The Colorado Republican Party May Be On The Verge Of Extinction-- And The Democrats Have Nothing To Do With It

Ken Buck (R-CO) doesn't see anything wrong with stealing elections

Most Americans who have ever heard of Ken Buck just know him as one of the stupidest and most extreme neo-fascists in Congress. Many people say he's the single worst member of Congress. He represents the very backward, very red (R+13) High Plains district of eastern Colorado. The district has been trending redder and redder over the years and Trump beat Hillary there 57.4% to 34.3%. The big blue wave of 2018 missed it entirely and Buck was reelected with 60.6%, winning 21 of the 22 counties that make up the immense district. But Coloradans know him for another reason as well; Buck is the chairman of the Colorado Republican Party.

And as Colorado has moved bluer and bluer, Buck has dragged the state GOP further and further right. In 2016, Bernie won the state 58.9% to 40.4% and then Hillary beat Trump by 3 points in November. In 2018 Democrat Jared Polis beat Republican Walker Stapleford 1,348,888 (53.4%) to 1,080,801 (42,8%), although Buck's district was Stapleford territory. Statewide races seem increasingly out of the grasp of Republicans. In 2016 even an utterly mediocrity like Michael Bennet beat Republican Darryl Glenn 50-44% and this cycle shows GIO incumbent Cory Gardner the most likely Republican to lose his seat. The most recent polls all show Gardner losing by double digits. As for Trump, his campaign has given up even the idea of trying to win the state. The Morning Consult Trump Tracker shows that since inauguration day, Trump's net approval in Colorado has decreased by 14 points and now stands at 42% positive, 55% negative.

Trump's negative coattails were blamed for the 54.1% to 42.9% loss of the suburban 6th congressional district last cycle, which leaves the GOP with 3 congressional seats, extremists Scott Tipton, Doug Lamborn and Buck. Tipton, who drew just 51.5% of the vote last cycle, is likely to be the next to lose his seat.

The state legislature has also trended blue. The Democrats control the state Senate 19-16 and control the state House by an intimidating 41-24. So what is the state Republican Party doing about its sinking fortunes? Trying to cheat; which is what Republicans always do.





Yesterday Conrad Swanson reported for the Denver Post that Buck "pressured a local party official to submit incorrect election results to set the primary ballot for a state Senate seat." The call was recorded and you can listen to it on the YouTube above. Buck hasn't been fired yet.

“You’ve got a sitting congressman, a sitting state party chair, who is trying to bully a volunteer-- I’m a volunteer; I don’t get paid for this-- into committing a crime,” Eli Bremer, the GOP chairman for state Senate District 10, told The Post on Wednesday, confirming the authenticity of the recording. “To say it’s damning is an understatement.”

Buck says he was merely asking Bremer to abide by a committee decision.

At issue is the Republican primary for the District 10 seat currently held by Sen. Owen Hill, who’s term-limited. State Rep. Larry Liston and GOP activist David Stiver both ran for it. To qualify for the November ballot via the caucus and assembly process, a candidate must receive 30% of the vote from Republicans within the district.

During a district assembly in March, Liston received 75% of the vote and Stiver just 24%, according to documents filed later in Denver District Court. Stiver complained the election was unfair, and the issue was taken up with the state central committee, which agreed, Buck said in an interview Wednesday.

The central committee consists of nearly 500 members, including elected officials and county officers. About 200 were on the line during an April 17 conference call in which the group voted to place Stiver on the ballot for the seat, even though he failed to receive 30% of the district’s votes. After the vote, Buck asked Bremer, the District 10 chair, whether he would comply with the committee’s decision.

...Buck, a lawyer, told The Post on Wednesday that it has been the tradition in both parties for their committees to make such decisions.

“What I was asking Eli to do was not to commit fraud, I was asking Eli if he understood the decision of the central committee and if he was willing to follow the request of the Republican central committee,” he said. “It wasn’t like I was asking him to do something because I have a personal stake in the process.”

The assembly process to select the District 10 candidates, carried out as coronavirus was quickly spreading through the state, was flawed, Buck said.

“We have two choices,” he said. “We’re going to allow an unfair election to stand, or we’re going to require the chairman of the Senate district to put the candidate’s name on the ballot and let the primary voters decide.”

Bremer never filed the paperwork. Three days after the phone call, the district’s vice chair filed a “friendly lawsuit,” Bremer said, to prevent him from doing so. Bremer told the court he had no position and would abide by its decision.

District Court Chief Judge Michael Martinez ruled Monday that any certificate of designation filed with the Secretary of State’s Office showing Stiver as a candidate would violate state law because he did not receive at least 30% of the district’s votes.

The state Republican Party appealed the case to the Colorado Supreme Court, which declined Tuesday to hear it. State party spokesman Joe Jackson expressed disappointment in the Supreme Court’s decision, predicting it will set a new precedent in which the courts will be inundated with political fights every two years.

But the April 17 conversation struck Colorado politics expert Seth Masket as brazen. The political science professor at the University of Denver said it’s also likely an uncommon occurrence.

“There are plenty of examples within Colorado and elsewhere of party leaders pressuring subordinates to sort of fudge results or to change their views on things, but it’s very rare you see someone directly ordering someone to commit a crime,” Masket said.

The aftermath is likely problematic for both Buck and the state Republican Party, Masket said.

“But also potentially for Buck as a member of Congress,” he said. “This is something his colleagues probably don’t think highly of. But I can’t imagine it’s about to flip his district blue or anything like that.”

Joe Webb, former chair of the Jefferson County Republican Party, said he counted the votes for the District 10 race and Buck’s comments angered him so badly that he hung up the phone.

“Eli was being asked, and this is very serious, to attest to something as true when he knew it was false,” Webb said. “There’s a word for that in the legal jargon; it’s called perjury.”

Buck, a former district attorney, should have known better, Webb said.

The entire ordeal was disheartening and would not have happened if the coronavirus hadn’t forced the party’s assemblies into a truncated timeline, Webb said.

Bremer said the court rulings were a vindication for him, and Buck’s actions were a betrayal.

At a minimum, Bremer said, Buck owes him an apology.

“How in the heck is the Republican Party going to go out and say we’re for the rule of law except when it applies to us-- we can do whatever we want to?” Bremer said. “That’s not my Republican Party.”

Is Ken Buck (R-CO) The Worst Member Of Congress?

2014 was a good year for the GOP and a poor one for Democrats. In Congress 41 Republicans were part of the freshman class, but just 17 Democrats. The Democrats wisely elected Ted Lieu freshman class president. The Republicans, less wisely, elected Colorado crackpot and extremist Ken Buck their freshman class president. Almost 3 decades before that, a young Ken Buck was hired by then-Congressman Dick Cheney to disrupt the Iran-Contra investigation which led to his hiring by the Department of Justice, from which he was fired after being reprimanded on ethics charges in 2001. He was elected Weld County, Colorado District Attorney and led unconstitutional raids meant to target undocumented workers, raids that the Colorado Supreme Court declared unconstitutional and fined Weld County $150,000.

In 2010 Buck ran for the U.S. Senate as the anti-healthcare tea party candidate. He ran a vicious, misogynistic, anti-establishment primary campaign against Lieutenant Governor Jane Norton. Buck won the primary 209,638 (51.6%) to 196,954 (48.4%). Although conservative Democrat Michael Bennet swamped him financially (over $11 million to less than $4 million), Buck kept it close, although Bennet won, 851,590 (48.1%) to 822,731 (46.4%).

Four years later, Buck won himself a seat in the House. GOP extremist Cory Gardner gave up his safe 4th district House seat to run for the U.S. Senate and Buck won the GOP primary overwhelmingly and then defeated a weak Democratic opponent in a 64.7-29.2% landslide. The 4th district is blood red-- with a PVI of R+13. The district is comprised primarily of Weld and Douglas counties with a tiny bit of Boulder (the only blue spot in the district) and all or part of 19 other counties-- all rural and none with any significant populations. The closest places to cities in the district are Greeley (pop-107,348). which can be considered a Denver suburb, Fort Morgan (pop- 11,359) Trinidad (pop- around 8,100) and Limon (pop- around 1,900). Obama lost the district both times he ran, with around 40% of the vote, and Trump beat Hillary 57.4% to 34.3%.

Voters seem to like Buck and what he stands for. He always wins reelection with over 60%. He has 3 opponents this cycle. He knows there's no real threat and doesn't spend much time raising money. So far just $159,628. The only one of his opponents to have raised anything at all is Isaac McCorkle, who raised $5,878.

This, to put it mildly, isn't a district that the DCCC is targeting. And that gives Buck the opportunity to not even trying to cover up his sociopathic tendencies. He's insane and his GOP loves that about him. On Saturday he was the guest on Wake Up With Randy Corporon on KNUS, the far right Salem Media hate talk station. The stations regular neo-fascist hosts include Dennis Prager, Hugh Hewitt, Mark Levin, and Sebastian Gorka-- perfect for Buck!

Buck, who is chairman of the Colorado Republican Party, was on there bitching that tre Trump regime isn't right wing enough for him. He was blaming Pence's and Kushner's Coronavirus Task Force for "the 'craziness' of shutting down businesses last month. He recently doubled down on criticism of the $2 trillion stimulus relief package, saying state governors don't care if the federal government goes into more debt. He said "young Americans are developing a 'bailout mentality' and he and Corporon "chastised Congress and the Trump administration for 'writing a blank check' to keep the lockdown economy afloat. Corporon and Buck ripped the 'so-called stimulus' for now amounting to trillions rather billions of dollars while there has been 'no consideration' for how millennials and Generation Z will face unemployment and staggering debt for decades to come. 'No consideration at all to the long term, and I mean decades long-term, consequences to indebting our kids and our grandkids to those massive sums of money all at once,' Corporon said to Buck Saturday on the former's radio show. 'There's no consideration at all, certainly it doesn't get into Dr. Fauci's mind when he talks about the inconvenience of literally shutting down the world for now weeks and weeks and weeks.'"

There were only two members of Congress who voted against the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act-- Buck and fellow sociopath Andy Biggs of Arizona. The two lunatics co-wrote an OpEd for right-wing media outlet the Washington Examiner, tearing down the trust most Americans have in Anthony Fauci: Is Anthony Fauci helping or hurting?. Buck'n'Biggs wrote that they had "heard Fauci say the economic cost and societal impacts of his policies were not considered when he devised his epidemic response plan. But the question is whether the medicine he prescribed will prove to be more harmful than the disease in the long term. Many businesses have been shuttered forever. It will be almost impossible for countless other small businesses to reopen once the government gives the all-clear for the economy to restart. It is tragic that thousands of people in the country have died or may yet succumb to the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. But we also must remember that millions of people have had their lives and livelihoods permanently altered because of the government response to this virus. While our government may make promises and help make things better once the hysteria subsides, there is nothing our leaders will be able to do to make everything completely right again." Back to Buck's radio guest slot:

"If we put a group of people together as opposed to a Dr. [Anthony] Fauci or a Dr. [Deborah] Birx [of the White House Coronavirus Task Force], if we put a group of people where we'd have this discussion about how the suicide rates are going to go up, how with unemployment increases-- are we going to get those people back to work?" Buck replied. "What are we doing to young people who see the bailout mentality that we are developing in this country?"

Buck acknowledged "it is a serious problem and people are dying," but he added, "there are other ramifications for the strategy that has been adopted." Neither Corporon nor the congressman discussed the previous 2008 taxpayer bailout of the country's largest banks, the current plan's bailout of the airline industry or the trillions of dollars young Americans hold in student loan debt.

Just before adjourning for... well no one knows how long it will be, the House passed the massive Families First Coronavirus Response Act. Again Buck'n'Biggs voted against it. But so did 38 other Republican crackpots, only 3 of whom have serious November challenges coming up in November: Steve King (IA), Chip Roy (TX) Tom and McClintock (CA). Pity there's no way to get at Buck, but please consider chipping in the help replace Steve King with J.D. Scholten. You can do that here. Imagine how good you'll feel on November 3rd!

The Biggest Moments Of Today's Judiciary Committee Hearing

Likely Western New York candidate for Congress, Nate McMurray: "The GOP really has become the party of conspiracies-- while ignoring what’s right before them. It’s like the house is on fire, and they want you to look at mold in the basement. But we have it, word for word... THE PRESIDENT WAS NOT EXONERATED"

One of the most compelling moments this morning was made by Jamie Raskin of Maryland (below). After he was finished I asked him what the Committee was trying to accomplish. He told me that he thinks "we demonstrated that there is overwhelming evidence in the Report that  President Trump repeatedly obstructed justice. I was one of the Members who described in fine-grained detail a specific episode of obstruction and mine was Trump’s outrageous witness tampering with Michael Cohen. I only had three and a half minutes but I think the point was made. Despite Attorney General Barr’s best efforts, the Administration’s fog of propaganda is lifting."

Mike Siegel, a candidate for Congress-- previously an attorney for the city of Austin-- watched the hearings today and soon after Jerry Nadler gaveled the session to a close he told me that "Robert Mueller has done his part to document criminal activity by Donald Trump. Although he is clearly weary of these proceedings, today he confirmed the core findings of his report. It’s in the hands of Congress. If I were there, I’d support starting impeachment proceedings. But either way, this is the fork in the road. Go big or go home."

Ted Lieu (D-CA):




This is what Ted told me after he was finished questioning Mueller: "I simply walked Special Counsel Mueller through the three elements of the crime of Obstruction of Justice. Mueller agreed that Donald Trump had met the first two elements and then I read the third element verbatim from his report, which stated there was 'substantial evidence' of corrupt intent. Without the Department of Justice OLC Opinion preventing the indictment of a sitting President, Donald Trump would have been indicted. That's why over 1,000 former federal prosecutors signed a letter stating that any other person would have been indicted if they had done what the President did. In America, no one should be above the law. It is clear that right now we have a person in the Oval Office who has committed multiple felonies."

Jerry Nadler (D-NY):




Ken Buck (R-CO)




Jamie Raskin (D-MD)




Marqus Cole is a prominent attorney in Georgia running for Congress in an open suburban Atlanta seat. He watch the Buck questioning with a great deal of interest and he shared his impressions with me. "With one word," he said-- referring to Mueller's 'yes' response-- "in one moment, the man that was tasked with investigating the sitting President provided Pelosi, House Democrats and the country with everything we need to know. To review: without any question, the President of the United States is an unindicted co-conspirator to a federal crime in which a fellow co-conspirator was sentenced to three years in federal prison. Now, separate from that crime we have Mueller saying in one word that the President could be charged with a second a separate criminal offense. I want to be crystal clear; an impeachment inquiry needs to be opened right away. The House is the sole body in the entire country that has that power, authority and obligation to do so. House members should put aside party, politics and questions of whether the Senate will remove from office. It is time to impeach the unindicted con-conspirator to a federal crime that currently occupies the White House."

Val Demings (D-FL)




Hank Johnson (D-GA)




Kina Collins is another congressional candidate (Chicago) who watched the Mueller testimony carefully. "Robert Mueller's testimony today," she said, "confirmed what many of us have believed from the beginning-- that the president and his administration were involved in obstruction of justice and were aware of Russian interference with the 2016 election. I want it to be clear-- I stand with representatives like Maxine Waters who have been vocal from day one with calls to 'Impeach this man.' Because Democratic leaders have slow walked this issue, we have quickly descended into one of the darkest and most corrupt periods in our country's history. There are consequences for the choices we make in how we proceed next. I know what side of history I am standing on, and if I was in Congress now, I would be voting for impeachment hearings to begin. We can't keep playing these games when the morality and integrity of our entire democracy are at stake."




Adam Schiff did an excellent job later at the House Intelligence Committee. His introduction (above) was powerful and he was able to get Mueller to be very clear (below) that his investigation was neither a "witch hunt" nor "a hoax," that Russia helped Trump win the election and that the Trump campaign knew it and coordinated with the Russians and that Trump was trying to make a lot of money in his dealings with Putin and the Russians. Mueller also warned the Intelligence Committee several times that the Russians are currently trying to interfere with the 2020 elections.




New Mexico Secretary of State-- and Senate candidate-- Maggie Toulouse Oliver issued a statement after the Judiciary Committee adjourned. "The Mueller Report and the Special Counsel’s testimony on Capitol Hill today," she wrote, "provide more than enough evidence to warrant impeachment proceedings. For the good of our democracy, I am asking Congressman Luján to join my call for impeachment so that we can hold this president accountable and prevent any further abuses of power by him... Anyone who has read the Mueller Report can see there is evidence that the president, in an effort to protect himself, fired FBI Director James Comey, forced Attorney General Jeff Sessions to step down, and even attempted to have the Special Prosecutor fired. The president is not above the law and it is Congress’ job to hold him accountable. We can’t wait any longer. We must take action now to protect our democratic process by impeaching President Donald Trump. What’s more, we can hold this president accountable and still pass important legislation like the Green New Deal and Medicare for All."

57 Democrats Voted With The Republicans To Water Down Ro Khanna's Get-Out-Of-Yemen Bill

Trump water-carrier Ken Buck (R-CO)

Less-than-progressive members of Congress who are afraid of being primaried the way Crowley was, are happy to fork over $5,000 annually to the Congressional Progressive PAC so they can "join" the CPC, an important protection racket/insurance policy issuer for New Dems. And the latest New Dem who's joining the CPC is Eliot Engel. Does that mean AIPAC is a de facto CPC member now too?

It's gotten so bad, that when Sarah Lazare and Michael Arria wrote up the out-of-Yemen victory, the title of the In These Times piece was Here Are the “Progressives” Who Watered Down the House Measure Ending Support for the Yemen War. They list 13 CPC members (including 9 freshmen) who voted with the GOP to water down the import of the resolution. And, although, technically 4 of those freshmen-- Gil Cisneros (CA), Angie Craig (MN), Katie Hill (CA) and Steven Horsford (NV)-- are members of the CPC, each has joined the New Dem Coalition and is no more progressive than fellow New Dem freshmen like Max Rose, Abigail Spanberger, Mike Sherrill, Elissa Slotkin and Ben McAdams.

There are already 11 members of the CPC with ProgressivePunch over-all "F" scores: Antonio Delgado (NY), Jared Golden (ME), Katie Porter (CA), Donald Norcross (NJ), Steven Horsford (NV), Jimmy Panetta (CA), Adam Smith (WA), Lisa Blunt Rochester (DE), Brendan Boyle (PA), Tulsi Gabbard (HI) and Darren Soto (FL). Something's wrong here, although it's nice that CPC boosters can still brag that they have more members than any other Democratic caucus in Congress. Does anyone still take that boast seriously???

I had lunch today with an old friend who is often the biggest Democratic donor in Southern California. Before I could even sit down he started talking about how "moderate" Democrats have been all about telling us what's too difficult to accomplish. "They've done this for decades," he said. "And now they're doing it with the Green New Deal and Medicare-For-All. Thank God for those new freshmen who are holding their feet to the fire." He was talking about AOC, Ilhan, Rashida and Ayanna, but I'm thinking Jose Neguse belongs in that grouping too.

Thursday, in the run up to the vote to get the U.S. out of the Saudis' Yemeni genocide, right-wing Republican Ken Buck offered an amendment to water it down. Although most Democrats (175-- including the 5 heroes we just mentioned) voted against Buck's amendment, it passed 252-177. How did that happen? The Democratic leadership team voted against it. Why did 57 Democrats vote with the GOP? Fair question-- and an important one. First let's look at who crossed the aisle. The only Republicans to vote NO were libertarian-types Justin Amash (MI) and Tom Massie (KY). These are the Dems who they passed on the way across:

• Cindy Axne (New Dem-IA)
• Anthony Brindisi (Blue Dog-NY)
• Cheri Bustos (New Dem-IL)
• Ed Case (Blue Dog-HI)
• Gil Cisneros (New Dem-CA)
• Lou Correa (New Dem-CA)
• Angie Craig (New Dem-MN)
• Jason Crow (New Dem-CO)
• Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX)
• Joe Cunningham (Blue Dog-SC)
• Sharice Davids (New Dem-KS)
• Antonio Delgado (D-NY)
• Abby Finkenauer (D-IA)
• Jared Golden (D-ME)
• Josh Gottheimer (Blue Dog-NJ)
• Josh Harder (New Dem-CA)
• Alcee Hastings (D-FL)
• Katie Hill (New Dem-CA)
• Kendra Horn (Blue Dog-OK)
• Steven Horsford (New Dem-NV)
• Chrissy Houlahan (New Dem-PA)
• Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)
• Andy Kim (D-NJ)
• Anne Kuster (New Dem-NH)
• Conor Lamb (D-PA)
• Susie Lee (New Dem-NV)
• Dave Loebsack (D-IA)
• Elaine Luria (New Dem-VA)
• Stephen Lynch (D-MA)
• Ben McAdams (Blue Dog-UT)
• Lucy McBath (New Dem-GA)
• Joe Morelle (D-NY)
• Seth Moulton (New Dem-MA)
• Stephanie Murphy (Blue Dog-FL)
• Tom O'Halleran (Blue Dog-AZ)
• Jimmy Panetta (D-CA)
• Chris Pappas (New Dem-NH)
• Ed Perlmutter (New Dem-CO)
• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)
• Dean Phillips (New Dem-MN)
• Katie Porter (D-CA)
• Max Rose (Blue Dog-NY)
• Harley Rouda (New Dem-CA)
• Raul Ruiz (New Dem-CA)
• Bobby Rush (D-IL)
• Kurt Schrader (Blue Dog-OR)
• Kim Schrier (New Dem-WA)
• Bobby Scott (D-VA)
• Brad Sherman (D-CA)
• Mikie Sherrill (Blue Dog-NJ)
• Elissa Slotkin (New Dem-MI)
• Abigail Spanberger (Blue Dog-VA)
• Haley Stevens (New Dem-MI)
• Xochitl Torres Small (Blue Dog-NM)
• Jeff Van Drew (Blue Dog-NJ)
• Maxine Waters (D-CA)
• Jennifer Wexton (New Dem-VA)

Early this morning, Ro Khanna was still rejoicing that the overall War Powers Resolution passed. But... "I was disappointed," he told me, "that the Buck Amendment was added to water down our Yemen resolution and allow for limited intelligence sharing with the Saudis. It was unnecessary, and it gives the Administration a small loophole. That said, the main event of passing the WPR should not be diminished. That is the first time it has happened since 1973. The signal is very clear to the Saudis-- they need to stop the bombing in Yemen and let in food and medicine."

The way Buck, the GOP and what amounts to most of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party (list above) watered down Ro Khanna's out-of-Yemen bill was by allowing Trump to share U.S. intelligence with any country he deems appropriate. That goes right to the heart of Khanna's bill and I;'ve been reaching out to some of the ostensibly progressive members who voted for it so I could find out why. So far none of them have responded.

No one was surprised that "ex"-Republican Tom O'Halleran voted with the still-Republicans for the Buck Amendment. O'Halleran has one of the most persistently-Republican voting records of any Democrat in the House and voting with his old cronies in the GOP is his safe space/comfort zone. Fortunately, actual Democrats in AZ-01 are fielding a progressive, Eva Putzova, for next year's primary. Blue America has endorsed her and you can contribute to her campaign by clicking on the thermometer on the right. This morning she told us that she opposes the Buck amendment because it "allows the Trump administration to continue sharing intelligence with the Saudi regime in their war on Yemen. Over the past three years the Saudis have used the information provided to them by American intelligence services to attack civilians in areas under Houthi control in Yemen. Neither the Trump administration nor the Saudis can be trusted to conduct themselves otherwise. I support the original resolution sponsored by Rep Ro Khanna that 'directs the President to remove U.S. Armed Forces from hostilities in or affecting Yemen within 30 days unless Congress authorizes a later withdrawal date, issues a declaration of war, or specifically authorizes the use of the Armed Forces.' Tens of thousands of civilians have died in this war and millions more are in the middle of a growing cholera epidemic as a result of the unsafe water supply. The American people never authorized the President to assist the Saudis in this war against Yemen and it is time to end it."

What Does Big Oil Get For It's Political Bribery?

Where did the $1.6 billion bribe to Trump come from?

With Trump and Bannon tearing it up so raucously in the center ring, some people aren't paying close enough attention to what the Republicans are up to in the sideshow. Like "world's best negotiator," Trumpanzee himself, totally buckling to PhRMA lobbyists within minutes. And rest assured, Ryan's foul little Congress is up to no good. As the Washington Post reported yesterday, the oil industry lobbyists are collecting on a debt. Big Oil and Gas spent $29,193,276 bribing politicians in the 2016 cycle alone-- $25,361,577 to Republicans and $3,797,930 to Democrats. (Since 1990, Big Oil and Gas has poured $265,991,602 into congressional races.) The biggest Oil whores in Congress this cycle include Speaker Paul Ryan ($646,683), Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady ($392,050), Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy ($329,750) and Majority Whip Steve Scalise ($273,900). The grateful Ryan, Brady, McCarthy and Scalise have lead the lobbyists to the feeding trough and told them gorge themselves.

One of House Republicans’ first targets for regulatory rollback is torn from the oil industry’s wish list: eliminating recent Obama administration requirements that oil, gas and mining companies divulge more information about business payments they make to foreign governments.

A House resolution this week, which aims to scrap the transparency rule imposed by the Securities and Exchange Commission, is one of the first measures that seeks to use the Congressional Review Act to undo regulations adopted during the final months of the Obama administration.

And it comes at a potentially awkward moment for former ExxonMobil chief executive Rex Tillerson, who opposed the SEC regulation and is now awaiting confirmation for the position of secretary of state.

The review act could be used to nullify regulations dating back to June last year, experts on the law say.

In this case, the SEC drafted the regulation in response to directions in the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation. The directive was in an amendment backed by Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) and then-Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.). “Information is power,” Lugar said at the time. “It is power for shareholders and power for citizens living under oppressive regimes.”

The SEC says that it would “combat government corruption through greater transparency and accountability.”

But the SEC’s first version of the regulation was struck down by a federal district court in the District of Columbia after the American Petroleum Institute and U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed suit in 2012. That prompted a second attempt by the SEC. Because the final version was imposed near the end of the Obama administration, it now falls within the time frame that permits Congress and the president to use the review act to undo the regulation.

The oil industry has been particularly incensed about the regulation, complaining that the SEC rule would put them at a competitive disadvantage to foreign firms and be unduly expensive.

The SEC has argued that the rule would help fight corruption not only by companies but by governments around the world. It has also noted that global companies have begun to provide, on a voluntary basis, more comprehensive disclosures. In December 2015, then-commission member Luis A. Aguilar said that at least two large resource extraction companies were already providing payment disclosure on a project basis, and at least one other major resource extraction company was voluntarily providing other disclosures.

“Other global companies are also beginning to open their books to permit a window into their resource extraction payments to foreign governments,” he said.

...“Rolling back this law will enable the corruption President Trump told us all he would end,” said Corinna Gilfillan, head of the U.S. office of Global Witness, an advocacy group that targets environmental and human rights abuses. “The oil industry has been striking backroom deals with dictators and tyrants for decades, wrecking developing economies and the environment in the process.”

She added that “this law helps prevent it by making sure people can see how much money is changing hands for their resources, and who is really benefiting from those deals.”

Right wing extremist Ken Buck (R-CO) introduced the resolution, which passed yesterday 235-167, 5 Democrats voting with the GOP-- Gene Green (TX- $727,313), Henry Cuellar (TX- $565,180), Collin Peterson (MN- $117,275), Filemon Vela (TX- $72,800) and newcomer Vicente Gonzalez (TX- $1,000). Big Oil schmeared Buck with $72,950 this past cycle-- $402,329 since he was first elected to his High Plains Eastern Colorado seat in 2014. 

Not that Ken Buck or conservatives in Congress are the only ones Big Oil is schmearing. According to some pretty heavy duty, well-sourced rumors, Exxon gave Trump a nice fat $1.5 billion bribe. Sounds unbelievable? Maybe you haven't been paying close enough attention to what Exxon is and what Trump is. From Jonathan Schwartz:

According to documents recently uncovered in Europe, Exxon paid the Trump Organization $1.5 billion in June 2016 through a money laundering scheme involving banks in Europe, Hong Kong and New York. This payment occurred just days after ex-Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson attended the St. Petersburg Economic Conference in Russia.   It is unclear whether Trump's decision to nominate Tillerson as Secretary of State is in any way connected to the payment.

The documents were discovered by a European intelligence consulting company, headed by former European intelligence officers. The company was working with European intelligence and law enforcement agencies monitoring attempts by European companies to bypass US and EU sanction on Russia.

The documents state that on June 16, 2016, Exxon signed an agreement with MCC Holdings, a subsidiary of MCC (Metallurgical Corporation of China), a Chinese company owned by SASAC (State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council), the Chinese government agency responsible for managing government owned corporations.

Both MCC and its subsidiary, MCC Holdings have been rated by Moody's. The CEO of MCC Holdings, Mr. He Ting Shen (aka Heting Shen) is one of the signatories on the contract. According to public records as confirmed by several news sources, Shen is registered as the CEO of the company.

Кукольный! Кукольный! Нет кукол!

According to the contract agreement, Exxon and MCC holdings entered into what they defined as a "$1.6 billion joint participation agreement". The agreement, a 35-page document, is remarkably opaque, and can be described as a legalese waffle without any tangible deliverables or any other viable basis for a normal large scale business deal. The sole purpose of the agreement appears to obfuscate the payment by providing a cover that could be claimed was a plausible justification for the $1.6 billion payment Exxon made to MCC.

...On January 11, 2017, information regarding this payment was shared with the Department of Justice, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and several Senators.

Rex Tillerson visited Russia in June 2016, and then, just days later, the Exxon payment took place. Six months after that, Trump nominated Rex Tillerson, who was still Exxon's CEO at the time the agreement was signed and the payments made, as his nominee for Secretary of State, despite his lack of pertinent experience. Clearly, it is vitally important that this matter be investigated assiduously before the Senate confirms Tillerson.

In addition to the circumstances regarding the actual payment, two other issues need looking into. One is the source of the money. If it did not come from Russia, but from Exxon sources, Exxon, as a publicly traded company is required to report a $1.5 billion to the SEC, and list it in the relevant quarterly report. If this did not happen, then either the money originated from a third party, probably Russia, or Exxon is guilty of gross violations of banking laws and regulations.

...Unlike the Russian dossier recently released in the United States, the documents in this matter are available and include the contract agreement, the wire transfer document from Paris to Hong Kong, the HSBC “Payment Advice” document, passports from signatories, and emails describing the transactions.

Yesterday 3 right-of-center Democrats-- Manchin (WV), Warner (VA) and Heitkamp (ND)-- plus 1 independent-- Angus King (ME)-- voted with the Republicans to confirm the Trump-Bannon-Putin pick for Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson. All 4 of them are up for reelection in 2018. This is how much each has received from Big Oil:

• Manchin- $290,150
• Heitkamp- $259,379
• Warner- $161,920
• King- $17,800

Congressional Freshmen Pick Their Class Presidents-- Ted Lieu (D-CA) And Ken Buck (R-CO)

Presidents: Ken and Ted

This year's House Republican freshman class is over twice the size as the Democratic freshman class-- 41 to 17. Both classes elected their respective class presidents this week (Freshman Orientation Week), after the new members had a chance to meet and feel each other out. The Republicans picked extremist Colorado crackpot Ken Buck. The Democrats were more discerning and strategic, electing one of California's most accomplished and up-and-coming political stars, Ted Lieu.

Blue America endorsed Ted Lieu and we've done a lot of writing about him here at DWT. A principled and effective progressive state legislature, he's always been about doing the nitty-gritty work it takes and building the coalitions to lead on difficult legislation and pass bills others shied away from. Ted led where others watched and waited. He wrote and passed bills to protect consumers from unscrupulous mortgage lenders, something that didn't endear him to the banksters and passed a bill to prevent the state of California from cooperating with constitutional domestic spying from the CIA and NSA, something that didn't endear him to the Military Industrrial Complex. He passed the first law in the nation to ban anti-gay conversion "therapy" and landmark environmental and Climate legislation that set California greenhouse gas limits way ahead of the rest of the country.

Another freshman Blue America candidate, Bonnie Watson Coleman, who was the assertive progressive Majority Leader of the New Jersey state Assembly was an early backer of making Ted the freshman class president. She understands political courage and ability better than most and saw both characteristics in Ted. After the vote she told me that the freshman class has many seasoned local and state elected members and that Ted stood out as a natural leader.

Ted's statement: "I am deeply honored to be elected by my colleagues as Class President, and look forward to working with this incredibly diverse and talented Democratic Freshman Class to tackle the important issues facing our nation. We will seek areas of cooperation with our colleagues across the aisle and also fight to protect and advance our core Democratic values."

A Stanford alum who graduated magna cum laude from Georgetown University Law, Ted is a decorated Lieutenant Colonel in the Air Force Reserves-- and couldn't offer a greater contrast to the garbage the GOP freshmen elected. Buck, graduated from the University of Wyoming Law School and worked for Dick Cheney and then for the U.S. Attorney's Office where he was reprimanded for various ethics offenses. A radical right Weld County District Attorney, he spent his time pursuing an extremist ideological agenda and losing cases for unconstitutional violations of basic American rights. He was one of the 2010 cycle's pro-rape Republicans and he lost a race for the U.S. Senate. Obsessed with anti-Choice psychosis, much of his career has been spent vilifying and attacking women and pushing crackpot personhood amendments and anti-contraception schemes. Naturally, he's also an anti-LGBT fanatic, a science denier who doesn't believe in man's role in Climate Change, a gun-worshipper, opposes health insurance for working families and wants to privatize just about everything the government does... and-- big surprise-- abolish the Department of Education. He made a cynical deal with Cory Gardner this cycle to let Gardner run for Senate unopposed by the Tea Party in return for him running for Gardner's congressional seat in the reddest district of Colorado (R+11).

Here's a list of all the new Members. First the 17 Democrats:

• Ruben Gallego (D-AZ)
• Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA)
• Pete Aguilar (New Dem-CA)
• Ted Lieu (D-CA)
• Norma Torres (D-CA)
• Gwen Graham (Blue Dog-FL)
• Mark Takai (D-HI)
• Seth Moulton (D-MA)
• Debbie Dingell (D-MI)
• Brenda Lawrence (D-MI)
• Brad Ashford (Blue Dog-NE)
• Donald Norcross (D-NJ)
• Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ)
• Kathleen Rice (New Dem-NY)
• Alma Adams (D-NC)
• Brendan Boyle (D-PA)
• Don Beyer (New Dem-VA)

These are the 41 Republicans, many of them-- most of them-- borderline insane and dangerous to the the country:

• Gary Palmer (R-AL)
• French Hill (R-AR)
• Bruce Westerman (R-AR)
• Steve Knight (R-CA)
• Mimi Walters (R-CA)
• Ken Buck (R-CO)
• Carlos Curbelo (R-FL)
• Buddy Carter (R-GA)
• Jody Hice (R-GA)
• Barry Loudermilk (R-GA)
• Rick Allen (R-GA)
• Bob Dold (R-IL)
• Mike Bost (R-IL)
• Rod Blum (R-IA)
• David Young (R-IA)
• Bruce Poliquin (R-ME)
• John Moolenaar (R-MI)
• Mike Bishop (R-MI)
• David Trott (R-MI)
• Tom Emmer (R-MN)
• Ryan Zinke (R-MT)
• Cresent Hardy (R-NV)
• Frank Guinta (R-NH)
• Tom MacArthur (R-NJ)
• Lee Zeldin (R-NY)
• Elise Stefanik (R-NY)
• John Katko (R-NY)
• Mark Walker (R-NC)
• David Rouzer (R-NC)
• Steve Russell (R-OK)
• Ryan Costello (R-PA)
• John Ratcliffe (R-TX)
• Will Hurd (CIA-TX)
• Brain Babin (R-TX)
• Mia Love (R-UT)
• Dave Brat (R-VA)
• Barbara Comstock (R-VA)
• Dan Newhouse (R-WA)
• Alex Mooney (R-WV)
• Evan Jenkins (R-WV)
• Glenn Grothmann (R-WI)

Who Would You Rather Have Represent You, An Ideological Fanatic... Or A Crook?

This week Amanda Terkel reported about the disturbing tendency of the GOP towards endorsing anti-choice fanatics who insist on forcing rape and incest victims to give birth to children they were violently forced to conceive, the ultimate Big Government interference into the life of a woman. Aside from the long-standing crackpot incumbents like Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Mean Jean Schmidt (R-OH) and Duncan Hunter's alcoholic son, DH, Junior (R-CA), there are 60 more who favor forcing rape victims to bear the child of their rapist including dangerous sociopaths and religious fanatics like GOP House challengers Bill Flores (TX-17), Stephen Broden (TX-30), Rocky Raczkowski (MI-9) and Sandy Adams (FL-24), crazy gubernatorial picks like Carl Paladino (R-NY), Bill Brady (R-IL) and Nathan Deal (R-GA), the last two of whom are probably winners, and some of the Tea Party fringe candidates running for Senate-- Sharron Angle (R-NV), Ken Buck (R-CO), Roy Blunt (R-MO), Joe Miller (R-AK), Christine O'Donnell (R-DE) and, of course, non-board certified eye doctor Rand Paul (R-KY). Marco Rubio is like a greased pig on this issue and depending who he's talking to he's either pro-rapist or anti-rapist and pro-incest or anti-incest. No one really knows where he stands because he's constantly flip-flopping and going out of his way to be hazy and sneaky in his approach. He's anti-choice for sure but doesn't want to be seen as being as extreme as O'Donnell, Angle, Rand Paul and the "new generation" of Republican extremists.

Angle received significant national attention in July when she advised young rape victims to make "a lemon situation into lemonade"-- the "lemon situation" being the rape and the "lemonade" being giving birth to, and raising, the child. Buck has said, "I don't believe in the exceptions of rape or incest" and backs a constitutional ban on abortion. The progressive group Campaign for a Strong Colorado held a press conference on Tuesday with rape and incest survivors who oppose Buck's stance. "Ken Buck is in a luxurious position of not seeming to care of the permanent impact of rape can have on a woman's life," said one rape survivor at the event.

There are very few pro-Choice Republicans left-- and they're being squeezed out of the party. Many Republican office seekers, though, don't care one way or the other about abortion rights and just want to get on with Business... literally. The GOP is, after all, the conservative party that serves the interest of the wealthy. It's the party's raison d'être and, for them, the social issues is a means to an end, not an end in itself. Conservative politics for someone like Boehner or Ryan is about money and power; period. One of Boehner's handpicked shills in his homestate of Ohio, for example, is a spectacularly successful used car salesman, Tom Ganley, who's become rich by ripping off car buyers for decades-- and now wants to move his skill set to Capitol Hill.

In the DCCC’s latest round of TV ads, the campaign committee tells voters Ganley “made millions taking advantage of average folks.”

“Millionaire used-car salesman Tom Ganley is trying to ride his reputation into Congress — he should be trying to hide it,” a narrator says in the new DCCC ad. “Sued by customers for fraudulent and deceptive practices, two ‘F’s’ from the Better Business Bureau, over 160 complaints in just three years. Tom Ganley will try to sell you on his reputation, but with this used-car salesman, it’s buyer beware.”

With accusations about Ganley’s business practices blanketing the northeastern Ohio airwaves, the DCCC may turn next to numerous court documents claiming his businesses not only ripped-off their customers, but also mistreated their employees.

According to court records obtained by Roll Call, Ganley’s dealerships-- like many companies-- are currently being sued for racial, gender and age discrimination.

The Ganley campaign did not respond to requests for comment for this story. In an interview, National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Tory Mazzola said Democratic harping on the wealthy candidate’s alleged business practices are a distraction...

In one pending case against Ganley-owned dealerships, a former female employee alleges that management discriminated against her because of her gender. In court papers, the ex-employee alleges that she was “routinely given less opportunities for commissions that were given to the male employees” and that the mistreatment “made working conditions so intolerable that any reasonable person under the circumstances would have felt compelled to resign.”

In another pending case, one current and one former black employee are suing a Ganley Jeep dealership for not paying them fair wages and for giving white co-workers preferential treatment, as well as for their boss’s “disparaging remarks about [their] intelligence.”

Accusations of age discrimination have also been lodged at a Ganley Jeep dealership. In February 2009, two employees-- one 55 years old and the other 61 years old-- alleged that they were fired and replaced with younger salesmen who were in their 20s and 30s, an act that “had a great probability of causing substantial damage” to their predecessors, according to allegations in the court documents.

In May 2006, a former employee, who was white, accused two of Ganley’s dealerships of firing her because her boyfriend was black. Court papers also show the former office manager was erroneously accused of stealing $4,000 from a petty-cash drawer.

The false accusation resulted in the employee’s arrest and four nights in jail, where she “was forced to undergo degrading, humiliating and emotionally distressing experiences, including but not limited to, being strip-searched and forced to use and watch others use open bathroom facilities,” according to allegations in the court documents.

Ganley’s lawyers and the former employee settled the case in June 2007. Details of the agreement are unavailable.

Although cheating consumers and abusing workers could get Ganley far inside Boehner's GOP House caucus, lately he's probably getting even more famous for another Boehner trait-- blatant dishonesty and ye olde art of the flip-flop. PolitiFact's has just given him their Full Flop rating in regard to Betty Sutton's popular and successful Cash For Clunkers program.

The program devised by Sutton provided government rebates of up to $4,500 to buyers who traded in gas guzzlers for more fuel efficient models. The U.S. Department of Transportation says that over the weeks that program lasted in 2009, nearly 680,000 older vehicles were replaced. It says the nation's economy benefited immediately from this stimulus program, which caused a distinct upward movement in GDP and created or saved tens of thousands of jobs at a crucial time in the recovery process.

But the Republican candidate seeking Sutton’s congressional seat-- Brecksville auto dealer Tom Ganley-- says the program was a clunker even though government records show it helped his dealerships sell 934 cars worth $20.6 million. In recent interviews, he has insisted the program sparked a temporary sales spike that was followed by a slowdown, and had negative long-term effects on the industry and used-car consumers who could have bought trade-ins that were destroyed under the program.

Ganley’s views on the "Cash for Clunkers" program have evolved dramatically since he decided to run for Congress against Sutton. Ganley had nothing but praise for the program an August 2009 Time Warner Cable interview conducted while he was pursuing the GOP U.S. Senate nomination in Ohio that was ultimately won by Cincinnati’s Rob Portman.

Ganley told In the Spotlight host Bob Conklin that he generally opposed government bailouts for business, but believed the "Cash for Clunkers" program "really worked."

"I don’t think it is a double standard," he said. "Once again, the government was searching for ways to stimulate our economy and create jobs. And I’m sure your read the headlines just recently. General Motors is going to a second shift in Lordstown because of this. That creates jobs it also creates taxpayers. They are bringing back something close to 1,300 employees at Lordstown.. Those 1,300 people are going to begin to pay taxes. That’s 1,300 jobs we’ve stimulated through the Cash for Clunkers. Plus, I have created jobs out of necessity in my stores now because of the large volume of folks coming in. We are bringing back people that we had laid off."

Nearly a year later, on August 18, 2010, he told the Plain Dealer that the government stimulus and "Cash for Clunkers" program "created work, not jobs." He said he would have voted against the program if he were in Congress, even though he’s a car dealer.

Do Conservatives Like Ken Buck Want To Destroy America? Who Knows, But The Sick Policies They Espouse Will Do Just That

After Amato bet me that Obama would fire McCrystal-- I took the position Obama didn't have the intestinal stamina to do it-- I'm a little wary of these pool sharks taking advantage of me. So when one of my friends wanted to bet that he could name someone running for the Senate even more bizarre, extreme and perhaps even more psychotic than Sharron Angle or even Rand Paul, I hesitated. A case could certainly be made about that creepy bribery and coercion guy in Wisconsin. And Vitter's up for re-election. Of course, there's the former Wall Street derivatives trader, Pat Toomey, who's stark raving mad, and that pasty, pudgy guy who hasn't been able to stop eating cane-glazed pork chops with apple chutney since being caught embezzling Republican Party funds with his magic credit card. But then I remembered-- just in time... Ken Buck, the nutroots candidate, straight from Teabaggerville in Colorado.

What I remembered about Buck, another fringy DeMint candidate, wasn't just the ordinary far right claptrap he's been screeching about getting rid of Social Security and ending the whole separation of church and state thing. (These super Constitutionalists actually hate everything about the Constitution except the their interpretation of the Second Amendment.) It's his despicable comments about student loans and the mindset behind that.

Yammering on to a bunch of selfish wingnuts about the evils of Social Security, he recited usually carefully disguised GOP dogma: “I don’t know whether it’s constitutional or not; it is certainly a horrible policy. The idea that the federal government should be running health care or retirement or any of those programs is fundamentally against what I believe. And that is that the private sector runs programs like that far better.” And he threw in government backed student loans in to boot, adding, "over time, we have to wean the American public off those." Like Rand Paul and Sharron Angle, he would like to abolish the Department of Education (but then so would the Republican Party hack he's running against in the primary, Jane Norton).

I want to say something about these Republican greed-mongers, many of whom-- like both Buck and Norton-- have been sucking at the government teat all their lives. Basically they're nihilists and law-of-the jungle, anti-social suck-ups to the ruling elite. Before I retired I was paying nearly a million dollars a year in taxes. I didn't love writing those big checks but I love my country and when you pay that kind of money in taxes, it means you're doing pretty damn well. America did a great deal for me and I was proud I could give back. I couldn't have gone to college at all if not for the state university system-- opposed by conservatives, as too costly from the day they were proposed-- and I still wouldn't have been able to go without grants and loans. And then there was a time in my life when I couldn't quite make the ends meet and I don't know what would have happened to me with food stamps. I don't quite know what the government investment in me was. But I bet it worked out really well, considering I started a business, employed people, paid taxes and eventually generated many millions of dollars in income for American companies. And my taxes in any single month more than paid back the year of food stamps. And the student loans Buck and shortsighted conservatives like him want to do away with! What a bleak vision for our country these blinkered, greed-obsessed conservatives have!

Sunday you may have read Paul Krugman's harrowing column, The Third Depression, something the economics Nobel laureate thinks is descending on us because of a repeat of adopting as policy the same kind of conservative ideology that have caused past depressions.

Neither the Long Depression of the 19th century nor the Great Depression of the 20th was an era of nonstop decline-- on the contrary, both included periods when the economy grew. But these episodes of improvement were never enough to undo the damage from the initial slump, and were followed by relapses.

We are now, I fear, in the early stages of a third depression. It will probably look more like the Long Depression than the much more severe Great Depression. But the cost-- to the world economy and, above all, to the millions of lives blighted by the absence of jobs-- will nonetheless be immense.

And this third depression will be primarily a failure of policy. Around the world-- most recently at last weekend’s deeply discouraging G-20 meeting-- governments are obsessing about inflation when the real threat is deflation, preaching the need for belt-tightening when the real problem is inadequate spending.

In 2008 and 2009, it seemed as if we might have learned from history. Unlike their predecessors, who raised interest rates in the face of financial crisis, the current leaders of the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank slashed rates and moved to support credit markets. Unlike governments of the past, which tried to balance budgets in the face of a plunging economy, today’s governments allowed deficits to rise. And better policies helped the world avoid complete collapse: the recession brought on by the financial crisis arguably ended last summer.

But future historians will tell us that this wasn’t the end of the third depression, just as the business upturn that began in 1933 wasn’t the end of the Great Depression. After all, unemployment-- especially long-term unemployment-- remains at levels that would have been considered catastrophic not long ago, and shows no sign of coming down rapidly. And both the United States and Europe are well on their way toward Japan-style deflationary traps.

In the face of this grim picture, you might have expected policy makers to realize that they haven’t yet done enough to promote recovery. But no: over the last few months there has been a stunning resurgence of hard-money and balanced-budget orthodoxy.

And his conclusion as to why the ruling elites are headed down this road again? Even more chilling: "the victory of an orthodoxy that has little to do with rational analysis, whose main tenet is that imposing suffering on other people is how you show leadership in tough times. And who will pay the price for this triumph of orthodoxy? The answer is, tens of millions of unemployed workers, many of whom will go jobless for years, and some of whom will never work again." If you're a regular DWT reader you're certainly aware that we don't want to single out Ken Buck-- or even a raving sociopath like Sharron Angle-- as if the real toxicity were coming from anyplace else other than the very nature of conservatism itself. And since the fish rots from the head, let's take a look at the most recent random sociopathic utterances of the little orange man who would be Speaker, John Boehner. There's a wealth of information about the conservative mindset in those videos but the two most astonishing takeaways is that Boehner thinks she should cut back on Social Security-- in fact, keep Americans from retiring until they're 70 so that we can afford to pay for the foolish wars the ruling elites want to fight-- and that Financial Regulation is an overreaction, like killing an ant with a nuclear weapon.

The actual Speaker didn't seem especially amused by Boehner's boneheaded remarks. "An ant, Mr. Boehner? It was the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression-- Americans lost 8 million jobs and $17 trillion in retirement savings and net worth. The irresponsible fiscal policies of George W. Bush and Congressional Republicans were much bigger than an ant to American workers, their families and small businesses."

Justin Coussoule is the Democrat running for the seat Boehner is occupying. Earlier today he told us that this kind of shameless grandstanding is par for the course for Boehner. "While protecting bankers and careless polluters he blocks desperate unemployed workers from receiving essential compensation and now suggests that to pay for corporate giveaways and endless war that we balance the books by doing a bait and switch on Social Security recipients. Once again Boehner defends the powerful and tells the most needy in our society that it is time for them to suffer so that his benefactors can continue to wade in shallow water while those who have suffered from his trickle on economics gasp and drown in the deep and treacherous economic waters." Contributing to Coussoule's campaign seems like an exceptionally good idea-- unless you approve of Boehnerism.

Meanwhile, my friend Jill Richardson, author of Recipe For America: Why Our Food System Is Broken And What We Can Do To Fix It, put a very human face on this looming macro-economic crisis, asking a simple question about how, as a society, we treat our own children: Tate Tots Aren't Vegetables: Why Do We Feed Our Kids Crap?

Those who say the deficit must be addressed now via PAYGO ignore the basic principles of Keynesian economics. John Maynard Keynes, the economist most credited with bringing the U.S. out of the Great Depression, encouraged increased government spending-- even deficit spending-- during economic downturns. Recall that GDP is calculated as consumer spending plus investment by businesses plus government spending plus net exports. When consumers and businesses tighten their belts and spend less, the government can increase spending to jumpstart the economy once again. That was the very idea behind last year's stimulus package, which provided for targeted spending on infrastructure, food stamps and other programs that would most create jobs and result in immediate spending to help the economy recover.

Keynes knew that in a downturn, people are earning less so they also pay less in taxes. Simultaneously, more people qualify for entitlements (like food stamps or Medicaid), pushing up government spending. An austerity budget to fix the deficit now will prevent the government from spending what is necessary to bring back our economy. Once the economy recovers, the opposite will be true, and we will be more able to fix the deficit then.

In the specific case of school lunches, an austerity budget (and unhealthy food) now will result in massive increases in spending in the future when a generation of children raised on unhealthy food becomes a generation of unhealthy adults with costly, chronic illnesses. Some say they don't want to pass the deficit onto their children. But what child, when they are diagnosed with diabetes at age 25, would say "Thank you for balancing the budget by saving money on my school meals"?

I don't mean to single out John Boehner but his scary little world, is the conservative mind: