Greg Walden (R-OR) Bye-Bye

Barton left because of sex molestation charges, Walden just wants to get away from Trump

Greg Walden isn't really a nut; he's a mainstream conservative who has risen high in the ranks of the House GOP. And he announced yesterday that he's retiring from Congress next year.-- the 19th House Republican who is looking forward to not having Trump in their lives. He's Oregon's only Republican federal official. It's almost as though when they drew the Oregon districts, they shoveled all the Republicans into his. Oregon is a very blue state. Obama won it both times and even as weak a candidate as Hillary won the state 1,002,106 (50.07%0 to 782,403 (39.9%). The last time a Republican won the state was when Reagan beat Mondale in 1984. But OR-02, Walden's district, is very different. the state PVI is D+5 but the district PVI is R+11. It's primarily rural and the only cities, Medford and Bend, are both Democratic towns. There are 20 counties. Republicans are vulnerable in the biggest and second biggest, Jackson and Deschutes counties and in a few smaller blue counties like Hood River and maybe Wasco in a good year. Bernie won every single one of the 20 counties-- from most populated to least populated:

• Jackson- Bernie- 56.3%, Hillary- 43.7%
• Deschutes- Bernie- 53.3%, Hillary- 46.7%
• Klamath- Bernie- 55.4%, Hillary- 44.6%
• Josephine- Bernie- 56.7%, Hillary- 43.3%
• Umatilla- Bernie- 53.3%, Hillary- 46.7%
• Union- Bernie- 59.1%, Hillary 40.9%
• Crook- Bernie- 54.8%, Hillary- 45.2%
• Wasco- Bernie- 58.8%, Hillary- 41.2%
• Hood River- Bernie- 60.7%, Hillary- 39.3%
• Malheur- Bernie- 52.0%, Hillary- 48.0%
• Jefferson- Bernie- 52.0%, Hillary- 48.0%
• Baker- Benrie -60.1%, Hillary- 39.9%
• Wallowa- Bernie- 59.9%, 40.1%
• Grant- Bernie- 64.1%, Hillary- 35.9%
• Morrow- Bernie- 53.2%, Hillary 46.8%
• Lake- Bernie- 59.6%, Hillary- 40.4%
• Harney- Benrie- 59.9%, Hillary- 40.1%

But watch Blue Dog imbecile Cheri Bustos try to recruit some conservative like herself and saddle the Democrats with a worthless Blue Dog, which, of course, will dampen the enthusiasm of base voters. Just watch; it's the only game the DCCC knows how to play... which is why they lose so much.

Walden is 62, not exactly retirement age in Congress. He was first elected in 1998. He was chair of the NRCC for the 2012 and 2014 cycles and then rewarded with the ranking slot at the Energy and Commerce Committee, a cash cow for unethical members. All of his reelection battles were won with between 74 and 69% until last year when he had a slight scare, winning with just 56.3%, a startling 14 point drop, that can be attributed to Trump. Jamie McLeod-Skinner took 145,298 votes (39.4%) to his 207,597 (56.3%). It was the best any Democrat had done in OR-02 in contemporary history. She was outspent $1,309,788 to $4,876,725, the DCCC ignoring the race. She's running again this cycle, as are two other (unknown) Democrats, John Holm and Raj Mason, neither of whom has raised any money.

Walden told Politico that he's closing the public service chapter of his life and won't run for any other offices. "Based on recent polling, strong fundraising, and the backing of my wife and family, I am confident I could earn the support of 2nd District voters for another term. I’m also optimistic that a path exists for Republicans to recapture a majority in the House, and that I could return for two more years as chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. But I also know that for me, the time has come to pursue new challenges and opportunities."

Walden, a former chief of the House GOP’s campaign arm who earned a reputation for party loyalty over his past two decades in Congress, has been quietly picking and choosing his battles with Trump this year, fueling speculation he might be eyeing the exits.

The Oregon Republican rebuked the president over the hugely controversial border wall project, backed Russia sanctions over Trump's objection, voted with Democrats to end the historic 35-day government shutdown and has been vocal about addressing climate change. But Walden also has stood by Trump throughout the Ukraine scandal and fallen in line on other key issues.

Walden is the fourth House GOP committee leader to call it quits this cycle. That list includes Reps. Mike Conaway (Texas), ranking member on the Agriculture Committee; Rob Bishop (Utah), ranking member on the Natural Resources Committee; and Mac Thornberry (Texas), ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee.

...Before wielding the Energy and Commerce gavel, Walden spent years chairing the panel’s telecommunications subcommittee that oversees the Federal Communications Commission. He helped advance major legislation in that position, including a 2012 law that created the public safety communications network known as FirstNet and other measures aimed at fighting illegal robocalls, expanding broadband and freeing up airwaves to be used in 5G wireless networks.

Ted Lieu (D-CA) has nothing against Walden, bears him no ill-will and wishes him well in the next chapter of his life. But he did mention to me today that "Rep Walden would become Chair of the immensely powerful Energy and Commerce Committee if Republicans flip the House next term. Instead, he chose to retire. We can all draw the inference that Rep Walden understands the GOP House Caucus is on the wrong side of history."

104 Republican Congressmen Voted To Reduce Benefits For Seniors And Vets

Looks like somebody stepped in it

The GOP is trying to decide how to best use Obama's screw up on Chained CPI for their own purposes. It's a Republican Party policy that he foolishly adopted for his dead-in-the-water budget at the urging of Boehner and McConnell. When will he ever learn that their ideas are toxic? (That's a rhetorical question; he'll never learn.) But while some Republicans praise the idea or say it doesn't go far enough, the chairman of the NRCC, Greg Walden (R-OR) has decided to use it in an attack against Democrats aimed at seniors and people who expect to be seniors someday. H was quick to run to CNN and tell Wolf Blitzer viewers that "the budget really lays out kind of a shocking attack on seniors, if you will. And we haven't seen all the detail yet, and we'll look at it, but I'll tell you, when you're going after seniors the way he's already done on Obamacare, taking $700 billion out of Medicare to put into Obamacare, and now coming back at seniors again, I think you're crossing that line very quickly here in terms of denying access to seniors for health care in districts like mine, certainly, and around the country. I think he's going to have a lot of pushback from some of the major senior organizations on this and Republicans, as well... you're trying to balance this budget on the backs of seniors and I just think it's not the right way to go."

And yet... and yet... 104 House Republicans already voted for Chained CPI on March 20th, when it was presented as part of the Republican Study Committee's alternative budget. So whatever game Walden wants to try playing, the candidates he's charged with reelecting aren't running against Barack Obama. They're running against Democrats who, in most instances are strongly opposed to Chained CPI, no matter if it's being proposed by Boehner, Obama or a bunch of crackpot extremists. Let's take Buck McKeon, for example. McKeon is an extremist in a moderate suburban Los Angeles area district (CA-25). His likely opponent in 2014 will be Dr. Lee Rogers, one of America's most distinguished podiatric surgeons, a man who already came closer to beating McKeon than anyone else in his career. As soon as Alan Grayson and Mark Takano circulated their letter pledging not to vote for any cuts to benefits for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, Rogers announced he would have signed it on the day it was drafted. "As a doctor I am adamantly opposed to cutting benefits to our population in most need. I announced several weeks ago, I would have been a day-one signer of the letter Mark Takano and Alan Grayson authored pledging to protect seniors and veterans from cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits, including chained CPI." So for voters in Santa Clarita, Antelope Valley and Simi Valley, there is a clear choice: McKeon (and Obama) want to cut social security benefits for seniors and veterans using Chained CPI. Rogers is adamantly opposed. 104 Republican incumbents are in the same boat and although most of them are crazy fanatics in gerrymandered blood red districts with constituents as ignorant as they are, there are several, like McKeon, in more precarious political positions.

This is a list of Republicans (with their districts' PVIs) who already voted to reduce benefits for seniors and veterans and could be vulnerable to competent independent-minded Democratic opponents in 2014:

• Justin Amash (R-MI) R+4
• Joe Barton (R-TX) R+11
• Kerry Bentivolio (R-MI) R+4
• Dave Camp (R-MI) R+5
• Steve Chabot (R-OH) R+6
• Ron DeSantis (R-FL) R+9
• Scott Garrett (R-NJ) R+4
• Randy Hultgren (R-IL) R+5
• Doug LaMalfa (R-CA) R+10
• Patrick McHenry (R-NC) R+11
• John Mica (R-FL) R+4
• Steve Pearce (R-NM) R+5
• Robert Pittenger (R-NC) R+8
• Scott Rigell (R-VA) R+2
• Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) R+7
• Pete Sessions (R-TX) R+10
• Lee Terry (R-NE) R+4
• Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) R+8

There are Democrats serving in Congress in districts with PVIs higher than these. It won't be easy for any of them, but it's not impossible either. The Democrats running against these guys-- and every one of them is a male (even Patrick McHenry and Dave Camp)-- have an opponent who voted to cut Social Security for seniors and vets. They did it already. That should be what the election in those districts are about.

Two of the Democrats in the Blue America Save Social Security contest, Nick Ruiz and Ken Sanders, are in that sweet spot, respectively running against John Mica and Joe Barton. As you can see, each is already running against Chained CPI and other unfair cuts their opponents back. Sanders has a message that will resonate in the suburbs between Dallas and Ft Worth, maybe even down in Waxahachie, Midlothian, Ennis and Corsicana:

"We cannot balance the budget on the backs of seniors, veterans, and our nation’s most vulnerable citizens. Our Social Security system is critical to protecting middle class families, and we cannot allow it to be dismantled one inch. Chained CPI, cutting Social Security, is a terrible idea and a pointless exercise. Besides, Social Security isn't in serious trouble. The Social Security trust fund is flush for at least two decades. If we want to ensure it's there beyond that, there's an easy fix-- just lift the ceiling on income subject to Social Security taxes, which is now $113,700. This way people making above $113,700 will pay like everyone else does, is a far better way of keeping Social Security secure long into the future. We need Congressional leaders who support middle class families, seniors and veterans; those who have helped make this nation great. I will fight to defend social security from Chained CPI. Seniors spend 20-40% of their income on healthcare. Two-thirds of seniors rely on Social Security for most of their income; one-third relies on it for at least 90% of their income. These people aren’t stashing their Social Security checks in the Cayman Islands and buying vacation homes in Aruba-- they are hanging on by their fingernails to their place in the middle class. Right now, corporate profits are at an all time high, the wealthy are doing phenomenally well and we must not balance the budget on the backs of some of the most vulnerable people in this country. Support me and I will be your voice in Washington to fight against Chained CPI and any other cut that threatens the shrinking middle class families of this country."

Nick Ruiz is running in the suburbs just north of Orlando-- Winter Park, Altamonte Springs, Oviedo, Maitland, Apopka, and all the way up to Deltona and Orange City. He'd make a great neighbor for Alan Grayson, who represents the suburbs on the other side of Orlando. They sure see eye to eye on protecting Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Ruiz: "I would never vote to diminish Social Security benefits.These benefits cover retirees, widows, children, disabled persons and veterans-- none of whom receive enough as it is by current economic standards of reasonable cost, inflation and common decency. In fact, it's part of my platform to actually increase Social Security benefits, financed by lifting the FICA cap, and Wall Street cost-sharing. My GOP opponent, John Mica wants to CUT Social Security benefits and make seniors retire even later in life, at 70 years of age. It's unacceptable. Help me stop him."

If you'd like to vote in our contest, just contribute at least one dollar to one of the anti-Chained CPI candidates on this page. The candidate who gets the most donors wins $1,000 from the Blue America PAC and everyone who donates is eligible to win an RIAA-certified platinum award for the eponymous 311 album. Win-win!

Any Congressional Democrat Who Backs Cutting Social Security Might As Well Look For Another Job

If Obama was just trying to demonstrate that the Republicans will never compromise no matter what-- even if he gives them exactly what they want-- fine. It worked. Otherwise, his call for cutting Social Security and further shredding the social safety net to "placate" the austerity hawks he surrounds himself with, is catastrophic. It's obviously catastrophic for the elderly and for handicapped vets first and foremost. But it's also catastrophic for the Democratic brand to whatever extent Obama is allowed to represent that brand after this Grand Betrayal. And it's catastrophic to any congressional Democrats who go along with him. Look at how the White House tried to cover up the brutal cuts:

In the interest of achieving a bipartisan deficit reduction agreement, beginning in 2015 the Budget would change the measure of inflation used by the Federal Government for most programs and for the Internal Revenue Code from the standard Consumer Price Index (CPI) to the alternative, more accurate chained CPI, which grows slightly more slowly... The switch to chained CPI will reduce deficits by at least $230 billion over the next 10 years.

Elizabeth Warren phrased it a little differently: "I was shocked to hear that the President's newest budget proposal would cut $100 billion in Social Security benefits. Our Social Security system is critical to protecting middle class families, and we cannot allow it to be dismantled inch by inch. The President's policy proposal, known as 'chained CPI,' would re-calculate the cost of living for Social Security beneficiaries. That new number won't keep up with inflation on things like food and health care -- the basics that we need to live. In short, 'chained CPI' is just a fancy way to say 'cut benefits for seniors, the permanently disabled, and orphans.'"

Republicans are drooling to have Obama dangling from a string like an idiot. Yesterday Greg Walden (R-OR), head of the RNCC-- charged with electing more Republicans to Congress-- attacked Obama for throwing seniors under the bus. He told Wolf Blitzer in CNN that "the budget really lays out kind of a shocking attack on seniors, if you will. And we haven't seen all the detail yet, and we'll look at it, but I'll tell you, when you're going after seniors the way he's already done on Obamacare, taking $700 billion out of Medicare to put into Obamacare, and now coming back at seniors again, I think you're crossing that line very quickly here in terms of denying access to seniors for health care in districts like mine, certainly, and around the country. I think he's going to have a lot of pushback from some of the major senior organizations on this and Republicans, as well... you're trying to balance this budget on the backs of seniors and I just think it's not the right way to go."

Take a look at how Chris Collins, a Republican incumbent from western New York-- a DCCC top target-- is using Obama's foolhardy proposal. Expect a lot more of this, especially if Democrats start backing Obama.

On the eve of President Obama’s budget presentation, a Western New York Republican joined the AARP in criticizing an expected decrease in the amount paid out in Social Security benefits by restructuring cost of living adjustments. Chris Collins says the move would hurt seniors and veterans.

“If you change the calculation of the consumer price index and how you calculate inflation, that’s going to continue to pinch our seniors who, come the end of the month, the stories I hear, are having trouble putting food on the table,” Collins said.

According to the AARP, changing the way the consumer price index is calculated would cost seniors and veteran pension recipients in Erie County $476 Million in future benefits. An AARP representative told YNN’s Ryan Whalen Tuesday, the “Chained CPI” expected in the President’s budget would hit Erie County harder than originally expected.

“It does not take into account the fixed costs that the seniors or all of us have, such as utilities, your healthcare costs, prescription drugs, gasoline. You can’t make a substitution for those. So that will make it even more difficult, particularly for those who are struggling to begin with,” AARP advocate Dave Hollen said.

Collins says this proposal impacts Western New York more than other parts of the country because there are more seniors.

“We’re not a wealthy community. So many of our seniors, I think the number is 75 percent of the average senior’s lifestyle, is supported by Social Security. They don’t have pensions and other savings,” Collins said... I’m frankly very disappointed that he (Obama) is focusing on seniors."

Obviously, no Democrat worth his salt would ever go along with this. Alan Grayson (D-FL) was very succinct and to the point: “I take no pleasure in saying this, but, in this case, the President is wrong. The chained CPI will substantially undermine the protection against inflation that Social Security recipients enjoy right now... They can change the programs, and not break the promises to Americans. They can eliminate waste, fraud and abuse in the programs. They can change the way we fund the programs. They can change the payments to doctors, pharmaceutical companies and hospitals. But we absolutely cannot break our promise to people by cutting benefits or raising the retirement age."




Adam Schiff is from the other end of the spectrum inside of the Democratic caucus. He is a conservative New Dem, who was a member of the Blue Dog Caucus until a few weeks ago. He may be conservative, but he's not stupid. Right after Obama's budget was released I asked him if she's supporting Chained CPI, expecting either evasion or a straight "yes." I got neither. Adam Schiff: “I oppose moving to a chained CPI. I believe that there are better ways to ensure the longevity of Social Security, and urge the President to consider raising the threshold of contributions into Social Security, rather than adopting a chained CPI-- a measurement that could hurt our most vulnerable seniors.” If he keeps on like this, maybe he'll dump the New Dems too and even join the Progressive Caucus.

Mary Kay Henry, President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) had the kind of response to the Chained CPI proposal I would like to see echoed by every Democrat.

“We object to the President’s proposals to cut Social Security and Medicare. Social Security has never been contributing factor to the deficit and we cannot leave seniors out in the cold. Our nation must honor our elders with retirement and health security that they have earned through a lifetime of hard work. The President and Congress need to work toward a commonsense solution that addresses the aging of our nation and strengthens and expands Social Security to all working Americans.

“On Medicare, healthcare workers and healthcare employers want to partner to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse in the system and expand on the healthcare redesigns that have improved quality and reduced cost. Medicare costs have not risen in two years because of reforms and restructuring at the federal, state and local levels. Healthcare providers can continue to build on these reforms and efficiencies, but not under the weight of massive cuts.

“To truly address the deficit and continue our economic recovery, we must focus on creating more good jobs. That should be priority number one.”

Although the DCCC has refused to recognize his race, steel worker and Army vet Andy Hounshell is running for the western Ohio congressional seat currently held by John Boehner. Andy has been active in supporting the No Cuts campaign and is a die-hard Democrat for economic growth-- a jobs-not-Austerity kind of guy. He's on the Blue America Saving Social Security page. Andy is no fan of Boehner's and no fan of the Boehner-Ryan Austerity Agenda. "We need a dedicated and concerted effort to put people to work," he told me this morning, "not cuts to seniors and veterans who can least afford them. To me a bad idea is a bad idea, whether it's coming from Speaker Boehner, Congressman Ryan or any Democrats in office. Chained CPI isn't something that serves the interests of people in Ohio. And I'm running for Congress to represent them, not a political party or any other politicians. People where I live don't want to take away from seniors and vets; I'm standing with them."

There isn't any doubt who Bernie Sanders is standing with either:

Gerrymandering-- Another Anti-Democracy Tool In The Right-wing Arsenal

At this point you have to either be an unreconstructed Southerner or a Michele Bachmann constituent to not understand that the Republican congressional strategy is to undermine the United States and cause as many people as possible as much pain as they can. House Republicans aren't even hiding it any longer. That's because of gerrymandering. Their districts have been drawn so precisely to exclude anyone who hasn't been brainwashed by Fox, that no matter what normal people think about GOP treachery, the congressmen leading and enabling it can be reelected forever and ever. It doesn't matter that militia extremist Steve Stockman (R-TX) was involved in the Oklahoma City bombing, his constituents love him and 165,388 of them gave him a 71% win. Yesterday he was threatening to introduce legislation to impeach President Obama. How do trolls like Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Virginia Foxx (R-NC), Buck McKeon (R-CA), Patrick McHenry (R-NC), Steve King (R-IA), Trey Radel (R-FL), Steven Palazzo (R-MS), Marsha Blackburn (R-OH), Ken Calvert (R-CA), Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA), Darrell Issa (R-CA) get elected? Why did it take so much sturm und drang for voters to finally dump a claque of obvious sociopaths like David Rivera (R-FL), Frank Guinta (R-NH), Mean Jean Schmidt (R-OH), Allen West (R-FL), Dan Lungren (R-CA), Ann Marie Buerkle (R-NY), and Joe Walsh (R-IL)?



Oregon Republican Greg Walden, the new NRCC Chairman, understands exactly why. "Redistricting," he crowed, "was a blessing for us." A blessing because Republicans can act like dicks and psychopaths and not have to worry about being defeated at elections. Their handpicked (or computer-picked) constituents are as bad as they are-- sometimes even worse. Thursday Alexandra Jaffe suggested in The Hill that Republicans are worried that they'll lose the House in 2014 if they continue botching up the debt ceiling debate. I guess that comes down to a definition of "botching up."

There’s growing angst among Republicans that the party’s House majority could be at risk in 2014 if the deep GOP divisions that emerged during the recent “fiscal cliff” negotiations persist in looming negotiations over a slew of budgetary issues.

Even as Republican officials maintain the GOP majority is safe, several lawmakers and longtime activists warn of far-reaching political ramifications if voters perceive Republicans as botching consequential talks on the debt ceiling, sequestration and a possible government shutdown.

“Majorities are elected to do things, and if they become dysfunctional, the American people will change what the majority is,” Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a House deputy majority whip and a former National Republican Congressional Committee chairman, told The Hill.

Concerns on the right stem from a public perception that House Republicans were to blame-- because of poor leadership strategy and rank-and-file dissent-- for bringing the country to the edge of the fiscal cliff late last month. ... Only 19 percent of Americans approved of the job Republican leaders did on the issue, while 48 percent said they approved of Obama’s handling of the negotiations, according to a Pew Research Center poll.

And polling that shows generic national polling favoring congressional Democrats by double digits is unimportant. Individual, usually genrrymandered, Republican districts are the only thing these House Members care about. And Jaffe did acknowledge "redistricting shifted a majority of House districts into solid-red territory... Democrats need to net 17 districts to take back the House in 2014, widely considered a significant hurdle to overcome." Combine that with DCCC Chairman Steve Israel's astounding incompetence and his insistence that he will not target GOP leaders or any of his pals from the Center Aisle Caucus and you come up with a mathematical impossibility-- regardless of what the Republicans do to screw up the country-- that they can lose the House! Jamelle Bouie responded to Jaffe almost immediately in the Washington Post.

We’re just a few weeks into 2013, but the Republican brand has already reached a new low. To wit, when given the choice between a generic congressional Democrat, and a generic congressional Republican, only 37 percent say they would support the Republican, according to the latest survey from Rasmussen.

Indeed, it’s this unpopularity that has caused a little panic in GOP ranks. The Hill’s Alexandra Jaffe reports on the “growing angst” among Republican lawmakers over the longevity of their House majority. In short, they worry that the voters will punish the GOP if its perceived as “botching consequential talks on the debt ceiling, sequestration and a possible government shutdown” ... Not only are Republicans trailing on the generic congressional ballot, but the public has grown tired of GOP shenanigans. According to a CNN poll released last month, 53 percent of Americans saw Republican policies as extreme, and 52 percent believed that Republicans should give up more than Democrats to craft bipartisan solutions to the nation’s problems. Likewise, according to the most recent Washington Post poll, 71 percent of Americans disapprove of Republicans in Congress, and 67 percent say they’re doing too little to work with Obama on “important issues.”

Happy Days are here again? Not so fast. Without even going into the whole gerrymandered district problem, Bouie points out that "the midterm electorate is much different than the one that votes in presidential elections. The former is older, whiter, and more conservative. The latter is younger, browner, and more liberal. It’s that difference which drove the Republican gains of 2010, and which gave Obama a huge advantage in last year’s presidential election. Even if Republicans provoke a debt ceiling crisis and destroy any remaining credibility they enjoy, it remains true that they’ll enter 2014 with a favorable electorate on their side. And given the extent to which voters tend to support the same party, regardless of circumstances, odds are good that Republicans won’t lose any of their most reliable voters." And it can get a lot worse.

The GOP now wants to use the corrupt gerrymandering of congressional districts-- tolerated and enjoyed by Democrats who are far from innocent in this matter-- to assign electoral votes so that their candidates can consistently lose the popular vote by large margins while winning the gerrymandered congressional districts and then presidency. A new poll from Gallup released yesterday shows that only 29% of Americans support keeping the electoral college, which was conceived as an anti-democratic tool from inception and has become worse and worse of the years. Scott Keyes at Think Progress pointed out how it's worked so far.

[T]he Republican State Leadership Committee released a report boasting that the only reason the GOP controls the House of Representatives is because they gerrymandered congressional districts in blue states.

The RSLC’s admission came in a shockingly candid report entitled, “How a Strategy of Targeting State Legislative Races in 2010 Led to a Republican U.S. House Majority in 2013?. It details how the group spent $30 million in the 2010 election cycle to sweep up low-cost state legislature races in blue states like Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Their efforts were so successful, in fact, that Republicans went from controlling both legislative chambers in 14 states before Election Day to 25 states afterward.

In turn, the new Republican majorities would be tasked with redrawing congressional districts for the 2012 election. “The rationale was straightforward,” the report reads. “Controlling the redistricting process in these states would have the greatest impact on determining how both state legislative and congressional district boundaries would be drawn.”

This effort paid off in spades. As the RSLC’s report concedes, a majority of Americans voted for Democratic congressional candidates on Election Day, but only through the miracle of gerrymandering did Republicans wind up controlling the House. From the report:

Farther down-ballot, aggregated numbers show voters pulled the lever for Republicans only 49 percent of the time in congressional races, suggesting that 2012 could have been a repeat of 2008, when voters gave control of the White House and both chambers of Congress to Democrats.

But, as we see today, that was not the case. Instead, Republicans enjoy a 33-seat margin in the U.S. House seated yesterday in the 113th Congress, having endured Democratic successes atop the ticket and over one million more votes cast for Democratic House candidates than Republicans. The only analogous election in recent political history in which this aberration has taken place was immediately after reapportionment in 1972, when Democrats held a 50 seat majority in the U.S. House of Representatives while losing the presidency and the popular congressional vote by 2.6 million votes.

The report credits gerrymandered maps in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin with allowing Republicans to overcome a 1.1 million popular-vote deficit. In Ohio, for instance, Republicans won 12 out of 16 House races “despite voters casting only 52 percent of their vote for Republican congressional candidates.” The situation was even more egregious to the north. “Michiganders cast over 240,000 more votes for Democratic congressional candidates than Republicans, but still elected a 9-5 Republican delegation to Congress.”

Though party officials typically dance around the unseemly issue of gerrymandering, this report is surprisingly candid and unabashed. The RSLC, after all, is tasked with winning control of state legislatures in large part so they can redraw congressional maps to the GOP’s benefit after redistricting. Because most states allow partisan redistricting, its understandable that the RSLC would release a report boasting of its gerrymandering success that “paved the way to Republicans retaining a U.S. House majority in 2012.”

And that's why Memphis Tennessee Democrat Steve Cohen has introduced a bill that seeks to end the whole gerrymandering practice and replace cigar smoke filled backrooms-- and fancy partisan computer programs with independent redistricting commissions like the ones California and Arizona use.

Cohen said his bill would help prevent the partisan redistricting of states, which many Democrats and Republicans have said creates districts that favor one party or another and allows hyper-partisan candidates to get elected.

"It's time to take politics out of the redistricting process," Cohen said. "Congress is so polarized today that we're unable to find common ground on the major issues facing our country.

Cohen's co-sponsors are fellow progressives Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and Dave Loebsack (D-IA), two Blue Dogs, Mike Michaud (ME) and Collin Peterson (MN) plus John Dingell (MI) and the head of the New Dems, Ron Kind (WI). The bill has been sent to the House Judiciary Committee to be killed by corrupt Republican Chairman Bob Goodlatte (VA), an anti-reform fanatic. Now watch Rachel Maddow explain what Operation RedMap was and how the GOP used it to steal the House majority in November:

Time To Bring Back The Fairness Doctrine

My first job as a dj was at WUSB in Stony Brook, New York, my college station. That's when I learned about the Fairness Doctrine, which the FCC had put in place in 1949. Being pretty opinionated, I didn't always love it but I did realize it was... well, fair. I was also booking the speakers program at the university at the time and when I hired the Julian Bond (D-GA) my faculty advisor, Mrs. Couey, insisted I present a balanced program as though the Fairness Doctrine also governed the Speakers Bureau. Bond was one of 8 African Americans elected to the previously all white Georgia House of Representatives after the passage of the Voting Rights Act (1965). The unrepentant racists who ran Georgia's House refused to seat him (ostensibly because he opposed the War in Vietnam) but the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 9-0 (Bond v Floyd) that hey were denying him his freedom of speech and had to seat him. I asked her if she wanted me to hire someone from the KKK. "Now, Howie..." she said. I hired Strom Thurmond to speak on the same night. I've written about what went down and here's my 2006 recitation of the story. Fair and balanced.

But the FCC, the Federal Communications Commission, doesn't govern communications in a college auditorium, only over the publicly-owned airwaves. And the idea is that those airwaves, although they are being used by private companies to make millions and millions of dollars, should also be used for the public good. The fairness doctrine was deemed part of the public good, probably because the kinds of companies that gained control of the radio industry were owned by wealthy conservatives who would-- if not forced to take the public good into consideration-- fill the airwaves with corporate whores and fascists pushing the reactionary line-- people like Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Coulter, Savage, O'Reilly... the whole panoply of American neo-facsism. And look at what happened when 25 years ago this month, the FCC did end the Fairness Doctrine. The radio waves because a virtual brainwashing machine for deranged right-wing ideology.

Progressives-- without the backing on conservative Democrats-- have tried to bring the Fairness Doctrine back. In 2005 Louise Slaughter (D-NY) got the ball rolling with the Fairness and Accountability in Broadcasting Act which failed to gain enough support to get out of committee, Since then Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Tom Harkin (D-IA) have both tried and even President Bill Clinton indicated he might support the idea: “Well, you either ought to have the Fairness Doctrine or we ought to have more balance on the other side, because essentially there’s always been a lot of big money to support the right wing talk shows.”

Demonstrating a fatal character flaw, Obama, is always looking for common ground with the extreme right no matter how they undermine and denigrate him. I suspect it was to try to please that that he said he opposes reinstating the Fairness Doctrine. The has put a kind of a crimp in the efforts of progressives who would like to work on the issue. But it's certainly encouraged right-wingers:

"Radio Independence Day" will be July 4, if activist Brent Bozell, Rep. Mike Pence (a former talkshow host), Rep. Greg Walden (a former group owner), talk host Laura Ingraham and tax activist Grover Norquist get their way. Their idea of "independence" is getting the House to hold an up or down vote on the Broadcast Freedom Act-– which would prohibit the FCC from reviving the long-dormant Fairness Doctrine. They and a bunch of talkshow hosts fear it would squelch the voices of conservatives. There’s a discharge petition to get the BFA out of committee and onto the House floor, but it’s still 14 votes short. Bozell, president of the Media Research Center and publisher of NewsBusters, "demands" that members of Congress sign up for a vote on free speech by July 4. Bozell says "the era of the Fairness Doctrine represented dark days for this first and fundamental right."

An aside-- Walden, who represents the right-leaning eastern half of Oregon, is currently campaigning to be the head of the NRCC, the GOP's version of the DCCC. He thinks he should be part of the Republican leadership team.

CLEAR AS NIGHT AND DAY: CAROL VOISIN v GREG WALDEN (OR-02)

I asked Rick Browne, a Firedoglake community member, to give us a run-down of the difficult race in his Oregon district between a shining progressive, Carol Voisin and a truly hideous and venal reactionary incumbent, Greg Walden. Rick, an independent, has never been involved in a political campaign before. He is a social studies teacher with a passion for current events and, like so many Americans, he has been thoroughly turned off by the corruption and money that goes into divisive elections.  Feeling that no one is watching the watchers, he became motivated to volunteer for two reasons: the backwards direction the GOP government is leading the United States; and, Carol’s passion and commitment to right the ship. He is a believer in the Apollo Project and the George Lakoff model of properly framing our values, and he is horrified by the systematic shredding of our Constitution. "George Bush says the terrorists hate us for our freedoms," Rick pointed out to me, "yet it is our President who seems intent on destroying these freedoms." Rick, like many of us, refuses to live in fear and believes the best response to these tactics, from within or without, is to proclaim our rights, our values, and our ethics not through empty rhetoric, but through actions that show we care about every human being on the planet. I hope you will find his report on OR-02 as enlightening as I did. And if you do, I hope you'll join me in making a contribution to Carol's campaign. It's a campaign for all of us.
 
Carol Voisin is running against Greg Walden in Oregon's 2nd district. It is an absolutely beautiful region of this great country: Cascade Mountains and lakes, dormant volcanoes, salmon-spawning rivers, lush old growth forests, glacier-carved valleys, and flora and fauna who's diversity rivals any in the country.   Needless to say, this prized beauty and diversity is also in need of protection, and yet Clinton’s designation of the  Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument was fought every step of the way by Walden. 


Our district is one of the largest districts, geographically, in the entire country. It is mostly rural, sprinkled with small towns that are suffering economically. Go back and read the first half of  this Down With Tyranny post on Pete Goldmark about rural farms and it describes perfectly the situation in eastern Oregon. Statistics show that this economy Bush keeps bragging about is really benefiting the very few at the top end of the income scale, and that inequality is magnified in our district. These small towns are dying a slow death, jobs are few and low paying. There is still an underlying sense of division here between the once-robust timber industry and the environmentalists trying to save the last strands of old-growth forest. Health care is a major issue as 600,000 Oregonians don't have health insurance and in eastern Oregon that rate is highest with 25% of its citizens lacking basic health coverage.
 
Bend and Medford are the biggest towns in the area, holding about 60% of the population of our district. These cities have done better economically than the outlying areas, largely due to the computer industry and the housing boom, but the economy statewide has been hard hit in the last 5 years (imagine that!). However, the soaring housing prices are largely due to non-Oregonians moving here and now many locals are priced out of the market. As yesterday's Medford Tribune explained:  A majority of Oregonians are not making a "living wage."
 
So what has 4-term incumbent Greg Walden done about the problem? Well, he's voted 94% of the time with the Delay GOP Corruption Machine including all those tax breaks that went to the  wealthiest 1-2%. These tax breaks have clearly not benefited the vast majority of the hard-working people of our district. He positions himself as working for the middle class yet according to the Drum Major Institute he gets a big fat 0, an F, on his middle class voting record.
 
He also pretends to care about the environment yet his voting record doesn't support his rhetoric.  The Republicans for Environmental Protection give Walden a lousy 12% rating, and the independent  League of Conservation Voters gives him an even worse 11% rating-- and that's his highest rating yet! He is proud of his Orwellian "Healthy Forests Act" that Bush signed into law despite all the  science that rejects their pro-logging position. Flatly, it is a bill that is a giveaway to Big Timber at the expense of our precious shrinking old growth forests. As if that wasn't bad enough, Walden has now pushed an even worse bill,  HR4200 through the House and is awaiting Senate action. This bill is opposed by scientists, hunters, fishers, firefighters and conservationists.  It is yet another giveaway to his corporate donors.

Walden also sponsored a bill with the corrupt Dirty Dick Pombo (R-CA) to gut the Endangered Species Act. No surprise here, but his votes actually support his biggest contributors: Big Oil, Big Agribusiness, and Big Pharmaceuticals.  Why voters would support someone who does not want to protect and preserve the very land we prize for its life-giving sustainability is a mystery.

On the other hand, the Sierra Club has enthusiastically endorsed Carol Voisin.

Walden has also voted for cuts to rural health care, education, college loans, veterans benefits, and he has voted against a $1,500 bonus for our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, against improving fuel standards on cars, against investigations of wasteful spending and has failed to push for any level of oversight or accountability... You can see his whole disgraceful record  here.  So not only does Walden vote against our interests economically, he votes against taking care of the very veterans he voted into war, he votes against clean drinking water, clean air, and affordable health care for the very people he "represents."  Actions speak louder then words Mr. Walden, and it is clear your professed values are not borne out in the votes you make as our congressman.
 
The facts declare that Greg Walden deserves the title, “Rubber Stamper,” as much as anyone in Congress.  Walden's newsletters and mailings trumpet "Real solutions for today's problems" yet the only thing he actually talks about is how many times he flies back to our district. No mention of Iraq, Afghanistan, health care, the deficit, the economy, global warming... nothing.  Despite all these frequent trips home none of his constituents seem to be able to find him.  "Where's Walden?" is a refrain heard frequently here.

As one of his constituents I have lost count of the number of unanswered emails, letters and phone calls. Just yesterday, 9/18/06, I called about the Voter ID act (which would require a $97 passport and has a 6-week waiting period!), and the aide said Walden hadn't taken a position on it. She took my name and number and said she'd call me back. On 9/19/06 he voted for this awful piece of legislation, and I am still batting .000 in constituent responses from Greg Walden. He needs to go back to running his Rush Limbaugh-playing radio stations (he owns five of them), or possibly something a bit less divisive and of a more beneficial nature to the community at large. Don't hold your breath.

As for Carol Voisin, she meets all the criteria of a true progressive, someone for whom ethics and faith is a core value. Carol is a trained Methodist theologian with a Master of Divinity degree and a doctorate in Theology who currently teaches college freshmen "Ethics in the Twenty-first Century." She is intelligent, full of passion for the tasks ahead, and compassionately concerned about this country's direction. As our congresswoman she will work tirelessly for ALL of her constituents.  In Senator Ron Wyden's words: "Carol Voisin is a champion for restoring fiscal discipline at the federal level, improving public education, ensuring access to quality health care for all, and ending a too-costly war in Iraq. She brings fresh ideas to some of our nation's toughest challenges."
 
If you go to Carol's home page you will find her mission is straightforward and focused. 
 

Providing affordable and accessible health care for everyone
Ending the Iraq War responsibly and soon
Fast tracking research and development of renewable energy and alternative fuels
Reforming our public school system based on regional needs and resources
Protecting our ports, nuclear reactors, and chemical plants from terrorists
Balancing the budget and reducing our national debt
Representing my constituency and their needs, not big corporations and their greed.

We need a government that is paying attention to the needs of ordinary middle class Americans. We have record deficits, record bankruptcies, record uninsured Americans, and more citizens cycling downward into poverty every year under an all-Republican government.  It is time for a new direction.  There is nothing "conservative" about the national debt we are leaving our children, nor is there anything "compassionate" about 45 million Americans that can't afford health insurance and the fundamental respect that it affords. I am a firm believer in the values and common sense of a national health care program and Carol is ready to champion that cause. It makes sense economically and it makes sense ethically.  We need leaders who are actually ready to lead on health care for all Americans, and that means making critical changes to the status quo.
    
Carol lists the Iraq War as "the major issue facing our country today."  Staying the course in Iraq is killing 1,000 soldiers per year, Baghdad alone averages 30+ deaths per day, and yet where is Bush's and his rubber stamp Congress' solution? Troop deployments are increasing not decreasing, and the treatment of the boots on the ground is deplorable-- both in the war theater and when they come home. All the while, the GOP's biggest donors, like Halliburton and Bechtel, are raking in billions of dollars on unfulfilled reconstruction contracts. Yet there is no oversight, and a complete lack of realistic solutions from the governing party. They got us into this mess yet they have no plan to get us out.

Carol's is a 100% volunteer true grassroots campaign paid for by individual donors like you and me. Carol's campaign has a strong netroots presence. After winning the primary, she started with the traditional campaign model, but became frustrated by lack of support from the DCCC and other central democratic institutions, and wanted to find out how to engage with the creative netroots and grassroots energy like Ned Lamont's campaign was doing. She happened to meet a Roots Project member who had just returned from Ykos, and asked him to help her campaign become part of this new force. Her campaign makeover was completed when she asked him to take over management of the campaign at the beginning of September.  Several other Roots Project members have joined the team, and have worked to improve her website and create the tools to reach volunteers. We have essentially “Crashed the Gates” and Carol has embraced us! This is as pure a citizen's effort as you can get, and despite the late start and the huge financial disadvantage we face, this team of volunteers is getting out the word and making sure that the voters have a clear choice in the election.

We are here because we believe in Carol. She is beholden to no corporate donors, and vows to stay that way, but that means we need your help. You can donate to Carol's campaign through ActBlue  here.  Even better, if you are an Oregon resident, the first $50 ($100 for a joint return) is a straight tax deduction. We want to help Carol Take Our Country Back. She will serve Oregon's 2nd district with equanimity and candor, and she will serve all of America as part of a Democratic House of Representatives that will demand accountability from the Bush Administration and provide much-needed oversight on an ever more secretive and overreaching executive branch. Thank you for your support. Vote Voisin!