Has Republican Obstructionist Dave Reichert Met His Match? Suzan DelBene Jumps Into The Race In WA-08

Early this morning Politico posted a short feature on the next race against rubber stamp Republican backbencher Dave Reichert. DWT readers will be familiar with Reichert and the suburban 8th CD outside of Seattle because of the heroic campaigns of Darcy Burner in 2006 and 2008. (Darcy, who will be a Blue America guest at Firedoglake this coming Saturday at 11am, PT, scored 49% (59,268 voters) against Reichert in 2006 and 47% (171,358 voters) this past November). Obama beat McCain 57-42% and the PVI for the district has gone from a D+2 to a D+3. Reichert looks like he has a big, fat target on his back.

The point of the Politico piece is that "for the third consecutive election cycle, Reichert could face a well-funded, former Microsoft employee" and that Suz DelBene is less of a liberal and more "moderate" than Darcy. Politico completely bought into the meme that Reichert supporters in the media have been able to perpetuate, namely that Darcy lost because she was too liberal and too close to "the blogs." There is no evidence of this; just nonsense spread by the Reichert camp.

Interestingly the new candidate, Suzan DelBene, is probably just as progressive, especially on social issues, as Darcy. But she's trying to create an imagine as a pro-business moderate. I hope she doesn't make the mistake of getting onto an anti-working family path. Reichert, who has taken a staggering $1,088,931 in legalized bribes from the financial/insurance/real estate sector, has been a dependable handmaiden for the banksters against ordinary American families-- always. For example, in early March he wasn't among the few Republicans who crossed the aisle to vote for the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009, which will allow bankruptcy judges to work with lenders and borrowers to readjust the terms of mortgages to keep families in their homes. This lockstep anti-family vote came despite the fact that the projected foreclosure numbers for WA-08 over the next 4 years show 13,204 families losing their homes. But, as usual, Reichert was more interested in Republican Party tactics of obstruction than in the well-being of his own constituents.

Friends in Bellevue tell me DelBene is a great candidate with lots of money and a strong impulse towards social justice. They tell me to ignore her overtures towards the establishment and the Democratic strategy of painting her as a middle of the road Democrat. The middle of the road thing sure was pushed in the Politico piece.

“Her business experience suits her very well at a time when economic issues are at the forefront of people’s minds,” said DelBene lead consultant Kelly Evans, who led Democratic Gov. Christine Gregoire’s reelection efforts last year. “Suzan has progressive values, but she also brings a business approach to fiscal matters.”

...“She’s very different than Darcy. I think it’s a matter of style and the way she approaches people. This woman is polished and professional, she’s low-key and people listen to her,” said King County Democratic Party Chairwoman Susan Sheary. “I’ve watched her several times go in cold into meetings and events where she knows no one, and before you know it, the room is hush and everyone’s listening.”

The two candidates have also cultivated distinctly different constituencies. Burner, a regular contributor to the liberal blog Daily Kos who launched her second campaign with an anti-war video, was embraced by the Netroots, which donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to her campaign.

But her liberal politics, though well-suited for online activists, limited her appeal in the moderate suburban seat. She twice lost narrowly in suburban King County, which casts roughly 80 percent of the district vote, and lost by wider margins in Pierce County, which casts the remainder.

Where Burner talked about the war in Iraq, DelBene on her campaign website focuses on investment, jobs and the economy-- with no mention of the war. And as she meets with local Democrats, she emphasizes her business background.

In an interview with Politico, DelBene argued the party’s problems over the past several elections stem from its inability to reach out to blue-collar voters in the district’s outer suburbs in Pierce County and southern King County.

“It’s important we represent not only the northern part of the district but also the southern part of our district that’s more rural and has a different economy than up here,” said DelBene. “We need to address both sides of the district.”

Why Are Republican Congressional Candidates Sinking Everywhere In The Country?

It starts with abysmal leadership

For months we've been predicting significant gains for Democrats running for Congress in every part of the country. This morning it's official: Carl Hulse and David Herszenhorn have affirmed it in the NY Times. Covering for laughable Inside-the-Beltway myopia, they claim that "analysts now predict a Democratic surge on a scale that seemed unlikely just weeks ago, with even some Republicans in traditional strongholds fighting for their political careers, and Democratic leaders dreaming of ironclad majorities." And they blame the Wall Street meltdown, rather than a gestalt where the Wall Street meltdown and whatever follows it is a symptom of now loathed Republican misrule.

As we've explained before, the open Republican seats in Virginia, New Mexico and Colorado are out of grasp of the extreme rightists running for those seats. McCain strategists have written off Elizabeth Dole in North Carolina and Al Franken just whipped Norm Coleman in two consecutive Minnesota polls. John Sununu (R-NH) has had a big "loser" sign painted on him all year and it's never coming off and the news on Gordon Smith has been so terrible-- I mean the guy;s frozen food factory was busted for employing undocumented workers a few weeks ago-- that it's hard to imagine that in the current electoral climate he can win. Much depends on the outcome of his bribery trial but corrupt Alaska Senator Ted Stevens has come out on the wrong side of every poll in the last 5 or 6 months. One of the two Mississippi races, Wicker's re-election bid, looks very rocky, And although they are tougher races, Democratic challengers have shots in Texas, Maine, Georgia, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Idaho, and Nebraska.

In the House, Democrats say they could capture a dozen of the 26 Republican seats left open by retirements, and challengers are closing in on Republican incumbents in Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New York and elsewhere.

“The last week has severely damaged Republican candidates,” said Stuart Rothenberg, a nonpartisan analyst who predicts that Democrats could gain as many as six to nine Senate seats and 25 to 30 House seats. “Everything points to warning signals for Republicans.”

If such projections by Mr. Rothenberg and others are realized, it would push Senate Democrats tantalizingly close to the filibuster-proof 60-vote majority that has eluded Senate leaders since the late 1970s. While the environment could change again in the remaining weeks, recent polling suggests a fundamental shift, with Republicans absorbing more of the blame for the economic uncertainty.

At the same time, the political arms of Congressional Republicans are being outspent-- their House organization recently borrowed $8 million-- and have fewer targets, with only a handful of Democrats in Florida, Louisiana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wisconsin and in potential trouble.

Republicans are understandably nervous.

...Strategists for both parties say Republican House and Senate candidates are being hurt by the dip in support for Senator John McCain at the top of the ticket, frustrating Republicans who had initially viewed Mr. McCain as a strong asset who could appeal to independents and even moderate Democrats and protect Republicans in a tough year.

But the market volatility and perceived Democratic edge on handling the economy has evidently turned voters to Democrats, a view supported by one top adviser to Republican candidates.

“This financial crisis has provided momentum to Barack Obama and other Democrats, and their campaigns now have the wind at their backs,” said the consultant, who asked not to be identified speaking pessimistically about the Republican outlook.

Look at the upstate New York race that pits progressive Democrat Dan Maffei against reactionary Republican Dale Sweetland. A brand new poll shows Maffei with an 18 point lead! And it's far more than just the pinch in people's wallets. The feeling everywhere in the country is that the Republican Party has strayed too far from the mainstream and have lost touch with regular Americans. Republican registration has plummeted while Democratic registration is through the roof. But pick any serious race-- or even one of the dozens of races rapidly becoming serious-- and you'll see why Democrats are ahead and moving further ahead. Let me pull one up at random--- eenie, meanie, minie, Joe... yes Joe Knollenberg serving his eighth term representing moderate, suburban Oakland County near Detroit (MI-09). If the guy was ever on the ball he's completely lost it. Forget for a moment that he's been a Bush rubber stamp on every single issue domestic and foreign and forget that he flip-flopped on Paulson's Wall Street bailout-- against it like his constituents, and then for it like his campaign contributors ($362,500 from Finance, Insurance and Real Estate). Instead think about what kind of an utterly out-of-touch mentality it takes to buy into a late night comedy show punchline like this:

Knollenberg said Wednesday he had asked Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Republican John McCain's running mate, to campaign with him in Oakland County. McCain's campaign pulled out of Michigan last week and Palin said she was disappointed by the tactical move.

"She's an exciting lady. She's somebody who knows something about the real world. The governor of Alaska obviously is very much involved in national security because Alaska touches very close to Russia and Russia is not all that happy with us right now nor are we with them," Knollenberg said.

Highlighting the absurdity of Knollenberg's flight from reality, the Michigan Democratic Party has invited Tina Fey to come campaign in Michigan. New polling out this morning from Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research confirms that Peters is beating the incumbent. Knollenberg's job approval rating is down to 34% and the new polls shows a 43- 40% lead for Peters.

East of MI-09 is a district represented by one of the most radical right extremists in Congress, Tim Walberg. Polls show him losing badly to state Senator Mark Schauer, who has significant support not just from wildly enthusiastic Democrats and from independents but even from mainstream Republicans embarrassed to be represented by someone from the political fringe. It's worth comparing the brand new ads of the two candidates. Walberg's is about... Michael Moore. Here's Mark Schauer's; another example of way the congressional races are turning into a route:



Although Karl Rove, whose future residency in or out of federal prison is likely to hang on the outcome of the election, is still banking on the capriciousness, ignorance and stupidity of undecided voters, less biased political observers are starting to whisper the word landslide. Obama's coattails have already proven themselves as strong as McCain's are toxic. An Obama landslide will be something Republican members of Congress will remember for decades.

Obviously, what the mainstream media would never think of looking into is the differences between progressive Democrats and nominal Democrats from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, something we looked at yesterday. The differences however, are very real and very crucial and it means a lot more to elect one Darcy Burner or one Gary Peters than a dozen pseudo-Democrats like Paul Carmouche, Bobby Bright or Jerry Connolly. If you'd like to help, you'll find all good ones and no bad ones here at the Blue America ActBlue page.

How Many Seats Do The Democrats Stand To Pick Up In November?

We've written before about the 1936 congressional election. The Depression was raging, Democrats had been steadily building a majority since 1932, and Roosevelt was re-elected in a landslide. The Democrats only gained 5 seats (net) in the Senate (although Nebraska Republican George Norris quit the GOP and became an independent). But that left the Republicans with only 16 Senate seats. Over in the House the Democrats had a net gain of 12 seats, upping their total to 334 (76.7%), while the Party of Greed and Selfishness, rightly blamed for the Great Depressed, lost another 15 seats-- aside from the 12 that went to Dems, one to a Progressive Party candidate in California and two to the Farmer-Labor Party-- leaving them with a total of 88 members of the House (20.2%).

2008 isn't 1936... at least not yet. But today CNN reports that congressional polling numbers are showing strong Democratic gains in the offing. "Generic Democrats" are stomping "generic Republicans" again. The fact that all Republicans are generic and that the Democratic cause is furthered by incredible candidates who are anything but generic-- progressive leaders like Darcy Burner, Vic Wulsin, Alan Grayson and Dennis Shulman on the House side and Jeff Merkley, Tom Udall, and Andrew Rice on the Senate side-- greatly strengthens the Democrats' chances to make significant gains.

So which party has the upper hand in the fight for Capitol Hill?

The answer, according to a new national poll, appears to be the Democrats. In a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released Tuesday, 56 percent of those questioned are backing the Democratic candidate for Congress, while 42 percent support the Republicans.

That's a change from immediately after the GOP convention, when the Democrats had only a 3-point lead over the Republicans, 49 percent to 46 percent.

According to this morning's Diageo/Hotline poll, Obama's numbers have continued to climb as voters focus on the economy. Can the Democrats, generically speaking, blow this? Of course they can; they're Democrats. They could get behind the Bush Regime bailout/giveaway for example. They would do them in.

Fortunately, many non-generic Democrats and Democratic candidates will not be following Hoyer down that particular corporate pathway to Hell. Democratic challengers have gas prices, health care, the mortgage crisis, Iraq, unemployment, inflation, the Wall Street meltdown, and corruption all breaking in their favor. Watch Steny Hoyer and Rahm Emanuel try to balance that out with boneheaded, self-serving fealty to corporate donors.

Reactions from Blue America candidates to the bailout have been strong and uniformly mindful of the best interests of working families, not of Wall Street executives. Today Vic Wulsin, the progressive Democrat running against clueless corporate shill Mean Jean Schmidt in southern Ohio, added her voice to the rising chorus of skeptics and reformers. She's not supporting the $700 billion boondoggle that way it currently stands. Her line in the sand is that it must contain adequate congressional oversight of the Treasury Department and that it must place restrictions executive compensation for companies who will benefit from the plan. She wants Congress to make sure that everyday Americans facing home foreclosure are given assistance long before anyone starts talking about golden parachutes.

“The politicians in Washington don’t seem to play the same rules we live by and now they are asking American taxpayers to pay for the mistakes of corporate executives on Wall Street. Making a smart investment to keep our nation’s financial sector up and running is the right thing to do, but it is not our responsibility to cover for the excesses and mismanagement of CEO’s... While Congress and the current administration have been asleep at the switch, Southern Ohio is facing record home foreclosure rates. Politicians in Washington put themselves first, put money first and put special interests first, but I will not support writing a $700 billion check to Wall Street without making sure government is accountable to the people in my district first.”

Darcy Burner is running against Washington state's most consistent corporate shill, Dave Reichert, who has taken money from every corporate interest-- from Big Oil to Big Banks-- and then voted for their interests instead of for the interests of his own constituents. He's infamous as one of Bush's worst rubber stamps in Congress. Today, Darcy explained, in great detail, to voters in suburban Seattle why she doesn't support the Wall Street bailout the way it stands now and what she would do instead.

Darcy and supporters (non-fat cats)

“Over the past decade, with the removal of protections that had been in place since the Great Depression, we abandoned all checks on bad behavior by banks. As a result, we face a financial crisis of historic magnitude. It should never have come to this.

“The Bush administration and its Republican allies enabled, encouraged and ignored the bad behavior on Wall Street that created this mess. Now they say that that without the largest taxpayer-funded bailout in human history -- at a cost of more than $2,000 for every man, woman, and child in the United States -- our economy is at risk of collapse.

“If we are going to bail out Wall Street to the tune of $700 billion or more, then taxpayers must get significant reforms and real protections in return. Congress needs to take the time to get this right. They should move forward in a calm and orderly way, and not be stampeded into endorsing a bad deal. First and foremost, we must not just hand over a blank check to an administration and a financial sector that has failed us. Again: no blank check.

“Instead, let's put in place reforms with real teeth. Any bailout plan must include provisions that address the following points:

1) We must protect taxpayers.

a. The financial institutions that made the poor decisions that created this mess should bear as much of the cost of their mistakes as possible, and taxpayers should be given a stake in the bailed out firms in proportion to the size of the bailout they receive. When these companies return to profitability, taxpayers must be able to recoup some or all of their investment.

b. The financial institutions must be held accountable for accurately representing the quality of the assets they’re unloading so that they cannot game the system. Mechanisms could easily be put into place to ensure that companies and their executives who misrepresent the quality of the assets they sell to the government are held accountable if those assets turn out to be of significantly inferior quality.

c. People who chose irresponsible risk should have prime responsibility for paying for the consequences of that risk. That means, for instance, that creditors of the financial institutions who made loans bearing especially high rates of return in the days leading up to the crisis should not necessarily recover all of their money at taxpayer expense.

2) We must not reward bad behavior. Any firm that takes advantage of the bailout must accept restrictions on out of control CEO pay. The taxpayers should not be on the hook for golden parachutes for failed executives – they have a right to know that the money they are handing over will not disappear into the pockets of the same people who created this mess in the first place.

3) We must help communities, and work to protect the value of the assets taxpayers are acquiring. If Wall Street deserves generous government assistance, then Main Street deserves a little help too. If we are acquiring sub-prime mortgages, the homes that provide the collateral for those loans retain more value if they are occupied than if they are abandoned. In addition, the blight of homes abandoned because of unrealistic mortgages drags down not only the homeowners in question, but whole neighborhoods and communities. Homeowners with delinquent mortgages should be offered renegotiated mortgages that will give them greater opportunity to stay in their homes.

4) We need accountability. Congress must have explicit oversight of bailout efforts. No unelected member of the administration should have sole authority over so much of the taxpayer’s money.

“If Congress implements these sorts of taxpayer protections, this bailout could end up having a positive effect on our economy in the longer term as transparency and accountability are restored and sensible regulation puts our economy back on a sustainable track. But let’s be clear: this is a sad moment for America. Our economy is likely to sink sharply lower now for a time. As a result, thousands of Americans will lose their jobs through no fault of their own. Trillions in wealth held by ordinary people in the form of home value and investment value will be erased. Let's make sure we take the appropriate actions now so this never happens again.

“And finally, while this crisis is not a time for excessive partisanship, I would point out that Congressman Reichert and I have a basic philosophical difference on these issues. Time and again, Congressman Reichert has supported the economic policies of the Bush administration that have put us in this mess. For instance, he voted for the misconceived 2005 Bush Bankruptcy Bill that, as BusinessWeek pointed out last year, is a major factor in driving up the foreclosure rate and has made the housing slump worse, thus contributing to our current difficulties.

"We need change, not more of the same. We need a government that stops focusing on showering favors on the wealthy and powerful corporations, and instead does its job by protecting the interests of the people of this country. I will be that sort of representative.”

Like I said, neither Vic Wulsin nor Darcy Burner is a generic Democrat. None of the candidates endorsed by Blue America are, and if you'd like to help make sure Vic, Darcy, and other Democrats like them get into Congress in November, our Blue America ActBlue page makes it very easy to do that.