Darren Soto Hates Being Called Florida's ConservaDem Poster Child, But He'd Be Another Gwen Graham Or Patrick Murphy In Congress

There are definitely some big changes coming due to the judicial redistricting in Florida, likely among them will be the end of House careers for several conservatives: Carlos Curbelo who finds himself in a neatly blue district and will be facing Annette Taddeo, who can probably beat him; Daniel Webster, who also finds himself in a Democratic district he can't win, certainly not in a presidential year (although he is probably going to move to FL-06 and try it win the seat Ron DeSantis is giving up; David Jolly, who took one look at the new map and decided to run for the Senate, leaving his district to Charlie Crist who's been a Republican, an Independent and a Democrat and is likely to be a mix of all three in Congress; and Blue Dog Gwen Graham, the most right-wing Democrat in the House, whose newly redrawn district no longer has the Democratic voter base to make it feasible for even as far right a Democrat as she to expect to win. John Mica's Orlando area district is now also good territory for a Democrat but the DCCC recruited a total conservaDem loser, Bill Phillips, who even the DCCC sees can't win against Mica (or, probably any other competent Republican).

But the district I want to talk about today isn't one of them; it's district 9-- Alan Grayson's very blue Orlando-area seat. The PVI is D+8 and Obama won it with just over 60% both times he ran. In 2012 Grayson won the seat against Republican Todd Long 165,098 (63%) to 98,984 (37%). And in 2014, a bad midterm year for Democrats, Grayson, despite a poor turnout, was reelected 93,739 (54%) to 74,903 (43%). Grayson is leaving the House to take over Rubio's abandoned Senate seat. The key is to get a progressive voice like his into that House seat. But, of course, the DCCC has different ideas. Officially "neutral," they're surreptitiously backing one of the most conservative Democrats in the state Senate, Darren Soto. We'll come back to him in a moment.

The contours of the new district make it slightly less blue, but still relatively safe for a Democrat, particularly in presidential year. I'm estimating that the PVI will probably drop from a D+8 to a D+5. The whole part of Orange County west of the airport-- basically over 100,000 people in communities like Hunters Creek, Meadow Woods and Southchase, a very Puerto Rican area, is now going to be part of FL-10 (Webster's district, likely soon to be Bob Poe's district). FL-9's Hispanic population will drop from around 45% to around 31 or 32%. To make up for the loss of population, FL-9 pushes west further into Polk County and picks up neighborhoods like Lake Alfred, Winter Haven, Inwood and Auburndale that had been the southernmost part of FL-10.

The governing philosophy of the Emanuel/Van Hollen/Israel DCCC (and Israel's sock puppet Ben Ray Luján isn't making any changes in that regard) is to run conservatives as indistinguishable from a Republican as possible-- a losing strategy for holding seats when the inevitable midterm rolls around and Democratic base voters don't want to go vote for a Republican with a "D" next too his or her name. And, of course, that's exactly what Darren Soto is. Another Chamber of Commerce Democrat, Soto earned an "A" from the NRA (the only Florida state Senator to be so honored) and is widely considered a complete gun lobby shill-- exactly what Washington does not need. Another thing Washington doesn't need is another charter school goon, which is what Soto, who voted to divert public funds to private school vouchers several times, is. He also voted for mandatory ultrasound, 24-hour waiting periods and parental notification laws, all positions that are abhorrent to people who believe women should make decisions about their own body without government interference. He's been mediocre on the environment and way to generous with tax breaks for the wealthy and for corporations, pushing more of a tax burden onto the middle class.

Back in July, when Soto first made it clear he intended to run for Grayson's seat if Grayson jumped into the Senate race, our old friend Kartik Krishnaiyer ran down Soto's abysmal record-- first here and then here-- for the Florida Squeeze. "Soto’s voting record through his eight sessions as a legislator," he wrote, "is on the extreme rightward end of what is acceptable as a Democrat... Free from the constraints of tough primaries and quickly emerging as a favorite of business and school 'choice' lobbyists in Tallahassee, Soto became the poster child for conservative Democrats who seek higher office by running in safe Democratic seats backed by Republican money and the support of large elements of a bipartisan political establishment. The Sunshine State News, one of the voices of record that conservative political insiders in the state swear by said the following about Soto:

Soto is about as good as conservatives can hope for from his liberal Democratic district.

The SSN is spot-on, but here’s our perspective-- Soto is about as BAD a Democrat for liberals and progressives as anyone in the state."

Krishnaiyer went on to list many of Soto's short-comings and got some serious pushback from some right-of-center establishment Democrats who have virtually wrecked the Florida Democratic Party over the last few decades, which is why he wrote the second post in which he explains that "Democrats in Florida are badly in need of developing a values based party that represents something beyond simple electoral and political “moderation”.  Right now we don’t have a clear set of values that drive us as a party collectively forward.

While it is true Soto voted for the onerous HB 71 “personhood” bill days after winning a Special Election in 2007 and also cast anti reproductive-rights votes in 2008 and he voted for Parent Trigger in 2012 (one of only two Democrats in either chamber to do so), and that he got an “A” rating from the NRA in 2010 and 2012, and numerous other bad votes let’s focus on his more recent record in the Florida Senate this very calendar year.

Before walking through this it is important to remember President Obama got close to 65% of the vote in Soto’s current Senate district in 2012 and that Congressional District 9 where Soto is running currently is an area where the President got about 62% of the vote in 2012.

Let’s review what some of the conservative special interest groups that lobby the Legislature thought of Soto’s 2015 performance.

• Soto scored 100% on Jeb Bush’s Excellence in Education Foundation which advocates for the privatization of public education

• Soto scored 100% on the Florida Chamber scorecard; This was higher than many conservative Republicans

• Soto scored 96% on the Associated Industries of Florida scorecard; This was higher than many conservative Republicans

Keep in mind Soto was casting these votes with right-wing interest groups just as he was planning on launching a campaign for Congress in a liberal seat. With one eye one must surmise toward who could help him raise the most campaign cash in a safe Democratic district, Soto cast his lot for the past several months with conservative Republicans. Or perhaps Soto is just a conservative who will serve the interests of the US Chamber of Commerce and other business interests were her to be elected to Congress? Either way, progressives throughout Florida should be alarmed.

...Soto’s game has been like that of any transactional politician. Find allies in other offices, schmooze special interest lobbyists while pretending to be a good progressive in front of local audiences that will have a bearing on future runs for office. For us at TFS, this is exactly the type of politics we abhor and are committed to opposing it while trying to reform our party.

There may be as many as half a dozen Democrats in the race, including some strong progressives, but you can always count on the DCCC to find the worst of all and just for him, in this case Darren Soto. Thursday, one of the most extreme right of the defeated anti-Choice Pennsylvania Blue Dogs, Jason Altmire, now a Florida-based lobbyist, is holding a fundraiser for Soto. We used to write a lot about Altmire when he was in Congress for 3 terms. He was one of the worst of the worst, very much like Soto. It makes sense that he's helping him now. Alter voted with the Republicans against the Affordable Health Act, voted with the Republicans against reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act and was an anti-Choice fanatic with a ZERO rating from NARAL.

Yesterday we looked at a study about what accounts for low Democratic voter turnout. The author wrote that "it’s clear that many voters are alienated by parties, and many see very few differences, which can depress turnout. Low-income Americans are the most likely to perceive large differences, possibly because parties overwhelmingly favor the preferences of the rich. Some have advocated Democrats pushing toward the center, but a working paper by political scientist Seth Hill finds that parties are far more successful in pulling in new voters than in converting swing voters." That describes the Soto type Democrats and Hill, whose data is all from Florida, emphasizes that "swing voters contribute on average 4.1 percentage points to change in party vote shares, while change in turnout influences outcomes by 8.6 points." Or, we can make it even simpler, watch the video:

Checking Chicken Bones In Pennsylvania... Sifting Through The Blue Dog Ashes

If you've been reading this blog lately you probably have come to the conclusion that we were more than a little obsessed with defeating corrupt Blue Dog Tim Holden in northeast Pennsylvania, where I used to live. Holden was gerrymandered into the district and a native, a progressive native, Matt Cartwright, beat him decisively on Tuesday night. Since then Holden has been out trying to find a lobbying job while he's still got a vote in Congress and the media has been trying to figure out what happened. How is it possible that some guy who never ran for anything and backs marriage equality, a pro-Choice position and is decidedly anti-corporate and anti-Austerity could beat the dean of the Pennsylvania delegation who was actively-- very, very actively-- backed by Steny Hoyer, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Allyson Schwartz, Joe Crowley and most of the rest of the corrupt DC Democratic Establishment? Maybe they should glance up from Drudge once in a while and take a look at Digby's blog or even DWT.

A good deal of the coverage Wednesday emphasized that it was another Blue Dog Apocalypse, albeit a mini one. Across the state a Blue Dog even more conservative than Holden-- if not quite as corrupt-- was also beaten. That would be Jason Altmire. We paid that race almost no attention at all since there was virtually no difference between Altmire and his opponent, Mark Critz, who were thrown together by Republican gerrymandering in Harrisburg. Let me run three numbers by you-- the 2011-'12 crucial vote scores, tabulated by ProgressivePunch, of Holden, Altmire and Critz:

Critz: 36.36
Holden: 35.80
Altmire: 22.10 (meaning he votes with the GOP over three quarters of the time, worse than only 3 "Democrats," fellow Blue Dogs Jim Matheson of Utah, Mike Ross of Arkansas and Dan Boren of Oklahoma, the second two of whom are retiring).

Have no doubt... these are three of the worst Democrats in Congress and all three have been counted on by John Boehner and Eric Cantor to provide the votes on key legislation that allows them to go crying to the press that the Senate won't pass their wonderful "bipartisan" bills. Blue America would have been happy to join a battle to unseat Altmire or Critz-- just as we did to unseat Holden-- but not to replace one with the other. Neither has any saving grace... at least not for me.

But I talked with a friend of mine who serves with them in Congress. He had a different perspective. He was rooting for Altmire-- who has a lower score and is a member of the Blue Dog caucus. I was surprised, since my friend is one of the most progressive Members of Congress... in history. This is how he saw it:

"There is a temperamental difference. Altmire, like for instance Walt Minnick, felt that he was constrained to vote the way that he did because of his perception of the district. On any particular vote, though, you could have a meaningful conversation with Altmire. Critz, on the other hand, really is conservative."

That's how Holden excused his horrific voting record; he blamed it on the voters in the southern part of the state who are far more conservative than the Democrats up north, the new heart of the district-- and the area that sent Holden packing. He took over 80% of the vote in conservative Schuylkill County-- where he lives and was once sheriff-- but lost by nearly as big a margin in Lackawanna County... which has a lot more people. If you look at the dozen worst voting Democrats.

Let's look at the dozen worst Democrats in Congress, according to their propensity for voting with the Republicans and compare it to how Obama did in their districts in 2008. We'll go from bad to worse:

Bill Owens (NY)- 36.03... Obama: 52%
Tim Holden (Blue Dog-PA)- 35.80... Obama: 48%
Ben Chandler (Blue Dog-KY)- 31.87... Obama: 43%
Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX)- 28.47... Obama: 56%
Joe Donnelly (Blue Dog-IN)- 26.45... Obama: 54%
John Barrow (Blue Dog-GA)- 24.36... Obama: 54%
Jim Costa (Blue Dog-CA)- 23.88... Obama: 60%
Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)- 22.63... Obama: 47%
Jason Altmire (Blue Dog-PA)- 22.10... Obama: 44%
Jim Matheson (Blue Dog-UT)- 18.25... Obama: 39%
Mike Ross (Blue Dog-AR)- 16.36... Obama: 39%
Dan Boren (Blue Dog-OK)- 14.02... Obama: 34%

And in Critz's old district, Obama and McCain essentially tied with McCain ahead by a nose. But I guess that comparing these numbers one could say that Owens, Cuellar, Donnelly (who the Democratic establishment picked to run for U.S. Senator this year), Barrow, and certainly Costa are not voting with the Republicans so consistently because they're forced to but despite the voters they represent being more progressive than they are.

You can also use this type of analysis to figure out which Republicans are voting to the right of their constituents. Let's take Wisconsin's 5 Republican-held districts for example.

WI-1- Paul Ryan ... Obama: 51%
WI-5- James Sensenbrenner (11.23)... Obama: 41%
WI-6- Tom Petri (13.41)... Obama: 50%
WI-7- Sean Duffy (4.36)... Obama: 56%
WI-8- Reid Ribble (4.44)... Obama: 54%

It certainly appears that Duffy and Ribble are challenging their constituents to do something about it. And Paul Ryan, at least by the numbers, is also skating on thin ice. Meanwhile, let me get back to the Inside the Beltway spin, always ideologically-phobic. Their interpretation of what happened last night-- he lesson learned: the Democrats need more Blue Dogs, more Democrats to vote like Republicans. The serious Paul Kane, hoping as always to be the next David Broder, has so many glaring errors that I was thinking of doing a contest to see who could find the most. In the first two paragraphs he makes the preposterous claim that the Blue Dogs were once "the most powerful voting bloc on Capitol Hill" and that Critz was "more liberal" than Altmire, both of which should have been caught by a fact checker... if the Post employs those any longer. And only a Broderite would call Altmire's and Holden's GOP-lite voting records "centrist" instead of extreme right wing. But instead of noting how far to the right the GOP has marched, he blunders into the kind of error not even rookies would make: the Democrats, basically a status quo, conservative party are now, "father to the left than any time in the last decade." I wonder if he wrote this while he was on drugs.

Just two years removed from being the most powerful voting bloc on Capitol Hill, Blue Dog Democrats are now trying to stave off political extinction.

On Tuesday Reps. Jason Altmire and Tim Holden, members of the moderate-to-conservative caucus of Democrats known as the Blue Dog

Coalition, lost their primary battles to more liberal opponents who painted their centrism as apostasies that could no longer be tolerated.

These were the latest blows delivered to the Blue Dogs, whose membership ranks have been decimated the last two years by a perfect political storm that has driven the House Democratic caucus farther to the left than at any time in the last decade.

It’s increasingly unclear whether Democrats can ever reclaim the House majority unless they pick up ground in the conservative-leaning terrain that the Blue Dogs once represented. In addition, with so few moderates left, there are fewer House members in the political center to
create the sort of bipartisan coalition that in the past has provided the bulwark of support for budget compromises.

...The group's long-term prospects are endangered on a few other political and demographic fronts. This moderate group has lost almost all of its female members, down to just Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.), whose Orange County district often makes her more in line with the suburban New Democrat Coalition than the rural-tilting Blue Dogs.

[I hate to interrupt but Kane should lose his newspaper writer's license for peddling this completely made up nonsense, at best stuff he remembers when he was a child. Loretta Sanchez's district is in Orange County-- he did get that right-- but a completely Democratic part of the county. McCain only managed to get 38% of the vote there. And sooner or later the Democratic voters in the district will throw Sanchez out for being too conservative.]

...Interviews with a handful of current and former senior aides to Blue Dogs all focused on recruiting, with each strategist suggesting that finding the right candidates in these regions can be very painstaking but also very rewarding. When he served as the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman in 2006, then-Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) found non-politicians such as Shuler-- a college football legend in the South who played a few years in the NFL-- and telegenic sheriff Brad Ellsworth in Evansville, Ind., to run in very conservative districts.

They both won and helped propel the Democrats into the majority for the first time in 12 years, giving Pelosi her historic speakership.

Privately, many Blue Dogs and their staff blame Pelosi’s liberal leadership. Her image was run countless times in 2010 against Shuler and Altmire, both of whom were rare survivors. Despite a coordinated recruiting effort by the DCCC this time around, few Blue Dogs who lost in 2010 have opted to run for their old seat. Shuler and Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.), both co-chairmen of the coalition, decided to retire at the end of this year rather than run for re-election in new districts that tilted toward Republicans. Ellsworth lost a Senate race in 2010 by 15 percentage points, leaving behind a House seat that flipped to Republicans.

Shuler, who spent time Wednesday on a conference call trying to recruit Blue Dog candidates, said his coalition resonates with most voters in terms of its anti-deficit message but is struggling with translating that into seats in Congress. “The Blue Dogs represent 80 percent of America, but there are just 25 of us in the House,” he said.

Blue America Has Been Concentrating On Tim Holden For A Reason

There are two "Democrats" battling it out for Pennsylvania's 12th CD in the western part of the state, and both-- as hard as it is to imagine-- as actually more right-wing than Tim Holden. That would be Jason Altmire and Mark Critz, who were thrown into one district by the Republican gerrymander in the state legislature. In three weeks one will be headed back to a career of voting for corporate interests in Congress and the other will be headed to K Street to work as a lobbyist-- for the same corporate interests.

Altmire, Critz and Holden are three of the worst Members of Congress. According to ProgressivePunch, the 2011-12 session has seen Altmire voting with Boehner and Cantor against the Democrats (on crucial rollcalls) an astounding 87.41% of the time. Only fellow Blue Dogs Dan Boren (OK-retiring), Mike Ross (AR-retiring) and Jim Matheson (UT), have worse records. Critz's isn't that much better. He's adhered to the Boehner agenda on 62.83% of the roll calls, about the same as Holden (63.75%). All three are virulently anti-Choice, anti-gay and anti-health care and routinely support the Republicans on just about everything important. ProgressivePunch rated the three Pennsylvania homophobes on their lifetime votes on roll calls crucial to the LGBT community. Critz-- whose very first vote after being elected was to oppose including gays in Hate Crimes legislation, has a zero-- that's worse than many Republicans! Holden has voted the anti-gay line 85.71% of the time and Altmire voted anti-gay a flat 75% of the time.

As we've seen, Steny Hoyer and the Blue Dogs have come out strongly to try to save Holden's career. He's in a strongly blue district now and his deep red voting record doesn't fit. His opponent, progressive attorney Matt Cartwright, is giving him a run for his (corporate) money. If Cartwright wins, he'd quickly be embraced by the Democratic caucus with which is has far more in common that the reactionary Holden. The race out west is more nuanced-- since both congressmen are hopeless, ideologically speaking.

2 reactionary losers disguised as Democrats

According to Shira Toeplitz at Roll Call, most Democrats would rather see the widely hated Altmire defeated.

Most Democrats in the delegation emphasized their neutrality, at least publicly, ahead of the April 24 primary for the competitive district north of Pittsburgh.

“I’m Switzerland,” Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) said last week. “I think the position of most of the delegation is we’re going to make sure whoever wins the primary wins the general election.”

But last week, Rep. Robert Brady (D-Pa.) broke ranks and backed Critz.

“I did give Mark Critz a financial contribution,” Brady told reporters. “I am endorsing him also.”

Pennsylvania Democrats view Brady as the unofficial dean of their delegation, and his endorsement carries symbolic weight. Even though he’s not the longest-serving House Democrat from Pennsylvania, aides argued that Brady’s support shows where many Democrats in the delegation stand on the race: More than two years after Murtha’s death, many Members are loyal to Critz, his longtime staffer.

“Most people are rooting for Mark,” one Pennsylvania Democratic staffer said. “There’s clearly a history. A lot of Members worked with Mark when he was a staffer. Mr. Murtha was beloved by the delegation, and I think that merits a certain loyalty.”

Critz worked on Murtha’s official staff beginning in 2001, including serving as his district director for three years. After Murtha died in 2010, Critz won a competitive special election for his seat.

“When I got through that special election, I was adopted by a lot of senior Members,” Critz said. “In the Pennsylvania corner, those guys really took me under their wing. Even though I was Jack Murtha’s guy, I was still a rookie.”

In addition to Brady, Critz remains close with a couple of Pennsylvania Democrats. He dines almost weekly in Washington with Doyle, Rep. Tim Holden (Pa.) and a cadre of other northeastern Democrats.

Meanwhile, Altmire staked out a distinctly different path in Congress.

An underdog and outsider in 2006, Altmire upset then-Rep. Melissa Hart (R) in a Republican-leaning district in suburban Pittsburgh. He’s successfully won re-election by compiling a moderate voting record and profile in Congress [translation: when Roll Call uses the word "moderate," it's code for far right-wing but usually not quite as far as, say, outright Nazism].

Most memorably, Altmire voted against Democrats’ health care overhaul, a vote that many Pennsylvania insiders say saved his 2010 re-election. But Altmire’s decision irked Democrats who felt he held them out to dry with his last-minute and closely held decision to vote “nay.”


These days, instead of hanging out in the Pennsylvania corner of the House floor, Altmire sits with fellow Blue Dog Democrats, such as Reps. Mike Ross (Ark.) and Heath Shuler (N.C.), during votes. And as of last week, Altmire said he hasn’t asked anyone in the delegation for support.

There is no good outcome in PA-12. Critz and Altmire are both putrid Members of Congress who tugs the Democratic congressional caucus ever rightward and into horribly anti-working family/pro-corporate positions. In PA-17, on the other hand, replacing Holden with Cartwright would be a godsend for ordinary Americans and for the Democratic caucus. Pennsylvania votes in three weeks. There's still time to ignore PA-12 entirely and support Cartwright in PA-17.

You Won't Find Many Democrats Who Have Been More Disappointing Than Jason Altmire

Despite overwhelming consensus from Inside the Beltway pundits that the GOP was winning the battle of Wisconsin, three national polls-- Pew, Gallup, NY Times/CBS-- all show that Americans disapprove of Scott Walker's union-busting strategy. Washington Post columnist Greg Sargent called the polling "clear evidence that the public has not been as quick to scapegoat them for our economic doldrums as many expected," many being the predictably out-of-touch DC punditocracy which warned Democrats to give in or suffer the consequences. Less spotlighted was a PPP poll of Wisconsin voters showing that if they could get a re-do of the November election, Walker would lose, convincingly. Buyers remorse is widespread among voters there.

Fifty-two percent of respondents said they would vote for Barrett if the election were held today, while 45% said they would vote for Walker. That's almost exactly the opposite of what happened in the election, when Walker won the governorship with 52% of the vote to Barrett's 47%.

Democratic response? Mostly wary caution and hand-wringing. Obama's most progressive cabinet member, Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis responded well. And I was pleasantly surprised Monday that President Obama made a clear statement to the nation's governors-- apparently the Koch Bros preferred their boy in Wisconsin stay home and weld his windows shut-- that it was just wrong to vilify public workers or attack their unions: "I don't think it does anybody any good when public employees are denigrated or vilified or when their rights are infringed upon."

George Lakoff explains what's happening in Wisconsin-- and why-- far better than any of the professional Democrats in Washington because they're conflicted and can't get their heads around the fact that the trumped up budget deficits "emergency" is a ruse to turn the country conservative in every area. It's about the money and the GOP keeping Democrats from having access to what unions can do to counterbalance corporations, which gladly contribute to conservatives and shills from either party. The Nation gets it... and so does Rachel Maddow:



Conservative Democrats don't. Blue Dog Heath Shuler and "ex"-Blue Dog Steve Israel, now chair of the DCCC, are running around like chickens without heads trying to recruit conservative Democrats to run for House seats, despite the fact that Democratic voters stayed away from the polls in droves last November and defeated over half the Blue Dogs and many of their most conservative allies. Big Business loves those types-- your Melissa Beans and Travis Childers and Frank Kratovils-- but Democratic and left-leaning independent voters do not. The DCCC doesn't care. They are all about beating pro-family progressives and pumping up pro-business conservatives. Yesterday's Roll Call highlighted reactionary Blue Dog Jason Altmire and his electoral problems. Before we get to their story, just keep in mind that Altmire has the third most Republican ProgressivePunch score in the House among Democrats, a dismal 37.47, beaten out only by fellow Boehner Boys Joe Donnelly (Blue Dog-IN- 37.23) and Dan Boren (Blue Dog-OK- 229.64). And those are lifetime scores. When it comes to the tough issues this year, Altmire has sided with Boehner 75% of the time, a record of treachery exceeded only by Jim Costa (Blue Dog-CA- 79% with Boehner) and Boren (85% with Boehner), considerably worse than several Republicans!

When Altmire first beat GOP incumbent Melissa Hart in November, 2006, 130,480 voters backed him (as opposed to 120,822 for Hart). His landslide victories in Beaver (61%), Westmoreland (60%) and Lawrence (58%) counties helped him overcome the hump. Two years later, while McCain took 55% of the district, Altmire was reelected in a rematch, 56-44%, 186,536 voters to 147,411 for Hart. Last year was much closer and Altmire failed to turn out much of the Democratic base, scraping by with 51% of the vote, 118,554 to Keith Rothfus' 113,434. It was Altmire's worst showing ever and he lost Allegheny, Butler, and Westmoreland counties. And Pennsylvania Democratic Party Chairman Jim Burn told Roll Call Altmire will face some very serious headwinds in 2012-- but from inside the Democratic Party.

“I have not heard a name yet, but I know there is a movement in some pockets of the Democratic Party in Congressional 4 that think he’s walked away from the party,” Burn told Roll Call in an interview late last week. “I don’t agree with that. But because of that, I think he may see a primary challenge.”

Altmire voted against the health care overhaul and other recent top Democratic priorities. He also voted against Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) during leadership elections. And Altmire’s office issued a statement last week touting his partisan ranking as “15 slots to the right of center” for the second year in a row.

Burn goes on to say "we’d like to avoid [a primary] if we can.” I guess he'd like a job at the DCCC next.

To Chris Van Hollen, Boehner Is Just A Profitable Piñata-- Not The Disaster He Is For Working Families

I got a call the other day from a frustrated Democrat in a red state who works on the Democratic Party's coordinated campaign effort for the state. He was fuming because he feels the DSCC and DCCC come into his state to raise money by talking about how bad extremist Republicans are, collect a bunch of money and then instead of using it in the state, use it to bolster conservative Democrats elsewhere. We've been talking about that for a while here at DWT, presumably why the guys called me. Yesterday, Greg Sargent, who might not be aware its something people Outside-the-Beltway think about, touched on it in an interesting column in the Washington Post about DCCC chair Chris Van Hollen. Sargent confirms what we've been saying: the Establishment Democrats create bogiemen to run against-- Boehner is the example in this case (and always a good one)-- but have no intention of defeating him, only in scaring and suckering money out of concerned voters, which can then be used to reelect the very Democratic Blue Dogs who vote with Boehner against the Democratic agenda! Van Hollen doesn't want to lose his good parking spot and fancy office with a view.

Van Hollen said the DCCC would advise Dem candidates to seize on Boehner's speech.

"The Boehner speech is Exhibit A that they want to take a U-turn back to Bush policies that failed," Van Hollen said of Republicans. "We will be using it to encourage our candidates to draw a clear distinction between continuing on the road to recovery or turning back the clock to the failed Bush economic agenda."

Van Hollen added that Boehner's speech-- which presented an extension of the Bush tax cuts as a panacea but added few other policy prescriptions-- had only helped Dems by giving them a target, because it would enable Dems to present the election as a choice, rather than just as referendum on them.

"No longer is the Republican plan a blank slate," Van Hollen said. "Their proposal is Bush economics on steroids. By making that clear, he has sharpened the choice in these races. What he's proposing will provide ammunition for our candidates."

When I pointed to evidence this message isn't sinking in-- a recent polling memo circulated by Dems found only 25 percent believe the GOP wants a return to Bush policies-- Van Hollen didn't respond directly. "Boehner's speech opened up greater opportunities to have that conversation," he said.

This morning, the NRCC announced that they will be amplifying Boehner's call for Obama to fire Tim Geithner and Larry Summers, by pressuring Dem candidates to say whether they agree. But Van Hollen dismissed this strategy as a transparent stunt.

"People will see that as pure political gamesmanship," Van Hollen said. "If they focus on just that piece it will demonstrate that they lack any seriousness. The Geithner Summers piece is obviously a political effort at distraction."

Is Boehner a monster? Absolutely. But Van Hollen and his ilk don't give a rat's ass. Ditto for Paul Ryan, another dreadful character they are working hard to demonize but not defeat at the polls. Ryan, in fact, is in a blue-trending district, filled with high profile Democratic state politicians, a district Obama won in 2008, but the DCCC drove Paulette Garin out of the race and had her replaced with a sad and implausible patsy, exactly who Ryan would have chosen to run against had he been able to pick. There's a very different situation in OH-08, where Boehner, who's never had a competitive race before, is up against a fighting Democrat, Justin Coussoule.

The DCCC (and DNC) constantly beg loyal Democratic voters for money to "fight Boehner," but they refuse to even acknowledge Coussoule is running. As you probably know, Blue America is trying to support Coussoule's run and, with your help, we've got our second billboard and our second TV ad up now. Van Hollen and Wasserman Schultz have been hostile but thank God for Ed Schultz, who's helped invigorate grassroots Democrats from Butler to Mercer and everywhere in between.

As Coussoule is showing voters in southwest Ohio, the selfish and greedy Big Business policies Boehner has been pushing for his entire two decades at the public trough have hollowed out the American economy and hollowed out the middle class. He's, first and foremost, a low-wage fanatic. His trade policies-- he pushed NAFTA and everything remotely like NAFTA and even tried making them worse for American workers-- have been catastrophic for our country. Now he's running around the country shrieking, "Where are the jobs, Mr. President," and the DCCC should be helping Justin Coussoule to run around OH-08 asking "Where are the jobs, Mr. Congressman?"

One of the sharpest economic minds writing about trade policies in the country is Dave Johnson at Campaign For America's Future. He covered this ground pretty well this week with a post called Boehner Trade Plan: Go Back To Disaster. Before getting into Boehner's anti-family trade policies, Johnson looked at the overall economic approach he took in his Big Speech on Tuesday:

In the speech Boehner said we have an "economy stalled by ‘stimulus’ spending." But according to FOX News' Wall Street Journal, yesterday the CBO reported that "the impact of the stimulus program estimated ... the plan lowered the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percentage points and 1.8 percentage points." In addition, the Washington Post reported, "The CBO said the act also increased the nation's gross domestic product by between 1.7 percent and 4.5 percent in the second quarter, indicating that the stimulus may have been the primary source of growth in the U.S. economy."

Boehner also said that "each dollar the government collects is taken directly out of the private sector." This is the old "taxes take money out of the economy" argument, which is intended to trick people into thinking that the money just disappears instead of being used to pay for the schools, courts, agencies and infrastructure that enable businesses to thrive and drive the country's prosperity. If you think that President Eisenhower's spending on the Interstate Highway System "took money out of the economy" you really need to see someone about your problems and not take them out of the rest of us.

Taking direct shots at democracy, Boehner complained about "big government"-- namely We, the People making decisions instead of a few wealthy corporate owners making decisions for us-- and said, "As Mitch Daniels, the governor of Indiana, recently said, "You'd really be amazed at how much government you'd never miss." Boehner really has a problem with this whole "We, the People" thing.

As for Boehner's approach to trade... it's been devastating to Ohio and it's been devastating to the United States in general. Look at the chart up top showing the U.S. trade balance in advanced technology since Boehner was first elected until now. This is Republican economics-- creating a low wage economy that works well for a few wealthy families and screws everyone else. This is why Americans banished the Republicans from power for 4 decades starting in the 1930s. But they're back and Boehner hasn't learned a thing. As Johnson points out, "he called for 'passing free-trade agreements' with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. He doesn’t mention what is IN these agreements, only calls for passing them." They were conceived of during the Bush administration and are even worse-- if you can imagine-- than the devastating NAFTA agreements. Boehner's idea of "free trade" would only accelerate this:

[T]hese "free trade" agreements create a worldwide race to the bottom, allowing companies to bypass the protections that democracies fought to provide for their citizens, pitting exploited, low-wage workers against citizens in democracies, forcing wages and standards ever lower.

These "free trade" agreements need to be reviewed and reformed, so they protect wages, the environment., worker's rights and small businesses around the world. We have a chance to lift each other up instead of push each other down. In February I wrote about Whirlpool closing a refrigerator plant in Evansville, moving the jobs to Mexico where workers are paid $70 a week. The problem is that Mexican Workers Paid $70/Week Can't Buy Refrigerators! If they were paid decent wages, we could sell things we make to them, while they sell things they make to us. But if we follow Boehner's trade ideas everyone just gets poorer and eventually the economy stops.

Oh, wait, we DID follow Boehner's trade plans, and everyone DID get poorer, and the economy DID stop! But a few of his buddies got really REALLY rich. So he wants to do more of that.

This speech by Boehner is just more calling for a return to the policies of the past: we’ve been seeing the trade deficit soaring in the last few months, as the economy tries to go back to old economy. China is 96% of our trade deficit. Boehner saying lets go back to the path we followed when we were borrowing $2 billion a day, it took away 2.8% growth in 1st quarter, sapping the recovery. This notion that Boehner calling for continuing course shows a perverse blindness to changes country has to make.

Do Van Hollen and Wasserman Schultz not get this? Try "not care about this." How do I know? Well, they are actually encouraging the same reactionary anti-Choice, antigay, anti-healthcare, pro-Wall Street Blue Dogs who habitually vote with Boehner to run ads against Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic agenda! (Greg Sargent broke the specifics on this one.) They're spending the millions of dollars they suck up by scaring voters about Boehner to reelect conservatives like Jason Altmire, Bobby Bright and Glenn Nye who vote with Boehner as a default position. Now look at the ads Altmire, Bright and Nye are running. The DCCC are spending over two million dollars on these three clowns and won't even give Justin Coussoule a dime!

A SLEW OF HOT CONGRESSIONAL RACES SHAPING UP PENNSYLVANIA-- AND ONE IN LOS ANGELES

Sam Bennett and a bunch of male politicians; PA needs her, obviously

This morning's Congressional Quarterly puts the spotlight on Pennsylvania's upcoming House races. Like 2006, this looks like it will be another year where Pennsylvania is in the middle of the action. While Democrats feel certain they cane make some more inroads to add to their four take-overs last year, Republicans have deluded themselves into believing they cane win back a seat or two. The state's House delegation stands at 11 Democrats vs 8 Republicans. (In 2005 there were 12 Republicans and only 7 Democrats.)

There's one retirement, rubber stamp loon John Peterson (PA-05), a blood-red district. None of the state's incumbents have any primary challenges to speak of but, of course there's a hot primary between the wing nuts-- 9 of them-- to see who gets the party nod in the 5th. (There are also 3 Democrats vying for the nomination, including journalist and Iraq war vet Bill Cahir.)

CQ rates 6 districts are more prone to change than the 5th. First and foremost is the 4th CD (suburban Pittsburgh), where freshman Jason Altmire has basically voted like a Republican for the past year, racking up one of the worst, most reactionary voting records among Democrats in Congress, just under Rahm's boy Heath Shuler and a smidge better than Brad Ellsworth from Indiana. The former Republican rubber stamp, Melissa Hart bought herself a rematch and is deceptively and crudely attacking the right-of-center Altmire as a flaming liberal.

With an almost identical reactionary voting record, and a well-earned reputation for dishonesty, Chris Carney will also face an as yet undetermined right-winger in the very Republican 10th CD. He's been one of Bush's and Cheney's most dependable Democratic allies on a wide array of issues, a disgrace to the Democratic Party.

The other two districts wrested from the Republicans in 2006, both in the Philly suburbs, are both relatively safe. Patrick Murphy and Joe Sestak each has a respectable moderate voting record in sync with his district and both are extremely popular and well-financed. Neither has a credible Republican challenger. My old Congressman, Paul Kanjorski (PA-11) is facing a challenge from far right extremist loon and xenophobic one-issue maniac Lou Barletta, the outspoken racist mayor of Hazelton. He is widely considered an embarrassing joke and lost to Kanjorski in 2002 by 13%.

Meanwhile there are 4 Republican seats that are vulnerable. First and foremost is the 15th CD (Lehigh Valley) where an unpopular rubber stamp disguised as a fake moderate, Charlie Dent, is being vigorously challenged by Blue America-endorsed Sam Bennett. The other vulnerable Republicans are Phil English, Jim Gerlach and Tim Murphy, all of whom will face winners of hotly contested Democratic primaries.

Someone who will not be facing a Democratic primary, we've just learned, is the Blue America endorsed Russ Warner in suburban Los Angeles (CA-26). Having learned from his experience in 2006, Russ paid more attention to his primary challenge this year and his persistent grassroots work has paid off, with his Democratic opponent, Hoyt Hilsman, withdrawing from the race a few days ago.

“I respect Hoyt’s decision and wish him well," Russ told us. "He’s a good man who is committed to improving his community and his country.  However, I am glad to be able to turn my full attention to David Dreier.  Dreier has lost touch with the people here-- and his record shows it. When Dreier votes to deny millions of children health care and consistently supports the continued expansion of the Iraq war-- he’s voting for George Bush’s agenda-- not ours."

The photo on the right was taken last year at a house party in the Valley and shows Russ with bloggers Jane Hamsher, and myself (flanking Russ) and, in the back row, Dave (D-Day), Todd Beeton, and Lucas Gardner. With the Democratic field cleared, Russ can now focus his resources and energy on one of Bush's most persistent rubber stamps, creepy Kansas City-based closet queen David Dreier. He is busy making sure voters in his moderate suburban district understand that their congressman is a radical right extremist and utter Bush tool.

"We deserve a representative in Congress who will fight to improve our communities, not just sit around Washington and serve as a lap dog for the President's agenda." 

• In the past five years, Dreier voted with President George W. Bush 96% of the time - that's more than almost any other California congressman.

•  In 2002, Dreier voted for the legislation giving President Bush the authority to use force in Iraq and said: "the vote I cast giving President Bush the authority to act pre-emptively against Iraq I consider to be an anti-war vote."

• Just last year, Dreier voted against expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), which provided health care coverage to the children who need it most.  He also voted twice to support the President's veto of this legislation.  To view our web-ad on this issue, visit www.warnerforcongress.com

•  Between 1980 and 2006, Dreier received over $400,000 from health care interests.  In 2003, he voted for the Bush-backed Medicare prescription drug plan.

•  Just last year, Dreier said that "the jury is still out" on the human effects on global warming.

•  Between 1980 and 2006, Dreier received over $184,000 from energy and natural resource industry interests.  In 2005, Dreier voted for President Bush's 2005 energy bill, which gave $2.6 billion in tax breaks to energy companies.

"I'm running for Congress because I believe we need new leadership in Washington, not more career politicians like David Dreier who have become part of the problem. I will fight every day to make sure our government is accountable and focused on serving the people of the 26th District."

Suggestion for today: consider a split contribution, for Sam Bennett in PA and Russ Warner in CA. Everyone who donates at least $5 to both of them in the next 24 hours will be entered in a drawing for a lovely navy blue embroidered Impeach Cheney baseball cap.

BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE-- JASON ALTMIRE (PA-04), NOT PROGRESSIVE ENOUGH FOR DEMOCRATS AND NOT REACTIONARY ENOUGH FOR REPUBLICANS

To be fair, it's too early-- and there have been too few of the kind of congressional roll calls that separate the wheat from the chaff-- to be able to judge definitively which freshmen have the makings of great progressives-- though Yvette Clarke (NY), Mazie Hirono (HI) and Hank Johnson (GA) haven't made a single voting misstep yet-- and which freshmen are future Joe Liebermen or Jim Marshalls. Aside from the 3 mentioned above, Keith Ellison (MN), Steve Cohen (TN), Betty Sutton (OH), Peter Welch (VT), and David Loebsack (IA), Mike Arcuri (NY), John Sarbanes (MD), Paul Hodes (NH), Chris Murphy (CT), Tim Walz (MN), Kathy Castor (FL), Albio Sires (NJ) Steve Kagen (WI), Joe Sestak (PA), Carol Shea-Porter (NH), Ron Klein (FL), John Yarmuth (KY), Bruce Braley (IA), Phil Hare (IL), Jerry McNerney (CA) and John Hall (NY) have started developing solidly progressive records. Way at the bottom of the heap among freshmen Democrats-- even below Rahm Emanuel's Heath Shuler (NC) and Tim Maloney (FL) is Pennsylvania Congressman Jason Altmire.

That isn't to say Altmire is in a category with freshmen Republicans like Tim Walberg (MI), Kevin McCarthy (CA), Mary Fallin (OK), David Davis (TN), Jim Jordan (OH), Michele "the secret puker" Bachmann (MN) or Doug Lamborn (CO), the members with the 7 most reactionary voting records in the entire House. But if I had to guess now, I'd guess that in years to come, Altmire is going to be giving progressives a lot more anxiety than almost anyone else of the newly elected Democrats-- that is if he's still in Congress in years to come. Right now, I wouldn't bet on it.


Voters want a choice, not a slightly less reactionary Republican-lite Democrat. This makes Altmire one of the most vulnerable of the Democratic freshmen. And the Republicans are starting to circle; they smell blood. This week, abysmally-defeated 2006 Pennsylvania gubernatorial Lynn Swann started testing the waters in preparation for a run against Altmire. Swann only got 40% of the vote against Gov. Ed Rendell. At the same time, Altmire beat incumbent Republican Congresswoman Melissa Hart 52-48%, besting her by around 10,000 votes in a Republican-leaning district just north of Pittsburgh. (Swann did beat Rendell in the 4th CD, taking 52% of the vote there.)

Swann is counting on being remembered in the district as a former star of the Pittsburgh Steelers, rather than as an embarrassing candidate for governor. Of course, Melissa Hart will have to be dealt with before Swann gets a chance at Altmire since she has every intention of trying to re-capture her old seat. Another possible contender is a former Allegheny County councilman Ron Francis.

Today's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette paints the race as one that will revolve around Altmire's record, which they claim may be too progressive for the district. He voted for a deadline to remove American troops from Iraq and for he "voted to increase the minimum wage, expand federal funding for embryonic stem cell research and allow workers to organize unions more easily." The Republicans are trying to paint him as a puppet of Nancy Pelosi and they've already launched a typically Republican smear website against him.

Last year Hart, in a vain attempt to retain her seat, spent double the $1.1 million. Generally Republicans need to spend double or triple what Democrats spend in order to win elections since their stands are always at odds to the interests of ordinary people. Swann and Hart are both capable of raising millions of dollars for the race.

PENNSYLVANIA CONGRESSIONAL UPDATE-- WILL IT BE A COMPLETE BLOWOUT IN THE KEYSTONE STATE?

Pennsylvania is looking very good for Team Blue November 7. Last week Lois Murphy pulled ahead of Foley's little palsy-walsy Jim Gerlach and Joe Sestak deepened his lead over uber-corrupt Curt Weldon, whose daughter/bag-woman had her home raided by the FBI yesterday as they looked for more proof of the gigantic bribery scams that have marked Weldon's disgraceful public career. And today-- finally-- the super-incredible Patrick Murphy pulled ahead of Bush rubber stamp Michael Fitzpatrick in PA-08 (44-40%). Steve Porter is gaining traction as more and more people realize that Phil English not only has a consistently toxic voting record that goes against every interest of the middle class in PA-03, but that he is also likely to be another Foley-about-to-explode.


But of all the Pennsylvania race's, the one looking like the biggest cataclysm for the evil Red Team is Chris Carney's against The Choker in PA-10. Even with Bush and a whole slew of far right politicos coming into northeast PA to try to save The Choker's ass, Carney's lead continues to grow. Chris is now out-raising Sherwood-- at least among Pennsylvanians-- and leading him by an astounding 14%. Let's celebrate with a little singin' and dancin':




UPDATE: ALTMIRE GAINING ON MELISSA RUBBER STAMP HART

Yep, PA-04, which has been on virtually no one's list of targets, is looking like another possible pick-up for Team Blue. Jason Altmire, a conservative, anti-choice Democrat has pulled within striking distance of bizarre, far right fanatic Melissa Hart.