You Can't Say Trump Brought Back A Know Nothing Ethos-- Since It's Never Really Gone Away

Jews voted overwhelmingly for Hillary against Trump last year, but immigrant Jews, especially from Russia, voted for Trump. Emma Lazarus was born in 1849 to a family of Jewish immigrants from Germany, although she is known for her writings about Russian Jewish immigrants who fled the pogroms that followed the assassination of Tsar Alexander II in 1881. And, of course, she's even better known for her 1883 sonnet, "The New Colossus," which was placed on a bronze plaque in the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty 1903.

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
MOTHER OF EXILES. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Today, most Americans who are aware of it's existence at all, know the lines

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

I wonder what people-- both Trump voters and normal Americans-- would think/say/do if he decided to physically remove the plaque. Trump's war with Emma Lazarus' poem isn't about "illegals." It's about his own ugly xenophobia and the Know Nothing stand of American politics that energizes his base of supporters. As Heather Long wrote in yesterday's Washington Post Trump's steep cut in legal immigration-- from a million annually to half that-- is seen as a "grave mistake" by most-- like nearly 90%-- economists.

Experts overwhelmingly predict it would slow growth-- the exact opposite of what Trump wants to do with “MAGAnomics.”

“Restricting immigration will only condemn us to chronically low rates of economic growth,” said Bernard Baumohl, chief global economist at the Economic Outlook Group. “It also increases the risk of a recession.”

During the campaign, Trump repeatedly told illegal immigrants to “get out.” Now he wants to cut back on legal immigration as well. On Wednesday, Trump stood side-by-side with Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and David Perdue (R-Ga.) to endorse their bill, the RAISE Act. The bill does two things: It moves the United States toward a "skills-based immigration system" where people with special skills get top priority and it cuts legal immigration by 50 percent.

"This legislation demonstrates our compassion for struggling American families," Trump said Wednesday. He believes immigrants-- both legal and illegal-- take jobs from Americans, even though the jobless rate in the country is incredibly low.

...“We need to modernize the immigration system, but cutting immigration in half is bad for the economy and bad policy,” says Jeremy Robbins, executive director of New American Economy, a coalition founded by former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg to improve U.S. immigration policy.

Robbins points out that Canada and Australia-- the supposed models for the Trump administration's reforms-- both let in more than double the number of immigrants per capita than the United States does. There are also concerns that such a dramatic cut to legal immigration would cause illegal immigration to rise.

Cotton introduced the RAISE Act in February. It wasn't expected to go far given the crowded to-do list for Congress this year, but Trump's news conference Wednesday is giving it new life.

In April, over 1,400 economists from across the political spectrum sent a letter to Trump urging him not to cut immigration. The letter said there was “near universal agreement” on the “the broad economic benefit that immigrants to this country bring.” Thomas Simons, senior economist at Jefferies investment firm, said a 50 percent reduction would be “absolutely harmful to an economy with a population undergoing the demographic transformation.”

The bottom line is that the United States needs more workers. Growth happens when one of two things occurs: The economy gets more workers or the existing workers become more productive. At the moment, both of those factors are red flags. Productivity growth is sluggish, and, as Trump has pointed out many times, the percentage of American adults who actually work-- the labor-force participation rate-- is hovering at the lowest levels since the 1970s.

A big part of the problem is the baby boomers are starting to retire. The United States needs more people to replace them, but the U.S. birthrate just hit a historic low, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That's why many economists, demographers and business owners keep calling for more immigration, not less.

“Limiting immigration to the U.S. is a grave mistake,” says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics. “The only way to meaningfully increase U.S. economic growth on a sustained basis anytime soon is to increase immigration.” During the campaign, Zandi predicted that Trump's protectionist stances on trade and immigration would lead to a “lengthy recession.”

Trump portrays immigrants as scooping up American jobs. But the data appears to tell a different story.

U.S. unemployment is at 4.4 percent. In May, unemployment hit the lowest level since 2001, a milestone Trump celebrated. That implies there aren't many people struggling to find work. At the same time, the United States has 5.7 million job openings, which is near a record high. It's been that way for a year now. Business leaders with big and small firms say they can't find enough workers. They are especially vocal about not being able to find enough people for really low-skilled, low-pay work and for really high-skilled jobs.

Trump is already heeding the calls for more lower-skilled workers. His administration recently bumped up visas for seasonal foreign workers by 15,000, a 45 percent increase from last year.

There is growing support for moving the United States to a more merit-based immigration system. The idea is to attract more of the immigrant workers that the country desperately needs. At the moment, only 15 percent of green cards are issued for employment reasons, according to Department of Homeland Security data.

...From an economic standpoint, the key is to get more workers with the desired skills into the country. It's why the tech community is lobbying so hard for more H-1B visas. Immigrants also tend to start more businesses. While start-up founders in Silicon Valley are glorified, the reality is business formation in the United States is near a 40-year low. That worries Carl Tannenbaum, chief economist at Northern Trust.

“Countries that get collectively older are granted fewer patents, start fewer small businesses and take fewer risks with capital,” Tannenbaum said. All of that hurts economic growth.

Doug Applegate, a former Marine colonel and the progressive opponent for GOP bigot Darrell Issa was crystal clear about where he stands on the immigration debate. This is a statement he sent out to voters in San Diego and Orange counties yesterday"

We are a nation of immigrants. One of the values our country was founded on is the acceptance of individuals from all over the world, with notions of lifting every person up and presenting opportunities they could not get elsewhere.



The most recent actions of Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress have attempted to demolish the values our nation was founded on. Republican Senators Tom Cotton and David Perdue have outlined new legislation that will cut legal immigration in half and cap refugees at 50,000 a year.



Let’s be clear: This legislation is created under the false notion, which the Trump administration has continually pushed forward, that immigrants are taking away jobs from Americans and negatively impacting our communities.



I wholeheartedly know that to be false. I know that right here in California, and all over the country, we celebrate and embrace all cultures. We grow as we learn from one another, and we lift one another up to make this country better. Immigrants are our friends, our family, our colleagues, our neighbors, and their contributions are woven into the fabric of our lives.

The United States needs appropriate and comprehensive immigration reform-- but it should not deny children and family members of citizens or those with green cards just because our government is being led by a few closed-minded xenophobes. When I am in Congress, I will fight for sensible, compassionate, comprehensive immigration reform, with pathways to citizenship for our millions of hard-working undocumented residents.

Another military veteran and progressive candidate for Congress Blue America has endorsed is Jim Thompson (KS-04). The kind of insight he shows as he analyzed what Trump and Cotton are up to helps get a grasp on the kind of congressman he will be. He wrote that Trump's "new immigration policy is nothing more than a reflection of the homogenized world he wants to build, giving preference to those who speak English and already possess money and power. The practical effect of this policy will be to give admission to those individuals from western countries while denying entry to poor, non-Christian, and non-English speaking people. No longer will we allow entry to the poor, the hungry, or the huddled masses yearning to be free. From the Burroughs of New York, to the beaches of Florida and California, to the hills of Wisconsin and Minnesota, what would our country look like today if this policy had been in effect throughout our history. Our diversity is our strength. It has been woven into the fabric of our society because we once believed that all men and women are created equal and entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

  "When a person joins the military, he or she agrees to give their life if needed to defend this country against all enemies foreign and domestic. President Trump cannot understand such selflessness because he dodged service in the armed forces during Vietnam. He does not know what it means to place his life in the hands of another and have them place their lives in his. Shamefully, Trump would deport soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and any member of their family that are not citizens. Deportations such as this will seriously jeopardize military readiness and enlistment. We owe these men and women a debt of gratitude for protecting us and our loved ones. Military service should guarantee citizenship and stop any deportation of a family member. Upon completion of the initial enlistment, the immediate family of any service member should be given citizenship as well. To do otherwise dishonors not just these brave men and women, but all who swore an oath to defend this country and sacrificed their lives. The graves in Arlington do not distinguish between citizen and non-citizen, and neither should our President."

  Sam Jammal is the Blue America-endorsed candidate running for the Democratic nomination to take on notorious bigot Ed Royce, long famous for disparaging immigrants. Sam told us that his parents-- "like so many others before them-- came to America to build a better life. My mother came to the United States from South America to finish high school and my father came from the Middle East. Neither started with much, but they worked hard and sacrificed so my siblings and I could achieve the American Dream. This is the story for so many Americans. America is a welcoming country-- the land of hope and opportunity. We are a country where someone like me-- the son of an immigrant fast food restaurant worker-- can run for Congress. This is why I started my career working in civil rights at the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF)-- because we need an immigration system that works and is in line with our values. When it comes to immigration, it's about solutions, not divisive rhetoric. I strongly support Senator Duckworth's legislation to protect our military veterans from deportation. Someone willing to put their life on the line for our country should have their sacrifice honored regardless of their immigration status. This is the type of solutions oriented policy we need-- not what the Trump Administration and Ed Royce are proposing. Given the diversity of the 39th district, its shameful that Ed Royce refuses to speak out against the Trump immigration plan. But its not a surprise given Ed's 97% voting record with Trump and silence on every other bad policy being put out by this Administration."

Sam is referring to a very different kind of bill from Cotton's ugly xenophobic legislation, one that was introduced in the Senate by Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) on Thursday. Their bill attempts to protect U.S. military veterans convicted of nonviolent offenses from arbitraty deportation. Duckworth's and Cortez Masto's bill would also allow deported veterans convicted of nonviolent offenses to reenter the country to access Veterans Administration health care facilities, and allow deported veterans to apply for visas to permanently return to the U.S. Duckworth: "Men and women willing to wear our uniform shouldn’t be deported by the same nation they risked their lives to defend."

I get the impression that this scapegoating of immigrants is pissing off Randy Bryce, the progressive running against Paul Ryan in southeast Wisconsin, just over the Illinois border. "I turned on my tv," he told us, "to see Stephen Miller distancing the White House from the Statue of Liberty. It wasn’t any surprise. I guess the big problem is that I still haven’t gotten used to Trump’s America (not mine) looking down it’s nose at those who have made the US what it is. How soon until 'melting pot' is removed from our vocabulary? Staying on the subject, I recently read some legislation being proposed by my (s)hero Sen. Tammy Duckworth. Do we really need a law to tell us that anyone willing to Serve in the US military might be someone we want to thank instead of deport? Apparently so-- seeing as the current resident of our White House who called it 'a dump' and took multiple deferments in order to avoid defending us chose Stephen Miller to do his talking."

Jenny Marshall is the courageous progressive running for the North Carolina seat occupied by one of Congress' worst bigots, Virginia Foxx. Jenny told us that her great grandparents "came to America from Poland and settled in Chicago. My grandfather didn't speak a word of English until he went to Kindergarten. This is a familiar story for millions of American's who can trace their roots to immigrants who flocked to this country for a better life and a place they could call home. Under Trump's RAISE plan my great grandparents and others like them would not have been allowed to come here. These immigrant newcomers become part of their communities. They join PTAs at their children's school, buy houses, learn a trade, start businesses and even serve our country in the military. They weave their story into the fabric that becomes America. But, frankly, our immigration system needs an overhaul. It is difficult to maneuver, subjective and is often out of reach for those who truly need to flee their home country for a better life. We could do much better. Take for instance Senator Tammy Duckworth's newly introduced legislation which could remedy a current injustice where non citizen men and women who serve in our military are subject to deportation. Do we really want to be a nation who deports our veterans? I say no and I support her efforts to right the wrong here. We must prioritize these servicemembers' path to citizenship and allow them to remain in the country they fought so bravely to protect."

David Gill is the progressive physician running for Congress against rubber stamp Republican hack Rodney Davis in Illinois' 13th district. This morning he told us that Trump and the Republicans "unveiled an immigration bill that is nothing more than an ethnic purity test. No matter what Trump tells you, his immigration policies will not improve our economy or make us safer. This is just more of the same unadulterated bigotry that we've seen time and time again from this man, and I look forward to getting to Congress in January 2019 to stand in his way when he seeks to discriminate against people based on their religion, nationality, gender, or sexual orientation. I'm proud to see my senator, Tammy Duckworth, propose bills to protect veterans from deportation. It's obvious that deportation of such veterans smacks of the same bigotry we see demonstrated repeatedly by the commander-in-chief. I'm a 24-year member of the American Civil Liberties Union, and I can't wait to get to work eliminating such naked racism from our federal government."

A Quick Senate Scorecard

Chuck Schumer, your next Democratic Senate Minority Leader (source)

by Gaius Publius

I want to offer a quick Senate scorecard for the upcoming election, not just races to watch and their current status, but the effect of the races on the "final score" — control of the Senate until the wipeout in 2018 puts the Republicans firmly in control.

To do this, I want to organize the races the way basketball or football analysts look at your favorite college team's upcoming season — games grouped by Should Be Easy, Tough Call, On the Bubble, Would Take a Miracle. For this exercise, we'll ignore the baked-in results in places like California (Democratic and will stay that way), and list the races to watch by these categories:

• Washouts — four contests (IL, WI, OH, FL)
• No Change — one contest (CO)
• Possible Flips — three contests (NH, PA, IN)
• Toss Ups — three contests (NV, NC, MO)
• and one Wild Card race — Alaska

We will look briefly at these 12 races. Others may disagree, but it looks to me like these are the ones to watch.

For reference, the state of the Senate today is:

• Republicans: 54 seats
• Democrats: 44 seats
• Independents: 2 seats (caucus with Democrats)

No independent is up for reelection this cycle. Democrats need a net pickup of +4 to tie in the Senate (50-50) and +5 to take it outright (ignoring for now the "60 vote rule" that makes sure no progressive legislation gets passed). Here are races in each group, with the likeliest outcomes by group in parentheses.

Washouts (+2 D)

The "washout" states are those where one party has conceded the race by withdrawing money. All four seats are held by Republicans. Two of the Democrats have washed out, as have two of the Republicans. These are:

Illinois, currently Republican
Winner should be Tammy Duckworth (D)

Wisconsin, currently Republican
Winner should be Russ Feingold (D)

Ohio, currently Republican
Winner should be Rob Portman (R)

Florida, currently Republican
Winner should be Marco Rubio (R)

Net result: +2 Democrats.

From Electoral-Vote.com:

Democratic challenger Patrick Murphy in Florida, incumbent Republican Mark Kirk in Illinois, Democratic challenger Ted Strickland in Ohio, and incumbent Republican Ron Johnson in Wisconsin are doing badly enough that their parties either have already cut off the money (the two Republicans), or are close to doing so (the two Democrats).

I think most would call these races closed. (Note: Chuck Schumer actively interfered with progressive challengers in Florida and Ohio. The +2 Democrats could easily be +4 Democrats in this category, absent that interference.)

No Change

This category could be larger (I had the New Hampshire race here at first), but let's play it safe.

Colorado, currently Democratic
Winner should be Michael Bennet (D)

The Hill on Bennet:

Once viewed as one of the only ripe opportunities for Republicans, Bennet appears poised to sail to reelection. Republicans aren’t coming to the aid of Darryl Glenn, a county commissioner who trumpeted his conservative bona fides during the primary. But he’ll need to look beyond his base in a state that Obama carried twice and also has a large Latino population.

Michael Bennet is this guy, by the way, from 2014: "Shorter Republicans: "We forgive Michael Bennet for trying to win the Senate." Shorter Sen. Bennet: "Glad we're still friends.""

Possible Flips (+2 D, Maybe)

These are fairly close races where the Democrat could flip a Republican seat. I have three of these:

New Hampshire, currently Republican
Leader is Kelly Ayotte (R)

Pennsylvania, currently Republican
Leader is McGinty (D)

Indiana, was Republican, now open
Leader is Bayh (D)

If the current leader wins each seat: +2 Democrats, but this is iffy.

In New Hampshire, Ayotte is surging at the moment (+8 in the latest Marist poll), but she's coming from behind. Hassan could take it, but I'm not confident.

The Hill on the Pennsylvania race:

The presidential race appears to be trickling into Toomey’s reelection. Political observers in the state say he’s running a strong campaign, but his dip in the polls is largely thanks to the top of the ticket.

Toomey continues to withhold his support from Trump. But his opponent, Katie McGinty, a little-known former gubernatorial chief of staff, has been helped by Clinton’s consistent lead over Trump in the Keystone State. McGinty has maintained a lead since mid-July, though one survey has Toomey up 7 points.

RealClearPolitics has this race a wash, but I think Toomey has the edge. In Indiana, Bayh is only up by single digits, but has never trailed.

(Note: Chuck Schumer actively interfered with non-Democratic establishment Joe Sestak in the Democratic primary, who might easily have beaten Toomey. If Schumer-chosen candidate McGinty fails to win, it will be because of Schumer.)

Too Close To Call (A Wash)

There are three races here — Nevada, North Carolina, Missouri — and Republicans are defending two of the three seats. (Nevada is an open seat, but was Democratic.)

Nevada, was Democratic, now open
Joe Heck (R) has a slight lead over Catherine Cortez Masto (D)

North Carolina, currently Republican
Richard Burr (R) has a low single-digit lead over Deborah Ross (D)

Missouri, currently Republican
Roy Blunt leads Jason Kander (D), but not by much

Republicans flip one seat if all three leaders win. Most likely positive case for the Democrats is no change (two wins and one loss). If Democrats win out: +2 Democrats.

Subtotal (+2 D or +4 D)

If you're counting the total to this point, Democrats are up +2 among the Washout races, then it's a wash until the Too Close To Call races, where there's either no change (more likely) or they go up +2 (by winning them all).

In other words, our best case gives the Democrats +4 seats, and our middle case gives them +2 seats. That's not enough to take the Senate.

(Note again, that Schumer's interference in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania have reduced these totals. Instead of "+2 Democrats or +4 Democrats" so far, the call would have been " +4 or +6" — putting full control of the Senate within reach.)

Wild Card Race: Alaska

Alaska is a Republican seat at the moment, with Lisa Murkowski defending it. A pro-Sanders Democrat is in position to win the seat — and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) wants him to lose (!).

Howie has written about the Alaska race here:

[T]he populist Democratic Party in the state-- which gave Bernie a 81.6% to 18.4% landslide over Hillary and massive victories in every single electoral district (numbers that beat Trump too)-- also nominated Ray Metcalfe, a former Anchorage state Rep who was one of the state's original Bernie for President organizers. Although he won the party nomination, 15,198 to 10,074, Metcalfe is not a Schumer kind of candidate....

The DSCC (and Alaska's grotesquely corrupt Democratic Party establishment) are worried that-- with teabagger and Trumpist Joe Miller in the race as a Libertarian and tearing Murkowski apart from the right-- Metcalfe could actually win. ... That's how Schumer's reptilian mind works. So he's encouraging a proven corruptionist buddy of his, Mark Begich, to mount a last minute write-in campaign to draw votes away from Metcalfe and throw the election to Murkowski!

More from Electoral-vote.com (my emphasis)

Alaska looks like it's going to become a free-for-all. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) is running for reelection, trying to keep a seat that she last won as a write-in candidate after being primaried by tea partier Joe Miller. She could end up facing four viable opponents: Ray Metcalfe (the Democratic nominee), Margaret Stock (an independent with a very impressive resume), Miller (who's back, as the recently-chosen nominee of the Libertarian Party), and possibly former Democratic senator Mark Begich (who may run—wait for it—as a write-in candidate). 30% of the vote could very well win this thing.

Schumer has succeeded in sabotaging every race he has tried to sabotage, so I'll give Murkowski and Schumer the win.

Alaska, currently Republican
Lisa Murkowski (R) has the edge in a five-person race

Net change (if Schumer succeeds): None.

Your Most Likely 2017 Senate

The most likely 2017 Senate, the high point of the bell-shaped curve, if all current likelihoods hold, appears to be this:

• Republican: 52 or 50 seats
• Democrats: 46 or 48 seats
• Independents: 2 seats (caucus with Democrats)

By sabotaging the Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and possibly Alaska races, Schumer (a) may well have handed Republicans control of the Senate, but (b) will have assured his own personal, hand-picked control of the Democratic minority that remains. In Schumer's world, that must count has a win-win. I can't imagine any other motivation for this ... what, debacle? betrayal?

Anyway, here's a scorecard to follow as these races evolve. For the Democrats to reach 50 seats, watch the Too Close To Call races, plus Alaska.

GP

Clear Choice For Democrats In The Open IL-08 Seat

State Senator Mike Noland, progressive Democrat

Now that Tom Cullerton has dropped out of the race to replace Tammy Duckworth as Representative from Illinois's 8th Congressional District-- Chicago's northwest suburbs, Elgin and Schaumburg-- there is a clear two-man choice. On the one hand you have corporate Dem Raja Krishnamoorthi, and on the other you have proven progressive state Senator Mike Noland, who Blue America endorsed in April.

Krishnamoorthi is the kind of guy who says anything he thinks his listener wants to hear. His actions, though, speak louder than his recent pandering to progressives. In his 2010 losing campaign for state comptroller, Krishnamoorthi took nearly $75,000 worth of support from Spry Solutions, a company that specializes in outsourcing jobs to India. In fact, he ran his campaign from their office.

Krishnamoorthi hasn't fooled Blue America and, hopefully, won't fool voters in IL-08, where 64% of likely Democratic primary voters identify themselves as liberal while only 11% identify as conservative. A poll that was taken before Cullerton dropped out showed the primary wide open. A plurality of likely voters were undecided; it was Noland 22%, Krishnamoorthi 18%, undecided 32%. After only positive messaging about each of the candidates, Mike Noland pulled ahead among likely primary voters with 35% of the vote, to 22% for Krishnamoorthi and just 13% undecided.

IL-08 is a progressive district that is looking to support a pro-union, progressive candidate. Mike Noland’s record and biography fit this district, and he starts this race with a solid base of support in his state Senate district. With the resources to communicate his message and the ability to turn out targeted voters, he can win this competitive Democratic primary in March.

Noland is the lead sponsor of a bill in the Illinois General Assembly to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana. Here's what he told us about this issue at the end of May:

The time has come to allow patients to gain access to medical marijuana. Too many people are unnecessarily suffering when there is a natural alternative that can provide much relief from pain and other debilitating symptoms.

The medical community provides more than enough justification to legalize marijuana for medical purposes.

The American Medical Association has long supported research on medical marijuana.

What is known is that the ‘high’ experienced by those who use marijuana is from only one component: Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC.  What’s more, our bodies contain a natural cannabinoid that regulates health and wellness.  Indeed, our systems are pre-programmed to work with the active ingredient in marijuana, THC, which may be superior to narcotic painkillers for neuropathy, or nerve pain. Moreover, marijuana can decrease the amount of narcotics needed for pain relief. Yet the science is unequivocal, unlike narcotic painkillers, marijuana has only the same addictive potential as caffeine.

Marijuana’s main side effect is euphoria, and is often used as a sedative for cancer patients. In fact, it is currently being studied as a treatment for various forms of cancer itself.

The medical use of marijuana has also been shown to relieve the affects of both symptoms and the pain associated with AIDS/HIV, Arthritis, Asthma, Chronic Pain, Crohn’s Disease, Epilepsy, Glaucoma and Multiple Sclerosis. So, many people are suffering unnecessarily when there is a real possibility for hope and relief.

I am proud of my past support of this cause in the Illinois Senate and plan to continue to support the science-based policy of legalized medical marijuana.

His bill passed 62-53 in the House and 37-19 in the Senate. Mike's been great on TPP as well.

Having served in the Illinois General Assembly for the past eight years now, I know that budget sweeps are among the most undisciplined and unprincipled actions a legislator can take. Funds earmarked for designated programs must be protected. Medicare is a sacred program that provides millions of seniors with the health care services they need. Demanding that funds for job training come from Medicare is just another example of Tea Party Republicans' attempt to dismantle any form of a social safety net.

Here's what he told us on his platform:

If elected to Congress I hope to carry on the work that I have started in the state legislature. As a progressive member of Congress I would continue to (1) be a leader on campaign finance reform, (2) be a fighter for universal health care (which could include single payer), and (3) help ensure that we find solutions to stem the effects of climate change.

I’ve been a keen leader on campaign finance reform throughout my time in the state Senate. In 2009 I was a lead co-sponsor of IL SB 1466, which for the first time introduced campaign contribution limits for candidates running in Illinois. Not only did this legislation introduce limiting the amount individuals and PACs could donate to campaigns, it also created greater transparency by requiring all contributions over $1,000 be reported (and posted publicly) within 5 days, and required candidates to disclose their contributions each quarter (instead of only twice a year). In 2013 I helped pass a joint-resolution that urged Congress to adopt a constitutional amendment to reverse the Citizens United decision and clearly define that CORPORATIONS ARE NOT INDVIDUALS. During the current legislative session I am carrying a bill that will create a first of its kind system of public financing campaigns in Illinois. I hope to go to Congress and work with members of the progressive caucus to pass campaign finance reform legislation that can curb the influence of money in our electoral process.

Even before the ACA was passed, it came under constant assault from the Tea Party and Republicans who were unhappy with its goals and accomplishments. I believe that we must stand up and protect the ACA, while continuing to expand its reach and create greater access to quality healthcare for more Americans. As an IL State Senator, I worked on legislation that could start the process of creating a Single Payer system in Illinois.

Finally, while deniers exist, we have to accept the damage that our environment has suffered as we live with the affects of climate change. I’ve served on the IL Senate Energy Committee and have worked to find practical solutions that allow for the expansion of renewable sources of energy. I’ve been very proud of my work with a local manufacturer of wind turbines in my district. Finding more sources of renewable energy is good for consumers, business, and our environment.

The choice is clear: Mike has been a stalwart and effective progressive in the state legislature; Krishnamoorthi is a corporate Democrat with different priorities. If you'd like to help Mike Noland win the seat... here's the place.

Beltway Dems Coalescing Around Tammy Duckworth For The Illinois Senate Seat

Blue America has a page devoted to progressives running for the U.S. Senate in 2016. There aren't many candidates so far; we're looking forward to adding Russ Feingold (D-WI) soon. But we know our endorsement list isn't going to get too long. You've probably read how CitiGroup and other Wall Street banksters have been threatening the DSCC because they claim progressives like Elizabeth Warren are gaining too much influence. The move this week to put Wall Street whore Chuck Schumer into the top Democratic leadership job is meant as a peace-offering to the banksters. But the Beltway Democratic Establishment had already been going out of its way to recruit mediocre and conservative candidates to appease the Wall Street predators. Tragically, the political leaders who will stand firm for the legitimate aspirations of America's working families, not for the monied special interests, aren't ones favored by the DSCC.

Few DSCC recruits are as overtly bad as Florida New Dem Patrick Murphy but uninspiring careerists as candidates will likely keep Blue America out of hot contests in New Hampshire, Ohio, California and North Carolina. And Illinois. Yesterday Tammy Duckworth announced she's challenging vulnerable wishy-washy Republican incumbent Mark Kirk. The two other potential candidates the DSCC was looking at-- Blue Dog Cheri Bustos and New Dem Bill Foster-- are even worse than she is. But that doesn't make her any good. Here are their Progressive Punch lifetime crucial vote scores:

• Tammy Duckworth- 65.11
• Bill Foster- 56.00
• Cheri Bustos- 44.03

The best Member of the Illinois congressional delegation to challenge Kirk would be Jan Schakowsky, whose 96.61 score is the 4th best in the whole House. The DSCC, predictably, did not show any interest in recruiting her. New-comer Robin Kelly is also considering a run. Her score is 87.34 but few consider her a viable candidate at this point. The Establishment seems to be coalescing around Duckworth as the Democrat with the best chance to beat Kirk.

Duckworth is an Army veteran who lost both her legs and sustained damage to her arm when a helicopter she was co-piloting in Iraq was shot down. Kirk is also a veteran and is disabled from a stroke he suffered in January 2012.

...Sen. Richard J. Durbin, who has been a champion for Duckworth, told CQ Roll Call in January he thinks Democrats will work to avoid a messy nomination process... [T]he electorate is expected to be much more favorable for Democrats in 2016. President Barack Obama carried his home state by double-digit margins in 2008 and 2012. Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who is expected to announce a presidential bid within weeks, could see similar support and boost down-ballot Democrats.

Despite an inspiring personal story, Duckworth is a run-of-the-mill politician, an ally of Rahm Emanuel's, who is likely to vote with the party leadership and not make waves in the caucus. She's no Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders or Sherrod Brown-- which is why you won't find her on this page despite being a better choice than Mark Kirk.

Alan Grayson-- Helping Save The Republic

Aside from running his own race in the Orlando area (FL-09), which, in the 3 latest polls, finds him up against his unhinged rival, Todd Long, by 15 points, 16 points and 18 points, Alan Grayson has been busy giving advice and raising campaign money for progressives all over the country. He helped Lee Rogers figure out how to run a grassroots campaign against an entrenched corrupt incumbent in CA-25. He bolstered Beto O'Rourke in El Paso after Beto's primary win brought him face to face with the ugly and corrupt side of Insider the Beltway corruptionists. He raised more money for progressive challengers than any other candidate for Congress. And now he's getting serious. Grayson has been warning voters about some of the worst miscreants seeking reelection to Congress this year.

On Friday Grayson sent out an e-mail blast to his supporters with the subject line: "He Shouldn't Be In Congress." He was talking about cartoonish Miami-Dade County crime figure David Rivera and he includes a model in a suit with black and white stripes with the caption, "David Rivera would look good in this." With the FBI Hot on his trail, we'll probably soon see if he does.

As I noted a few months ago, a tsunami isn't normal sea water. It's a filthy sludge, brimming with dead fish and farm animals, dead trees, construction debris, garbage, mud and sewage. A giant wave of gunk and junk.

What a perfect metaphor to describe the many accidental Congressmen who were swept into Congress in the Tea Party tsunami of 2010.

Here's a good example: Rep. David Rivera, of Miami.

Where shall we begin? A domestic abuse charge was filed in Miami in 1994 against "David M. Rivera." Rep. Rivera says that it was a different "David M. Rivera," not him. But a friend of the victim says that Rep. Rivera and the victim attended a dinner party at her house, as a couple. And the victim's mother worked for Rivera's campaign. Just coincidences, Rivera says. Rivera, like OJ Simpson, surely will devote the rest of his life to finding the true perpetrator.

In 2002, Rep. Rivera ran for the Florida State House of Representatives. A truck carrying thousands of anti-Rivera mailers was on its way to the post office, to meet a deadline. On the highway, in the middle lane, a car deliberately smashed into the truck. The truck was forced to the side of the road, and the mailers did not go out on time. The car was driven by... David Rivera. David M. Rivera. Another coincidence, I'm sure.

During the time that Rep. Rivera served in the Florida House, he reported in sworn documents that his only source of outside income, for seven years, was his work as a consultant for the US Agency for International Development. There was only one problem with that story-- USAID has no record of ever employing him.

So how did Rivera make his money? Well, in 2008, Rivera was an outspoken and determined proponent of an initiative to approve slot machines at Flagler Dog Track and other locations. And the Flagler Dog Track made $500,000 in secret payments to Rivera, which Rivera omitted from his financial disclosure.

Another coincidence.

I do think that the taxpayers should be paying for David Rivera's room and board. But I don't think that the federal institution at which Rivera serves should be the U.S. Congress.

David Rivera should not be in Congress. And we have a good chance to get rid of him, on Nov. 6.

Reminding his readers that Rivera is a stain on Congress' reputation that needs to be removed, he endorsed Democrat Joe Garcia. And the following day, Grayson was doing the same thing for Tammy Duckworth in Illinois. She's the Democratic opponent for loudmouthed phony-baloney teabagger Joe Walsh. [Note: Eagle Joe Walsh has endorsed Tammy Duckworth.]

Joe Walsh. The great, great guitarist for the Eagles. As much as I have enjoyed listening to his riffs over the years, I don't think that Joe Walsh, the guitarist, should be in Congress.

Also Joe Walsh, the Congressman. He shouldn't be in Congress, neither.

Like David Rivera, about whom I wrote yesterday, Joe Walsh is another Member of Congress whom the cat drug in two years ago. But at least Rivera recognizes that silence is a virtue. Joe Walsh is without virtues.

Joe Walsh said that Barack Obama was elected President only "because he pushed that magical button: a black man who was articulate, liberal-- the whole white guilt [thing], all of that."

Joe Walsh didn't pay his child support.

Joe Walsh, like my opponent Todd Long, drove on a suspended license. (Although in Walsh's case, unlike Long's, the media actually reported it.)

Last year, a Walsh constituent suggested to Walsh that the banks had been responsible for the Crash of 2008. Walsh swore at her.

The Democrats nominated Tammy Duckworth to face Walsh. Duckworth, a helicopter pilot, lost both legs and the use of one arm in Iraq. Joe Walsh callously whined, "My God, that's all she talks about. Our true heroes, the men and women who served us, it's the last thing in the world they talk about."

And on Thursday night, in a debate, Joe Walsh said that "you can't find one instance" of abortion being necessary to save the life of the mother. (Six hundred American women die from pregnancy each year.)

So our choice is between Tammy Duckworth, war hero, and Joe Walsh, irresponsible loudmouth. Hmmmmmm.

Joe Walsh should not be in Congress. And we have a good chance to get rid of him, on Nov. 6.

If you're ready to make a last minute contribution to campaigns where Grayson thinks it will help make a better Congress and a better America, this page and this page are my two favorites.

Joe Walsh-- The Dream Opponent... But Will He Resign Now?

Forget for a moment that Joe Walsh is a deranged extremist with the most radical right perspective of almost any Member of Congress (not counting Paul Broun and Allen West). Even forget for a moment, if you can, that Walsh is such an Ayn Rand fanatic that he refused to pay over $100,000 in child support for the three children he abandoned from his first marriage. He's truly a horrible person-- although he constantly tries convincing his constituents he's just an average Joe. When he got evicted from his fancy condo for not paying his mortgage, he claimed he's just like everybody else and voters understand his problems. When he welshed on his campaign debts and refused to pay his staffers for their work, he said the same thing. When it was reported that he has federal and state tax liens for not paying taxes in the '80s and '90s he said he's just like everyone else. But not everyone inherited trust funds from grandpa. When he was pleading poverty and running up $117,437 in missed child support payments, the deadbeat dad of the year was enjoying exotic luxury vacations and loaning his political campaign $35,000. He had the temerity to say that your "average guy" doesn't pay their child support either. Hideous man-- who has suckered the moronic teabaggers who support him.

When he first ran for Congress in 1996 he "positioned himself as a socially liberal Republican who favored abortion rights and gun control measures-- sharp contrasts to the staunchly conservative stances he now holds. "I think I'm the kind of Republican who can win because I'm open and tolerant," Walsh told the Tribune at the time. "I'm not some right-wing conservative." In 2010 he won because he ran against a hated corporate Democrat and Chamber of Commerce shill, Melissa Bean, a victim of that years' Great Blue Dog Apocalypse." Having taken expensive acting lessons at the Lee Strasberg Theatre and Film Institute in both NYC and L.A., he decided to play the role of teabagger next. It fit him well.

He also decided to stop paying for car insurance-- typical behavior of Ayn Rand type sociopaths and social parasites-- and his drivers license was revoked. Nonpartisan watch dog group CREW has named him one of the 14 most corrupt Members of Congress and last September a circuit court judge issued a preliminary ruling against Walsh in his contentious child-support dispute with his first wife, ordering Walsh to pay up and chastising his attorney for his refusal to appear in court. The judge also wanted to know why Walsh failed to appear. The attorney haughtily replied, "Mr. Walsh is a U.S. congressman" and, infuriated, the judge said, "Well, he’s no different than anyone else." Which is, after all, just what Walsh is always saying about himself. And that brings us to the 4th of July festivities.

True to character, Walsh, a dedicated warmonger, shirked military service. He's always seen it, like most Republican chickenhawks, as something that suckers do, not winners on their way to the top. On Sunday he disparaged his Democratic opponent, Tammy Duckworth, and her military service at a town hall meeting in Elk Grove. Let me just say that DWT doesn't support Duckworth. Politically, she's a product of the Rahm Emanuel Machine and a conservative New Dem to boot. But that doesn't mean we don't honor her sacrifice to the country-- and abhor Walsh's craven attacks against her for that very service! The man is an utter disgrace. And Duckworth, a double amputee who lost both legs piloting a Black Hawk helicopter in battle in Iraq, courageously dedicated her life since then to her fellow veterans, fighting for them every single day in both the Illinois and U.S. Departments of Veterans Affairs. Yesterday she went right back at the unapologetic Walsh during an interview with MSNBC’s Martin Bashir.

"If anybody highlights my military service, it’s Mr. Walsh, who actually attacked it on a regular basis. Yes, my wounds do inform my discussions with the constituents when I talk about health care. I know very deeply in a deeply personal way what access to affordable health care means, so when he votes against Medicare for our seniors not once, but three times, he’s voting against the people of the district. So yes, I talk about the fact that had I not had the great health care that I have from the VA, I would probably be bankrupt and that’s why we need to make sure we preserve Medicare as we know it."

Calls for Walsh's resignation have been echoing across the nation all day. The nonpartisan VoteVets PAC went ballistic, and kicked off the demands that Walsh resign: "Joe Walsh’s disgust for our veterans’ sacrifices knows no bounds. First, he falsely and maliciously claims that Tammy Duckworth, a veteran who lost her legs in Iraq didn’t have much of a record of service. Now, he denigrates that same American hero for talking about how her experience shaped her worldview and strengthened her resolve to serve even more-– a conversation that isn’t just legitimate to have, but crucial as America charts its course domestically and internationally. This is a new low for this deadbeat dad. Telling a veteran to shut up on the 4th of July is beyond the pale. We are past the point of calling on Joe Walsh to apologize. He should step aside and stop embarrassing his district and America."

So where's Speaker John Boehner? Not a peep out of him-- at least not as of this writing. Is he on a bender of just avoiding a very sticky situation for himself? After all, it was Boehner who persuaded Walsh to give up a relatively safe seat and go after Duckworth. His initial instincts had been to primary weak GOP freshman Randy Hultgren-- their two districts were merged-- but Boehner dangled some cash ($3.5 million) under his nose. Boehner-- who is said to detest Walsh personally and view him as a clown and a distraction-- can make these kinds of promises because right-wing mobster Sheldon Adelson has given him $5 million to play around with in the upcoming election, money Adelson got from running a prostitution business in China. But how long will Boehner be able to hide before someone forces him to either stand behind his boy Walsh or denounce him for what he is?

What They Hell Is Wrong With Richard Burr? Hurting Vets Isn't Enough-- Now He Wants To Spread Cancer And Heart Disease?

A couple days ago Rachel Maddow blew the whistle on the block North Carolina's obstructionist Senator Richard Burr's has on the nomination of Tammy Duckworth for a job in the Veteran's Affairs Department. Duckworth, who is universally recognized as one of the country's most forceful and effective advocates for vets when she ran the Illinois Veteran's Affairs Dept is a highly decorated officer in the National Guard who lost both legs in combat in Iraq. Maddow to Burr: "How about diligently doing the right thing right now and picking a different high horse to ride in on, ok?"

Burr, another garden variety Republican vet-hating war-monger and extremist, avoided the military because he was too busy selling lawn furniture for seventeen years and forging ties with the Big Business interests that would later finance his political career. He's on the Senate Armed Services Committee and is the ranking Repug on the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee. The only pro-war bill he ever opposed was on May 24, 2007, not because it made emergency supplemental appropriations for our military in Iraq, but because it also included appropriations to support efforts to save New Orleans (i.e., African Americans) from the ravages of Hurricane Katrina. The bill passed 80-14 despite Burr's obstinate Jesse Helm's imitation.

Now about Burr's ongoing campaign to spread cancer and heart disease. Is that hyperbole? Not really. On Thursday the House passed the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act 298-112, with seventy Republicans telling John Boehner he could stuff his tobacco bribery checks where the sun don't shine, crossing the aisle and voting with the Democrats. Burr, who has taken more bribes from Big Tobacco than any other member of Congress except Miss McConnell-- yes even more than notorious tobacco whores John Boehner (R-OH) and Eric Cantor (R-VA)-- has never ceased battling against legislation regulating his paymasters in the tobacco companies. He has been Congress' chief opponent to warning labels and now he's vowing to filibuster the bill the House just passed, which seeks to lower the number of deaths-- currently 400,000 per year-- related to smoking tobacco.

President Obama supports the bill and his administration issued a statement explaining why:

Cigarette smoking is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States and is a contributing factor to scores of diseases and conditions inflicting misery upon millions of our citizens. Further, tobacco use is a major factor driving the increasing costs of health care in the U.S. and accounts for over a hundred billion dollars annually in financial costs to the economy.

When the House passed the same bill in 2008, Burr had threatened a filibuster then too-- and Bush said even if the Senate passed it, he would veto it. There were 60 Senate sponsors at the time, not enough to override a veto, so they just put it off for a year. Now they'll just need to shut down Burr's filibuster-- and that takes 60 votes. Supporters have closer to 70.

Richard Burr's Obstructionist Jihad Tagets American Veterans

Invariably, whenever I point out that Jim DeMint (R-SC) is the worst, most venal obstructionist in the Senate, I get letters from readers in North Carolina pointing out I've picked the wrong obstructionist from the wrong Carolina. They claim it's their own venal obstructionist, Richard Burr, a Jesse Helms throwback, who is the worst. It also looks like he may be toast, although he's not going to go down without a fight. Burr's strategy: obstructionism today, obstructionism tomorrow, obstructionism forever. Maybe he ought to take a look who won the presidential race in North Carolina. And the senate race; and the gubernatorial race. And at which party has lost been losing House seats.

Apparently, though, none of this means squat to Burr. As Rachel Maddow pointed out so beautifully, he really is a very sick man. I have no words to add to what she said: