Will A 2010 Bright v Love Rematch Be A Replay Of The Dynamics That Doomed Don Cazayoux And Nick Lampson In 2008?

When it matters, Bobby Bright is just as bad as a Republican

Republican Jay Love is telling whoever asks that he's considering a rematch with reactionary Democrat, Bobby Bright in their deeply red Alabama district. Now that voters in the area have seen that Bright will never stand up for Democratic values-- he votes more frequently with the GOP against President Obama's programs than any Democrat other than fellow winger Walt Minnick of Idaho-- two questions will have to be answered. First, will enough Republicans and conservative independents vote for him over an actual Republican (and one who is even more conservative)? And second, will moderate and progressive Democrats in AL-02 bother turning up at the ballot box to vote for someone who has been as terrible in Congress as Bright? In other words, will Bright suffer the same fate suffered by similarly positioned-- and similarly craven-- Blue Dog Democrats Don Cazayoux (LA) and Nick Lampson (TX) last year?

First let's look at the stats on the 3 districts. In November Bright narrowly edged Love 143,997- 142,231 (50-50 if you want to work out the percentages) in a southern Alabama district with an R+13 where a longtime Republican incumbent, Terry Everett, has retired. At the same time the voters were narrowly giving Bright the nod, they voted overwhelmingly for McCain, 63-36%, the largest McCain vote in any district electing a new Democratic congressman.

Don Cazayoux had been elected to replace Republican crook Richard Baker in May, 2008, when Baker was sent to prison for corruption officially became a lobbyist. Cazayoux, a conservative, ran against a KKK-backed extreme right sociopath. The sociopath was winning until Cazayoux was able to nail down support from East Baton Rouge's African-American community, which he immediately stabbed in the back-- repeatedly-- upon getting into Congress. Last November voters in East Baton Rouge supported a third party candidate, their own state Senator, Michael Jackson, who decided to teach Louisiana Democrats a lesson about dissing working families. In a powerfully Democratic year, Cazayoux became one of only 4 Democratic incumbents-- all conservatives-- to be defeated. Bill Cassidy beat him 150,226 (48%) to 125,716 (40%) with 12% going to Jackson, more than enough to have prevented Cazayoux to continue another two years of crossing the aisle to vote with Republicans. The PVI is R+7 and McCain won with 57%.

A second reactionary Blue Dog incumbent to be defeated in 2008 was Texas' Nick Lampson who, in 2006, had beaten a stand-in for disgraced GOP corruptionist Tom Delay 52-42%. The right-leaning district (PVI- R+15 at the time) then turned around this past November and rejected Lampson for Republican Pete Olson 161,600 (53%) to 139,879 (45%), while handing McCain a 58% win over Obama.

Why should a progressive Democrat-- one of a small number in AL-02-- come out and vote for Bright? He's a bit better than Love? Yeah, he is-- but on almost all the key issues of the day, he really is just as bad as Love and tarnishes the Democratic brand and leads in the wrong direction. Even on something as easy for a Democrat to vote for as SCHIP, Bright was one of only two Democrats to vote "No," while forty Republicans voted for the program to provide health insurance to needy children. He was also one of only 8 right-wing Democrats to vote against the Paycheck Fairness Act and 5 Democrats to oppose equal employment protection for women. I don't see how anyone who cares about Democratic Party values would even seriously consider voting for Bright. He calls himself a Democrat but... so what? When it counts, he votes with the GOP. And at the same time, Democrats try working with these Blue Dogs and compromising with them, forever dragging the Party rightwards-- and away from solutions to the country's real problems. Time to dump Bobby Bright, no matter how execrable Jay Love is.

How Badly Can Right Wing Democrats Hurt Obama? Like Nick Lampson

Only one Democratic congressman can be The Worst, unless there's an exact tie. Or unless you can't agree how to measure worst. But if you measure worst by looking at every contentious vote in Congress on a substantive issue and you see which Democrat has voted most consistently with the Republicans and against the Democrats you come up with... Blue Dog Nick Lampson.

Lampson would never had been elected had Tom Delay not been indicted. And Lampson would never had been elected had Tom Delay not contributed some of his district's solidly Republican areas to neighboring districts so that they would turn red-- even if it meant his own was less red. But it's still plenty red. Since getting into Congress (for the second time), Lampson has catered to Republican voters and decided Democrats would have no place else to go except to vote for him. Today's CQPolitics calls his strategy going local. I call it selling out. And I'm not talking about his rational support for the Space Program or other job-producing efforts in TX-22.

In 2006 Lampson barely beat (52%) a write-in effort by a silly and discredited candidate, Shelley Sekula-Gibbs. This year he's facing a much more formidable threat from far right extremist-- and that's how they like 'em in that part of Texas-- Pete Olson. TX-22 is expected to vote overwhelmingly for McCain; he and Palin is exactly what this district wants in leaders. If 5% of the country thinks Obama is Muslim and 23% of Texans think Obama is Muslim, 50% of TX-22 must be mired in the same appallingly grotesque ignorance. The race is rated a toss-up and Lampson is considered one of only 3 or 4 Democrats vulnerable to defeat on Tuesday. I'll have my fingers crossed.

Lampson's "party unity score" for 2008 is 56%, far worst than even the most reactionary and chickenshit nominal Democrats like Jim Marshall (83%), Jim Matheson (86%), John Barrow (83%), Chris Carney (84%), Joe Donnelly (79%), Jason Altmire (84%), and Brad Ellsworth (85%). In effect, he isn't really a functioning Democrat. To counter Olson's attacks on him as not being conservative enough, Lampson never tries defending Democratic positions. Instead he boasts about endorsements from anti-Democratic, right-wing groups like the National Rifle Association, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and the Texas Farm Bureau.

But Olson is pushing his conservative credentials, saying in his first TV spot that only a congressman with “conservative principles” can reign in government excess. He’s anti-abortion and pro-“traditional marriage.” He is, as he announced at the candidates’ debate, “fundamentally against universal health care” and supports extending President Bush’s tax cuts. He describes himself as a “smaller government” conservative and says he would have opposed the $700 billion financial bailout package Congress passed in early October.

Lampson voted “no” on the bailout twice, saying the bill “forces the average taxpayer to pay for a crisis that they did not create.” The Olson campaign charges that Lampson voted for authorizing the Treasury department’s credit assistance to mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac “when nobody was watching,” then flipped “for political reasons” when it came time to weigh in on the higher-profile rescue. (The Fannie/Freddie provision was part of a larger housing package, and Lampson’s vote was to approve the entire bill.)

And Lampson is hardly the only member of Congress from Texas unworthy of the "D" next to his name. Bush's closest Democratic ally in the Texas Democratic congressional delegation has always been the odious Henry Cuellar from Laredo. Cuellar, proving that his loyalty is to the corporate interests that bribe him, not just to Bush personally, has already signaled that he is ready to undermine Obama if he becomes president-- especially on so-called "free trade."

Congressman Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo, says he is ready to "fight" Barack Obama over the future of U.S. trade with Mexico.

On the campaign trail, Obama has said many times that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) will be renegotiated if he is elected president.

South Texas business and political leaders say NAFTA has been hugely important in growing the region over the last 15 years.

Speaking at a Rio Grande Valley Partnership luncheon on Thursday, Cuellar said he had spoken to Obama about the importance of NAFTA.

"I will fight him, the president," Cuellar said at the meeting. "If Obama becomes president, on NAFTA I will convince him on why trade is important especially for the border area."

If the carefully placed and ubiquitous rumors are true-- and let's pray it's just more signature Emanuel self-promotion-- that Obama is already looking at the worst and most treacherous "free" trader in Congress as a potential chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, Cuellar won't have much to worry about-- unless it's true that Americans are actually ready to put their feet down and say no to the Lampsons and Cuellars and Emanuels, as well as the the GOP. In any case, if we don't fight against corruption in both parties none of the most venal corporate interests who seek to buy influence for their special interests will have much to worry about.

IS NICK LAMPSON A DEMOCRAT OR A REPUBLICAN?

Since being elected to Tom Delay's former seat, Nick Lampson has been one of the most reactionary members of the Democratic caucus. According to ProgressivePunch's "Chips Are Down" rankings, the only Democrat more likely than Lampson to desert the party on important issues is fake Dem John Barrow (GA). Yep, Lampson has been even worse than Jim Marshall (GA), Gene Taylor (MS) and Dan Boren (OK), three whose treachery and conservatism the GOP can almost always count on in a pinch. Lampson thinks pandering to ignorance and bigotry is more important in a deeply red district like his than being a leader. It's always harder, that's for sure. Will the pandering save him? Today's Houston Chronicle examines one Democrat who has moved right/(wrong).

Lampson is busy raising money to stave off what is sure to be one of the biggest GOP efforts to take back a seat they lost last year. Last year he outspent his Republican opponent by nearly 4 to 1, a rarity in American politics, where Republicans are almost always far better financed than Democrats. His voting record is one traditional Republican business donors should have little problem getting behind. He's the kind of Democrat, Republicans like-- a lot. The Post story says he's "tacked to the right to keep in sync with his heavily Republican 22nd District" and that he's "refashioned himself."

Gone is the moderate-to-liberal Beaumont Democrat from his earlier days in Congress. Nowadays, Lampson, 62, is keeping company with the Blue Dogs, a fiscally conservative bunch of Democrats working to bring budget discipline to Capitol Hill. [Ed: The last 8 words are mindless propaganda mainstream media innocuously inserts in stories like this to brainwash people who are too busy trying to make ends meet to pay close attention.]

And he's far from a solid vote for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and her lieutenants, joining a small band of other endangered Democrats to defect on sensitive issues.

Last week, Lampson broke with his party over Iraq. He was among 15 House Democrats who sided with President Bush by voting against a $50 billion Iraq spending bill that would have required the administration to start bringing some troops home almost immediately.

Lampson has ranged afield on other votes, opposing a tax package designed to keep millions of Americans from being hit by the alternative minimum tax; a bill banning workplace discrimination against gays and lesbians; several energy bills; and legislation limiting the administration's spying authority.

Lampson portrayed his Iraq vote less as a philosophical shift than opposition to a bill with contradictory elements. But he said he is not hesitant to steer a course that places him at odds with some Democrats.

"I'm not going to be afraid to go against the party," Lampson said in an interview in his Capitol Hill office. "I'm not going to be afraid to do what's best for the country."

Last year, when Lampson was first running, Blue America was repeatedly approached by his supporters for an endorsement. He didn't smell right and we demurred. We got it wrong in the case of Chris Carney, whose voting record has a very similar reactionary bent, but luckily we never got behind Lampson. Now he's trying to blur the distinctions between what a Democrat is and what a Republican is. The local GOP isn't buying it.

"Obviously Nick Lampson will do or say whatever it takes to try to get elected," said Jared Woodfill, the Harris County Republican Party chairman.

Already, local GOP officials have placed more than 400,000 automated phone calls to 22nd District residents, highlighting Lampson votes for tax increases and showcasing his $168,000 in contributions from the liberal MoveOn.org.

"Whether he is voting to strong-arm small businesses, switching his vote to provide taxpayer-funded benefits for illegal immigrants or happily taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from MoveOn.org, one thing is for sure: Nick Lampson's time in Congress is running short," said Ken Spain, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee.

I bet MoveOn wishes they had never raised any money for this one-- and I'll bet the Republicans won't be able to make the claim about them doing so this year. Instead he'll have Rahm Emanuel-- who approves of Lampson's xenophobic Tancredo-like stance against immigrants.

Perhaps more than any other House Democrat, Lampson has sided with the GOP on last-ditch parliamentary maneuvers designed to trip up Democrats by amending legislation on the House floor or sending it back to committee.

Of the 71 "motions to recommit" for which Lampson has been present-- many on hot-button issues such as immigration, taxes or gun control-- he's voted with Republicans for more than half, at times with only one or two other Democrats defecting.

That has created tremendous friction with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, which bristles at vulnerable Democrats' willingness to vote for anti-immigration resolutions.

Republicans "are continuing to bring up racist issues to try to use them as a political wedge," said Rep. Joe Baca, D-Calif., caucus chair. As for the defectors, he said, "The threat has got so many people scared and they think they have to vote one way when they don't have to."

After the Hispanic Caucus staged a revolt on the House floor to demonstrate anger at leadership for failing to halt the GOP resolutions, Baca said he and his allies are monitoring Democrats who vote for the measures. "We are going to have conversations with every one of them," he said.

Pelosi [now utterly dependent upon and under the control of Hoyer and Emanuel], who has exalted Lampson and his fellow freshmen as the "majority makers" who swept her into the speaker's job, has not forced the dissenters to toe the party line.

Lampson denied pressure from the leadership but acknowledged his votes have drawn colleagues' attention: "There's been some cross looks," he said.

Cross looks may be all Lampson can expect from his House colleagues. Grassroots Democrats may have something more effective in mind for him.

REPUBLICANS INTENT ON PICKING OFF REACTIONARY DEMOCRATS WHO VOTE LIKE REPUBLICANS

Bush Regime mouthpiece/right-wing propaganda sheet Weekly Standard is trying to bolster a counterintuitive notion that the GOP is not dead yet by quoting Democratic pollster Stu Rothenberg. Rothenberg acknowledges that the NRCC has some reason to be hopeful that they can minimize House losses by winning back a handful of seats that Democrats captured in deeply red districts. Rothenberg lists 5 as problematic for the Democrats.

Of them, a handful stand out because of their fundamentally Republican nature. Rep. Nick Lampson’s Texas district is horrible for Democrats, and that’s why he probably is the single most endangered Democrat who won in 2006. Yes, the Republican field has evolved in such a way that it now lacks big-name local officeholders, but that doesn’t change Lampson’s dubious prospects.

Reps. Nancy Boyda (Kan.), Christopher Carney (Pa.), Tim Mahoney (Fla.) and Jerry McNerney (Calif.) probably round out the top five ‘06 Democratic takeovers who are now vulnerable to a snapback...

If you examine the Progressive Punch rankings of every Democrat in the House you find Lampson way at the bottom of the barrel, far more likely to vote with the GOP than all but 3 reactionary Dixiecrats, John Barrow (GA), Gene Taylor (MS) and Jim Marshall (GA). Lampson's the 4th worst; not very inspiring for Democrats to go out and vote or to volunteer. But is it enough to convince actual Republicans to vote for him?

Chris Carney finds himself in a similar situation-- very red district, very Republican-friendly voting record that antagonizes every Democratic constituency except die-hard partisans who just want someone with a "D" next to their name, regardless how he votes on crucial values issues. Carney not only has a decidedly reactionary voting record, he has also developed a reputation for dishonesty and political expediency.

Tim Mahoney isn't even really a Democrat. Last year when Rahm Emanuel decided to take out hypocritical Republican closet queen/child predator Mark Foley, he found a wealthy countryclub Republican, Mahoney, convinced him to switch his party registration and run as a Democrat. In return Emanuel and Hoyer and their puppets at the pathetic excuse for a Florida Democratic Party knifed an anti-war grassroots progressive, Dave Lutrin, in the back so that Mahoney the Republican would have no opposition in a Democratic primary, and then made sure the Foley news was timed just right for an electoral win, Since coming to Congress Mahoney has supported the Bush Regime far more frequently than almost any other freshmen Democrats.

Nancy Boyda and Jerry McNerney have both racked up moderate voting records that reflect their red-leaning moderate districts. Each has a reputation in their district as a popular political straight-shooter and, although the DCCC is clueless about how to operate-- or even read-- either district, both seats are probably safe. Boyda was smart enough to tell the DCCC to keep out of her race altogether and let her do it on her own, the way she did last time. If McNerney is in trouble at all, with I doubt, it is because he has alienated his own personal core supporters in the progressive activist base. By burnishing his moderate credentials he may have lost many of his most avid volunteers and the goodwill of bloggers and activists but he has endeared himself to independents and moderate Republicans in the district and his seat looks far safer than freshmen who have chalked up truly reactionary voting records, particularly Lampson and Carney, the two Democrats I would bet will lose next year.

VISUALIZE: CONGRESSMAN JOHN MANLOVE (R-TX)

Last year not a single Democratic incumbent lost his seat in either the House or Senate, although the only two close calls, Georgia reactionaries John Barrow and Jim Marshall, did so badly because they both vote like Republicans which turns off the Democratic base and still doesn't convince many Republicans to vote for them against actual Republicans. Interestingly Barrow, Marshall and Mississippi Republicrat Gene Taylor were the only three Democrats who voted more frequently for the Bush agenda than freshman Nick Lampson (TX)-- who has only marginally worse than right-wing freshmen Heath Shuler (NC), Jason Altmire (PA), Joe Donnelly (IN) and Brad Ellsworth (IN). ProgressivePunch ranks Lampson #230 out of 232 among Democrats.

On the one hand, any of the Republican kooks running against him would be infinitely worse. On the other hand one of those kooks is named John Manlove. Yes, it's a shame it isn't John ManBoyLove but still... imagine Representative John Manlove (R-TX). It has a ring. He was the mayor of Pasadena (Texas) until yesterday, when he resigned so he could take on Lampson. Among the other nuts seeking to run against Lampson are Shelley Sekula-Gibbs, who held the congressional post after winning last fall's special election to fill the remaining two months of DeLay's term, but then lost the general election and was pretty much considered insane, even by Republican standards; neo-fascist state Rep Bob Talton; Dean Hrbacek, the ex-mayor of Sugarland; Pete Olson, a former staffer for the unpopular John Cornyn; and a Harris County Family Court Judge named James Squier. I like the sound of Representative Manlove best of all. And Lampson... que sera sera; he's earned nothing more.

WHY I'M GLAD WE RAISED CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS FOR JOHN HALL LAST YEAR AND NOT NICK LAMPSON

Last night Ken and I were commiserating about how difficult it is to know what the members of the 110th Congress have actually been up to so far. There just haven't been enough votes to see patterns yet. Some of the real progressive stars have started to emerge, like Steve Cohen from Memphis, Carol Shea-Porter from New Hampshire, and Jerry McNerney here in California, for example. But the empirical evidence in terms of votes on tough bills, sponsored legislation, etc is too scanty and inconclusive. Some hints were available from day one when some of the newly elected members ran to join the Blue Dogs and/or Ellen Tauscher's DLC right-wing splinter group, the New Democratic Caucus, while others-- the ones predisposed towards progressive values and ideals-- joined the Congressional Progressive Caucus. But even with choosing up teams, the story is far from complete.

The best way to know who is keeping promises and who is doing a good job, however, is to watch closely... and patiently. Most votes don't tell us much-- other than the all-important fact that every Democrat, no matter how horrible, is better than even the "best" or least monstrous Republican. Today's 9/11 Commission vote in the Senate was important in making the distinction between the Democratic brand and the Republican brand. Every single Democrat voted in favor of approving the bill already overwhelmingly passed in the House as part of Speaker Pelosi's First 100 Hours Agenda. And although a handful of Republicans abandoned their extreme right-wing lunatic leadership to vote with the Democrats-- giving the bill a 60-38 win-- the McConnell's hackish Republican leadership tried to stop the bill from passing. OK, Democrats are better than Republicans-- but this kind of vote tells us nothing about why Max Baucus and Ben Nelson barely are Democrats at all-- and why Joe Lieberman was drummed out of the party-- though not the Insider faction of the party-- entirely.

Something that will probably never make the newspapers happened during the debate, however, that is more revealing. Harry Reid, the Democratic Majority Leader, in summarizing the bill made an off-the-cuff remark, trying to bolster the bill's mainstream appeal-- although the last I saw over 90% of Americans already approved it. "No one can accuse former Congressman Tim Roehmer of being a 'wild-eyed liberal'-- he's a 'moderate' from Indiana..." Thanks Reid, for further pushing Karl Rove's talking points about liberals. We need leaders who know how to think on their feet. Let me quote from today's FDL comments on the matter:

Harry Reid made that statement in order to try to give credibility to the efforts Roehmer contributed behind the scenes in the drafting of this bill, and thus to the bill itself. It's like shooting ducks in a barrel for the Republicans... They must howl with laughter behind closed doors at the pathetic efforts and cluelessness of their Democratic "opposition" in Congress. [Reid also made sure to call the longtime Lieberman/Collins lovefest a 'model' of how the Senate committee chairs and ranking members should collaborate. We simply can't teach that old dog any new tricks.]

Coming on top of Dave Obey's "you idiot liberals" hurled at a wounded Marine's mother, we can see the absolutely disgraceful level of failure to which the Democrats have descended in the propaganda
wars. Harry Reid is simply incapable of absorbing the lessons that Americans have been screaming from the rooftops for years now. It is in one ear, out the other for him. He hasn't the least clue how to sell a message, how to take a stand, how to fight back. Not the least clue.

Today Stoller put up a list of the Blue Dogs who helped sabotage the no attack on Iran clause in the bill Nancy Pelosi has been trying to craft. Although most on the list were the Rahm Emanuel shills like Baron Hill (IN), Tim Mahoney (FL), and Heath Shuler (NC) and the usual suspects, who tend to vote with Republicans almost as much as with Democrats-- Gene Taylor (MS), Mike McIntyre (NC), Jim Marshall (GA), Jim Cooper (TN), Bud Cramer (AL), Dan Boren (OK), John Barrow (GA), Melissa Bean (IL)-- there were some real disappointments as well, freshmen who were supported last year by Blue America and to whom we donated thousands of dollars: Kirsten Gillibrand and Joe Sestak. Lesson learned-- although it may be a very narrow lesson indeed.

That said, I'm damn proud that Blue America supported John Hall in the last cycle-- and relieved we passed on the drumbeat to jump on the Nick Lampson bandwagon. Am I happy to see Lampson representing the Texas seat instead of DeLay or some DeLay clone? No doubts-- not a one. This morning's Hot Line talked about the differences between a progressive Democrat like John Hall and a... well... a less than progressive Democrat, endangered in a red, red district.

Reps. Nick Lampson (D-TX) and John Hall (D-NY) are among 30 Dems who won seats from GOPers in '06, giving their party a 15-seat majority. And for cong. Dems, finding Iraq proposals that lawmakers such as Lampson and Hall will both agree to-- "and that won't imperil their support back home-- is vital in their hopes of retaining power" in '08.

Lampson says that he would not vote for any measure that 'constrains' Bush's ability to wage war. Lampson: 'It's my feeling that my constituents do not support restraining funds for our troops, and they don't support, nor do I support, artificial timelines for withdrawing our troops.' Hall, meanwhile, belongs to the Congressional Progressive Caucus and is an ally of MoveOn.org. He says he will not back a 'war without end, and wants U.S. troops home by the end of '07.

Both these guys are in districts where the Republicans have the advantage in registered voters. I hope they both win. Like I said, I hope every Democrat beats every Republican for every office. But you can expect Blue America to be raising money for John Hall and other like-minded Democrats who stand for something that is different from what Republicans stand for.


UPDATE: ACTION ITEM TO REMEMBER FOR NOVEMBER 2008

If you're one of the 90% of Americans who think the 9/11 Commission's suggestions should be made into law in order to make America safer, you'll want to remember some names next time we go to the ballot box. First and foremost is the one coward who played hooky on this: Mr. Double Talk Express John McCain. As I said earlier all Democrats voted "yes." The Republicans who voted against the bill who have to face voters next year are

• Alexander (R-TN)
• Chambliss (R-GA)
• Cochran (R-MS)
• Cornyn (R-TX)
• Craig (R-ID)
• Domenici (R-NM)
• Enzi (R-WY)
• Graham (R-SC)
• Hagel (R-NE)
• Inhofe (R-OK)
• McConnell (R-KY)
• Roberts (R-KS)
• Sessions (R-AL)
• Sununu (R-NH)
• Warner (R-VA)

Coleman (R-MN), Collins (R-ME), Dole (R-NC), and Smith (R-OR) were too scared of their constituents to vote the GOP line on this one.