-- to vote for them in 2010. And the districts' already have anti-health care Republicans running. The House will be a far better place, though, without the likes of quivering, confused reactionaries like Bright, Childers, Kratovil, Griffith, Minnick, and Melancon, something we invite you to help us achieve at the Blue America Bad Dogs page.

Most Democrats are out there telling their constituents why this is a step in the right direction. Gwen Moore, the Democrat from Milwaukee who personally debated GOP and Insurance Industry shill Paul Ryan, was very proud of her vote for the bill. She wrote to her constituents today that Congress had "tirelessly debated and reviewed this bill-- and its numerous amendments--  and I believe that this legislation is a crucial step toward providing quality, affordable health care to the working people of Milwaukee, the citizens of the great state of Wisconsin and to everyone in our nation."

The legislation will drastically improve our current health care system to make quality and affordable health care available to families who are struggling under the crushing costs of health care at a time when they are also suffering in the worst economy since the Great Depression. I'm proud to have supported a public option in this bill and to have voted for a plan that I believe meets President's Obama's criteria for reform-- offering stability, reducing the cost of health care for everyone, and not adding to the deficit.

...I take my responsibility to best represent Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and all of America very seriously. When we have seniors being forced to choose between expensive medication and their next meal,  there can be no question that the current health care system is broken. As a Member of Congress, the Vice-Chair of the Women's Caucus, a mother, a grandmother, a woman and an American, I simply refuse to sit by and allow our great nation to fall behind when it comes to ensuring the health of our citizens.

Our nation deserves better and this is why I am proud to have voted "Yes". Yes for you, yes for our seniors, yes for our children, yes for real health care reform.

But what about Republicans? Do you think an electorate craving health care reform is going to endorse systematic, mindless obstructionism from the entire party? Even between a quarter and a third of Republican voters favor a public option. CQPolitics made an off-handed mention of some risk for a few Republicans at the tail end of their story.

Of the 33 House Republicans who represent districts Obama won in 2008, all but one -- Anh "Joseph" Cao of Louisiana, whose black-majority New Orleans district gave three-fourths of its votes to Obama-- joined the rest of the GOP Conference in opposing the health care bill.

After Cao, the Republican from the most strongly pro-Obama district is Delaware Rep. Michael N. Castle, who is a candidate for the Senate seat formerly held by Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. Democratic officials last week pressed Castle to vote for the legislation, though the congressman said that it "over-reaches by creating new government programs costing over $1 trillion, paid for from tax increases and cuts to Medicare which are more gimmicks than real entitlement reform."

Illinois Rep. Mark Steven Kirk also voted no, despite representing a district that voted nearly as strongly for Obama (61 percent) as the state at-large (62 percent). He's running for an open Senate seat in 2010 and faces little-known but vocal opposition on his right in a primary election and more serious competition on his left in a general election.

Except for Cao, Reps. Erik Paulsen of Minnesota and Leonard Lance of New Jersey are the only first-term House Republicans from districts Obama carried, though neither is presently a top target for defeat by Democratic strategists.

Funny they didn't mention all the races where Republicans voted against the wishes of their districts, including 8 vulnerable California Republicans in districts Obama won-- including several, David Dreier, Ken Calvert, Mary Bono Mack, Brian Bilbray and Dan Lungren-- who have vigorous challenges coming up next year. Similarly, unless he resigns, Bill Young in Florida is likely to be defeated and Michigan Republicans Thaddeus McCotter, Fred Upton and Dave Camp are all considered on shaky ground. Also likely to regret having voted against health care reform are Charlie Dent (PA), Judy Biggert (IL), Paul Ryan (WI) and Dave Reichert (WA).

Dreier's opponent, Russ Warner, wrote a letter to the editor of the local paper, explaining the difference between his position and Dreier's negativity. He called the victory on Saturday "bittersweet" for his district because of Dreier's obstructionism. "I applaud," he wrote, "Congress’ passage of the Affordable Health Care for America Act because it includes a strong public option and will ensure affordability for the middle class. It also provides security for our seniors; ends discrimination for pre-existing medical conditions; invests in wellness and prevention; and ensures responsibility to our children-- by not adding a dime to the deficit. A great deal of work remains before President Obama can sign the act into law. Please join me in urging our Senators to support healthcare reform. And, don’t let David Dreier off the hook-– let him know you’re disappointed with his actions." And Francine Busby, who's taking on Brian Bilbray further south was quite to put out a press release making it clear that unlike her opponent she supports the bill.

Francine Busby, candidate for the 50th Congressional District, joins the American Medical Association and the American Association of Retired People in supporting the landmark Affordable Health Care For Americans Act of 2009.

“Although it is not perfect, the Affordable Health Care Act is a first step in the right direction for all Americans including the voters of the 50th District. Americans can breathe a sigh of relief that Congress has taken a stand against the status quo that allows insurance companies to dictate medical decisions to healthcare professionals, ration care, bankrupt families, increase costs to employers, and deny coverage to millions of Americans.”

Congressman Bilbray voted against this bill. Bilbray voted against providing access to insurance to over 60,000 uninsured people in his own 50th District, and over 500,000 San Diegans across the county. Bilbray seems to be more concerned with the health of health insurance companies than his own constituents. And maybe for monetary reasons: Bilbray has received $51,000 from health insurance giants including Blue Cross, Cigna and Aflac, along with $33,000 from insurance political action committees such as the Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers and the Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of America. Taking insurance companies payoffs and then doing their bidding in Washington-- such as voting against the Affordable Health Care Act-- puts insurance company profits before the well-being of his constituents.

In fact, savvy Democratic challengers all over the country are castigating Republicans-- and anti-choice Blue Dogs-- for their bad votes Saturday. Ohio is a state where voters are very much in favor of meaningful health care reform. The progressive candidate for the open Senate seat, Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, has been a longtime proponent of both healthcare reform and Choice. She was out fast and strong on Saturday's vote.

The Stupak-Pitts amendment makes it virtually impossible for private insurance companies that participate in the new system to offer abortion coverage to women, even if they pay for such coverage with their own funds. The amendment disallows any coverage of abortion in the public option and disallows anyone receiving a federal subsidy from purchasing a health insurance plan that includes abortion.  Under the amendment, private health insurance plans are forbidden from offering through the planned insurance exchange a plan that includes abortion coverage to both subsidized and unsubsidized individuals purchasing through the exchange.

The Stupak-Pitts amendment would leave women worse off than they are today in obtaining reproductive health services by denying them the right to use their own money to purchase an insurance plan with abortion coverage. This restriction is far more onerous than the Hyde Amendment, which has prohibited public funding of abortions since 1977. Presently, more than 85 percent of private-insurance plans cover abortion services.

By voting late Saturday to block women from essential reproductive health care services, the anti-choice obstructionists in Congress have abandoned women and would render a woman's constitutional right to choose ineffective at best. The final health care bill must not only guarantee each American woman’s right to the health care she needs when she needs it, it also must also provide access to reproductive health services for all, regardless of income level and regardless of whether or not they receive government subsidized care.

Less well-known in the political world, but probably better known in the world of pop culture, Surya Yalamanchili, a marketing executive whose apolitical moment of fame came when he was a contestant on Donald Trump's Apprentice, is having a run, as an independent, at reactionary knuckledragger Mean Jean Schmidt (R-OH). Schmidt is widely disliked in her very Republican district and has never won a convincing victory. Yalamanchili thinks next year will be her last year in Congress.

“The overriding issue for this campaign is to get special interests out of the way and get individual people’s voices heard in government again,” he said.

Yalamanchili, who is not accepting PAC contributions, bemoaned the large amounts of campaign funds that the financial services industry has bestowed on both the Democratic and Republican parties, which he said have engaged in partisan bickering and ignored the nation’s long-term challenges... [He] said that the economic stimulus law President Obama signed into law in February included a “lot of pork” but was a “painful pill that we probably had to take.” He said the health care bill the House passed last weekend was “better than what we have now,” but didn’t include enough consumer choice or “tort reform” to curb lawsuit abuse.

Blue America Welcomes Back Francine Busby (CA-50)

Francine Busby was one of the first candidates Blue America ever endorsed. 1,216 members of our community contributed $22,828 to her campaign to succeed Republican bribe taker Randy "Duke" Cunningham in 2006. She took 43% of the vote (to lobbyist Brian Bilbray's 54%). Two years earlier she had taken on Cunningham himself, winning 36% of the vote and spending $212,406 against Cunningham's $939,542. What attracted us to Francine's candidacy in 2006 was her absolute determination to stand up for basic progressive values in a strongly red district. Unlike the 2008 candidate, she didn't play Republican-lite. At all times she tried persuading independents and moderate Republicans that her solutions were better than those offered by right-wing ideology.

Thursday, Francine announced that she would run against Bilbray again in 2010. I called her yesterday and invited her to come on for a chat at Firedoglake today. Before joining us in the FDL comments section for a live discussion, let's do a little quick catch-up on the politics of CA-50. Francine reminded me that when she first ran in 2004 "there was very little Democratic presence in this North County San Diego area. There was a 16% Republican voter registration advantage in this very gerrymandered district. "I ran," she said, "because it was a time when I couldn't stand to not be active any longer in speaking out against what the Bush Administration was doing; I needed to stand up and do something. We built the nucleus of a network of Democrats and progressives in North County... Now we're starting this campaign with 500 precinct captains already in place. The differences between 2006 and now are enormous." That's exactly what I was eager to hear about.

First of all, as a candidate I have a lot more experience in running a campaign and dealing with the media, not to mention the millions of dollars in name recognition I have because of my previous runs. In this district voter registration has shifted, just like it has in the state and across the nation. President Obama won this district, 51-47%. The Republican registration advantage has been cut from 16% to 8.9% and there's been a steady decline in Republican registration here. Independents are 24% of the registered voters; it's no longer a Republican-majority district. The voters here do want change and they like Obama's message that we're going to work together to solve the problems that people have in their lives and reform health care and education and energy.

If Francine can keep voters in CA-50 focused on that, they will easily draw the conclusion that the congressman they re-elected last year, who swore up and down the district that he's a "moderate," has been a lockstep obstructionist for everything that has come up this year-- against the Stimulus package, against the budget, against equal pay for women, against health care for needy children, against middle class tax cuts, against mortgage relief for responsible homeowners... everything that they elected Obama to do. In the short time he's been in Congress, Bilbray has already scooped up $235,705 from the financial/insurance/real estate sector, and has the temerity to support their special interests instead of the interests of working families in his district.

Bilbray only has one issue: illegal immigration. That's all he talks about. If someone brings up war, he talks about illegal immigration; if someone brings up health care, he talks about illegal immigration; if someone brings up education, he talks about illegal immigration... But if all he wants to talk about is illegal immigration and people here want to talk about their mortgages and that there are half a million uninsured people in San Diego County and 37,000 newly unemployed in San Diego County... and if he only wants to talk about illegal immigration, I'll be talking about health care, unemployment, education, green economy, jobs, and start-ups in this county that are the engine of our economy. He can talk about illegal immigration all he wants.

When I asked Francine how she can confront a divisive hot button issue like Employee Free Choice, she was very clear and seemed to have a better grasp of what the bill is about than some Democratic leaders who have been to the mass media speaking about it. She needs Republican votes but she believes she can get them by proving her positions are better, not by offering watered down Republican positions that have proven detrimental. "Employees," she told me unflinchingly, "have to have the right to organize in a way that makes it easy for them to do it without being intimidated and I think the more they're organized the better the benefits and the better the pay, the better off everyone is going to be. I just saw a report reiterating that the gap between the wealthiest one percent and the rest of us has been steadily increasing."

OK, Francine will be at the FDL comments section at 11am (PT) for 2 hours answering questions. Please come over and hear what she has to say.

CUNNINGHAM RENEGS ON COOPERATION DEAL... IN THE EXPECTATION THAT BUSH WILL PARDON HIM ON THE WAY OUT?

Now that Cunningham has gotten off so lightly-- just 8 years and a few months instead of 30 years, for bribery and other criminal acts, he has cooperating with Federal investigators. Yesterday's North County Times has reported today that he "has not been helping federal authorities as they continue to probe the former North County congressman's web of corruption. Rick Gwin, special agent in charge of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service's western regional office, said he is troubled by the lack of assistance, particularly in light of Cunningham's plea agreement that calls for him to tell all that he knows. 'In my opinion, he has not been cooperative and I have not gotten any information from him to further develop other targets,' Gwin said in a telephone interview from his office in Mission Viejo. 'I was hoping that from a jail cell, he might become more cooperative, but we just don't have the cooperation that I think we should have... This is much bigger and wider than just Randy "Duke' Cunningham," he said. 'All that has just not come out yet, but it won't be much longer and then you will know just how widespread this is.'"

It was widely expected that Cunningham's testimony would at least help authorities successfully prosecute 3 other right-wing Republican congressmen who were bribed by the same defense contractors who were bribing Cunningham, Jerry Lewis, Duncan Hunter and John Doolittle. CIA chief Porter Goss and his deputy "Dusty" Foggo were fired last week for their involvement in the bribery scandals swirling around Cunningham, Brent Wilkes and other Republican defense contractors who were "losing" a great deal of money at weekly poker games to "lucky" GOP solons. Like Cunningham, Goss and Foggo were making sure the defense contractors got sweet contracts in return for millions of dollars in bribes.

And there's the little matter of Cunningham's pal Thomas Kontogiannis who had given Cunningham $400,000 to buy a pardon for himself from the one person who could grant him one, Cunningham's other pal, George W. Bush. Some people think Bush has let Cunningham know that if he just sits there quietly he'll spring him with a presidential pardon as he leaves office, a pardon that can't be challenged.

Meanwhile a brand new SUSA poll reported today that the Republicans' mirror image crooked ex-congressman/lobbyist choice to replace Cunningham, ultra sleazy Brian Bilbray, is rapidly losing support in a district gerrymandered for a Republican. "In a special election held today, 5/10/06, in California's 50th Congressional District, Republican Brian Bilbray and Democrat Francine Busby tie, each with 45%, according to a SurveyUSA poll of 442 likely voters conducted exclusively for KGTV-TV San Diego. 9% would vote for some other candidate. Bilbray gets 82% of Republican votes. Busby gets 92% of Democrat votes. Among Independents, Busby leads Bilbray 54% to 19%."

ANOTHER CHANCE TO HELP FRANCINE BUSBY HELP AMERICA

The countdown is on. Two weeks from today is election day in Northern San Diego's 50th congressional district. As I discussed yesterday, progressive Democrat Francine Busby is leading by impressive-- and still growing-- margins. If momentum continues to build for her reformist campaign-- and after years and years and years of Randy "Duke" Cunningham's right-wing extremism, rubber-stamping, and bribe taking what district better needs a true reformer?-- Francine could take this once bedrock GOP district without a run-off. No one is counting on this though. It's more likely that she will have to face whichever loon or nutcase the Republican die-hards pick to be The Candidate Of More Of The Same.

Although way behind Francine at this point (39%-15%) Bilbray leads the Republican pack. As a former (and very ethically-challenged) Republican congressman from some other district who has spent the last few years getting rich as a lobbyist, Bilbray has all the big money interests which corrupted Cunningham and the whole DC Republican Party (think Tom DeLay, Richard Pombo, Jack Abramoff, Bob Ney, John Boehner, Katherine Harris if you want to know what scum-ponds Bilbray swims in) ready to kick in for him. Busby has... us.

I hope you've already contributed, as I have, and want to give more, as I do. I don't know if this is going to incentivize anyone, but the first 50 people who donate something-- anything-- on the DWT ACT BLUE Page will get a special CD in the mail from me. (If you don't know, before I became a blogger I was president of Reprise Records, so I have lots of cool music I am eager to share with fellow progressives.) Tell your friends.


UPDATE: BUSBY RATING SOARS IN NEW SUSA POLLS RELEASED TODAY

Recent polling has consistently shown Francine Busby leading the pack by a a wide margin. Today SUSA released the freshed polling ad it shows Busby with the biggest lead yet-- 45% (with the combined polling for her 3 closest competitors at 36%). Busby can win this one outright. Be a part of it.


SATURDAY UPDATE: BUSBY MAKING HISTORY

Today's San Diego Union-Tribune has a pretty good piece on Francine Busby's race to replace Randy "Duke" Cunningham in Congress. This will probably be seen by more voters in CA-50 than all the blogs and all the campaign pieces combined. I think if this story helps enough undecided voters make up their minds, Busby will be the next congressperson from the San Diego area. Aside from showing how clearly she differs from the pathetic gaggle of rubber-stamp Republicans vying to actually be the next Randy "Duke" Cunningham, the Union-Tribune touches on Francine's magic: "Then, there are occasional flashes of charisma. At a Carlsbad business association forum Thursday night, Busby connected with the crowd of 200 and inspired enthusiastic cheers that Republican candidates at the podium with her couldn't match. The buzz around her is undeniable. Private polls continue to show her leading the pack of 18 candidates in the April 11 special election for the 50th District. In head-to-head competitions, one early poll had her beating some of the leading Republicans. This in a district where 44 percent of registered voters are Republican and 30 percent are Democrats... There's also the Duke factor.'People in that district will be looking for a change and a way to show with their votes they want to move in a new direction after Cunnngham,' said Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia. It will be a war between the desire for change and someone completely new and different, and the tendency to pick a stable political figure who won't embarrass the district, again.'"

FRANCINE BUSBY INTO THE HOME STRETCH-- IN A DISTRICT WHERE THE IMMIGRATION ISSUE IS PARAMOUNT

While the gaggle of nutcases and loons who are offering themselves to voters as a replacement for imprisoned Republican bribe-taker Randy "Duke" Cunningham in Northern San Diego County (CA-50) fight amongst themselves about who will be tougher and more draconian on illegal immigration, Democratic nominee Francine Busby is attracting a wide array of voters from across the political spectrum. Having positioned herself as the reform candidate in a district badly in need of reform, Busby has consistently dominated the polls, with a preference rating more than double that of her nearest rivals.

And while the Republican 3-ring circus wanders off the cliff of common sense and even sanity, Busby has come up with workable immigration proposals-- to go along with her well thought out ideas on a wide number of issues that concern people in Southern California. A quick visit to her web site will bring you to a set of easy to understand immigration proposals that go beyond the weak, divisive and pathetic Republican screaming points. Captive to the competing interests of bigotry, xenophobia and racism from their hard-core base on the one hand and to the financial demands from their Big Money backers eager to keep wages low and labor unions weak on the other hand, Republicans are in complete disarray on this. They would rather posture and pander than come up with a comprehensive program.

Busby's plan has 3 main points:
-Tough penalties for businesses that continually hire undocumented workers;
-Create a "smart fence" that utilizes 21st century radar technology to prevent unlawful border crossings;
-Create a demand-based guest worker program that addresses American economic needs

Here's the statement on her website:

Francine believes that the problem with our immigration policy is that we don’t have one. On one hand, we have a "Keep Out" sign and on the other hand we have a "Help Wanted" sign. For years, we've heard heated rhetoric from politicians in Sacramento and Washington without any concrete results. Is it any wonder that citizens are frustrated and demanding action? We need to implement a comprehensive immigration policy that addresses all aspects or our immigration issues. Unfortunately, current leadership in Washington and Sacramento has been unwilling to address the issue. Francine supports John McCain's bipartisan immigration reform plan that will strengthen border security, increase penalties for employers who hire illegal immigrants and ensure that no jobs that Americans want are going to immigrant workers first. The legislation would also assist states and localities with the increased costs of education and healthcare that have come as a result of federal inaction on illegal immigration. She also supports the creation of a Smart Fence that uses proven 21st Century radar technology to detect and prevent undocumented border crossings.

It seems like every time you turn on the TV you see George Bush braying like a jackass at the behest of the corporate interests which he represents, that "Americans don't want these jobs." He's said it so many times, that everyone just accepts it as true. Is it? If Bill Clinton's economic policies were based on the premise that a growing economy-- growing from the bottom up-- would lift all boats, Bush's has been based on the premise that the rest of us would survive on the scraps that trickled down from an orgy of unproductive, conspicuous consumption by multimillionaires. Bush's economic agenda has destroyed the economic underpinnings of the working and middle class while creating a tiny minority of super wealthy, self-entitled privileged parasites (in his own image).

Let's look a little closer at "Americans don't want these jobs." Well, at $5.00/hour they don't. But in a capitalist, free market economy-- as opposed to Bush-ist corporate socialism-- market conditions set wages, not schemes for importing cheap foreign labor. Today my neighbor Cynthia and I were walking around Los Feliz. There was no one picking lettuce but on every block we saw painters, construction workers, gardeners, housekeepers, nannies, carpenters. I'd say if they weren't all from south of the border, maybe there was one or two who weren't. Maybe. Americans don't want those jobs? Why not? They don't pay enough. If market conditions determined the wages for the jobs Americans would want them. But that is precisely what Bush and his Big Money backers don't want. Their alternative: serfs... virtual slaves... people struggling to stay alive and make ends meet, shipping jobs overseas and keeping taxes low with still legal offshore schemes.

Bush's plan seeks to create two America's-- a built in "us and them" dynamic that will institutionalize a caustic and stressful faultline based on class and race inside America. It should be firmly rejected while the Republicans tear each other apart over the issue. Today on CBS' Early Show Republican strategist and well-known sociopath, Bay Buchanan, called for the deportation of 11 million undocumented workers living in the U.S.-- 11 million men, women and children. You think I'm making it up? I mean could anyone actually say such a thing? Here, watch it yourself.

In two weeks voters in Southern California start the process of replacing the disgraced Cunningham. In one fell swoop the citizens of CA-50 can go from being represented by a corrupt self-serving slob who was voted "stupidest person in Congress" (tied with recently unhinged and also drowning in corruption Katherine Harris) to being represented by an intelligent and energetic voice for commonsense moderation and reform, Francine Busby. It's not too late to help her win a very winnable district, right here at the DWT ACT BLUE Page.


UPDATE: BRAND NEW POLL NUMBERS SHOW BUSBY LEADING THE FIELD

The Busby campaign just released new polling numbers. At this moment 39% of the voters in the district are supporting her and the 17 others split up the rest with her nearest competitor, a former Republican Congressman from another district who has since become a lobbyist, at 15%. The poll, conducted by Lake Research Partners, also showed that President Bush’s approval rating in the district is at 38% and that by a 47-38 margin, voters prefer a candidate who will provide a check on the President’s agenda over a candidate who will blindly support the President’s policies. “Voters have shown that they are not excited by the business as usual candidates: career politicians, lobbyists and millionaires trying to buy votes,” said Busby. “I’m not a career politician and I am running to make Washington work for the people of San Diego, not the special interests.”