Republican Civil War Roils Iowa House Race-- Bad News For Boehner-Buddy Tom Latham

Another crackpot teabagger wants to go to Congress

The GOP civil war is ravaging the party in Iowa, mostly because of the half dozen or more Republicans vying for the U.S. Senate nomination (and the near certainty of being beaten by Democrat Bruce Braley next November). But now the bloody fraternal warfare has come to the 3rd CD, the southwest part of the state from Council Bluffs to Des Moines. All of Des Moines. Obama won this district in 2008 (52-46%) and again last year (51-47%). The PVI is exactly zero and in last year's incumbent vs incumbent battle, Establishment Republican Tom Latham beat distrusted Blue Dog Leonard Boswell 52-44%. There are 16 counties in the district and Latham beat Boswell in 14-- all but tiny Adams County and massive Polk County (Des Moines itself). His 49-47% win over Latham in Polk wasn't enough to make up for losing everywhere else, including huge loses in Dallas, Pottawattamie and Warren counties, the 3 other big ones.

Latham, who was first elected in 1994, is the dean of the state's House delegation. He's also a 100% Boehner crony and sits on the Appropriations committee where he's chairman of the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and a senior member of the Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration. He and Boehner are joined at the hip so this cycle, instead of just having to face a sketchy Blue Dog, he's facing an admired Democratic woman, Staci Appel, and and mad dog teabagger, Joe Grandanette, a gym teacher-- think back to your own. Mine was a 'yard who flunked Ken because someone with a similar last name (Fiore instead of Furie) used to cut classes and prevented the smartest guy in the high school from getting accepted into Harvard (which had already recruited him!) and forced him to go to Dartmouth (which is filled with Republicans).

“The residents of Iowa’s 3rd Congressional District need someone who will represent them and not Washington, D.C., Republicans,” Grandanette said in a prepared statement. “Tom Latham voted the same way Leonard Boswell would’ve voted had he still been in Congress on the so-called debt compromise. I’m offering a bold alternative to the typical pale pastel offered by todays GOP.”

…“When Tom Latham first ran for Congress he signed the Contract With America,” Grandanette said. “One of the 10 principles of that contract included something called the Citizen Legislator Act that wouldve limited Congressman to 12 years in office. Tom Latham is still running for Congress 20 years later. Thats Washington, D.C., math, not Iowa math.”

…“I am running for the senior citizens and the children so they have a voice in Washington,” Grandanette said. “The budget crisis is crippling our cities, our states and our nation. Everyone has a budget and Washington needs a budget now.”

Grandanette last ran for the Iowa House in 2004. He won his primary and lost in the general election.

Grandanette said he will establish a task force to find solutions to address black unemployment, entitlement corruption, gang involvement with youth, Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement, and child abuse.

Can Grandanette beat Latham in the primary? Probably not… but he can weaken him enough to help Staci Appel beat him in the general election next year.

Will Rural Chickens Come Home To Roost For The GOP Nov. 6?

Bye-bye Iowa?

As you know, the DCCC gave Boehner a free pass to reelection-- they made sure he would have no opponent this year-- and he's spending campaign season getting drunk with lobbyists raising money for vulnerable Republicans and campaigning in their districts (since he has no need to be back in his own). This week he was in Iowa begging voters to return one of his closest cronies, 8 term conservative shithead Tom Latham, who's in a tight incumbent vs incumbent match-up with Blue Dog Leonard Boswell (also a shithead). Latham is a straight down the line Establishment Republican, a member of the crooked Appropriations Committee and a member of that committee's Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration. It's how he brings home the bacon for his constituents. But it's what could cost him his career in two and a half weeks.

Iowans are flipping out that Boehner and Cantor refused to even bring the Farm Bill, which has overwhelming bipartisan support, up for a vote before adjourning Congress. Boehner and Cantor decided to gamble that causing pain in rural America would hurt Obama's presidential chances more than it would damage Republican congressional incumbents. They may have miscalculated. [A new poll out this morning, for example, shows Obama with a strong 51-43% lead in Iowa.] Everyone knows it was Cantor bottling up the bill and desperate Republicans, including Latham, are publicly blaming him. Latham claims "Boehner is not the problem... Eric Cantor is the one who controls floor activity.” The farm bill has passed the House Agriculture Committee and has passed the full Senate but has been hanging in limbo ever since and whether you blame Cantor or Boehner or both, voters in farm states-- and farm districts everywhere-- know the problems they're having now are the fault of the GOP leadership. Here's a letter Dick Durbin (D-IL) sent to a farm district newspaper in Illinois, explaining the problem.

Since we can’t make it rain, the single most important thing Congress can do to assist producers impacted by this year’s drought is pass a farm bill. Most farmers will tell you they can survive one bad year, but right now farmers can’t plan for future years. Nearly three months ago the Senate passed a full five-year farm bill with overwhelming bipartisan support. It would reauthorize several expired disaster programs, extend several other programs to assist fruit and vegetable growers and dairy producers and expand crop insurance coverage. The Senate farm bill would also provide farmers with long term certainty in farm policy that will allow to plan out their recovery from this drought while still reducing the deficit by $23 billion. Unfortunately, the House won’t even bring a farm bill measure to the floor for debate. Instead, they offered an extension of a few disaster programs that do little to help Illinois farmers and producers that have struggled through this drought. Nearly 63 percent of the country is experiencing some level of drought. Every county in Illinois has been declared a disaster by USDA.

And while our first thought during a drought is the impact to crop farmers, these conditions have a serious impact on businesses and economic growth throughout the state.

About 1.5 million Illinois workers are employed in agribusiness industry which contributes more than $8.85 billion to the Illinois’ economy annually. It’s time for the House to take up and pass a farm bill with robust disaster assistance and the long term policy farmers need.  If the House can’t write a bill, they should at least call the bipartisan Senate bill for a vote as soon as possible.

And Democratic candidates have been turning their fire on Republicans who were unable to persuade Boehner and Cantor to act on behalf of farmers. David Gill in one of Illinois' most productive farming areas: "We haven't just had a historic drought in Illinois and across the Midwest, we've had a drought of leadership in Congress. House Republicans have refused to step forward and pass a bi-partisan Farm Bill to help keep our Heartland alive. It's Tea Party politics at its very worst."

Aryanna Strader is opposing Joe Pitts in southeast Pennsylvania's Lancaster and Chester counties. Even if he's sitting on his hands and babbling about abortions and gays, she's talking directly to the regions farming families. "Too often, members of Congress like Joe Pitts talk about having political courage. Well Joe Pitts has been in Washington long enough that he should be able to demonstrate some leadership to get his Republican colleagues to pass the Farm Bill... but he hasn't. As an Iraq War veteran I have seen true courage and it means standing up and taking real action, not just standing at a microphone and giving speeches. The Farm Bill means jobs and economic security in Pennsylvania and Congressman Pitts just sits there waiting for the recess gavel to come down."

Another Blue America-endorsed progressive, Nate Shinagawa, is seeking to represent one of New York State's most productive farming areas, the Finger Lakes and Southern Tier. He held a press conference to distance himself from Rep. Tom Reed's blasé attitude about the GOP blocking the bill and the resultant hardship for area farmers. “Congressman Tom Reed and the Republicans seem to neglect the fact that Congress has significant responsibility, whether it’s with the livelihood of our farmers or promoting job growth, and as the party in power, should be taking immediate steps to compromise on a full 5-year renewal.” Shinagawa noted the importance of a 5-year renewal after conversations with local farmers, saying it was critical to be able to “plan accordingly to develop a business plan. They need the long term stability to remain profitable.” He supports the Senate version of the bill, which has passed with bi-partisan support, because it “sustains critical subsidies for farmers, and also limits cuts to food stamp programs used by 1 in 7 Americans.”

In North Dakota, Democrat Heidi Heitkamp has deftly turned the issue against Republican freshman Rick Berg, who's running against her for an open Senate seat. Heitkamp called the lack of a new farm bill the “biggest failure of this Congress" and Berg has cravenly blamed his cronies in the Republican leadership. "We have a stonewall problem. I’ll agree. The House Republican leadership is a problem on the farm bill."

Yesterday the Des Moines Register tore into Boehner while he was in Iowa campaigning for Romney, Latham, Steve King and other Republicans.

Boehner, of Ohio, didn’t respond to questions about federal farm provisions that expired this month after lawmakers failed to reach agreement on a new farm bill before leaving the capital ahead of the general election.

...Boehner’s speech did not include specific legislative priorities for the next Congress. He didn’t respond to media questions, and his staff blocked him off from reporters.

Boehner and other congressional leaders have been criticized in recent weeks for dismissing lawmakers without touching the federal farm bill.

Just before Congress went into recess, [Rep.] Loebsack wrote a letter to Boehner, urging him to push for a vote on the farm bill.

“Americans elected Congress to get things done for the American people. I stand ready to work in bipartisan fashion to get a farm bill passed and again urge your attention to bringing up the farm bill for passage in the House,” Loebsack wrote in September.

There are a handful of House and Senate races where the Boehner/Cantor decision to once again put their partisan anti-Obama mania before the good of the country could wreck GOP chances to win key races.

The farm bill, which sets subsidies for everything from crop insurance to milk production, expired on October 1 after the Republican majority in the House could not muster enough votes to pass a new law.

No race demonstrates the Democratic strategy better than in western Iowa, where Christie Vilsack, the wife of President Barack Obama's agriculture secretary, Tom Vilsack, is stressing the farm bill in a bid to unseat conservative Republican Representative Steve King.

"The lack of a farm bill right now has the farming community up in arms," said Bryan Kruse, 34, who has two small farms and works for another farmer to pay the bills outside Ringsted, population 422. "We need to get something done."

Kruse wants to know if he can still get federal crop insurance to protect his corn and soybeans against disasters like this year's drought.

...Democrats are focusing on the farm bill in Iowa, Wisconsin, South Dakota, Colorado and Illinois. It is also a major issue in close U.S. Senate races in Montana and North Dakota, where Republican House members are seeking seats held by Democrats.

...Vilsack, whose husband also was Iowa governor, touts the fact that the Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate passed a farm bill, but the Republican House did not.

Steffen Schmidt, a politics professor at Iowa State University in Ames, says most Democrats have done a poor job of explaining that, apart from farm subsidies, the farm bill includes food stamps, school lunches and rural development money.

"A big failure of the Democrats is they have not explained the farm bill has broader economic and social implications," Schmidt said. "Christie Vilsack has done better than other Democrats at making that point."

Voting Strategically In Iowa-- Against Blue Dog Leonard Boswell

Last night we looked at the horrific choices in some of the Senate races around the country-- exceedingly bad Democratic candidates like Joe Manchin (WV), Joe Donnelly (IN), Claire McCaskill (MO), Bob Kerrey (NE), Shelley Berkley (NV), and Tim Kaine (VA), to name a few, running against-- in every case even worse Republicans. Claire McCaskill, for example, has been one of the worst Democrats in the Senate since she beat Jim Talent in a Democratic sweep year with a bare 50% of the vote. This session her ProgressivePunch vote score was a dismal 67.86 on crucial substantive votes,, the third worst of any Democrat in the Senate, beaten out only by the wretched Jo Manchin (62.50) and Republican-all-but-in-name Ben Nelson (57.14). McCaskill, in other words, has voted more frequently with the Republicans than Joe Lieberman (CT), Mark Pryor (AR), Mary Landrieu (LA), and Max Baucus (79.09). But McCaskill's opponent? Todd "legitimate rape" Akin. What a horrible choice for voters in Missouri to have to make.

Right after writing that post I found an e-mail from an old friend from Iowa, Ed Fallon, who Blue America backed in his primary challenge against Blue Dog Leonard Boswell in 2008. We even had a cool song for the campaign:

Ed didn't challenge Boswell again this year. Instead Boswell is caught in an incumbent vs incumbent drag-out-knock-out battle with conservative corporate whore Tom Latham. I'd grade Boswell and Lathan both "F," although Latham is an even worse congressman than Boswell. Ed, still one of the loudest and clearest progressive voices in Iowa, is urging his followers to vote against both of them.

Just as I am most certainly voting FOR Barack Obama, I am most certainly NOT voting for Leonard Boswell. I am also not voting for Tom Latham. Before I tell you who I AM voting for for Congress, let me give you five reasons why you, too, should not vote for Boswell.
1. Lack of integrity. Perhaps you have your own stories. I have heard some of them. Mine include Boswell sending an aide to bribe me with the offer of an $80,000 a-year job to not run against him. The aide also told me that Boswell was so in love with power that he had "become like Gollum with the ring." The 2008 campaign itself was brutal, and it seemed there were no lies or half-truths that Boswell and his operatives would not stoop to.
2. Of the Democrats who have represented Iowa in Congress over the past several decades, there are none whose voting record is more out of sync with Democratic priorities than Boswell. Yet Party leaders insist we support him because Latham is so, so bad. It's a lousy argument and we shouldn't buy it, because when we do it empowers the Party to stuff another corporate Democrat down our throats next time. In fact, I guarantee you Party insiders have already drafted the short list of pro-big-business Democrats they want to foist on us when Boswell loses.
3. A common reason given for not voting for third party candidates is they will most certainly lose. Well, Boswell will most certainly lose, so let's be consistent. In 2008, Boswell outspent me 3 - 1 and I got trounced (39%). At last count, Latham raised six times as much money as Boswell. I sure wish money in politics didn't matter, but let's be realistic. There's a name for a candidate who gets outspent 6 - 1. It's "loser."
4. Some argue that Democrats and moderates need to support Boswell because we don't want the US House controlled by right-wing Republicans. Granted, Paul Ryan's House is a very scary place. But even the most favorable projections don't see a path to Democrats taking control of the House. So, Boswell losing will not tip the balance of power in Congress.
5. Conceding the seat to Latham opens the door for a strong, progressive-populist Democrat to win the primary in 2014 and beat Latham in an election where voters are actually presented with a clear choice. The best thing we can do in the third district is to create some momentum through a write-in campaign for a strong progressive who can beat Latham in 2014. So, with that in mind, I'm writing in...

Frank Cownie! To be clear, I have not communicated with Frank about this in any way, shape or form. In fact, Frank may want to issue a disclaimer, and that's fine. But Frank, you've served well as Mayor of Des Moines. You've got your priorities right. You'd make a heck of a Congressman, and if enough of us write-in your name, it will send a message to the Party elite that we won't tolerate another hand-picked corporate Democrat representing us in Congress.
And to be clear about one other thing: I am absolutely not running for Congress ever again, neither in this life nor the next.

The DCCC will probably spend around $2 million trying to keep the Des Moines based seat for Boswell. With that money they could elect 3 progressives-- like Lee Rogers (CA), Sue Thorn (WV) and Aryanna Strader (PA)... and for an extra $500,000 Patsy Keever (NC) as well. Those 4 would actually vote for Democratic Party  ideals and values and work diligently for working families. Boswell works diligently too-- for corporations and for Republican values. In the current 2011-12 session of Congress, Boswell has voted about equally with the GOP and the Democrats. His ProgressivePunch crucial vote score is 52.76. What a piece of shit! And that's reflected in recent polls showing Latham beating him in November. At this point it looks like the only thing that could save his miserable career would be Obama's coattails. In 2008 Obama won the 3rd district with 54% of the vote. After redistricting, the seat is less Democratic-leaning; Obama would have won but only with 52%. One less Blue Dog is always a good thing.

Republican Obstructionism Doesn't Just Harm Obama-- Let's Look At What They're Doing To Veterans And To Farm Communities

 Rachel was uncharacteristically mean when introducing four clownish Republican senators to her viewers Wednesday evening-- which you can watch in the video above-- John Boozman (R-AR), Mike Johanns (R-NE), Richard Burr (R-NC) and Pat Toomey (R-PA). None of them are running for reelection this November so none of them were worried about filibustering-- to death-- the Veterans Jobs Corps Bill. The bipartisan bill was meant to deal with the fact that the unemployment rate for vets returning from Iraq and Afghanistan have a 35% higher unemployment rate than the rest of the country. Rachel was so mean to Boozman, Johanns. Burr and Toomney because they helped to write the bill-- because this was one the Democrats were determined would be a true bipartisan bill that wouldn't be filibustered by the odious Miss McConnell for the sole purpose of dealing President Obama a defeat regardless of content. But The odious Miss McConnell led a filibuster anyway and co-authors Boozman, Johanns. Burr and Toomney voted against it. Rachel has often expressed-- sometimes pretty emotionally-- a special sense of gratitude for the men and women who are sent to fight our foreign wars-- not for those wars themselves-- but for the young people fighting on the battlefields. She's made it clear that it offends her greatly when they return home and get tossed on the garbage pile of Mitt Romney's and the Republican Party's 47%. So that's why she was mean to Boozman, Johanns. Burr and Toomney.

 But Boozman, Johanns. Burr and Toomney, like I said, aren't up for reelection. Toomey, the one from Pennsylvania, would never have voted against the bill-- not in a billion years-- if he had been up for reelection. And, although I'm not a clairvoyant, I would bet that Republicans like Scott Brown and Dean Heller-- who did cross the aisle to vote with the Democrats in favor of vets and who are fighting for their political lives-- would not have hesitated for one second to back the odious Miss McConnell's filibuster if not for the impending tight election. (The latest polls show both Brown and Heller losing, Brown to the fabulous Elizabeth Warren, Heller to the decidedly mediocre and corrupt New Dem, Shelley Berkley. Brown and Heller were also the only incumbent Republican senators who took public issue with Romney's divisive tactic of portraying 47% of Americans as freeloaders and moochers. Trying to distance himself from the self-entitled aristocrats Willard and Ayn Romney, Heller ran to the Nevada media to tell them to "Keep in mind, I have five brothers and sisters. My father was an auto mechanic. My mother was a school cook. I have a very different view of the world and as United States senator, I think I represent everyone.")

 Republican obstructionism was probably fatal-- literally-- for some returning veterans. As Patrick Murphy, an Iraq War vet himself, points out in the clip above, another returning vet commits suicide every 80 minutes. Murphy seemed even more emotional-- and seething-- than Maddow. But it wasn't just Miss McConnell and the Senate Republicans throwing the vets under the bus that has contributed to Congress' 12% approval rating-- the lowest ever in an election year. Unlike senators who face the voters every 6 years-- and whose bad votes are soon forgotten-- House members all face the voters every two years. So every single one of them is up for reelection this November. And the Republicans from farming districts-- of, let's take Tom Latham in Iowa as an example-- are freaking out because another bit of mindless Republican Party obstructionism was to trashcan the Farm Bill. Farms are furious-- and will pay the consequences. Latham didn't mince words; he blamed Eric Cantor for bottling the bill up.

Iowa Rep. Tom Latham says Speaker John Boehner wants to bring the farm bill to the floor, but is being stifled by his leadership colleagues.

Latham, a close ally of Boehner’s (R-Ohio), said on Simon Conway’s radio show in Iowa Tuesday that “Eric Cantor is the one who controls floor activity” and the Virginia Republican “honestly believe(s) that they cannot pass it.”

“John Boehner is not the problem,” Latham said.

The farm bill has passed the House Agriculture Committee, and has been hanging in limbo ever since. The Senate passed a bill, and rural farm states have been up in arms at Republican leadership, which refuses to bring it to the floor. The Wall Street Journal editorial page gave leadership reinforcement Tuesday, when they said leadership shouldn’t bring it to the floor because it spends too much money. But Latham’s party is in power, and he is in a tight member-on-member race against Rep. Leonard Boswell (D-Iowa). He wants the bill brought to the floor, and hashed out there.

Latham is hardly the only one representing a farm state who's furious at Cantor, the House Republican Majority Leader. Dick Durbin is kind of the Cantor of the Senate, at least so far as being the #2 guy in the leadership. Yesterday he wrote a letter to the editor of the Morris Daily Herald back in Illinois, Congress Must Pass Farm Bill.

To the Editor:

Since we can’t make it rain, the single most important thing Congress can do to assist producers impacted by this year’s drought is pass a farm bill. Most farmers will tell you they can survive one bad year, but right now farmers can’t plan for future years. Nearly three months ago the Senate passed a full five-year farm bill with overwhelming bipartisan support. It would reauthorize several expired disaster programs, extend several other programs to assist fruit and vegetable growers and dairy producers and expand crop insurance coverage. The Senate farm bill would also provide farmers with long term certainty in farm policy that will allow to plan out their recovery from this drought while still reducing the deficit by $23 billion. Unfortunately, the House won’t even bring a farm bill measure to the floor for debate. Instead, they offered an extension of a few disaster programs that do little to help Illinois farmers and producers that have struggled through this drought. Nearly 63 percent of the country is experiencing some level of drought. Every county in Illinois has been declared a disaster by USDA. 

And while our first thought during a drought is the impact to crop farmers, these conditions have a serious impact on businesses and economic growth throughout the state. 

About 1.5 million Illinois workers are employed in agribusiness industry which contributes more than $8.85 billion to the Illinois’ economy annually. It’s time for the House to take up and pass a farm bill with robust disaster assistance and the long term policy farmers need.  If the House can’t write a bill, they should at least call the bipartisan Senate bill for a vote as soon as possible.

And Dr. David Gill, a progressive Democrat running in Illinois' farm belt agrees with Durbin that the House Republicans need to stop blocking the farm bill. "We haven't just had a historic drought in Illinois and across the Midwest," he told us this morning, "we've had a drought of leadership in Congress. House Republicans have refused to step forward and pass a bi-partisan Farm Bill to help keep our Heartland alive. It's Tea Party politics at its very worst."

Instead, much to the chagrin of Democrats, Boehner and Cantor adjourned Congress until after the November election. I hope Wayne Powell can communicate Cantor's obstructionism to Virginia farmers. "This is just another example of the supposed 'leader' not leading," he told us today. "Whether there is an up or down vote, he should bring the act to the floor for the vote, before he recesses a month before the election. He again personifies the dysfunctional obstructionist title which he earns every day. This is yet another reason why he should be retired from Congress, instead of leading the Congress to the fiscal cliff which may occur. Kicking issues down the road is one of his many dysfunctional habits." Other Democrats running in agricultural districts certainly are.

Aryanna Strader is opposing Joe Pitts in southeast Pennsylvania's Lancaster and Chester counties. Even if he's sitting on his hands and babbling about abortions and gays, she's talking directly to the regions farming families. "Too often, members of Congress like Joe Pitts talk about having political courage. Well Joe Pitts has been in Washington long enough that he should be able to demonstrate some leadership to get his Republican colleagues to pass the Farm Bill... but he hasn't. As an Iraq War veteran I have seen true courage and it means standing up and taking real action, not just standing at a microphone and giving speeches. The Farm Bill means jobs and economic security in Pennsylvania and Congressman Pitts just sits there waiting for the recess gavel to come down." 

Another Blue America-endorsed progressive, Nate Shinagawa, is seeking to represent one of New York State's most productive farming areas, the Finger Lakes and Southern Tier. He held a press conference to distance himself from Rep. Tom Reed's blasé attitude about the GOP blocking the bill and the resultant hardship for area farmers. “Congressman Tom Reed and the Republicans seem to neglect the fact that Congress has significant responsibility, whether it’s with the livelihood of our farmers or promoting job growth, and as the party in power, should be taking immediate steps to compromise on a full 5-year renewal.” Shinagawa noted the importance of a 5-year renewal after conversations with local farmers, saying it was critical to be able to “plan accordingly to develop a business plan. They need the long term stability to remain profitable.” He supports the Senate version of the bill, which has passed with bi-partisan support, because it “sustains critical subsidies for farmers, and also limits cuts to food stamp programs used by 1 in 7 Americans.” Boehner is an asshole too:

 

Will Obama's Coattails And A Democratic Landslide In Iowa Drag Down King And Latham?

It wasn't a surprise in 2006 when progressive Democrat Bruce Braley won the open seat in IA-01 (Davenport, Dubuque, Waterloo). Although DCCC chair Rahm Emanuel was unenthusiastic over Braley's unambiguous opposition to the Iraq war, the DCCC gave him the green light and his victory over right-wing loon Bill Whalen was convincing (55-43%). On the other hand, the victory next door, in IA-02 (Cedar Rapids, Iowa City, Burlington), where Dave Loebsack squeaked by 30 year veteran Jim Leach, was one of the political shockers of the cycle. It was a Democratic year and Chet Culver's 100,000 vote margin in the gubernatorial race helped both Braley and Loebsack, each of whom has gone on to distinguish himself as among the better Democrats in the House.

Today's Des Moines Register doesn't mention any House races, let alone IA-04 (Tom Latham vs Becky Greenwald) or IA-05 (Steve King vs Rob Hubler). The Register story is, in a general way, about Mcpain, pointing out that the margin of victory in a brand new local poll shows Obama thumping McCain by 17 points. This morning I heard McCain on TV, delusional, insisting, shrilly, that Iowa is a battleground state he would win. Even if he improves his standing in the next 2 days-- and Palin's scheduled appearance in Dubuque on Monday is likely to do more harm than good for their ticket, it is unlikely he'll get to even 40%.

Obama's lead in the poll is almost three times what his average lead is nationally.

So much for Iowa being a "battleground" or "tossup" state this time.

In fact, the poll indicates a Democratic landslide may be in the offing in Iowa. The poll shows Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin beating his Republican challenger, Christopher Reed, by 57 percent to 31 percent. If Harkin wins by a margin like that - 26 points - it would be his biggest margin in his five general election campaigns for the Senate.

...Such poor numbers threaten to have a demoralizing effect among Republicans and an energizing one among Democrats. If Democrats smell victory and head to the polls while Republicans are in a funk and stay at home (as happened in the 1974 Watergate election), then Obama's landslide could bury other GOP candidates down the ballot.

And who would that be? There are only two Republican House members left in Iowa and both have strong Democratic opponents this year, though neither is on the lists the Cooks & Schnooks & DCCC make up as targets. Iowans, on the other hand, have shown in the past they make their own targets. The Register recommended that voters retire King as an embarrassment to the state and lauds Becky Greenwald's leadership potential as the right choice in IA-04. Iowa polls close late (10pm EST) and the only races we'll be looking at by then are in Alaska, Washington, Oregon and California. But if Hubler and Greenwald do manage to dislodge King and Latham, America will have, by then, taken a step towards the real systemic reform to our government that grassroots Democrats want so badly and that Republicans and odious Democrats from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party will do all they can to prevent. A short clip from the Register explaining why they think Rob Hubler is the right choice for IA-05... and for America:

For Many GOP Members Of Congress John McCain's Campaign Has Been A Career-Ending Tragedy

Dick & Tim-- helping turn PA bluer

Ever since McCain clinched the GOP presidential nomination and marched right into Denny Hastert's congressional district to campaign vigorously with Jim Oberweis for the seat Hastert was giving up, a shudder went up the spine of Republican incumbents. An unknown Democratic challenger, Bill Foster, straight from a bitterly fought primary that he only won by a few votes, should have been an easy target for McCain and Oberweis. The district is overwhelmingly Republican (R+5) and exactly the kind of district Republicans have to win if they are going to stay nationally relevant and not just fade away into the party of the old slave holding states and the Mormons. But instead of McCain's first victory, early March saw the beginning of a nightmare vision for the GOP about what kind of a disaster McCain's coattails were going to be for them. And it just got worse from there.

McCain's coattails were also toxic in Baton Rouge, in another very red district's special election, and then in a Mississippi district where Democrats normally don't even bother to run (R+10). It seems like every single day the rearview mirror, Inside the Beltway prognosticators are-- as usual-- trying to catch up with reality in the "real America" (everything to the west, north and south of the Beltway) by changing their ratings, which generally started out as 2 or 3 Democratic gains in the Senate and 8 or 9 net wins for the Dems in the House. Cook and Schnook and Rothengeek and the rest of them seem to be willing to declare a seat leaning to the Democrats when the Republican gives a concession speech. They're a joke and I expect that on Wednesday they will make fairly accurate predictions for a Democratic landslide in both houses.

Today's Washington Post deals with the delicate subject-- in a one industry company town-- of John McCain's coattails, by claiming that his struggle in traditionally Republican states is "complicating the already tenuous reelection prospects of some congressional Republicans." Moderate suburban districts are breaking for Obama and vacated Republican seats plus embattled GOP incumbents are looking mighty blue 6 days before the election.

The apparent McCain drag on congressional races comes as voters increasingly cast blame on Bush and Republicans for the crumbling economy and at a time when the GOP's national party committees have little financial resources to defend an increasing number of House and Senate seats that are in jeopardy.

"McCain is just running so poorly now. He's collapsed in some districts. It's brutal out there for Republicans," said Stuart Rothenberg, editor of the independent Rothenberg Political Report.

The environment has created the potential for gains by the Democrats that could leave them in control of the Capitol for years.

Democrats hold a 51 to 49 edge in the Senate when the two independents who caucus with them are factored in, and a 236 to 199 House majority. Rothenberg predicted that Democrats will pick up 27 to 33 House seats, and make gains of six to nine seats in the Senate. The Cook Political Report, another independent political forecaster, suggests that Democrats will net 23 to 28 House seats, and pick up seven to nine Republican-held Senate seats.

That would have been an astute observation in late August. If Cook were on the ball he would have said "Democrats will net 30 to 40 House seats."

Does anyone pay attention to these blinkered forecasters? The DCCC and NRCC consider them the holy grail, media frames the coverage of races through the prism they offer, and their impact on big donors is immense. Otherwise, they're inconsequential.

Many political observers are talking about the career-ending balloting coming up for John Sununu (R-NH), Steve Pearce (R-NM), Robin Hayes (R-NC) and Ric Keller (R-FL) but I want to talk about two races that none of the pollsters or pundits ever mention and that have been largely flying under the radar. This morning the most influential newspaper in Iowa, the Des Moines Register shocked the political establishment by rejecting 7-term incumbent rubber stamp Tom Latham and endorsed a grassroots Democrat for his seat, Becky Greenwald. Cook and Schnook must be scratching their head and scurrying around for a map that shows where Iowa's 4th CD is.

Iowa's 4th District has a chance to make history. This state has never sent a woman to Congress, but should do so this election.

Becky Greenwald, a Democrat from Perry, has not made that point the main emphasis of her campaign. She calls herself a candidate who "happens to be female." But she also happens to be a woman with potential to be a leader in Washington.

[The Register also endorsed progressive Democrat Rob Hubler in the 5th district and urged Iowa voters to retire hysterical extremist goon Steve King.]

The other race I want to bring up, though, is even further under the radar than either of the Iowa races. Southwest Pennsylvania's 18th CD was gerrymandered to find every potential Republican voter south of Pittsburgh and put them into a safe district for Tim Murphy. But the district (R+2) isn't safe enough for someone with as terrible a rubber stamp record as Murphy has amassed since first taking office in 2002. Just look at this Iraq voting record; it could have been accrued by Dick Cheney! But I bet no one outside the district-- especially no one Inside the Beltway-- knows that there might be an upset brewing inside.

Steve O'Donnell is a progressive Democrat with a shot-- albeit a longshot-- to be Tuesday night's jaw dropper. Murphy has tried to stay under the radar himself and he's tried, despite his record, to sound like a moderate and keep his distance, at least publicly, from Bush and McCain. But his approval rating is only 34%, something that would have him on the critical list if the DCCC was paying attention. Registration has changed so drastically in Pennsylvania that there are now 60,000 more registered Democrats in PA-18 than registered Republicans! And it's an economically hard-hit part of the country with very strong anti-Republican sentiment.

Labor is behind O'Donnell in a big way and his pro-choice, single payer healthcare, out-of-Iraq positions are in sync with what voters actually want. Meanwhile the FBI is investigating Murphy as another dirty Republican Culture of Corruption crook:



Murphy was named one of the 20 most corrupt members of Congress by CREW and he's continued taking immense sums of money from the special interests he serves in Congress, like Big Oil, Halliburton, Wal-Mart and many of the worst players in the mortgage crisis and Wall Street meltdown.

If O'Donnell comes close, the DCCC will be weeping to activists next year for screwing up-- like they're doing this year for screwing up Larry Kissell's race in 2006. But he can win, especially if McCain and Palin keep campaigning in Pennsylvania.


UPDATE: ET TU, SHAYS?

Chris Shays is a self-serving hack from a blue district in Connecticut who manages to stay in office by distancing himself from his right-wing voting record at election time. This year, up against an energetic and much smarter opponent, Jim Himes, it looks like Shays' old tactic isn't working. So instead, the Chairman of McCain's campaign committee in Connecticut has come up with an interesting new strategy: attacking McCain, when he's on the ground... and groping for a break.

"He has lost his brand as a maverick," Rep. Chris Shays, a Connecticut Republican and co-chairman of the McCain campaign in that state, told the Yale Daily News in the latest criticism. "He did not live up to his pledge to fight a clean campaign."

Connecticut conservatives are furious and many are swearing off support for Shays. "I know he always votes the right way when we really need him," said a Republican elected official in Fairfield County, who asked to remain anonymous, "but this is the last straw. He's just so treacherous and hypocritical. We all know McCain is going to lose but does that mean you kick him in the teeth on his way down. Christopher Shays owes Republicans an apology."

Why Are Republican Incumbents Afraid To Debate In Their Home Districts?

After seeing what an incredibly effective speaker Oregon Senate candidate Jeff Merkley is, I was interested in knowing if he would be debating Bush's rubber stamp mouthpiece Gordon Smith. So I asked. His campaign has proposed a series of 8 debates. Merkley has committed to five specific debates around the state with different Oregon television stations and nonpartisan public service groups. So far Gordon Smith hasn't committed to any. But let's be fair, if you had a record like his-- in a state like Oregon-- would you want to defend it in public? But they I started seeing a surprising pattern: Republican incumbents all over the country are avoiding or minimizing the number of debates they're willing to have with Democrats.

Yesterday, almost in passing, we saw how Bush rubber stamp Charlie Dent refuses to debate Sam Bennett about energy policy. “Congressman Dent is so deep in the pocket of Big Oil companies and special interest groups he’s refusing to publicly defend his record and have an open debate about the issue,” said Kathryn Seck, Sam Bennett’s campaign manager. “He should explain why he’s taken $75,000 from Big Oil and given them billions in tax breaks while middle class Pennsylvanians are struggling to afford high gas prices.  Voters deserve an open dialogue on the issues and Congressman Dent is ducking the issue.” Then this morning I got a press release from Iowa's 4th CD (the north central part of the state, centered in Ames). And sure, enough, the Bush rubber stamp incumbent, Tom Latham, is refusing to debate the Democratic candidate Becky Greenwald.

Tom Latham refused this week to debate Becky Greenwald while he is home on the August recess. The Greenwald campaign accepted a debate with Latham at the Iowa Farmer’s Union Convention, an event that Latham is attending. Latham refused to debate.
 
“We are disappointed that Tom Latham refused to debate Becky Greenwald at the Iowa Farmer’s Union Convention. We tried to work with his schedule and find a venue for a debate at an event Latham would already be attending,” said Campaign Manager Robert Brennan. “Iowans deserve to hear from Tom Latham why after 14 years in Congress, he has done nothing to address the energy crisis, lack of care for our veterans and the high cost of healthcare.”
 
Last week, the Greenwald campaign sent a letter to the Latham campaign asking to hold four debates over the August recess. The Latham campaign refused the debates saying their schedule was full. The Iowa Farmers Union tried to accommodate with his schedule and arrange for a debate at their convention in Marshalltown, IA on Saturday August 23rd, an event that Latham will be attending. The Latham campaign refused to debate.

Was I looking at a pattern? I reached out to a few of the campaigns I speak to regularly. Gary Peters (D-MI) has accepted invitations from the Troy Chamber of Commerce-- and even from the Troy Republican Party Club, as well as from other groups who have been trying to set up debates. Joe Knollenberg-- a Big Oil shill who has accepted $66,250 in "donations" from Big Oil and owns over $90,000 in oil company stocks that increase in value as gasoline prices rise-- is petrified to stand up in front of an audience of voters and defend his energy voters.

Annette Taddeo debates empty chair in Miami

In May the AFL-CIO, which had endorsed Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Mario and Lincoln Diaz-Balart in 2006, invited their 3 candidates plus Democratic challengers Annette Taddeo, Joe Garcia and Raul Martinez to a debate. The three Republicans, panicking at the last moment, ducked the debate. Each blamed scheduling conflicts. The AFL-CIO went on with the debate-- Annette told me she debated Ros-Lehtinen's empty chair-- and then endorsed the debate winners, the three Democrats.

South Florida congressional Republicans backed out of next week's debates. Their opponents say they're hiding.

Miami's three Cuban-American Republicans in Congress have scrapped plans to participate in a series of debates with their Democratic challengers.

The South Florida AFL-CIO, which in recent years has hosted debates for mayoral and gubernatorial races, planned three debates next week for the nationally watched contests. But the Republicans said this week that they're not going, throwing the bipartisan nature of the event into doubt.

The union-- which endorsed the three incumbents in 2006-- says the events will go on next week as scheduled. All three Democrats, who represent the first significant challenge to the incumbents, said they plan to attend and suggested the Republicans were reluctant to spar face to face.

"We just want to give our working families a chance to talk to the candidates,'' said union president Fred Frost, who met late Wednesday with representatives from two of the Republican campaigns in a bid to revive the events. "I think they'd be squandering what I'd consider a great opportunity."

In New Jersey Dennis Shulman has been trying to get incumbent Scott Garrett to debate him in front of voters. Apparently Garrett-- like fellow extremist loon and Big Oil shill John Kline in Minnesota-- just doesn't think he has to do debates. Kline's spokesperson said his record speaks for itself. It does-- and if voters were actually reading it Kline wouldn't get 30% of the vote.

Last year Darcy Burner was eager to debate incumbent Bush rubber stamp Dave Reichert everywhere in the district. His staff, wary of putting him into unscripted settings because he has a tendency to either put his foot in his mouth or reveal his lack of policy depth, allowed him to do one debate, which was sponsored by the Seattle Times. The Times debate for 2008 is scheduled for October 8 and Reichert is going to do it. Meanwhile, though, there have been debates proposed by KCTS-9 and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer as well as by TV station KING 5 and radio stations KUOW and KIRO 710. Darcy wants debates. Reichert wants to hide. Similarly, Bob Lord has challenged John Shadegg who refuses to talk, only waves his toy air pressure gauge over his head and mutters incoherently about running for the Senate. Shadegg won't say yes or no about debates. Last year Vic Wulsin was able, after embarrassingly her repeatedly, to get Mean Jean Schmidt, one of the House's most woefully ignorant members, to do one debate. Vic would like to do a series of debates across the district to talk about how to help solve the economic conditions of Ohio families hit hard by recession, the housing crisis, gasoline prices, unemployment, the health care crisis and inflation but Mean Jean isn't answering. The Ohio News Network has asked both candidates to debate in October but it looks like Vic may have the stage to herself.

Most of the Senate races have at least one debate scheduled. But Gordon Smith isn't the only senatorial coward hiding from his Democratic opponent. John Cornyn (R-TX) doesn't feel comfortable unless he's speaking at places like the Petroleum Club in Fort Worth. Big Oil has given him more money this year ($480,100) than any other member of Congress (other than the million plus they gave to ExxonJohn McCain) and he's backed them all the way, which is precisely why you're paying around $4/gallon at the pump. But when it comes to debating Rick Noriega about his votes, Cornyn is full of... petroleum. Plenty of TV and radio stations, as well as civic organizations throughout Texas, have reached out to the two campaigns for debates. Noriega keeps accepting invitation. Cornyn claims he's negotiating. But he isn't even doing that-- unless he's negotiating with himself.

Just as I was about to publish this, I got an e-mail from Andrea Miller, the powerfully articulate and knowledgeable Democratic candidate running against dull rubber stamp Randy Forbes in southern Virginia. Her experience is almost identical to at least half, perhaps three-quarters of Democratic challengers:

Randy Forbes is avoiding me big time. There have been at least 3 requests (2 from radio and 1 from TV). Additionally, there has also been a debate request from a group that simply wants to schedule a public forum.
 
What is he afraid of? I have an energy policy and he has energy questions. I have solutions to our education challenges and he doesn't even know there is a problem.

My guess: he's just afraid of Andrea Miller and getting his ass kicked publicly in front of the electorate when she exposes his indefensible voting record.

About That Mess Bush Is Leaving Obama... Closin' In On Half A Trillion Dollar Deficit

"It's good to be the boss," my old boss you to say to me when he was in a lighthearted mood. He was the chairman; I was the president. We had a few hundred people working with us. And it was good to be boss, responsibilities not withstanding. I have a feeling being president of the United States is immeasurably more amazing and awesome. And I sure hope it will be for Obama. But I don't see how it can be. It's like Bush and the GOP have systematically gone about wrecking the government they loathe and despise. They are the living, breathing, walking, talking evidence of the old Republican adage: "Government doesn't work; elect me and I'll prove it." They sure did!

This afternoon, the NY Times mentions the record deficit the Bush Regime is bequeathing the next president: $482 billion, a hell of a different figure than the flourishing, hard-won surpluses Clinton left Bush. And the story gets worse.

The deficit announced by Jim Nussle, the White House budget director, does not reflect the full cost of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the potential $50 billion cost of another economic stimulus package or the prospect of steeper losses in tax revenue or further declines in the housing market.

Mr. Nussle also predicted Monday that the deficit would more than double in the current 2008 fiscal year-- to $389 billion, from $162 billion in 2007.

The deficit projected for 2009 would be the largest in absolute terms. The White House and many economists prefer to measure the deficit as a share of the economy.

...“I think that the fiscal year 2009 deficit could get a lot worse, if you add in war costs, there could well be a real drop-off in revenues from this year’s slowing economy and of course if there are further problems in the housing market, if the federal government does have to inject some money into Freddie and Fannie, that could get worse too," [according to Robert Bixby, executive director of the center-right Concord Coalition

At 3.3% of the economy, at least it isn't as bad as it was in the Reagan years. The problem for Obama, of course is that it "will crimp the ability of the next president to carry out ambitious spending plans of any kind," which is precisely what Bush's brain (Rove), Cheney, Norquist and other GOP long-range thinkers had in mind. They don't want government to be able to work for the common good. To them that's godless communism.

In a statement that only someone who listens to tapes of Rush Limbaugh when the heroic figure isn't on the air could give any credence, Nussle blames the Democrats for letting spending get out of hand, although, still lying without blinking, he told reporters that Bush's budget blueprint remains on track to achieve balance with surpluses of $58 billion in 2012 and $29 billion in 2013." [Can we incarcerate or incinerate all of them if they're wrong?] Expect to hear lots more of Nussel-like crap from McCain and his lobbyist brigade.

Representative John Spratt, Democrat of South Carolina and chairman of the House Budget Committee, said the deficit figures confirmed “the dismal legacy of the Bush administration.”

“Under its policies,” he said, “the largest surpluses in history have been converted into the largest deficits in history.”

Becky Greenwald, whose feisty come-from-behind campaign has suddenly moved into position to challenge rubber stamp, 7-term incumbent Tom Latham (R-IA) in a district trending distinctly Democratic, pointed out that since Latham is a member of the Appropriations Committee he was in a position to rein in Bush's irresponsible spending. Instead, he rubber stamped everything, while Latham helped wave the fiscal magic wand to turn record surpluses into record deficits, opposing earmark reform and voting again and again to raise the debt ceiling so Bush could continue the occupation of Iraq.