Crucial Primaries Mañana In Georgia, Kentucky And Pennsylvania

Let me save Pennsylvania for the end, since that's the one with Democrats. Georgia and Kentucky are Republican affairs, although who the GOP voters pick in each state may influence the outcome of the November elections-- and the control of the U.S. Senate. We'll start with Georgia's 7 dwarves running for the open red Senate seat that conservative Democrat, Sam Nunn's daughter, thinks she has a chance to win. She doesn't really have a chance-- although flawed and irrelevant polling consistently predicts she does. Greg Bluestein in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution: "Michelle Nunn, the Democratic front-runner in the Senate race, has built leads against each of the five top GOP Senate contenders in a potential November matchup, though her lead against businessman David Perdue is particularly narrow… But it’s important to note that GOP candidates have yet to unleash the brunt of their considerable resources at Democratic rivals. Deal’s campaign has so far ignored Carter in its feel-good ad campaign, and Republican Senate candidates are busy battering each other ahead of the May 20 primary."

The most recent primary polling from Fox shows certain nuts and crackpots beating other nuts and crackpots:

• David Perdue 26%
• Karen Handel 18%
• Jack Kingston: 17%
• Paul Broun: 12%
• Phil Gingrey: 11%
• Other: 3%
• Undecided: 13%

The only real chance Nunn's daughter really has-- despite a lot of wasted energy from delusional Democrats-- would be if dangerous fascist/Bircher Paul Broun won tomorrow. But he won't. And neither will she. Her excruciatingly tepid, conservative campaign not going to motive enough Democratic base voters to bother turning out in November, despite the millions the DSCC and their allied organizations waste on the election. Lots of ugly Republican Civil War ads like this one up this week:



The video way up top shows the two front-runners flatly stating-- probably dishonestly-- that they will not vote for the repulsive GOP leader, Mitch McConnell if he's reelected and wants to be GOP Leader again. And, in all likelihood, McConnell will win his primary tomorrow. The most recent polling shows him beating teabagger Matt Bevin 55-35%.

Heading into the final weekend before the 05/20/14 Kentucky primary, incumbent GOP Senator Mitch McConnell soundly defeats more conservative Republican challenger Matt Bevin, according to the latest Bluegrass Poll, conducted by SurveyUSA for the Louisville Courier-Journal, WHAS-TV, The Lexington Herald Leader, and WKYT-TV. It's McConnell 55%, Bevin 35%.

50% of Republicans say Matt Bevin is too inexperienced and would harm KY's ability to get things from DC, compared to 38% who say that Matt Bevin is the fresh face needed to shake things up in Washington. 38% of Republicans say McConnell has been in office too long and it's time for him to go, compared to 55% of Republicans who say that McConnell's expertise and seniority are important for Kentucky to have in Washington DC. 51% of Republicans say McConnell has done too little to stop federal spending, 33% say he has done the right amount. 54% of Republicans say McConnell has done too little to stop the Affordable Care Act, 31% say he has done the right amount.

Assuming McConnell emerges triumphant from Tuesday's primary, and looking ahead to the 11/04/14 general election, the forecast is cloudy for the Senate Minority Leader, who stands to become Majority Leader should he hold his seat and should Republicans capture control of the Upper Chamber.

Today, it's even-steven, McConnell 42% vs 43% for his lesser known but well-financed Democratic challenger, Alison Lundergan Grimes. These results are a nominal 3 points more favorable to McConnell than the most recent Bluegrass Poll, released 02/04/14. That poll was conducted of registered voters; this poll is of likely voters. Today, Grimes has built a narrow coalition of Democrats (74% support) and moderates (60%). The rest of her support is below 50% (women 45%, greater Louisville 48%). McConnell holds on because he is backed by conservatives (68%), Republicans (69%), and because where he trails, it is narrowly, and by single digits, such as among Independents, where McConnell is down 38% to 32%. 6-months till votes are counted, even in the face of these poll numbers, McConnell cannot be underestimated. The national Republican Party is not prepared to lose his seat; every last dollar will be spent to keep it.

Among all registered voters:


• Grimes has a Plus 14 Job Approval as KY Secretary of State: 46% approve of the job she's doing, 32% disapprove.


• McConnell has a Minus 22 Job Approval as KY's senior Senator: 34% approve of the job he's doing, 56% disapprove.


• Grimes favorability is Plus 8 (35% view her favorably, 27% view her unfavorably).


• McConnell's favorability is Minus 20 (29% favorable, 49% unfavorable).


• Bevin's favorability is Minus 3 (22% favorable, 25% unfavorable).

So far, McConnell has spent $11,379,032 on this race and Bevin has spent $3,340,522. This week, the NRA spent $$99,073 bolstering McConnell. The Credit Union National Association, one of the nation's most corrupt Big Bucks players spent over $350,000 last week to push two slimy candidates who have proven records of selling out their constituents in favor of the banksters, McConnell ($156,394) and fake Democrat Pete Aguilar ($197,189). Americans for Tax Reform kicked in another $37,500 this week for McConnell. In contrast the Freedomworks fire-breathers spent $2,154 trying to prop up Bevin's disintegrating campaign. McConnell and his allies have unlimited millions to start deploying against Grimes on Wednesday.

Democratic voters in Pennsylvania seem well on the way to nominating Tom Wolf for governor tomorrow, the progressive alternative to EMILY's List's horribly flawed conservative shill Allyson Schwartz, despite the Beltway pundits having practically declared her the winner even before she declared her candidacy. The punditocracy also heavily backed Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky (the outrageously corrupt Clinton in-law) in PA-13 and Steve Israel's CIA spy/pro-fracker Kevin Strouse in PA-08. Both are poised to lose tomorrow, although both races are too close to call and will depend on robust progressive turnout.

DWT recommendations for tomorrow:

• PA-13- Daylin Leach
• PA-08- Shaughnessy Naughton
• PA Gov- Tom Wolf
• PA Lt. Gov- Mark Smith

Pennsylvania Progressives Just Say No To Corrupt Conservatives From The Republican Wing Of The Democratic Party

It isn't likely, but New Dem vice chair and EMILY's List fave, Allyson Schwartz, could still win the May 20, Pennsylvania gubernatorial primary-- and equally conservative corporate shill Marjorie Margolies Mezvinsky could win her congressional primary the same day. But that's also unlikely. Both women from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party were dubbed prohibitive frontrunners by the brain-dead Beltway punditry from the outset. The 3 most recent polls show progressive Tom Wolf beating Schwartz by an average of just over 27 points. And Internal PA-13 polling I've looked over shows Margolies' steady collapse from a 44 point lead to something in the mid-20s-- and dropping.

Monday, David Freedlander marveled at how progressives were able to expose the fatal flaws-- similar fall flaws-- in both conservative Democrats. "Schwartz," he wrote, "was up by 25 points in Pennsylvania’s Democratic primary for governor. Then came accusations of centrism-- now a dirty word in a party with an energized left flank."

Even though Schwartz severed her ties with Third Way after the group came out publicly against progressive values and progressive leaders like Elizabeth Warren and NYC mayor Bill DeBlasio, she didn't sever her connection to the corporately-owned right-wing New Dems and she couldn't severe her connection to her crappy voting record. ProgressivePunch gives her a 71.33 crucial vote score for 2013-'14, pretty miserable, especially for a Democrat in a D+13 district, the one she's leaving and the even more conservative Margolies is trying to win back. Freedlander quotes a local political operative looking at how the district has changed since the '90s, "I think at the time when income inequality is such a central issue and we have gone through the financial collapse and it seems like Wall Street was responsible for it, the country just isn’t there anymore. Groups that have been pushing Democrats to be more corporate-friendly at the expense of spending on social issues are living 20 years past their expiration date.”

How much has the Democratic Party of Pennsylvania moved to the left? Consider this: When Schwartz won her seat in the suburbs in 2004, it was carved out to elect a Republican. She beat one and held the seat for 10 years, and now a front-runner to replace her is Daylin Leach, a state lawmaker who proudly calls himself “The Liberal Lion of Pennsylvania.” Leach received the endorsement of Sen. Bernie Sanders and is threatening to hold a sit-in in Gov. Corbett’s office to bring attention to the issue of medical marijuana.

“She’s a centrist. She wanted to run as a progressive, but her voting record and her associations disproved it,” said John Hangar, a one-time candidate who before dropping out jumped on Schwartz’s Third Way connections. “Economic unfairness is moving public opinion. Two years ago, proposing a $10.10 minimum wage would have made you a radical. Now it’s like, ‘We already got that.’ There is something going on in the political world of the average worker that is causing them to favor strong, liberal actions, and I think Allyson probably missed that.”

For her part, Schwartz backs a $10.10 minimum wage. She supported the bailout of the banks but wanted stricter oversight, too, supporting the creation of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau.

But she also thought the Bush tax cuts should be extended for everyone making less than $500,000, double what many liberals called for and more than what President Obama favored. “In my district, there are families that make $200,000 that don’t feel enormously wealthy, so I was open to that discussion,” she says. The government, she adds, “has to create the environment for private-sector growth. Now, some progressives are critical of that. On the federal level, I have been clear: The country needs to balance its budget and deal with its debt.”

Still, she says she feels as if progressive groups wanted to make “an example of her.”

“I don’t think it was personal,” she sighs. “But there it was.”

“There are right-wing organizations, [and] there are progressive organizations that just care about an issue and that do use the opportunity of campaigns to push candidates further where they want to go,” she says. “It is less about me than it is about pushing all the candidates further.”

So her crappy corporate voting record doesn't mean anything? It may not among corrupted Beltway elites. It does among progressives. And both their problem is that there are plenty of progressives in Pennsylvania-- people looking for leaders with a coherent vision that goes beyond DC talking points. And neither of these relics from the past has one. Margolies has a base-- primarily older women who remember better times in their lives 2 decades ago when Margolies was politically relevant. Maybe they were healthier. Or wealthier. Maybe they were getting laid. Younger women are gravitating towards Val Arkoosh, who plays a nice lady on TV, and state Senator Daylin Leach, the proven progressive in the race. The one Democrat women aren't gravitating to is Brendan Boyle a vehemently anti-Choice/anti-public education Big City Machine Democrat. As Margolies' support falls apart, he's the one candidate who isn't benefiting. If you want to help make sure Daylin Leach beats this whole motley crew, please consider making a contribution to his campaign through ActBlue. Here's Margolies-Mezvinsky's last desperate ploy, which was released this morning-- weak tea:

Brandan Boyle-- Bipartisan When It Comes To One Thing: The Republican War Against Women

I'm no fan of conservative-leaning New Dem Allyson Schwartz. Earlier today, I mentioned in passing how she was one of the bought-out Wall Street shills who voted with the GOP for Bush's anti-family bankruptcy bill. But there is one area where no one can deny Schwartz's heroic stature and that's when it comes to women's issues. She has been staunchy pro-Choice and a leader in the fight for women's health issues, no small matter. It would be tragic if one of Philadelphia's most ardent opponent's of women's health, an ambitious state legislator dear to the heart of the corrupt party machine, Brandan Boyle, were to follow Schwartz into Congress and wreck the best thing about her legacy.

As we've been warning, Boyle is an anti-Choice fanatic with a horrifying record to prove it.

Boyle is as anti-Choice as any misogynistic Republican freak from rural Georgia or Texas. Boyle isn't passively anti-Choice; he's a fanatic and an activist and a danger to American women. Colleen Kennedy laid it all out for Keystone Politics readers.

State Representative Brendan Boyle (D – 170) is one of dozens who helped to pass Act 122, a law that has resulted in the closure of five women’s clinics so far, since its enactment on December 22, 2011. This wasn’t a shocking move for Boyle to make; he has been a legislative supporter of the pro-life lobby all of his political career, but what is shocking is that his anti-choice record has gone largely unnoticed in the 13th district congressional race. He is the only pro-life candidate in a race in one of the most left-leaning districts in the country, thanks to gerrymandering.

In 2004, Democrats for Life of America listed Representative Boyle as a “Pro-Life All Star” on their website, a title which today is reserved for conservative democrats like Senator Joe Manchin… In April 2011, Brendan Boyle was a prime sponsor of HB 1314, a bill that is similar in architecture to the bill State Senator Wendy Davis famously filibustered, launching her into the Texas gubernatorial race. HB 1314 required all physicians performing abortions in Pennsylvania to receive surgical privileges from a hospital within 30 miles of their clinic. In other states where this law has been on the books, clinicians have had trouble getting privileges, due to the conservative activist role that some hospital administrators have taken to block their medical privileges.

In accordance with this Pennsylvania bill, those who were found performing an abortion without such privileges would be fined and charged with a third degree misdemeanor, risking their ability to continue to practice medicine. The bill was so extreme that it did not even make it out of committee, a huge reason why many in the general public do not know of Boyle’s advocacy for the bill.

Then in December 2011, of course, Representative Boyle voted in favor of SB 732, which was passed as Act 122. Its legislative supporters assured the public that it wouldn’t close any clinics, but instead, make them safer for those using them. It included provisions that mandated all clinics as “ambulatory surgical centers”. This basically means that expensive renovations would be required of all health centers, regardless of any history of safety issues or structural flaws in a facility. It’s what reproductive choice advocates call TRAP laws, or the targeted regulation of abortion providers. Its sole purpose is to make it impossible for clinics to remain open under the weight of pointless red tape and renovation costs.

No medical associations, medical professionals, or reproductive choice advocates supported the bill, all whom are charged with lobbying for the safest possible outcomes for patients, but plenty of anti-choice legislators seeking to eliminate abortion access all together helped to make this bill law. They used the media frenzy over the Gosnell murder trial to misinform the public about clinics, and it worked. Since Act 122′s enactment, five clinics have closed.

She concluded by warning that Boyle's law "has returned Pennsylvania to the days before the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, in which abortions still occurred, but the safety of women seeking them was not valued. As you know, Blue America has endorsed Daylin Leach-- you can donate to his campaign here-- and Boyle's anti-Choice fanaticism isn't the only reason to make sure Daylin wins this race. Boyle is completely in the pocket of the anti-public school/pro-voucher forces, who have been funding his political career. Slimy anti-education dirtbags Joel Greenberg and Jeffrey Yass have maxed out to him and Boyle has been taking campaign cash from 2 of the worst anti-education outfits, the misnamed Students First PAC (Michelle Rhee's group) and Democrats for Education Reform.

Yesterday, Daylin released a new campaign ad, which you can watch up top.

"As a woman, as a mother, and as a grandmother, I know that Brendan Boyle in Congress will be bad for American women everywhere," said Diane Payne, a Northeast Philadelphia resident and retired teacher, featured in the ad. "We can't risk electing someone to be our next Member of Congress who will side with the Tea Party in Washington when they try to defund Planned Parenthood again or make it harder for women to get the healthcare they need.

  "While Boyle seems to have recently flipped on issues of abortion rights, and now is saying he supports a woman's right to choose, I don't think we can trust him, and I for one don't believe him. That's why I'm supporting Daylin Leach-- because he is the only candidate with a proven track record of standing up for choice and for women's health."

“Since before I was elected to office, and throughout my time in the Legislature, I have been a proud advocate for women and women’s health," said Daylin Leach. "I am proud of the work I have to done and the fights I have waged for women's rights, and look forward to continuing the fight in Congress.”

In April 2011, Boyle was a prime sponsor of HB 1314, which contained key parts of the same bill Texas bill that State Senator Wendy Davis fought against. (the bill did not get out of committee in the PA House). The bill requires all clinics that provide abortions to have admitting privileges to hospital within 30 miles (the same as the Texas bill) and imposes new fees on clinics, as well as slapping doctors with a third degree misdemeanor, which includes up to a year in prison, and $5,000 in fines. 8 months later, Boyle was back as a backer of the Republican War Against Women, this time voting in favor of SB732 (later called Act 122) which became law. This Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers, or TRAP legislation, forces all abortion clinics considered ambulatory surgical centers. So far, Boyle and his anti-women cronies have used it to shut down 5 facilities in Pennsylvania-- and the he PA Catholic Conference, an advocacy group for anti-choice legislation, thanked Boyle in 2011 for his vote on it.

You can thank Daylin Leach for voting against it and for championing women's health, Choice and equality. This primary is less than 3 weeks away!

Could Marjorie Margolies' Sordid And Unbridled Corruption Derail Hillary Clinton's Presidential Run?

Disaster in the making?

Three weeks from Tuesday is election day in PA-13. Yes, it's the primary for the seat Allyson Schwartz is giving up to run for governor. But the district is such a healthy deep blue-- PVI- D+13; Obama won against Romney with 66%-- that no one doubts that the winner of the primary will be the next Member of Congress from northeast Philly/Montgomery County. Blue America endorsed state Senator Daylin Leach last year-- you can contribute to his Get Out The Vote effort here-- and we've been warning all cycle that his best-known opponent, Marjorie Margolies (AKA- Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky) is a lot worse than just a garden variety corrupt conservative Democrat. We've made the case so many times about her career of corruption and her conservative positions on the most basic issues that I don't know how to be clearer. So… Simon Van Zuylen-Wood and Politico to the rescue.

The profile of Margolies and the peek at her excruciating relationship with the Clinton family in their magazine is absolutely devastating. My heart goes out to the poor son, Marc, whose horrid mother is dragging his wife's family through the slime for her own out of control, monstrous ego-trip. "In interviews with me and other publications," writes Van Zuylen-Wood when he meets her at a fundraiser, "she’ll insist that her candidacy is not premised on her relationship with the Clintons. But tonight, it’s her entire pitch."

Her decision to run puts the Clintons in a difficult spot. Do they risk their political capital by publicly supporting a flawed congressional candidate in the sensitive run-up to Hillary’s likely presidential run, or do they turn their backs on a family member—and one to whom the former president owes a considerable political debt at that?

Sure enough that is exactly the theme of Margolies’s riff at the fundraiser, when she refers to the time Bill phoned from the Oval Office to beg for her vote. “When he called and said, ‘What would it take?’” she tells her well-heeled donors, “I did not say, ‘Your first-born.’”

She’s joking. Sort of.

Margolies’s career in electoral politics lasted only one term, but it ended twice. The first death occurred on Aug. 5, 1993, when Clinton was one vote short of passing a budget bill and convinced Margolies to change her mind… A couple hours before the vote, she had appeared live on Philadelphia television to explain her opposition to the bill. “I felt the budget cuts didn’t go far enough,” she wrote in her 1994 book A Woman’s Place: The Freshmen Women Who Changed the Face of Congress. “Especially in our out-of-control entitlements programs.” Then the president called. “I picked up the phone and said hello, then heard his voice, which sounded tired and drained,” she wrote. “‘What would it take, Marjorie?’” Clinton asked her.

…Her career ended for a second time in 2000. She had lost her bid for lieutenant governor of Pennsylvania in 1998 and was in the midst of a run for Rick Santorum’s Senate seat when her husband, Edward Mezvinksy, a former congressman who represented Iowa in the 1970s, declared bankruptcy. Three weeks later, she declared bankruptcy too and dropped out of the race; creditors were asking the two of them for more than $7 million. It turned out a solid portion of the family’s money-- they owned a 15-room mansion in Narberth, Pa.-- belonged to other people. In 2002, Ed would plead guilty to 31 counts of bank fraud-- he had bilked more than $10 million from unsuspecting investors, including $309,000 from his 86-year-old mother-in-law. As one of the swindled told the Philadelphia Inquirer at the time, “Who expects to be taken to the cleaners when you’ve got an ex-congressman whose wife is running for the Senate?” Mezvinsky eventually got in so deep that he fell for one of the original Nigerian-guy-needs-cash email scams, losing up to an estimated $3 million just to try to feed the scheme.

By the time Mezvinsky went to prison in 2003, the conventional wisdom in Philadelphia political circles was that Marjorie’s political career was over. (The two divorced in 2007; Ed was released from prison a year later.) She was never charged with anything, and nobody I spoke with, from sympathetic former colleagues to bitter ex-friends, seems to think she was in on the fraud. Still, she was named in several lawsuits and her bankruptcy claim rested on the argument that she was too ignorant of the family’s finances to be held responsible for them. “What could she say?” one political operative told Philadelphia magazine in 2002. “I had no idea what was going on in my own household, but I’m equipped to vote on a $2 trillion budget! Vote for me!”

...A former friend of Margolies’s poses the question in a different way. “Can you really think the Clintons were happy to have their only daughter caught up in this complicated and not fully ethical family?” The degree to which the Clintons dive into-- and quite possibly make the difference-- in Margolies’s campaign might depend on the answer to that question.

…“There’s a sense of entitlement,” says one politico who used to work with her. “She asks a lot. I don’t know if there’s a lot of giveback.”

In this vein, the harshest indictment of Marjorie I hear comes from Mezvinsky’s former doctor Brad Fenton. Fenton and his wife were close family friends who often watched over Margolies’s son Andrew when she and Ed were away. Mezvinsky never asked Fenton to invest, and Fenton does not suspect Margolies was involved in his schemes. Rather, the fallout came after Mezvinsky was charged. In a last-ditch attempt at an insanity defense, he sued Fenton for prescribing him an anti-malaria drug that he said exacerbated his ostensible bipolar disorder, resulting in bouts of manic-depressive behavior, which in turn caused him to rob people.

The suit didn’t stick, and Mezvinsky eventually went to prison. What devastated Fenton, however, was not the outcome of the trial, but the fact that Margolies, who maintained that she was oblivious about her husband’s dealings, signed onto the lawsuit as well. The implication of this, Fenton tells me, is that “nothing is as important as what she needed personally, politically, and therefore she would have no problem conscience-wise to sign onto this lawsuit. It was sort of like that was the final affirmation that you know there couldn’t have been truly heartfelt, deep personal relationships.”

Dating back to the time Margolies invited him and his wife to Renaissance Weekend for the first time, the lawsuit confirmed his nagging feeling that everything she did was driven by political calculation. “It was a way you were indebted to her,” Fenton says. “And she would seemingly do something for you, but then call in the obligation at another time. You would feel used.”

There’s no question that the scandal and its messy fallout were damaging to Margolies as well. When she filed for bankruptcy, a judge rejected her assertion of ignorance in a scathing decision that, depending on how you read it, either calls her feminism into question or suggests she knows more than she’s letting on. “Her consistent response to questions asked by her creditors about the disposition of her assets is lack of knowledge or ‘my husband handled it,’ a mantra that is completely at odds with her public persona, background, and accomplishments,” the judge wrote.

…The night after the fundraiser I attended with Margolies, Hillary Clinton arrived in Philadelphia to give a speech to the Pennsylvania Conference for Women. Margolies was sitting in the audience and exchanged hellos with Clinton at the event. But when Hillary took the stage to praise a woman running for elected office in Pennsylvania, it was gubernatorial candidate Allyson Schwartz, the congresswoman Margolies is vying to replace.

…Perhaps the question to ask is not whether the Clintons will come—but whether it’ll make any difference if they do. Margolies is already being painted as the right-wing candidate running in her newly redrawn district, which is now considerably less suburban than it was 20 years ago. State representative Brendan Boyle is thought to have a lock on the urban part of the district, and state senator Daylin Leach is the favorite among progressive voters. While an internal poll showed Margolies as the frontrunner in August, it’s unclear what her natural voter base is. Indeed, if you scroll through her campaign donations, you’ll find that most of them come from tony suburbs like Bryn Mawr and Bala Cynwyd that are still located in her old district—not middle- and working-class Northeast Philadelphia, which now comprises more than half of the new seat. (When I float the possibility that some of her donors don’t know their district has moved, Margolies belts out a deep-throated laugh and says, ‘Thank God!”) And although she has gamely begun to Etch-a-Sketch—she told me President Obama’s $800 billion stimulus wasn’t big enough, a stark contrast to her “no” vote on Clinton’s $16 billion version in 1993—it might yet be her tony Main Line persona that does her in.

And the story, of course, doesn't stop there. Yesterday, Daylin Leach filed a complaint with the FEC noting that Margolies spent over $71,427 in general election funds from January 15th through the end of the reporting period on March 31. "Marjorie Margolies has broken the law and cheated in this race," said Leach. "She has broken the basic trust that all elected officials, or aspiring elected officials must have with the voters. That is why I am calling on Margolies, if she cannot explain how we are wrong about her finances, to finally, at long last, step down from this race and allow those who follow the rules to have an important debate about our country's future."

PA-13 Primary Is Less Than A Month Away-- What Happens To The Money We Contribute?

Pennsylvania state Seantor Daylin Leach was one of the first congressional candidates Blue America endorsed this election cycle. He's right up our alley: thoroughly progressive-- and aggressively so-- compassionate, smart, persuasive… and with a record of accomplishment in the legislature that goes beyond promises. So far this cycle 943 Blue America members have contributed $22,462.68 to Daylin's grassroots campaign-- an average of $23.72. And he needs that kind of support to compete with the candidate of the Philly Machine, anti-Choice/anti-education fanatic Brendan Boyle, and against the ethically-challenged Beltway Establishment candidate Bill Clinton and Steny "K Street" Hoyer are raising boatloads of cash for, Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky.

The end of the quarter FEC filing shows that Daylin has $654,202 on hand for the May 20 primary. Although most of that money is committed to Daylin's Get Out The Vote effort, his campaign has reserved $272,000 in cable and broadcast buys in the two-week run-up to the primary. The video above is the first of a series of ads and almost one in ten of those ads are being paid for by Blue America contributors. (Thanks and please keep that coming!) In PA-13, the Democratic primary will determine who goes to Congress. And what progressives want to hear is messaging like Daylin's:

"I've never been afraid to take on bullies like Governor Corbett and the NRA. In Congress I'll protect Social Security and a woman's right to choose. I'll fight for good schools and great jobs and to put Wall Street crooks in jail."

So, aside from reminding voters that he's been an unwavering champion for Choice and for women's rights in the legislator, he is also subtly reminding voters that Boyle has been fanatically opposed to Choice. And, by bringing up Social Security, he's not only reminding voters that he wants to expand Social Security and protect cost of living adjustments for retired people, he's also reminding voters that Marjorie Margolies not only lost her seat in 1994 because she tried raising the retirement age and cutting back on cost of living adjustments, but that it was Bill Clinton himself who slapped her down in no uncertain terms for trying that typical GOP trick.

If you go to http://www.margoliesforcongress.com/ you come upon a Phildadelphia Inquirer story from June, 1994, "Social Security Curbs Proposed Marjorie Margolies-mezvinsky Is Touting Major Changes. Her GOP Foe, Jon Fox, Opposes The Plan." Voters in PA-13 should read it carefully because Margolies is a candidate who remains eager to cut Social Security and other benefits for working families. She sounds like a garden variety Republican, although the Republican that beat her in 1994 was more a defender of Social Security than she was-- and the way she disappointed the Democratic base and kept voters away from the polls is why she was really defeated that year. Her proposal to cut back on Social Security for retired Americans was even too conservative for Bill Clinton, who pointedly told her that "we do not deal with a problem like the deficit by (creating) income stagnation among the elderly."

Calling it the first fruit of last year's conference on entitlement spending, U.S. Rep. Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky announced legislation yesterday that would raise the retirement age for Social Security recipients and limit their cost-of-living adjustments.

Margolies-Mezvinsky, who is seeking re-election, said the proposals would ensure Social Security's solvency and keep her pledge to control the costs of politically sensitive entitlement programs.

Social Security officials predicted in April that the trust fund would go broke in 35 years because of demographic shifts that would leave fewer workers supporting more retirees.

Margolies-Mezvinsky's proposal is a political gamble for the freshman Democrat, who is already in the doghouse with many constituents because of her 11th-hour switch last year in favor of President Clinton's budget bill and tax increases.

The current legislation, which Margolies-Mezvinsky is sponsoring with Minnesota Democrat Timothy J. Penny, would raise the retirement age to 70 by the year 2013-- beginning in 1999 and increasing the age by four months annually.

The retirement age currently ranges from 65 for those born before 1938 to 67 for those born after 1959. Those who retire earlier get reduced benefits.

The proposal would give only the bottom 20 percent of Social Security recipients the full cost-of-living adjustment, which is tied to the Consumer Price Index. Other recipients would receive a flat cost-of-living adjustment equal to that for recipients at the 20th percentile.

Margolies-Mezvinsky had made Clinton's attendance at December's entitlement conference at Bryn Mawr College a condition for her support of his budget. The budget increased taxes for affluent workers and for single Social Security recipients with incomes over $34,000 and couples with incomes over $44,000.

Although Clinton attended the conference, he said there should be only minor unspecified changes in Social Security. "We do not want to deal with a problem like the deficit by (creating) income stagnation among the elderly," Clinton said.

White House officials could not be reached for comment yesterday.

Social Security is among the touchiest issues for Congress, due in part to the lobbying strength of the American Association of Retired Persons, which claims 33 million members.

"They're not opposed to this," Margolies-Mezvinsky said. "We've been working with them so that we get their input."

But Martin Corry, AARP's director of federal affairs, said he was unaware of any contact between his group and Margolies-Mezvinsky since December.

He said AARP would oppose any form of "means testing" such as Margolies-Mezvinsky's proposal on cost-of-living adjustments.

"Changing the retirement age to age 70 is really premature," he added. ''There may well be changes in the retirement age, and they can be done gradually. I've seen nothing to suggest it needs to go to 70."

Republican Jon D. Fox, who will face Margolies-Mezvinsky in November, said he opposed her proposal, as well as another Democratic plan to increase payroll taxes.

Fox said he would have to study the issue further before making a proposal of his own.

"I'm going to be coming out in this campaign with proposals dealing with the protection of Social Security," Fox said in a telephone interview. "I'll be getting back to you on them."

Margolies-Mezvinsky said she did not know how the proposals would play in her largely Republican Montgomery County district.

"My feeling is it's the right thing to do. I think that what happens when you get to Washington is you see people saying to their constituents what they want to hear rather than what they need to hear."

In 1994 Democratic voters had no choice but to protect Social Security by sitting on their hands and letting a Republican defeat Margolies. This year, that won't be a problem because Daylin Leach is going to beat her in a primary less than a month away. "When we started this campaign, a little over a year ago," he told us "it was always my intention to tell my story, to let people know who I am and where I came from, and how that affects everything I have done in the state Legislature. I needed help once, and I fight for those who need help now… We have all seen what the far right is doing to working families across America. I've led the fight against these measures designed to create a greater rift between the rich and everyone else, to keep working families down, and to maximize corporate profits at the expense of the very fabric of our democracy. That is why elections like mine are so important. We need leaders in Congress who are not afraid to take on the tough fights, to take on the extremists and the corporate interests that fund them, and have a proven record doing just that."

Contributing here will help make sure that TV stays on the air between now and May 20. Canddiates like Daylin Leach don't come along everyday; candidates like Brendan Boyle and Marjorie Margolies-Mezkinsky, unfortunately, do.

PA-13-- How Much More Mud Will The Mezvinsky Clan Drag The Clintons Through?

I hate the money game that American electoral politics has devolved into, drowning out ideas and, in too many cases, all agendas and even visions other than those of the donor class. But it's how the Beltway pundits and the mass media view momentum and electability. And, normally, the candidate with the most money wins-- not always, but most frequently. In the PA-13 (northeast Philly and Montgomery County in the clsoe-in Philadelphia 'burbs) race to replace Allyson Schwartz, the candidate long dubbed the "front-runner," a corrupt, conservative wretch and former failed congresswoman best known these days as Chelsea Clinton's mother-in-law, may have raised the most money-- with help from the Clintons-- but, through gross incompetence, a hallmark of her long, sordid career-- she has the least to spend in the primary. Cash-on-hand that can be used in the primary (as of April 1):

• Daylin Leach- $598,311
• Val Arkoosh- $577,225
• Brendan Boyle- $309,420
• Marjorie Margolies Mezvinsky- $2,226

Years ago, when Margolies Mezvinsky and her husband, also a member of Congress (from Iowa), were caught up in one of the worst congressional fraud scandals in history-- he served 5 years in a federal prison while she walked away scott free-- she tried evading her debts by going to bankruptcy court. The judge was not amused and refused to grant her the discharge from her debts she was seeking. The court found Marjorie had failed to satisfactorily explain a significant "loss of assets" in the four years prior to her bankruptcy filing and the judge stated, in her published opinion, "I find that the Debtor has failed to satisfactorily explain the loss of approximately $775,000 worth of assets (the difference between the $810,000 represented in May 1996 and the $35,000 now claimed in her Amended Schedule B)."

Life just sort of happens around Marjorie. Money comes and goes, appears and disappears, and she is oblivious. She is either lying, or is someone we want nowhere near the federal treasury. Her claims that she had "no idea" where all the money went when her husband stole it was not credible. That may have been "a long time ago" but more recently she claimed she had nothing to do with raising her own salary at her charity, when the minutes show it was her idea and she voted on it. She has always been bad news for the Clintons but they continue supporting her. Now people are asking about the shady finances around the event Bill Clinton did for her a couple weeks ago. If the April 10 Clinton event cost $15,000-- does that include the secret service costs?-- and had to paid up front, which one would imagine the restaurant and the Warwick Hotel required, and its not on her campaign finance reports, then she is breaking the law in two ways:

1. She did not file an accurate campaign finance report

2. She used general election money for primary expenses.

Now comes the problem of her immense campaign burn rate, close to $75,000, mostly on a bevy of greedy, avaricious consultants and staffers-- no TV. She has been badly mismanaging her campaign funds and shouldn't be elected based on that alone-- even without getting into her refusal to answer voters' questions on policy or on her anti-family agenda of crushing retirees' dignity. One has to wonder why Josh Shapiro, Chair of the Montgomery County Board of Commissioners, is supporting a candidate with a clear pattern of ethical problems who is unable to manage money in a transparent way. This is what Philly area voters who read the Inquirer woke up to this morning: Margolies Seems To Be Losing Fundraising Race.

It turns out a visit from Bill Clinton isn't the only thing Marjorie Margolies needs to complete her political comeback. More money would help, too-- a lot more.

Campaign finance reports released this week show that Margolies, widely viewed as the front-runner to reclaim the congressional seat she lost two decades ago, was limping into the final stretch.

While most of her 13th District rivals boasted hundreds of thousands of dollars stored up by early March, Margolies had barely $5,000 left to spend on her campaign before the May 20 primary, according to reports she filed with the Federal Election Commission.

"I don't think Marjorie can do anything for the next couple of weeks. How's she going to pay staff? How's she going to pay rent? How's she going to buy postage?" said Dan Fee, a Democratic political consultant who is not affiliated with the race to replace Allyson Y. Schwartz in a district covering parts of Philadelphia and Montgomery County.

Margolies' campaign had an additional $155,000 on hand, but it was designated for the general election, the reports show. Under federal law, candidates cannot spend or borrow general-election funds before the primary is over.

…[F]or the last two quarters, she spent more than she raised-- and she spent most of it in the office.

In the first three months of 2014, more than 77 percent of Margolies' expenses went to consultants and pollsters. Smukler, for example, has received $199,000 since June for media outreach, research, and general consulting.

Fee said that in a campaign of this size, candidates usually try to keep administrative costs to about 20 percent, and save the bulk of their cash for advertising.

"I would be shocked if [her campaign] can point to a single example of a nonincumbent winning when other people spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on TV and they spend none," he said.

Lara Brown, associate professor at the graduate school of political management at George Washington University, said Margolies' spending patterns could turn off some donors.

"A burn rate like that starts to raise questions in donors' minds about why they should give you money," Brown said. "The first question that comes to mind is, how serious is this campaign? Does she really want to win, or does she simply want to essentially have her name out there again?"

Two of Margolies' opponents-- physician Valerie Arkoosh and State Sen. Daylin Leach-- have raised more than $1 million each and have more than $550,000 left to spend in the next month.

Both Arkoosh and Leach have reserved more than $400,000 worth of TV time in the two weeks before the primary. Margolies has not reserved any airtime, and would need a significant infusion of cash to do so.

State Rep. Brendan Boyle, running fourth in fund-raising, had $320,000 cash to spend on the primary in the first quarter. Boyle's fund-raising totals also appeared rosier on the surface than they were.

Nearly 15 percent of Boyle's total fund-raising came from in-kind donations, mostly from his staff and interns… No other candidates have listed a significant number of in-kind contributions, from themselves or others.

The primary is May 20th and Blue America has endorsed Daylin Leach. If you'd like to learn more about the substance of his campaign, here are a few posts we've run already. And here's the place where you can chip in to make sure he-- and not someone from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party-- is the nominee.

Differentiating Between Democrats In Primaries-- How About Anti-Choice Conservative Brendon Boyle In PA-13?

The biggest wedge issue in the Democratic primary for the blue-blue PA-13 seat Allyson Schwartz is abandoning to run for governor is Social Security. As we explained Monday, Marjorie Margolies has an anti-Social Security record going way back to when she was a crooked, mediocre, one-term ConservaDem a couple decades ago-- and she's still singing the same old Republican austerity song today. Daylin Leach-- as well as Val Arkoosh-- are duking it out with Margolies over Social Security… at least they are in theory. Completely depending on her relation to the Clintons-- her son/their daughter-- to get her elected, Margolies has steadfastly refused to join any of the debates or public forums. She's hiding from the voters and never says anything but "Clinton."

However, there is another divisive issue that should concern PA-13 voters-- and it was Allyson Schwartz's signature issue and the entire basis to her claim to moral leadership: women's Choice. Margolies is good on the issue as is Arkoosh. As a state Senator, Daylin Leach has been in the forefront on the battle to keep Republicans from diminishing women's rights. "For my entire career," he told us yesterday, "I have always been a staunch supporter of women's rights especially the right to choose. In fact, I have led the fight against the same anti-choice bills that it now appears that Boyle supported. In Congress, there is a constant drum beat of anti-choice conservatives from both parties who want to limit access to abortion services, defund Planned Parenthood, and even make it harder for women to get birth control. I will fight this on every front to ensure that women always have the right to make their own healthcare decisions."

Boyle? Brendan Boyle, the 4th candidate in the PA-13 primary, the handpicked candidate of Machine boss Bob Brady? That Boyle? Yep… that's the one-- as anti-Choice as any misogynistic Republican freak from rural Georgia or Texas. Boyle isn't passively anti-Choice; he's a fanatic and an activist and a danger to American women. Yesterday, Colleen Kennedy laid it all out for Keystone Politics readers.

State Representative Brendan Boyle (D – 170) is one of dozens who helped to pass Act 122, a law that has resulted in the closure of five women’s clinics so far, since its enactment on December 22, 2011. This wasn’t a shocking move for Boyle to make; he has been a legislative supporter of the pro-life lobby all of his political career, but what is shocking is that his anti-choice record has gone largely unnoticed in the 13th district congressional race. He is the only pro-life candidate in a race in one of the most left-leaning districts in the country, thanks to gerrymandering.

In 2004, Democrats for Life of America listed Representative Boyle as a “Pro-Life All Star” on their website, a title which today is reserved for conservative democrats like Senator Joe Manchin… In April 2011, Brendan Boyle was a prime sponsor of HB 1314, a bill that is similar in architecture to the bill State Senator Wendy Davis famously filibustered, launching her into the Texas gubernatorial race. HB 1314 required all physicians performing abortions in Pennsylvania to receive surgical privileges from a hospital within 30 miles of their clinic. In other states where this law has been on the books, clinicians have had trouble getting privileges, due to the conservative activist role that some hospital administrators have taken to block their medical privileges.

In accordance with this Pennsylvania bill, those who were found performing an abortion without such privileges would be fined and charged with a third degree misdemeanor, risking their ability to continue to practice medicine. The bill was so extreme that it did not even make it out of committee, a huge reason why many in the general public do not know of Boyle’s advocacy for the bill.

Then in December 2011, of course, Representative Boyle voted in favor of SB 732, which was passed as Act 122. Its legislative supporters assured the public that it wouldn’t close any clinics, but instead, make them safer for those using them. It included provisions that mandated all clinics as “ambulatory surgical centers”. This basically means that expensive renovations would be required of all health centers, regardless of any history of safety issues or structural flaws in a facility. It’s what reproductive choice advocates call TRAP laws, or the targeted regulation of abortion providers. Its sole purpose is to make it impossible for clinics to remain open under the weight of pointless red tape and renovation costs.

No medical associations, medical professionals, or reproductive choice advocates supported the bill, all whom are charged with lobbying for the safest possible outcomes for patients, but plenty of anti-choice legislators seeking to eliminate abortion access all together helped to make this bill law. They used the media frenzy over the Gosnell murder trial to misinform the public about clinics, and it worked. Since Act 122′s enactment, five clinics have closed.

She concluded by warning that Boyle's law "has returned Pennsylvania to the days before the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, in which abortions still occurred, but the safety of women seeking them was not valued. As you know, Blue America has endorsed Daylin-- you can donate to his campaign here-- and Boyle's anti-Choice fanaticism isn't the only reason to make sure Daylin wins this race. Boyle is completely in the pocket of the anti-public school/pro-voucher forces, who have been funding his political career. Slimy anti-education dirtbags Joel Greenberg and Jeffrey Yass have maxed out to him and Boyle has been taking campaign cash from 2 of the worst anti-education outfits, the misnamed Students First PAC (Michelle Rhee's group) and Democrats for Education Reform.

Pennsylvania progressives and libertarians were also upset that Boyle was a supporter of HB2400, an intrusive domestic spying bill, where he voted for increased surveillance that included particularly troubling things like government use in prosecutions of illegally-made civilian wiretaps, allowing wiretaps in any public place so long as notice is posted or recording equipment is easily visible, allowed any one civilian to record any other civilian if they thought they would get evidence regarding certain serious crimes, and government use of any seized cell phone to gather evidence without any oversight. You want a "Democrat" in Congress backing crap like that? Don't we have enough of that already? There's no need to try to figure out who's worse, Boyle or Margolies because we already know who's best: Daylin Leach, who has a record to prove it. If you'd like, this is a very good race to invest in.

Are You A Marjorie Margolies Democrat Or Are You A Daylin Leach Democrat?

This morning, Vermont Independent Senator Bernie Sanders endorsed a Democrat running for a House seat in Pennsylvania. Senators don't often endorse in House races and almost never endorse in primaries in other states. Bernie is backing Daylin Leach because of his record of accomplishment in the Pennsylvania state legislature and because of the campaign he's running for Congress and for Daylin's unflinching focus on raising the minimum wage, making college more affordable, shrinking the gap between the rich and the poor and, most important in this particular race in PA-13, expanding Social Security benefits. "At a time when our country has more income and wealth inequality than any other major country on earth," said Bernie, "and when the gap between the very rich and everyone else is growing wider-- it is imperative that we send candidates like Daylin Leach to the U.S. Congress."

Unfortunately, there aren't that many candidates like Daylin Leach. Pennsylvania's "liberal lion" is a lot like Sanders, motivated by standing up for ordinary working families. Probably the issue that has made him stand out the strongest is the difference between himself as the corporate media/Beltway pundit front-running, Clinton in-law and ex-Congresswoman Marjorie Margolies. Compact explanation: Daylin wants to expand Social Security; Marjorie wants to shrink it.

We've covered this dichotomy in the past. Back in February we pointed out a Phildadelphia Inquirer story from June, 1994, "Social Security Curbs Proposed Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky Is Touting Major Changes. Her GOP Foe, Jon Fox, Opposes The Plan." As we said then, Voters in PA-13 should read it carefully. This is a candidate who is eager to cut Social Security and other benefits for working families. She sounds like a garden variety Republican, although the Republican that beat her in 1994 was more a defender of Social Security than she was-- and the way she disappointed the Democratic base and kept voters away from the polls is why she was really defeated that year. Her proposal to cut back on Social Security for retired Americans was even too conservative for Bill Clinton, who pointedly told her that "we do not deal with a problem like the deficit by (creating) income stagnation among the elderly." Now her son is married to his daughter and he's selling out the American people by backing her campaign to get back into Congress. This candidate, of whom the Inquirer wrote "Calling it the first fruit of last year's conference on entitlement spending, U.S. Rep. Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky announced legislation yesterday that would raise the retirement age for Social Security recipients and limit their cost-of-living adjustments… The current legislation, which Margolies-Mezvinsky is sponsoring with Minnesota Democrat Timothy J. Penny, would raise the retirement age to 70 by the year 2013-- beginning in 1999 and increasing the age by four months annually… The proposal would give only the bottom 20 percent of Social Security recipients the full cost-of-living adjustment, which is tied to the Consumer Price Index. Other recipients would receive a flat cost-of-living adjustment equal to that for recipients at the 20th percentile."

Predictably, Margolies has learned nothing from her electoral loss. Today she is still part of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party and still pushing the Chained CPI scheme to reduce Social Security payments for retired Americans. Last December, Daylin, pushed back against the Paul Ryan/Marjorie Margolies Chained CPI plank: "Social Security has literally lifted entire generations of seniors out of poverty. But at a time when pensions are shrinking or going away and people are living longer, we must do better if Social Security is going to fulfill its promise of a reasonable life for retirees." This morning he told us that "Making the wealthy pay their fair share is the right way to reform Social Security. Cutting benefits is the wrong way, and a clear difference in my Congressional race… It is important to occassionally assess our policies in the context of what is actually happening in the real world. For example, we see a dramatic decline in the availability of and value of private pensions. Yet Social Security benefits continue to stagnate at best and atrophy at worst. Given how seniors are actually living their lives, it is time we boldly call for not only protecting Social Security, but expand it and increasing benefits. We need to remove the cap on the FICA tax and use that money not only to ensure the stability of Social Security, but to start employing E-COLA to ensure the cost of living adjustments reflect what seniors are actually spending, and to start making reasonable lump-sum payments to new retirees to enable them to settle bills and begin their retirement in a financially healthy position."

That's why Bernie Sanders has chimed in on his behalf. Last week, the highly regarded PoliticsPA interviewed Daylin and he sounded a little frustrated that Margolies' entire campaign is based on one thing-- that her son married Clinton's daughter. She has steadfastly refused to join the other candidates in debates and has tried as best she could to cover up her conservative record.

“Marjorie has a 20 year record of trying to dismantle Social Security; [she] introduced legislation that would cut cost of living adjustments and raise the retirement age,” Leach said. “And recently, when she was asked about the fiscal health of Social Security she said that we could ask wealthy people to voluntarily contribute more.”

But in this election, Leach claims that Margolies has been absent on substance.

“I’ve taken controversial positions, Marjorie has no issue that she’s spoken about at all,” he said. (Margolies has yet to attend a candidates forum with the rest of the challengers.)

May 20 is primary day in Pennsylvania. PA-13 is blue enough so that whoever wins the Democratic primary is sure to go to Congress. The PVI is D+13 and Obama beat Romney two to one-- 210,902 (66%) to 105,024 (33%), an even stronger margin than the one by which he beat McCain there 4 years earlier. PA-13 can be the next home of a brilliant and innovative Representative who stands up for working families-- or they can back a hopeless relic from the past who is from the Big Business/Wall Street wing of the party. I'm very happy that her son married their daughter… but that has absolutely nothing to do with what's good for the families in Montgomery County and Northeast Philadelphia. If you'd like to help Daylin win this race, you can contribute to his campaign here.

Who Will Protect Social Security-- And Who Wants To Wreck It?

In the new ad above, the DCCC-connected SuperPAC, House Majority PAC, quotes AARP about the dangers seniors face if conservatives ever get their way in regard to privatizing Social Security. And they point out that the Republican candidate in the FL-13 special election, for the remainder of Bill Young's term, David Jolly, was a lobbyist who worked to privatize Social Security and who still favors that approach. All true. What the DCCC will avoid at all costs, of course, is an discussion of how so many of its candidates (and incumbents-- primarily New Dems and Blue Dogs) also favor a conservative approach hated by AARP-- Chained CPI.

Most of Steve Israel's mystery meat candidates have received strict orders to not answer any questions about Chained CPI. Last year when I called Pete Aguilar to see where he stood on key issues-- and long before I found the newspaper interview where he endorsed Chained CPI and other Austerity measures-- I couldn't get past his campaign manager, Boris Medzhibovsky, a former campaign worker for Rahm Emanuel. He was friendly and said he would have Aguilar call me back but that they couldn't answer any policy questions yet because the DCCC hasn't told them what the answers are yet. I assumed I was talking to an inexperienced intern who didn't understand not to talk that way to strangers, but, no, Boris Medzhibovsky turned out to be the campaign manager. Unless there are two Boris Medzhibovskys. But the Pete and Boris Show isn't the only circus the DCCC is running. Israel's Jumpstart roster of mostly closet conservative Democrats like Aguilar-- Ann Callis (IL), Jerry Cannon (MI), Sean Eldridge (NY), Jennifer Garrison (OH), Gwen Graham (FL), John Lewis (MT), Suzanne Patrick (VA), Domenic Recchia (NY), Kevin Strouse (PA)-- are on the wrong side of the ideological divide within the Democratic Party. They are all from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. Bit don't expect any Majority PAC ads touting their feel ins about Chained CPI. The DCCC knows better than to trumpet that position to voters.

The Democratic Party Establishment-- from the corrupt Philly Machine to Steny Hoyer and his K Street goons-- have come to the aid of the most conservative of the 4 Democrats running for the PA-13 seat Allyson Schwartz is giving up to run for governor. And that would be former congresswoman Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky, who was defeated after she and her congressman husband got caught up in a multimillion dollar pyramid scheme that defrauded thousands of Americans. He went to prison and she settled comfortably into a life of obscurity… until their son married Chelsea Clinton and she decided to see if she could use the connection to catapult herself back into office so she could try-- once again-- to cut benefits for Social Security recipients.

Conventional wisdom-- relentlessly stoked by Margolies herself-- is that she was defeated in 1994 by Republican Jon Fox (who she had narrowly beaten in 1992) because of her heroic vote for Clinton's 1993 budget. She was the "deciding vote." But that isn't the full story. Margolies is a liberal on women's issues but, for a Democrat, a raging conservative on issues of economic justice. A few days ago she told the Philadelphia Daily News why she almost didn't vote for the Clinton budget. She claims President Clinton asked her "What would it take?" to get her to vote for the budget. "I said I wanted to talk about entitlements, I wanted further cuts, and I'll only be your last vote-- if you need it. And he did." Cutting entitlements and screwing working families is the kind of Democrat Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky has always been-- and that's one old dog that is definitely not learning any new tricks.

If you go to http://www.margoliesforcongress.com/ you come upon a Phildadelphia Inquirer story from June, 1994, "Social Security Curbs Proposed Marjorie Margolies-mezvinsky Is Touting Major Changes. Her GOP Foe, Jon Fox, Opposes The Plan." Voters in PA-13 should read it carefully. This is a candidate who is eager to cut Social Security and other benefits for working families. She sounds like a garden variety Republican, although the Republican that beat her in 1994 was more a defender of Social Security than she was-- and the way she disappointed the Democratic base and kept voters away from the polls is why she was really defeated that year. Her proposal to cut back on Social Security for retired Americans was even too conservative for Bill Clinton, who pointedly told her that "we do not deal with a problem like the deficit by (creating) income stagnation among the elderly."

Calling it the first fruit of last year's conference on entitlement spending, U.S. Rep. Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky announced legislation yesterday that would raise the retirement age for Social Security recipients and limit their cost-of-living adjustments.

Margolies-Mezvinsky, who is seeking re-election, said the proposals would ensure Social Security's solvency and keep her pledge to control the costs of politically sensitive entitlement programs.

Social Security officials predicted in April that the trust fund would go broke in 35 years because of demographic shifts that would leave fewer workers supporting more retirees.

Margolies-Mezvinsky's proposal is a political gamble for the freshman Democrat, who is already in the doghouse with many constituents because of her 11th-hour switch last year in favor of President Clinton's budget bill and tax increases.

The current legislation, which Margolies-Mezvinsky is sponsoring with Minnesota Democrat Timothy J. Penny, would raise the retirement age to 70 by the year 2013-- beginning in 1999 and increasing the age by four months annually.

The retirement age currently ranges from 65 for those born before 1938 to 67 for those born after 1959. Those who retire earlier get reduced benefits.

The proposal would give only the bottom 20 percent of Social Security recipients the full cost-of-living adjustment, which is tied to the Consumer Price Index. Other recipients would receive a flat cost-of-living adjustment equal to that for recipients at the 20th percentile.

Margolies-Mezvinsky had made Clinton's attendance at December's entitlement conference at Bryn Mawr College a condition for her support of his budget. The budget increased taxes for affluent workers and for single Social Security recipients with incomes over $34,000 and couples with incomes over $44,000.

Although Clinton attended the conference, he said there should be only minor unspecified changes in Social Security. "We do not want to deal with a problem like the deficit by (creating) income stagnation among the elderly," Clinton said.

White House officials could not be reached for comment yesterday.

Social Security is among the touchiest issues for Congress, due in part to the lobbying strength of the American Association of Retired Persons, which claims 33 million members.

"They're not opposed to this," Margolies-Mezvinsky said. "We've been working with them so that we get their input."

But Martin Corry, AARP's director of federal affairs, said he was unaware of any contact between his group and Margolies-Mezvinsky since December.

He said AARP would oppose any form of "means testing" such as Margolies-Mezvinsky's proposal on cost-of-living adjustments.

"Changing the retirement age to age 70 is really premature," he added. ''There may well be changes in the retirement age, and they can be done gradually. I've seen nothing to suggest it needs to go to 70."

Republican Jon D. Fox, who will face Margolies-Mezvinsky in November, said he opposed her proposal, as well as another Democratic plan to increase payroll taxes.

Fox said he would have to study the issue further before making a proposal of his own.

"I'm going to be coming out in this campaign with proposals dealing with the protection of Social Security," Fox said in a telephone interview. "I'll be getting back to you on them."

Margolies-Mezvinsky said she did not know how the proposals would play in her largely Republican Montgomery County district.

"My feeling is it's the right thing to do. I think that what happens when you get to Washington is you see people saying to their constituents what they want to hear rather than what they need to hear."

And Steny Hoyer is busy raising money for her campaign against Daylin Leach, one of the most aggressively progressive leaders in Pennsylvania-- or anywhere. If you want to see seniors starve, you can contribute to Steny and Marjorie. If not… Daylin Leach.

Momentum Continues To Build For Pennsylvania's Liberal Lion, Daylin Leach

Today two more important progressive groups, MoveOn and the Philadelphia Chapter of DFA (Philly for Change), joined Blue America and the PCCC in backing state Senator Daylin Leach in his bid for the open congressional seat (PA-13). In the May 20th primary Daylin will face a crowded field of garden variety Democrats, endorsed by Big Money interests. Republicans have no shot in this deep blue seat, so the bad players are backing conservative Democrats who will play ball with them.

It's a dynamic not unlike the one in the Silicon Valley high profile primary (CA-17) where Big Business interests are backing ConservaDem Ro Khanna against progressive champion Mike Honda because they know a Republican has no shot there either. Creeps like Wall Street predators Marc Leder (Romney's 47% host) and Peter Thiel appreciate Khanna's vow to cut Social Security-- which is very much like Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky's similar pledge. The most unsavory elements of the corrupt Philly Machine are backing her. This was the MoveOn vote.

• Daylin Leach - 55%
• Marjorie Margolies - 17%
• Valerie Arkoosh - 15%
• Brendan Boyle - 13%

The Matea Gold piece in the Washington Post exposing how the Koch brothers are trying to buy elections all over the country-- with millions of dollars in poisonous, inaccurate ads targeting Democrats, isn't about Democratic primaries, but the dynamic is similar. Big Business is playing against progressives and working to elect their own crooked conservative candidates like Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky in Pennsylvania and Ro Khanna in California.

This week Blue America is attempting to help raise some grassroots campaign funds to help Daylin fight back against this influx of corrupt money. The Hooters have customized and autographed a hooter for one lucky contributor on this page. Everyone who contributes to Daylin's campaign-- any amount-- is eligible to "win." In fact, if you want the hooter and find yourself strapped for cash, send a post card to Blue America at P.O. Box 27201, Los Angeles, CA 90027 and you'll have a chance to win too! We'll do a random drawing next week. One of Daylin's colleagues in the state legislature, Brian Sims, the first openly gay elected state legislator in Pennsylvania history, endorsed him in with as much enthusiasm as Blue America, the PCCC, MoveOn and DFA: "Daylin," he told us, "introduced Pennsylvania's first marriage equality bill (back waaaay before it was cool); Daylin co-chairs the LGBT caucus in the Pennsylvania legislature; and just last month stood with a Pennsylvania teacher who was fired just because he married his partner. That's why I'm supporting Daylin on his run for Congress. We NEED Daylin in Washington where issues (like ENDA) are currently being debated and will effect the lives of millions of Americans."

We agree-- and, if you wish, you can contribute here on the regular Blue America House candidates page or here on the special page that registers you to win the hooter.