There aren't many members of Congress in the mold of Anthony Portantino, but there ought to be.
Recently, former Mayor of La Canada Flintridge and current California State Assemblyman Anthony Portantino announced his intentions to run for United States House of Representatives. The news has gathered national attention, and has potential opponents like entrenched incumbent Rep. David Dreier worried.
That would seem to be at least a debatable question, based on a recent article in The Hill:
Rep. David Dreier (R-Calif.) has reimbursed himself for more than $200,000 out of his congressional campaign this decade without saying why.
Dreier's campaign reimbursements to himself don't appear to provide as much detail as the Federal Election Commission (FEC) requires, and watchdog groups say he should elaborate on them.
A spokeswoman for Dreier said the campaign has every indication that it's in compliance.
According to a review of Dreier's FEC reports since 2000, his campaign has listed a total of about $200,000 worth of expenditures for the purpose of "candidate reimbursement." But the forms don't say, as the FEC appears to instruct, what Dreier had to reimburse himself for.
At issue here is the fact that Congressman Dreier has not given any details whatsoever on exactly what the supposed reimbursements were for. The reports have only listed the expenditures--nearly all of which are large enough to trigger reporting requirement thresholds--as "candidate reimbursement."
Are Dreier's campaign statements in violation of the law? I must admit that they are apparently not--yet. The FEC decides who lives and who dies in this world, and unless the FEC asks for more information and the campaign is unable or unwilling to provide it, then apparently no law has been violated:
"If the FEC does not ask for more information, the committee may presume that the FEC is comfortable with the information provided," Berke said.
Dave Levinthal, a spokesman for the Center for Responsive Politics, said candidates have a responsibility, when dealing with reimbursing themselves, to attain a higher level of transparency.
"If there's nothing below board here, then that should be very clear and evident from his campaign finance report, and if it's not, then his constituents should demand that he provide more," Levinthal said.
So basically, we're talking about a candidate who is reimbursing himself personally for an average of over $20,000 a year this decade who is not providing the public with any disclosure whatsoever as to whether these expenditures are in any way justified. The question from here is whether the FEC is actually going to investigate to see if these are actual legitimate reimbursements. Anyone willing to take bets?
The banksters still have a powerful sway over members of Congress. Yesterday, they stopped cramdown in the Senate, which would have allowed bankruptcy judges to treat primary residences the same way as yachts and vacation homes in a bankruptcy. And there was much rejoicing.
On the same day, the House bucked the trend, passing the Credit Cardholder's Bill of Rights by a wide, bipartisan margin.
In 2008, credit card issuers imposed $19 billion in penalty fees on families with credit cards and this year, card companies will break all records for late fees, over-limit charges, and other penalties, pulling in more than $20.5 billion. Credit-card debt in the U.S. has reached a record high of nearly $1 trillion - and almost half of American families currently carry a balance, and for those families the average balance was $7,300. One-fifth of those carrying credit-card debt pay an interest rate above 20 percent [...]
The Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act passed today levels the playing field between card issuers and cardholders by applying common-sense regulations that would ban retroactive interest rate hikes on existing balances, double-cycle billing, and due-date gimmicks. It would also increase the advance notice of impending rate hikes, giving cardholders the information they need and rights to make decisions about their financial lives. Our economic recovery depends on a shared prosperity - and we must put an end to these abusive practices that continue to drive so many Americans deeper and deeper into debt.
I'm glad this ends double-cycle billing, where cardholders pay interest on debt that they've already paid off, and forces credit card companies to allocate payment to the debt with the highest interest rate. But overall, these are very modest protections that simply prohibit the credit card companies from ripping off the American people. And 105 Republicans agreed yesterday. But among those who didn't we're the usual suspects of arch-conservative Yacht Party wingers like Tom McClintock, joined by supposed "moderate" David Dreier.
Of course, as Dick Durbin noted yesterday, the bankers who own the Senate will return to try and ditch this bill. They've killed the same legislation before, and Harry Reid didn't exactly sound confident this time around. But I want to focus on Dreier and McClintock, both of whom and their pals in the GOP caucus have been well and truly bought by banking interests in exchange for votes like this.
Ed Royce (CA-40- $2,506,414)
David Dreier (CA-26- $2,118,538)
Gary Miller (CA-42- $765,988)
Devin Nunes (CA-21- $499,235)
Kevin McCarthy (CA-22- $461,138)
Tom McClintock (CA-04- $353,294)
Here's what newly-announced candidate Russ Warner had to say about this yesterday:
Dreier will once again be forced to face a top rate challenge in 2010, Russ Warner, who has every intention of making sure voters from Rancho Cucamonga, Upland, and Claremont to San Dimas, Monrovia, Sierra Madre, San Marino and La Crescenta know that Dreier is strictly a representative of the special interests that have done such grievous damage to the state's economy and to the financial well-being to his own constituents. "Time and time again," Russ told us this morning after going over the vote yesterday, "David Dreier proves the interests of his corporate donors take precedent over the people he was elected to serve. Dreier's never felt the pressure of supporting a family and has lived off the taxpayer dime for nearly three decades, so its not surprising he has no idea how harmful these predatory credit card companies are."
We're going to have to fight in the Senate to make sure this passes. But this vote should not be forgotten next year. Everyone has felt the pinch from credit card usurers, and so votes like this are signatures, marks of where you stand. Hopefully Warner and whoever challenges these other Republicans will use it.
Republican campaigns all over are starting to tank as Election Day approaches. California, long considered the land of "safe seats" because of the 2000 redistricting plan that basically secured the status quo for both parties, is no exception. The news is not good for incumbent Republicans.
We all know David Dreier is a Bush rubber stamp who has voted with George W. Bush 93.6% of the time. But what about that other 6.4%? We don't talk about it much because, well, there isn't that much to talk about.
But credit where credit is due, there is one important issue where Dreier has differed from Bush: The Federal Marriage Amendment.
The FMA, if passed (and ratified), would have limited marriage nationwide to between a man and a woman and it would have prevented courts from granting same sex couples certain rights that married couples enjoy. When it came up for a vote in 2004 and 2006, Dreier voted against it both times and the reasoning he gave for opposing it was simple.
He explained his opposition to the amendment by stating that he felt the Constitution was not the appropriate tool for restricting rights.
Well, now we have a similar initiative on the ballot in California in the form of Proposition 8, except this time, if Prop 8 passes, it wouldn't just amend the California constitution to restrict rights, it would amend the California constitution to eliminate the rights that people are exercising every day.
Yet David Dreier has been silent...and his silence is deafening.
Today, for the second time this week, David Dreier voted YES on the House version of the bailout bill. While many smart people on both sides of the aisle might disagree on the merits of this bill and the urgency of doing something now even if it's bad, it's worth exploring why Dreier supported this bill.
David Dreier will tell you that he hates the position we find ourselves in. He'll tell you that he supported this bill "reluctantly" and today on the House floor he even called the bill a "necessary evil."
But here are a few things Dreier won't tell you:
David Dreier received $254,000 in donations from the finance sector this cycle and $590,000 two years ago. Both times, this amount has represented more than two and a half times the donations he received from any other industry.
The American Bankers Association was the top donor to David Dreier's American Success PAC this cycle.
David Dreier continues to vote against bills that would have curbed this crisis. In May of 2008, Dreier voted with Bush against measures designed to impose "increased oversight and regulation of housing-related government sponsored entities." Sound familiar?
Things are happening very quickly in the most hotly contested campaigns in California. Here's an update:
• CA-04: Watching himself falling behind in the race to replace John Doolittle, perennial candidate Tom McClintock decided to borrow one of his predeccesor's smear campaigns and release an ad claiming that Charlie Brown dishonored servicemen by appearing at an anti-war rally.
The idea that wearing a camouflage jacket constitutes being "in uniform" is ridiculous, and so is the idea that a retired military officer has no free speech rights. But the idea is to smear Charlie as some kind of radical leftist and anti-military, despite Brown's long record of supporting veterans and McClintock's longer record voting against them.
The ensuing press conference put on by the McClintock campaign was a wild affair.
SACRAMENTO - A press conference on congressional candidate Charlie Brown's actions in 2005 at the home of an anti-war display nearly descended into conflict itself, with disruptions before, during and after the event and a near-appearance by police officers [...]
But before the event even began, a handful of Brown supporters - accompanied by Brown's campaign manager, Todd Stenhouse - were asked to leave so that they wouldn't cause a disruption.
One man loudly protested that as a military veteran and the father of an active-duty U.S. soldier, he felt he could stay. "This is not Russia," he said.
McClintock campaign consultant John Feliz and Stenhouse eventually got the man to agree to leave, but not before security at the Hyatt hotel where the press conference took place made calls to Sacramento police to remove the man [...]
But a third man who was with the veterans pointed out that Brown was within his First Amendment right to do so, prompting Feliz to ask him to leave as well, while also saying Brown should re-enlist and face a court martial for his actions.
The man, who gave his name as Bret Sherlock, said afterward that he attended because he was tired of non-veterans like McClintock smearing veterans like Brown.
"Did he do anything illegal?" Sherlock said of Brown, adding that if anyone should be able to protest the war, it should be Brown, as both a veteran and a father of a soldier who has served four tours of duty in Iraq.
McClintock campaign spokesman Bill George said the video came from a "concerned citizen." Neither McClintock nor Brown appeared at the press conference.
After the press conference concluded, Stenhouse tried to give McClintock's campaign a pledge to join a Brown program that donates 5 percent of Brown's campaign contributions to nonprofit community groups that work with charities.
Feliz angrily took it and threw it down without looking at it.
They don't want to talk about issues. So McClintock tries to smear a decorated veteran to win an election. Typical.
David Dreier pretends to be a champion of renewable energies and a crusader for cheaper gas prices but the truth is, on the question of how best to use energy to reduce carbon emissions to reverse the effects of global warming, Dreier is, yet again, nothing but a Bush rubber stamp.
Nowhere on either his congressional or his re-election website does Dreier even mention the phrase "global warming" or "climate change" but what he does advertise, right there on the front page of his house.gov website, is an award he is oh so proud to have received: "The Friend of the American Motorist" Award. If it sounds Bushian -- a la "Clean Skies" or "Healthy Forests" -- it is. Just look who gave him the award:
Congressman Dreier's award is based on AFP's "Freedom from Foreign Oil" scorecard which ranks lawmakers based on a composite score of eight roll call votes and co-sponsorship of three initiatives that would positively or negatively impact gas and energy prices. For more information, visit www.americansforprosperity.org.
Surprise! Americans For Prosperity, in the guise of a small government advocacy organization, is really just a front group for big oil.
Beacon Media News, publishers of Sierra Madre Weekly, Monrovia Weekly, Pasadena Independent, and Arcadia Weekly, note the results of a Russ Warner-paid-for poll of the 26th district that shows Dreier's vulnerability in the district.
Republican Congressman David Dreier falling below the crucial 50% support threshold for re-election. After voters hear biographical statements on both Warner and Dreier, the race pulls into a statistical tie.
The poll was conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, a respected national polling firm, with a sample size of 400 likely voters in California's 26th district.
We've been hearing rumblings about this poll for a while, but it's finally been released. In the 26th District, where Bush rubber stamp David Dreier hasn't had a legitimate opponent practically since being elected in 1980, Russ Warner is absolutely within striking difference with 88 days to the election.
The poll, conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, has all kinds of interesting information. IN the baseline poll, Dreier does not reach 50%
CA-26 (GQRR, margin of error +/- 4.9%)
Dreier 49
Warner 37
The sample size is pretty small, but Dreier not breaking 50 after being the Representative for 28 years is significant. What's more, after information about each candidate is delivered to those polled, the numbers change dramatically.
Dreier 47
Warner 44
Other significant findings:
• Independent voters in the initial poll, before bios, support Warner 49-32.
• 63 percent disapprove of the job George W. Bush is doing as president, with half of all voters (50 percent) strongly disapproving.
• Only 45 percent of voters say they approve of the job Dreier is doing as Congressman, while 33 percent disapprove.
• Nearly four out of five voters (78 percent) say the country is off on the wrong track.
• Barack Obama is in a statistical tie with John McCain in the district, 44 percent to 47 percent, and their favorables are identical (46 fav-36 unfav).
• Dreier has high negatives in the district. An equal number of those polled have a negative opinion of Dreier (32 percent) as have a positive opinion of him (32 percent).
The race is going to come down to resources. Right now, Dreier has a huge war chest, and he's undoubtedly going to use it to smear Warner and drive up his negatives. However, if Warner has enough cash to compete, things will get very interesting in the 26th.
As Dave wrote on Monday, last week David Dreier twisted some arms in the 26th district to get 9 local elected and business leaders, all Democrats, to sign on to a letter endorsing him for congress. You can read a pdf of the letter HERE. The gist of why they're voting for him this year: they'd like us to believe that David Dreier is above the partisan fray.
Riiiiight. Let's take a look at this letter.
One of the problems facing our country is that so many elected officials back in Washington, D.C. put party loyalty ahead of problem solving. We see it on the news and read about it every day. Partisan attacks and party line votes persist while we miss opportunities for real solutions.
Congressman David Dreier is a different kind of leader.
Um, really? According to Congressional Quarterly (behind subscription firewall), David Dreier has voted with George W. Bush 93.6% of the time between 2001-2007. That includes 100% in 2001 and 2003. And even the San Gabriel Valley Tribune conceded that:
[Rep.] David Dreier...almost always vote[s] with fellow Republicans - more than 90 percent of the time in 2007.
Dreier is nothing BUT a partisan party line Republican. But the letter gets worse...
Last week, David Dreier sent a letter to residents in his district. It was signed by nine "Democrats for Dreier" announcing their support of his re-election campaign, because he is a "different kind of leader" who is a passionate advocate for the San Gabriel Valley and the Inland Empire.
The letter was signed by the following 9 Democrats:
Paul Eaton, Mayor of Montclair
Roberto Campos, small businessman, Glendora/Upland
Karen Davis, Mayor of Glendora
Mary Ann Lutz, Monrovia Councilmember
Kurt Zimmerman, Mayor of Sierra Madre
Joe Garcia, Monrovia Councilmember
Anthony Fellow, Director, Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District, Arcadia
Dorrie Bryan, HR Manager, Rancho Cucamonga
Eugene Sun, San Marino Councilmember
The questions arose almost as soon as the letter was sent. On the flip...
Today Americans United for Change, the progressive advocacy group that is visiting districts throughout the country on the "Bush Legacy Tour," hammered David Dreier for being a tool to Big Oil and special interests. From their release:
With gas prices above $4, Americans United for Change, the progressive issue-advocacy group that recently launched its national Bush Legacy Bus tour, blasted Rep. David Drier today for standing in the way of lower gas prices for California families by voting against meaningful legislation to release 70 million barrels of light, sweet crude oil from the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve into the open market and replace it with heavy, sour oil that is tougher to refine - a move that has historically brought down gas prices and strengthened our national security.
The SPR has been tapped or suspended before by the current President Bush, President Clinton, and the first President Bush and each time oil has been released the impact on prices has been dramatic and immediate. For example, in 1991, oil prices immediately dropped by 33 percent. The 2000 exchange drove oil prices down by 19 percent. And the release by President Bush in 2005 resulted in a 9 percent drop.
"With gas prices hovering above $4 a gallon, Rep. Dreier was given a chance today bring real relief now to California families forced to make incredible sacrifices choosing between bills, gas, and food," said Caren Benjamin, for Americans United for Change. "But without apology or question, Congressman Dreier chose to put his loyalty to Bush and his addiction to big oil cash ahead of relief for struggling Californians."
I don't know if the "Free Our Oil" campaign and focusing on the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is the most effective message, but clearly somebody has to show some leadership on the energy front. Contrary to popular beliefs, Democrats are NOT being pushed out of this debate. In a recent poll by The Wilderness Society, the public is split on the question of drilling or protecting arctic lands and offshore areas, and they believe 76%-19% that the best way to secure our energy future is to invest in new technologies and renewable sources rather than continue to drill. In addition, by a 63%-31% score, those polled believe that the President's proposal to open up ANWR and the Outer Continental Shelf to drilling "is more likely to enrich oil companies than to lower gas prices for American consumers." That's why it's so crucial for AUFC to note that David Dreier has taken $129,400 in contributions from oil company executives over the years.
There's starting to be some real pushback on this "drill now" blather. The Democrats put forward this SPR bill today and most Republicans took the bait of voting against it. Jimmy Hoffa Jr. of the Teamsters, in a real game-changer of a move, came out with a very strong statement rejecting "drilling our way out" of this crisis, and demanding long-term energy solutions. Democratic Congressional candidate John Boccieri from Ohio made this amusing Web video to mock his opponent's reliance on drilling:
And just to your left, CA-46's Debbie Cook has put together a comprehensive 10-point plan to realize Al Gore's vision of receiving 100% of our electricity from renewables by 2018.
There's work to be done - by candidates, policy wonks, advocacy groups, and regular people - but together we can beat back these shortsighted solutions and expose those who want to wed our energy needs to the failures of the past.
Greetings and welcome to the latest installment of the California House races roundup. We're just around 100 days to go until the election, and things are starting to take focus. There are about a half-dozen seats where Democratic challengers have an outside shot at dumping the incumbent, and another six on the watch list in case something spectacular occurs. One thing to note is that the Cook numbers are tied to the 2004 election, and given the demographic changes and cratering of the Republican brand I think they mean significantly less now - it'll be interesting to see how all these districts change in November.
We have plenty of new information to judge these races, including 2nd quarter fundraising reports, national ratings from Charlie Cook and Swing State Project, additional DCCC targets, and the appearance of many challengers at Netroots Nation. So this list is really about who I think has the best chance to retain or take over a seat, not necessarily who should (though that may come through in the writing). Here are some helpful bits of information that I used to help judge.
Today, I am excited to announce that the Courage Campaign has officially launched our campaign to expose David Dreier (who represents CA's 26th district) for what he really is: one of George W. Bush's most reliable rubber stamps in congress. Check out our new ad below and please rate it up, spread the word and contribute to get it on the air in the district HERE.
More on Courage's Dreier Bush Rubber Stamp campaign over the flip...
Well, the votes are in, the matchups are set, and so I thought it was time for a baseline roundup of where I think the California House races stand as of now. The main pieces of information that are causing me to reset my expectations are the primary results, the April 1-May 15 fundraising numbers and the new registration numbers from the Secretary of State's office. You can track all three yourself:
This afternoon, Chris Bowers has an excellent piece: Once In A Generation Is Now. It argues that this election is the opportunity to go all in and make dramatic changes throughout this country. This is our chance to change the tone of discourse. This is our chance to break the GOP machine. And most importantly, this is our chance to get a strong progressive majority to DC that can pass legislation that's been waiting for 30 or more years. Now.
So I can't help but look around California for signs that all the chips are being pushed to the center. Dave noted earlier that there could, on the outer edge, as many as nine California seats in play this year, and certainly recent Democratic successes in Illinois, Louisiana and Mississippi suggest that the ability to win anywhere is now a reality.
While every district is unique, projections are rough at best, and anything can happen between now and November, the odds are slim of there being a better time to go for broke in the forseeable future. So I look around California and I see that between the 34 Democratic incumbents in California's congressional delegation, there's more than $14.6 million cash on hand. Out of those 34, only one (Jerry McNerney) is facing a serious challenge, freeing up a great deal of time and money to invest in races around the state.
Getting this one in under the wire. On the last day of April, with just over a month to go until the June primaries, and six months to go until Election Day, there's a lot going on all over the state in the Congressional races. Of the 19 seats in California currently held by Republicans, 17 will be contested in the fall, and some strongly so. And we now have a full 34 Democrats with the election of Jackie Speier early in the month, and only one of them is a serious challenge. We also have the first quarter of 2008 fundraising numbers, which will raise some eyebrows. You can track these races yourself with the 2008 Race Tracker wiki.
A note: I'm mainly getting my numbers on cash-on-hand competitiveness from the Swing State Project. Fundraising information comes from the FEC.
