In Congress, There Is A Big Difference Between Bipartisanship And Waving A White Flag As You Cross The Aisle

 

Meet The Blue Dogs and New Dems

Working across the aisle in a bipartisan fashion in an art. Most Democrats in Congress do not have a clue about how it's done. The so-called "Problem Solvers"-- like Third Way and the Blue Dogs and New Dems-- make up the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, colloquially, "the Democraps." They are always the first to rush across the aisle and claim they are thereby bipartisan. Being a coward and having no values is not the same thing as being a smart, skilled bipartisan legislator. That's way over the heads of the conservative Democrats who vote the most frequently with Republicans when progressive issues come to the floor of the House. This dirty dozen is not a list of bipartisan heroes. It is a list of always craven, 100% cowardly, and usually corrupt DINOs.

• Joe Cunningham (Blue Dog-SC)- 23.46% (R+10)
• Anthony Brindisi (Blue Dog-NY)- 24.69% (R+6)
• Ben McAdams (Blue Dog-UT)- 27.16% (R+13)
• Abigail Spanberger (Blue Dog-VA)-28.40% (R+6)
• Kendra Horn (Blue Dog-OK)- 28.40% (R+10)
• Jared Golden (Blue Dog-ME)- 34.57% (R+2)
• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)- 39.08% (R+12)
• Josh Gottheimer (Blue Dog-NJ)- 39.11% (R+3)
• Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX)- 40.02% (D+9)
• Cindy Axne (New Dem-IA)- 40.74% (R+1)
• Elaine Luria (New Dem-VA)- 41.25% (R+3)
• Abby Finkenauer (secret New Dem-IA)- 41.98% (D+1)

You'll notice that they are voting with the Democrats less than half the time on these crucial roll calls. I've included the PVIs of their districts so you can see how much each one is being pressured by the far right-- from Collin Peterson and Ben McAdams (a lot) to Henry Cuellar and Abby Finkenauer (not one bit).

Many people remember former Orlando Congressman, Alan Grayson as a fervent partisan and they especially remember his iconic Die Quickly-GOP Healthcare speech. But one of the things I always admired most about Grayson was his ability to pass prodigious amounts of legislation with bipartisan support. In fact, the Republicans controlled the House for much of the time Grayson was a member. And he still managed to write and pass more legislation than any other member of that body! I had a long talk with Grayson about this yesterday. He said that he tended to work with people-- regardless of party-- "who gave a shit." If someone cared, he felt there was a way to find some common ground without abandoning any principles or values. This is a small part of what he told me:

On our side the aisle, the political class is resolved to employ focus groups to try to validate meaningless phrases that sound good to them, and then to force-feed them to the electorate through ad-buys that give them their 15%. This resulted in Clinton’s “Stronger Together” motto, which no one understood, much less believed. (And I say that having voted for her, and having wanted her to win.) This sort of tasteless political oatmeal is what makes it hard for ordinary people to identify the Democratic Party with any tangible proposals that might improve their lives, and it creates a vacuum that the other side fills by promising that a Democratic victory would hasten the apocalypse.

But the most flavorless of all this flavorless oatmeal is the abuse of the term “bipartisanship” by, well, people who stand for nothing. Here is a very easy way to judge whether such a sentiment is real or not: has it resulted in any actual legislation? After all, that’s the job of a Member of Congress, according to the Constitution. If you see any actual legislation, then you can argue whether it made the world better or worse, but without that, the term “bipartisanship” is lipless lip service.

In my first term, with the Democrats in charge, I passed the only real bipartisan accomplishment of the 111th Congress, the law to audit the Federal Reserve. In my last two terms, with the Republicans in charge, I passed 121 laws through the House. I also accounted, personally, for ½ of all the amendments passed by the Science Committee, and 1/3 of all the amendments passed by the Foreign Affairs Committee. And EVERY SINGLE ONE of these was “bipartisan”; I couldn’t have passed any of them unless I had GOP votes. Further, in their own ways, every single one of them was progressive. When I passed a law extending mental health benefits to veterans-- after 250,000 of them came back from Afghanistan and Iraq with permanent brain abnormalities you could see with a CAT scan-- that was progressive to me, whatever may have led the GOP to vote for it. That’s real bipartisanship, not the “bipartisanship” that begins and ends with right-wingers calling right-wingers “my esteemed colleague from Whosits.”

Barney Frank had an interesting point to make in this regard-- he constantly reminded others than anonymous polling of Capitol Hill staff named him both the most partisan and the most bipartisan Member of Congress. Or, to put it another way, bipartisanship is judged not by words, but by deeds.

I haven't written much about Jody Hice, a radical Georgia teabagger, since he was first elected to Congress in 2014. In fact, I haven't heard much about him-- until yesterday, when he joined Ted Lieu to co-sponsor a bipartisan bill that's good for Lieu's constituents and good for Hice's constituents and good for the country in general. The transpartisan establishment may not be thrilled with it but it is neither a Republican nor a Democratic bill. The legislation-- the Oversite.gov Authorization Act-- is meant to increase transparency and accountability within the federal government. If passed and signed into law-- presumably by Biden-- it will formally authorize the establishment and maintenance of a website to help the public more easily access reports that have been generated by the independent work of Inspectors General.

In introducing it, Ted said that "Our bill will allow for crucial improvements to be made to Oversight.gov, a central online location for all federal Inspectors General to publish their reports. IGs are critical to rooting out waste, fraud and abuse in our government, and this website will make their findings more accessible to the American people. I am pleased to introduce this bipartisan bill to increase transparency in the IG community."

Hice was obviously proud to let his constituents know he was working in their interest with someone sane. "The inspector general community is on the frontlines in combatting waste, fraud, and abuse across federal agencies on behalf of the American taxpayer. The Oversight.gov Authorization Act is an important step in promoting and protecting the work of inspectors general, enabling the public to view firsthand the need for greater accountability and transparency in our government. This bicameral, bipartisan legislation is a commonsense measure that all of Congress can get behind, and I look forward to working with my colleague Rep. Ted Lieu, as well as Senators Chuck Grassley and Maggie Hassan, in seeing this bill across the finish line."

Previously, Ted and Hice have worked together to safeguard Inspectors General through their bill, the Inspector General Protection Act, which passed the House in July of 2019, to enhance the independence and integrity of IGs. As soon as Trump heard the word "integrity" he sensed the law would be bad for him and told McConnell to shit-can it in the Senate, which he promptly did.

Ted is co-chair of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee, and he has been coming up with much of the messaging that is destroying the House Republicans this cycle. Like Grayson's description of Barney Frank, Ted is very partisan... and very bipartisan at the same time. Confusing? I asked him about it this morning. "I have always believed that people of good will, intelligence, and patriotism can disagree on policy. I think it's important to try to work in a bipartisan way where possible. I drive my staff crazy sometimes, but I am always asking them to find me a Republican co-lead for our legislative ideas. It is much easier to move legislation through the process if you have bipartisan support from the outset. There are some issues upon which I will most likely never agree with my Republican colleagues. But the truth is there are many issues where there is a fair amount of common ground to be reached. I also try not to let disagreements on one issue impact potential partnerships on other issues. Just because I disagree with a Republican colleague on gun safety or abortion doesn't mean I won't work with them on marijuana legalization or government transparency. I will not compromise on my principals-- but I can search for common ground on good public policy. In my view the key to being a good legislator is being able to tell the difference."

Is Trump Having American Citizens Murdered Now?

 

At one of his super-spreader events in Greenville North Carolina on Thursday, a flailing Trump boasted to his people about how federal agents murdered an anti-fascist activist. The implication was that having agents kill a suspect without trial was an example of his own "leadership." He said, probably not even cognizant that there was anything wrong, "We sent in the U.S. Marshals. Took 15 minutes, it was over. We got him." Trump's boast was disgusting-- and a lie. The suspect, Michael Reinoehl, was killed by local officers, not by anyone Trump sent-- apparently in cold blood and without trying to arrest him.

Yesterday, Los Angeles Congressman Ted Lieu, a former prosecutor, urged Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz to open an investigation into whether U.S. Marshals task force officers had legitimate grounds to kill Michael Reinoehl. He suggested Horowitz explore these 5 questions:

• Were the U.S. Marshals given any type of order or suggestion that they kill Mr. Reinoehl without trying to arrest him first?
• Did the President give any orders or suggestions to the U.S. Marshals related to the killing of Mr. Reinoehl? If so, what was that order or suggestion?
• Did the Attorney General give any orders or suggestions to the U.S. Marshals related to the killing of Mr. Reinoehl? If so, what was that order or suggestion?
• Did the U.S. Marshals have legitimate grounds to use deadly force?
• What attempts, if any, were made to first arrest or subdue Mr. Reinoehl?

He reminded Horowitz that "Extrajudicial killings in the U.S. are illegal... Under our Constitution, the federal government cannot deprive a person of his or her life without due process of law, regardless of what crimes they are suspected of committing. The members of the U.S. Marshals’ task force were legally authorized to use deadly force only if they or another person faced an imminent threat from Mr. Reinoehl. Based on both the reporting from the NY Times and the words of Donald Trump, that does not appear to be the case."

Murdered anti-fascist Michael Reinoehl

There Are People In Congress Working On Sustainable Energy And Environmental Justice-- But We Need More Of Them

In its mission statement, Congress' Sustainable Energy & Environment Coalition lays out two overarching goals:

• Advance policies that promote clean energy innovation and domestic manufacturing, develop renewable energy resources, and create good green jobs across the economy and the country.
• Advance polices to address climate change, protect our nation’s clean air, water and natural environment, and promote environmental justice.

There are 67 members-- all Democrats-- who have joined the Caucus. This week, Blue America has been working with their SEEC PAC to help raise last minute campaign contributions for congressional candidates who have been endorsed by both groups, the men and women who will be helping to lead the group's future.

One member, Ted Lieu, was a California state Senator when I first got to know him. At a discussion, someone asked him whey he would want to move away from his life in balmy California to go to the DC snakepit. He immediately focused on what turns out to be the SEEC mission statement. It was all about leaving his two young children a livable world. Yesterday, now-Congressman and now-SEEC member Ted Lieu reminded us that "One of the main reasons I ran for Congress was to work on legislation to address climate change on the national level. But in order to make any meaningful progress, we need to elect more Members of Congress who want to expand sustainable energy and address our climate crisis. That is why I am so grateful that Blue America is partnering with SEEC PAC to help these great candidates."

SEEC was founded in 2009 by now-Governor Jay Inslee (D-WA) at the start of the 111th Congress and is now a key green voice in the Congress. Last Congress, the coalition introduced its Sustainable Infrastructure Proposal and has continued to call for an infrastructure bill that takes bold steps to address climate change. Through its advocacy efforts, SEEC has seen increased funding for clean energy programs at the Department of Energy and the inclusion of water sustainability policy in the Fiscal Year 2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). It also successfully opposed anti-environmental riders in the 2018 Farm Bill and focused early attention on the dangerous health consequences of Trump’s Clean Power Plan replacement. Another California SEEC member, Katie Porter told us today that "The climate crisis demands an all-hands-on-deck approach, and that includes strengthening our research in and use of green technology. We need allies in Congress who will fight for a more sustainable future and invest in the innovative clean energy we need to protect our planet."

Please consider helping elect new members of Congress who have prioritized the SEEC agenda in their campaigns and will be the kinds of allies Porter is talking about. Click on the thermometer on the right for the whole list-- and to contribute to the carefully and doubled-- vetted candidates, like Jon Hoadley, who is taking on Trump enabler and friend of polluters Fred Upton in southwest Michigan. Hoadley noted that "Michigan is the Great Lakes state, but we're still facing a drinking water crisis as a result of corporate pollution. We need to put an end to the large-scale contamination of our water and air we've seen from fossil fuel companies, and take bold action to preserve our climate for future generations."

Electing Kara Eastman to replace Trump puppet Donald Bacon in Omaha is a top priority for both SEEC PAC and Blue America. This morning she told us that "It's incredibly important to have the support of SEEC and Blue America because climate change is the number one national security threat to our country now, and it's the number one moral crisis facing America going forward. In Nebraska, we've fought against the Keystone XL Pipeline and successfully pushed our public power district to move to a carbon neutral plan. Let's turn up the heat on climate change together."

Mike Siegel's campaign has been almost an embodiment of the SEEC mission statement-- cleaning up the environment, ameliorating climate change and working with unions to guarantee good green jobs in the new economy. "I'm honored to have the support of SEEC and Blue America as we build a broad national coalition to combat climate change and build the renewable economy we need," he said this week. "As a Democrat running for Congress in the heart of Texas, I know how important it is that we take bold, courageous steps to address climate change and environmental degradation, even when those steps require difficult conversations with workers and businesses that depend on fossil fuel revenue. The Texas 10th Congressional District is already suffering from the impact of our fossil fuel economy. We have a coal plant in Fayette County that has been polluting the air and water for 40 years; we have widespread fracking operations that release chemicals into our groundwater and methane into our air; we have a Houston region that has suffered five 500-year flood events in five years; and we have Bastrop county, which was devastated by a massive wildfire nine years ago. These natural and unnatural disasters can all be traced to fossil fuel emissions. Even though Texas is built on a fossil fuel economy, we can't put our heads in the sand and pretend that change is not needed. I'm running for Congress to build an unparalleled coalition of unions, environmentalists, ranchers and farmers, progressives and activists of all types, to fight climate change, to create jobs in a renewable economy, and to address the legacy of pollution and environmental injustice. Thank you, SEEC and Blue America for your belief and support, and I look forward to joining with you in the days, months and years ahead, for the good of our planet, and for the good of our nation."

Audrey Denney is taking on Trumpist do-nothing Doug LaMalfa again in the northeast corner of California. She told us she's "honored to have the support of Congress' Sustainable Energy & Environment Coalition! Human induced climate change is already here and we are living through the consequences. We can’t grow cherries in Butte county because there aren’t enough chill hours. Fire season is almost year round and our fires are burning hotter than ever before. In some cases creating their own weather. Through our horrific fires of the last two years my district became the face of this crisis. As evidenced by politicians on both sides of the aisle using our devastation for photo ops. But this district can become the face of the solution. I’m talking about restoring our forests to health so they become carbon sinks not sources. We’re talking about ag policy that equips and trains farmers to use practices that sequester carbon-- that actually turn the dial back on climate change. I cannot wait to get to Congress and work with the members of the SEEC to push this policy agenda forward!


 


UPDATE: Nate McMurray (NY-27)

"Receiving the support from SEEC and Blue America is not just important for my campaign but also for the people of the NY-27. Climate change is the most pressing environmental challenge facing our planet and communities in the U.S. and around the globe are already experiencing its impacts. We feel the impact of increasingly extreme weather quite dramatically in Western New York, the NY-27, where we live alongside not one, but two of the Great Lakes-- Lake Erie and Lake Ontario. So Western New Yorkers see every day, in every season that effects of decades of bad environmental policies. And finally people see that we have an obligation to ourselves, our children, and the states and our neighbor to the north, to take immediate action to address climate change’s threats to our economy, health, and environment. In Congress the NY-27 and I as their representative, will have great partners in SEEC and Blue America in the fight for the region's environmental priorities, like supporting 100% transition to clean energy by 2050, access to clean air and water as well as regionally funded initiatives such as the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Plan 2014, more conservation-focused planning by the Great Lakes' International Joint Commission, and improved Farming and Conservation initiatives. I cannot thank SEEC and Blue America enough for their support and belief in my campaign. We are on the cusp of victory and making a Democratic supermajority in Congress a reality in 2020!"

The Donald Is A Ticking Time Bomb-- But Let's Hope It Isn't A Nuclear one

 

Opposition Research by Nancy Ohanian

Did you watch the "loyalty dinner" scene in Billy Ray's excellent mini-series, The Comey Rule? Writer-director Ray and actor Brendan Gleeson portray Trump as a repulsive mob boss demanding personal loyalty from an very uncomfortable James Comey. Comey made a half-assed attempt to placate Trump but Trump wasn't buying it and it led to Trump's smear campaign against him and eventual humiliating firing.

Something tells me Trump's animus towards Dr. Anthony Fauci is even greater than his hatred for Comey was-- but, for whatever reason, Trump has felt he couldn't fire him before the election. No doubt Fauci will get his walking papers in November.





On Monday Fauci told Jake Tapper that the Trump campaign should stop running a misleading ad that implies Fauci:

a- thinks Trump did a good job on the pandemic
b- is endorsing or even voting for Trump

Neither a nor b is true and Fauci said he thinks "it’s really unfortunate and really disappointing that they did that. It is so clear that I am not a political person and I have never either directly or indirectly endorsed a political candidate. To take a completely out-of-context statement and put it in what is obviously a political campaign ad, I thought, was really very disappointing."

Here's the deceitful ad in question, which Trump refuses to stop running, even though it has been debunked as completely false and even though Fauci doesn't want to be associated with Trump's campaign:





Fauci's official statement to the media: "The comments attributed to me without my permission in the GOP campaign ad were taken out of context from a broad statement I made months ago about the efforts of federal public health officials."

Fauci replied to a question from Tapper about the safety of Trump's super-spreader campaign events. More of what Trump will absolutely see as disloyalty to himself: "We know that is asking for trouble when you do that. We’ve seen that when you have situations of congregate settings where there are a lot of people without masks, the data speak for themselves. And now is even more so a worse time to do that... It's going in the wrong direction right now, so if there's anything we should be doing, we should be doubling down in implementing the public health measures that we've been talking about for so long, which are keeping a distance, no crowds wearing masks, washing hands doing things outside as opposed to inside, in order to get those numbers down... We’re entering into the cooler months of the fall and ultimately the cold months of the winter and that's just a recipe of a real problem. If we don't get things under control before we get into that seasonal challenge."

And Fauci's not the only insider unhappy with the way things are going pandemic-wise. A startling-- but not unpredictable-- NY Times piece yesterday, Trump’s Virus Treatment Revives Questions About Unchecked Nuclear Authority. This is something Ted Lieu has been talking about for several years because, as David Sanger and William Broad reported "Even before the president was given mood-altering drugs, there was a movement to end the commander in chief’s sole authority to launch nuclear weapons." Doctors say the steroids he's on can produce delusions, euphoria, bursts of energy "and even a sense of invulnerability."

Trump’s long rants and seemingly erratic behavior last week-- which some doctors believe might have been fueled by his use of dexamethasone, a steroid, to treat Covid-19-- renewed a long-simmering debate among national security experts about whether it is time to retire one of the early inventions of the Cold War: the unchecked authority of the president to launch nuclear weapons.

Mr. Trump has publicly threatened the use of those weapons only once in his presidency, during his first collision with North Korea in 2017. But it was his decision not to invoke the 25th Amendment and turn control over to Vice President Mike Pence last week that has prompted concern inside and outside the government.

Among those who have long argued for the need to rethink presidents’ “sole authority” powers are former Defense Secretary William J. Perry, considered the dean of American nuclear strategists, who has cited the fragility of a nuclear-weapons control chain and the fear that it can be subject to errors of judgment or failure to ask the right questions under the pressure of a warning of an incoming attack.

A Culture Of Violence by Nancy Ohanian

 

Mr. Trump’s critics have long questioned whether his unpredictable statements and contradictions pose a nuclear danger. But the concerns raised last week were somewhat different: whether a president taking mood-altering drugs could determine whether a nuclear alert was a false alarm.

...Peter D. Zimmerman, a physicist and former government arms scientist, said few things better illustrated the confused nature of the American effort to prevent a single individual from launching a nuclear strike than the “two-man rule” in nuclear silos, submarines, bombers and the nation’s coast-to-coast atomic complex.

The rule requires the presence of two authorized people for any step involving access to the armaments or the launching of a nuclear strike. “No unaccompanied person ever approaches a nuclear weapon,” Dr. Zimmerman wrote in a 2017 opinion essay. “It’s a basic precaution against theft, misuse or sabotage.”

But it does not apply to the commander in chief, whether in the Oval Office or at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.

A president could misjudge the situation or become impulsive, Dr. Zimmerman noted in an interview. “And the consequences,” he said, “would be horrendous.”

I asked Ted Lieu about the bill he introduced several times seeking to deal with this problem before it becomes a catastrophe. "No one should have the sole authority to start a nuclear war-- least of all Donald Trump," he told me this morning. "That is why Senator Ed Markey and I have introduced the 'Restricting First Use of Nuclear Weapons Act' for the past three congressional terms. We believe that a nuclear first strike constitutes an act of war and thus requires congressional authorization. It is important to note that our legislation does not prevent a president from responding to a nuclear threat in kind-- it just prevents a president from unilaterally starting a nuclear war. There are a myriad of risks associated with not having clear restrictions on a nuclear first strike. There is a risk of miscalculation or misunderstanding escalating to an all-out nuclear war. And there is also the risk that a president becomes completely unhinged and orders a nuclear strike on a whim. We all recall hearing the terrifying stories of the end of the Nixon presidency. I believed in 2016 what I still believe now: launching a weapon that has the power to kill millions of people is an obvious act of war. Regardless of who sits in the Oval Office, Congress has the constitutional duty to decide when a nuclear first strike is warranted."

I Doubt The Tax Returns Will Lose Him Any Votes, But They May Send Him To Prison-- And Wouldn't You Prefer That Anyway?

 

Lawless Zone by Nancy Ohanian

Will the NY Times blockbuster from Sunday night matter election-wise. It will matter to some people, but those people have by and large already decided they're not voting for Trump. Maybe there are some Republican businessmen and women who dutifully pay their taxes and will resent Trump enough to sit out election day-- though I wouldn't bet on that being too many. At best the stories that will emanate from him being a tax swindler will knock Trump off his game and keep him rattled and on the defensive.

In his Bloomberg News oped yesterday, Trump's Taxes Show He's a National Security Threat, Timothy O'Brien raised something more important that how Trump's base will react. "What trade-offs," he asked, "would a president with this level of indebtedness be willing to make to save face? And few people know as much about the tax-swindling nature of Donald than O'Brien who had tangled with him in and out of court for years. "Step away from the tragicomic tawdriness and grift that the tax returns define," wrote O'Brien, "however, and focus on what they reveal about Trump as the most powerful man in the world and occupant of the Oval Office. Due to his indebtedness, his reliance on income from overseas and his refusal to authentically distance himself from his hodgepodge of business, Trump represents a profound national security threat-- a threat that will only escalate if he’s re-elected. The tax returns also show the extent to which Trump has repeatedly betrayed the interests of many of the average Americans who elected him and remain his most loyal supporters."

According to The Times, Trump has about $421 million in debts which he has personally guaranteed and which are coming due over the next several years. This is consistent with earlier reporting about how much debt he carries, a chunk of which could be gleaned from the personal financial disclosures he is required to file with the federal government. But Trump’s overall indebtedness is greater than the Times tally, I believe.

...Dan Alexander, a senior editor at Forbes, has been covering Trump’s business interests since 2016 and has a new book out about the president’s financial conflicts of interest, White House Inc. Alexander, in a helpful tally he shared Sunday evening, estimates Trump’s total indebtedness to be about $1.1 billion...

Trump has been bloviating about being worth $10 billion ever since he entered the 2016 presidential race, a figure that simply isn’t true. He’s worth a fraction of that amount, and the larger his indebtedness becomes, the more strain it puts on his assets. The Covid-19 pandemic has taken a particularly brutal toll on the sectors in which the Trump Organization operates-- real estate, travel and leisure. If Trump is unable to meet his debt payments, he’s either going to have to sell assets or get bailed out by a friend with funds. Trump has never liked to sell anything, even when it’s hemorrhaging money. So if he’s tempted to save himself by getting a handout, that makes him a mark.

...If Vladimir Putin, for example, can backchannel a loan or a handout to the president, how hard is Trump going to be on Russia? Not that we should worry about Trump’s relationship with Putin. That’s just a hypothetical question.

And then there's Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the Emirates, Israel, China, Brazil, the Philippines... and number of countries run by unscrupulous politicians who Trump would be more than willing to take bribes from. Will it change votes? Nah, but, hey, how bad to you want to see that slob rotting in prison?





Yesterday, Morris Pearl, the Chair of the Patriotic Millionaires and a former managing director of BlackRock, Inc. wrote that "It seems obvious that Trump has committed some amount of criminal tax evasion, but that's not the biggest issue here. The real problem is a system that provides such absurd loopholes to the ultra-wealthy in the first place, and a deliberately underfunded IRS that lacks the capacity to properly prosecute rich people's criminal tax evasion. Trump's case may be particularly egregious, but he's far from unique. This is just evidence of the rot in our tax system, which is designed to allow rich people to avoid paying their fair share. This has been the case for decades, but the tax code is even more skewed in favor of the rich and powerful after Trump was able to rewrite the entire tax code to his liking in 2017 with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The American people should be angry about President Trump's tax evasion, but that's not all. They should be much more angry about how much of what Trump did is legal. The American people should be more angry about how many other millionaires and billionaires are able to avoid supporting the country that made them rich in the first place. Most of all, the American people should be pissed off about the fact that instead of offering them health care, or affordable childcare, or financial support during a pandemic, their government instead prioritizes protecting the wealth of the rich, powerful, and selfish."


This morning, Ted Lieu (D-CA), co-chair of the of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee, reminded me that "When Trump announced that he was running for President he said he would run the government like a business. Unfortunately, he meant a Trump business. Now we know why he was so intent on not releasing his tax returns. It has now come to light that Trump has grossly mismanaged his business and personal finances the same way he has mismanaged our government. He has also paid virtually no federal income tax over the past 15 years, which makes it extra rich when he insults hard working immigrants-- many of whom have contributed far more to this country than Trump ever will. But perhaps the most important aspect of this is the implications for our national security. Trump's massive debt makes him a security liability. Who exactly does he owe more than $400 million to?"

Matt Cartwright Is A Strong Progressive In A District Trump Won

In 2012, Matt Cartwright waged a strong primary campaign against reactionary Blue Dog Tim Holden (one of the "Democrats" who joined with the GOP to vote against ObamaCare). Hoyer and Pelosi warned that a progressive like Cartwright could not win that red a seat in northeast Pennsylvania. Matt was one of Blue America's top candidates that year and we were in the trenches with him, while Hoyer ran around the district with a pack of lobbyists begging "people" to vote for Holden, a pro-frack-maniac. Matt won-- by a lot: 57.1% to 42.9% and then went on to beat the Republican Hoyer and Pelosi said he couldn't do by even more: 161,393 (60.3%) to 106,208 (39.7%). Matt then joined the Congressional Progressive Caucus and worked his way up to the caucus' whip. He was immediately appointed vice chair of the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition Caucus. Even before the election, he endorsed marriage equality, a position that the DCCC recommended that swing district Democrats stay away from. since then, he's had a 100% voting record from the Human Rights Campaign.

This week, Matt told me that when he first ran for Congress, "I promised to be a Roosevelt Democrat-- someone who stands up for the ordinary working people of the United States, for their safety, their economic security, their access to healthcare, their clean air and water, and their civil rights. I promised to be someone who isn’t afraid to take on what FDR called the 'economic royalists,' the powerful, the moneyed, and the connected. Drawing on the words of the late Paul Wellstone, I ran as a proud member of the 'Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.' It was my belief that, as Democrats, we do not ever need to forfeited these principles, even in so-called difficult districts.I have never abandoned these values, or hidden them, and I believe my voting record reflects that. My congressional story is a demonstration that when we have the courage of our convictions, and stand for them in a forthright manner, we can win districts like mine with a consistently progressive message. If it means working a little harder, we’re not afraid of that."

He was reelected in 2014 and in 2016, while Trump won his district by 10 points, Matt won by 7.5 points. In 2018 the GOP threw a self-funding Wall Street crook up against him (who spent $1,687,182 of his own money on the race) and, even with the district gerrymandered against him, he beat the Republican by over 9 points.

This year, the GOP has a fringe nut, Jim Bognet, who won the crowded Republican primary on one message: claiming he is the Trump candidate. Lately, as Trump's approval continues to sink in northeast Pennsylvania, Bognet is trying to back away from his Trump-adhesion.

This year, Matt's district is rated a "toss up." A few days ago Ted Lieu called me and asked if Blue America could help raise campaign funds for Matt, who he told me needs some help to overcome the Republican onslaught. Matt is their #1 target among House incumbents.

Ted told me that he and Matt are co-chairs of the House Democratic Policy and Communications Committee, and that he had gotten to know him well. "He is an amazing Member of Congress who has advanced strong progressive values in a district that Trump won by 10 points," said Lieu. "Matt has shown remarkable courage, determination and grit. He is in a tough race again and we must bring him back to Congress. I hope you can help Matt. And as a bonus, every Democratic voter that Matt turns out in his district is also very likely to vote for Biden over Trump in the crucial swing state of Pennsylvania."

Another strong and activist Democrat who Matt serves with in the House, Jamie Raskin (D-MD), wants us to let DWT readers that, in his words, "Matt Cartwright is the lucid, passionate and unmistakable voice in Congress of every victim of asbestos poisoning, every community fighting toxic contamination of their water, and every citizen fighting for his or her rights against big money, big business and big government.  If you give a damn about the survival of democracy in America, do something right now to keep Matt Cartwright in Congress."

Please consider making a contribution to Matt Cartwright's campaign. Along with Ted Lieu and Jamie Raskin, he's one of only an even dozen incumbents we've endorsed this year. The other men and women we've endorsed are in blue districts. Matt's PVI is rated R+1.

Trump Blatantly Urges His Supporters In North Carolina To Commit A Felony By Voting Twice

Today, presidential voting kicked off and the first state to send out absentee ballot was North Carolina. Much to Trump's chagrin, 618,000 requested ballots went out today that's 16 times the number the state sent out at the same time four years ago. AP reported that "the requests came overwhelmingly from Democratic and independent voters, a reflection of a new partisan divide over mail voting... Democrats requested more than 326,000 ballots, and independents 192,000, while only 92,000 were sought by Republicans. Voters in the state can continue to request the ballots up until Oct. 27." Two days earlier, on Wednesday evening, Fox News released a new poll that shows Biden leading Trump-- albeit narrowly-- among likely voters in North Carolina by 4 points. This may have been depressing for Trump, who desperately needs North Carolina's 15 electoral votes if he's to have any hope at all of eking out any kind of path to victory in November.

Hours earlier, Rep Jamie Raskin (D-MD), in reference to Trump, told his own supporters that there is a "massive assault on the Post Office to sabotage the election" and that "We will have our hands full defending a November victory against every trick in the fascist playbook...These brutal times are trying to our souls." Maybe Trump saw it because he almost immediately reached for one of his most blatant proposals to his fans to help him sabotage the election yet.

Lauren Egan and Pete Williams of NBC News reported that while Stumping in North Carolina Trumo just urged his supporters to vote twice-- once by mail and once in person. That's illegal and I assume urging people to do so is also illegal. Egan and Williams noted that this is an escalation of "his attempts to cast confusion and doubt on the validity of the result."

Trump: "So let them send it in and let them go vote, and if their system's as good as they say it is, then obviously they won't be able to vote. If it isn't tabulated, they'll be able to vote... If it's as good as they say it is, then obviously they won't be able to vote. If it isn't tabulated, they'll be able to vote. So that's the way it is. And that's what they should do."

Asked about Trump's comments during an interview later Wednesday on CNN, Attorney General William Barr argued that a 2005 bipartisan report on election reform found that mail-in voting is "fraught with the risk of fraud and coercion."

Asked why there have been no findings, however, of widespread fraud, Barr responded, "We haven't had the kind of widespread use of mail-in ballots that's being proposed."

Barr said he was unaware of the specific laws in North Carolina, and he did not respond directly to questions about Trump's earlier comments.

Trump made similar claims about mail-in ballots during his 2016 campaign, essentially encouraging his supporters to commit voter fraud.

While the House House scurried to explain that Trump didn't actually mean what he said and wasn't really urging his supporters in North Carolina to break any laws, he flew off to Pennsylvania, where he urged supporters there to also vote twice. "Sign your mail-in ballot, OK? You sign it and send it in and then you have to follow it. And if on Election Day or early voting, that is not tabulated and counted, you go vote. And if for some reason after that-- it shouldn’t take that long-- they’re not going to be able to tabulate it because you would have voted. But you have to make sure your vote counts, because the only way they are going to be able to beat us is by doing that kind of stuff."

We began with Jamie Raskin-- and we'll end with him as well. "Trump’s open-air invitation to his supporters to vote twice," he told me yesterday, "is a plan for massive criminal voter fraud and chaos at the polls to justify other offenses against American democracy. Every elected official in America must denounce this criminal solicitation by the President or be considered complicit by history in this conspiracy against our government and Constitution."

California Is Burning-- But Trump Told FEMA Not To Help Because Not Enough Californians Voted For Him In 2016

There are dozens of wildfires raging across northern California right now-- primarily in Napa, Sonoma, Solano, Lake and Yolo counties. Thousands of people have been evacuated from their homes. At least 5 people, including 2 first responders, are dead. During his Convention segment Thursday night, Gavin Newsom said "If you are in denial about climate change, come to California." Led by Ted Lieu, the majority of California's congressional delegation has asked Department of Homeland Security Inspector General Joseph Cuffari to open an investigation into allegations-- watch the video from the former Department of Homeland Security chief of staff below-- that the federal government improperly denied or delayed aid to California wildfire victims. The letter follows allegations from a former Department of Homeland Security official that President Trump ordered FEMA to deny assistance to Californians because of the political demographics of the state. Taylor said that on a phone call with FEMA, Trump told them "to cut off the money and no longer give individual assistance to California. He told us to stop giving money to people whose houses had burned down from a wildfire because he was so rageful that people in the state of California didn't support him."





Trump has lost whatever bit of sanity he ever had. Although only 31.6% of Californians voted for him, that's still 4,483,810 people-- more voters than from any other states other than Texas and Florida. And most of the worst devastation from the fires were in Republican areas in the northeast corner of the state, solidly Republican CA-01, where a notorious Trump apologist and enabler, Doug LaMalfa is the congressman.

Ted Lieu's letter to Cuffari asks 4 questions all Californians should want to hear answered:

• Did the President or DHS officials improperly influence the issuance of any fire management assistance grant?
• Did the President or DHS officials improperly delay granting or deny any requests for an emergency or major disaster declaration?
• Did the President or DHS officials attempt to revoke or delay the distribution of any assistance that had already been granted to California fire victims?
• Did the President or DHS officials improperly deny requests from the State of California to adjust state and local cost share requirements associated with debris removal and emergency protective measures assistance?

Lieu asked every member of the California delegation to sign onto his letter. Most did-- but not a single Republican did. They rejected it out of hand. Kevin McCarthy, Devin Nunes, Ken Calvert, Tom McClintock, Paul Cook, Mike Garcia and, most shockingly, Doug LaMalfa all showed they would rather stand with Trump politically than stand with their own constituents in a life or death situation. California has 53 House members but just 7 are Republicans. In a justice world, there wouldn't be single California Republican left in Congress.

Liam O'Mara is a history professor in Riverside County running for the last southern California seat the GOP has managed to cling onto. Yesterday, after reading Lieu's letter-- and seeing Ken Calvert wasn't a signatory-- O'Mara noted that "Calvert is a hyper-partisan creature, afraid to buck this president and act in the interests of Californians. His spinelessness is part of the reason he's never chaired a committee and authored so little legislation-- he's afraid to stand out from the crowd. Our 'Representative' will never have the courage to challenge his own party leadership, even when doing so is transparently in the interests of his constituents and his home state. Failing to speak up as Californians die and their houses are destroyed is unconscionable and almost criminally negligent."

There's another corrosive "Devin" in the Central Valley-- it's a popular name among Republicans-- Devon Mathis of Tulare County, widely considered one of the California legislatures very worst members. His opponent is a young progressive first-time candidate, Drew Phelps, who told us that "Once again, California is faced with an unprecedented wildfire season. Meanwhile, to find out recently that the federal administration may have withheld past wildfire aid is extremely alarming. While our state leaders and the federal administration can bicker over policy differences, putting human lives at stake over those differences is never acceptable and should not be tolerated."

Jackie Fielder is running for California Assembly also, but in a November contest that pits her-- a staunch progressive-- against another Democrat, Scott Wiener, a corporate shill and conservative lackey of special interests. Jackie told me yesterday that "Californians affected by the wildfires are Americans, too. Whether the President likes it or not, he is their president. It’s disgusting he would let politics get in the way of providing relief for people who are being asked to leave their homes with nothing but the clothes on their backs in the middle of the night. We simply don’t have enough resources to fight these fires and save lives."

Ted Lieu For Senate

Ted Lieu by Nancy Ohanian

There are a multitude of reasons why the up-and-coming Congressman representing California’s 33rd Congressional District would make an excellent choice to serve as the next junior Senator from California when Kamala Harris is elected vice president in November. Ted Lieu has an amazing life story, is insanely smart and hardworking, and understands the true meaning of public service. And most importantly, Ted is a leader who knows how to get things done.

Ted is a man of conscience and compassion and he has never lost touch with where he came from. His story begins much like your story, or your parents’ story, or your grandparents’ story. It is the quintessential American story. Ted is an immigrant whose family moved to the United States looking to achieve the American dream-- and by every measure they succeeded. Ted’s family went from being poor and not speaking English well to opening several gift stores where Ted and his brother would help with the family’s small business. Ted attended Stanford University, where he earned undergraduate degrees in Computer Science and Political Science, and then Georgetown University, where he received his law degree magna cum laude after serving as Editor-in-Chief of the law review. Ted decided to give back to the amazing country that had given him and his family so many opportunities by joining the United States Air Force. After serving on active duty for four years in the JAG Corps, Ted wanted to continue to serve his country and joined the Reserves, where he still serves as a Colonel.

Ted has served in public office at the city, state, and now national level. He knows how to get things done in government. Prior to being elected to Congress in 2014, Ted served in the California State Assembly and Senate. He authored landmark legislation regulating the subprime mortgage industry; a first-in-the-nation ban on gay conversion therapy for children; and a first-in-the-nation ban on the use of tanning beds for minors. Ted also co-authored California’s landmark Global Warming Solutions Act.

In Congress, Ted has been a leader on a wide range of issues from the major challenges of our day like climate change and healthcare to lesser covered (but still important) topics like cyber security and nuclear weapons policy. The first bill Ted introduced after coming to Congress was the Climate Solutions Act, which aims to make California’s ground-breaking renewable energy goals and climate emissions reduction targets a national model. As one of only four computer science majors currently serving in Congress, Ted is frequently sought out for his insight on technology and innovation matters including cybersecurity, cloud computing and innovation as well as the sharing and creative economy. He has also introduced legislation to prioritize consumer safety in technologically-advanced cars as well as legislation that would ensure law enforcement and tech companies protect consumer privacy. Ted has also been a leader in Congress against ethnic and racial profiling, as well as discrimination against the LGBT community. His bill to ban so-called conversion therapy is modeled off of his successful legislation in California. On foreign policy and national security, Ted believes we are stronger when we use all elements of national power. Ted worked with Ed Markey in the Senate to introduce legislation to limit the President’s (any president’s) power to unilaterally use nuclear weapons. And has been speaking out against the US military support for the conflict in Yemen for years, even when it was harder to do during the Obama Administration.

But Ted Lieu is so much more than just the list of his accomplishments. He possesses those intangible qualities that make him a pragmatic and effective leader. When looking at Ted’s political career the adage attributed to Thomas Jefferson comes to mind: "In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." Ted knows how to work with his colleagues from across the political spectrum to deliver results when possible. Since coming to Congress, at least 15 pieces of legislation sponsored by Ted have been signed into law-- despite either serving in the minority or during a Republican Administration. He knows how to swim with the current when it can get things done. He also knows how to stand like a rock when the moment calls for that. Ted is not afraid to stand up to bullies like Trump-- and he has the Twitter followers to prove it. He has fought to hold the Trump Administration accountable at every turn over the past three plus years. As a Member of the House Judiciary Committee, Ted was a leader during the impeachment process, pointing out the obvious abuse of power committed by the President.





Throughout his three terms in the House of Representatives, Ted has earned the respect of his colleagues. In his first term, Ted was chosen by his classmates to serve as the President of their Freshman class. Last Congress he was an incredibly engaged and effective Vice Chair at the DCCC, doing his part to help support the 2018 Democratic wave. And this term he was elected by his Democratic Colleagues to serve as a Co-Chair of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee, making him one of about a dozen House Democrats to serve in Leadership. (Fun fact: Only Speaker Pelosi received more votes than Ted during the caucus elections, and she ran unopposed!) He has used this position to help hone the Democratic message heading into 2020.

Ted is also the last person who will talk about his qualifications to be the next Senator from California. When I asked him if he would be interested in the possible Senate vacancy, he said there is too much work to be done to spend time thinking about that. He then went on to list half a dozen things he’s working on right now for our nation and his district: ensuring adequate national testing for COVID-19, saving the US Postal Service, preventing voter suppression, passing the next economic recovery package being negotiated in Congress, working to elect Democrats to the House and Senate, and of course making sure Donald Trump is a one term president. Washington is full of politicians projecting false humility. It is downright refreshing to talk to one who is a genuinely humble public servant. We should-- Gavin Newsom should-- send him to the Senate to continue his service.

Trump Is Blocking A Pandemic Relief Package To Prevent Congress From Keeping The Post Office Alive

On Wednesday, Trump, lying, tried stampeding Congress and bending it to his will by declaring there won't be a pandemic relief package. The Washington Post reported that " A new attempt to restart economic relief negotiations between the White House and Democrats ended just minutes after it began on Wednesday, with President Trump appearing to cast doubt on the whole process by announcing a deal is "not going to happen." The sociopath in the White House said "The bill’s not going to happen because they don’t even want to talk about it, because we can’t give them the kind of ridiculous things that they want that have nothing to do with the China virus."

The Reuters story made it clear what he's up to: trying to wreck the U.S. Post office in the hope of being more easily able to steal the election in November. Patricia Zengerle and David Morgan reported that on Thursday he said "his team was rejecting Democrats’ bid to include funds for the U.S. Postal Service and to shore up election infrastructure in a new coronavirus relief bill, as he vowed to block money to facilitate mail-in voting. Señor Trumpanzee: "The items are the post office and the $3.5 billion for mail-in voting. If we don’t make the deal, that means they can’t have the money, that means they can’t have universal mail-in voting. It just can’t happen." Zengerle and Morgan reminded their readers that "Roughly one in four U.S. voters cast their ballots by mail in 2016, and Trump himself has voted by mail. But Trump and his fellow Republicans have criticized state efforts to make voting by mail more widely available, saying without evidence it could lead to widespread fraud. Election exerts say mail voting is as secure as any other method."

Pelosi said any coronavirus relief bill should include billions of dollars to protect not just Americans’ right to vote but also essential services, like mailing prescription medicines, during the pandemic.

“You would think they’d have a little sensitivity, but so obsessed are they to undermine absentee voting that this is their connection there,” Pelosi told reporters. “So the president says he’s not putting up any money for absentee voting and he’s not putting up any money for the Postal Service, undermining the health of our democracy.”

...New Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who has donated $2.7 million to Trump and his fellow Republicans since 2017, has ordered operational changes and a clampdown on overtime in a bid to fix the financially troubled Postal Service, which reported a net loss of $2.2 billion in the last quarter.

Cost-cutting measures put in place by DeJoy have led to mail delays across the country, raising concerns that they could complicate mail-based voting. State election officials have scrambled to expand mail-voting capacity as experts say the pandemic could prompt up to half of all U.S. voters to cast their ballots by mail.

The Postal Service in recent months has encouraged election officials to send their ballots using regular first-class mail, rather than the cheaper and slower bulk mail rate that many states use, to ensure ballots are delivered in a timely manner.

In the past, the Postal Service has generally treated all election and political mail as if it were first-class, the service’s internal watchdog said in a 2019 report. That has caused some Democrats to accuse DeJoy of trying to undermine mail-in voting.

GOP sleaze-bags Steven Mnuchin and Mark Meadows are leading the charge for Trump. Lisa Mascaro reported for AP that "With talks stalemated, Trump has resorted to bypassing Congress, issuing the executive actions that Meadows warned would come if the White House failed to reach a deal. The president’s orders for jobless aid and other actions are only expected provide modest relief to some 20 million Americans at risk of eviction and even more who are out of work, halving unemployment assistance to $300 a week. On a conference call with Republican senators, Meadows and Mnuchin left the impression there are no new talks scheduled with Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi."

CNN went right to the point: Trump "opposes much-needed funding for the United States Postal Service because he doesn't want to see it used for mail-in voting this November. By directly linking USPS funding to mail-in voting, Trump is fueling allegations that he is trying to manipulate the postal system for political gain. The pandemic has led to record-shattering levels of voting-by-mail, but Trump has tried to restrict the voting method because he says it will hurt his re-election and Republicans across the board."

Biden's campaign manager, Andrew Bates: "The President of the United States is sabotaging a basic service that hundreds of millions of people rely upon, cutting a critical lifeline for rural economies and for delivery of medicines, because he wants to deprive Americans of their fundamental right to vote safely during the most catastrophic public health crisis in over 100 years."

This is a highly unpopular stance by Trump and Democratic congressional candidates are increasingly using it to beat up on the Trump enablers they're running against. Few members have been more slavishly devoted to Trump than Omaha's Donald Bacon and progressive Democrat Kara Eastman took him to task yesterday for his refusal to denounce Trump's efforts at sabotaging the post office (and the election). She noted that The US Postal Service employs over 600,000 Americans, including almost 100,000 veterans and that people of color comprise 40% of the USPS workforce. "Congressman Bacon, this continued attack on the Postal Service is undermining workers and serving to promote voter suppression," Eastman said. "The US Postal Service is an American institution, protected by the Constitution. Donald Trump and Republican politicians like Don Bacon have been trying to undermine it for years and are now sabotaging it to rig the election. This attack on the USPS is an attack on American service and values. It’s time for Bacon to stand up to his party and stop these attacks on one of our most basic and fundamental institutions."

"We cannot allow this administration to sabotage the Post Office so they can cheat the election. Folks across the nine counties of the Texas 10th district need the Post Office to safely vote by mail, get prescription medications delivered, or run their small business," said Mike Siegel, a public school teacher turned civil rights attorney running in the gerrymandered central Texas district to unseat Republican corporate crony Michael McCaul, an unabashed Trumpist. "My opponent has taken over $50,000 from corporate PACs with a direct interest in gutting the post office. I am not taking a dime of corporate PAC money."


Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) sits on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, where he serves as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties and is on 2 other subcommittees-- the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus and the Subcommittee on Government Operations, which is where all the action is on the Republican Party play to destroy the post office. "The GOP attack on the Post Office," he told me today, "is definitely a sinister attack on the 2020 Election itself and we must do everything we can to stop it. But it’s also more broadly an effort to kill American democracy. The Post Office has been a central crossroads and symbol of American communications, culture, and political community from the beginning of the Republic. In the name of our first postmaster Benjamin Franklin and all the other great Americans who worked for the Post Office, including Abraham Lincoln and Harry Truman, we must take down the campaign to destroy the Post Office. This is the struggle of our lifetime."

Southern California congressman and realist Ted Lieu wasn't sugar-coating the dire nature of this disaster. He told me today that "This election is too important for me to promise things to make you feel better but won’t actually happen. The stark truth is the House cannot adequately fund the Post Office without the consent of Trump. The only option is a veto override with the Republican controlled Senate. That is not going to happen. That means our only solution is to empower the voters. We need you to spread the word that if people are going to vote by mail, they need to mail their ballot at least 10 mailing days out from Nov 3, which would be Oct 22. That’s how we win."

Adam Christensen is the progressive Democrat trying to flip Ted Yoho's north-central Florida district blue. Much of that district is rural and dependent on the post office. "This attack on one of governments best run and organized agencies," he told me, "is an attack on rural America. It is an attack on small business owners and those that rely on USPS everyday for shipping. It is an attack on our towns and our neighbors who are tired of paying outrageous fees for basic services. Attempting to destroy good paying jobs in our community and replace them with corporate monopolies is what has killed our town centers for the last 30 years. The Republican party is dying but it appears that they want to finalize the destruction of the middle class on their way out."