Sen. Mark DeSaulnier has based a lot of his campaign strategy in the quick-sprint Congressional race for CA-10 on endorsements. Not a day goes by when he doesn't release some endorsement by one character or another into my inbox. The other day he touted that he received a "majority of endorsement votes" from California Democratic Party delegates at their endorsement meeting over the weekend, without mentioning that he did not reach the 60% threshold that would be required for an official CDP endorsement.
However, one endorsement has caused DeSaulnier a bit of a headache - the support of the former holder of this seat, Ellen Tauscher. DeSaulnier has made no secret of that endorsement, including it in mailers and on his TV advertisement. One problem with all this: with Tauscher now at the State Department, some have raised concerns that her endorsement while working at a federal agency violates the Hatch Act, which prohibits executive branch employees from participating in partisan politics. DeSaulnier's camp has countered that the endorsement, which was made before Tauscher was confirmed for the post at State, always says "Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher" and thus indicates that it was made prior to that appointment. But the State Department has weighed in, asking DeSaulnier's campaign to remove the endorsement.
The U.S. State Department has asked 10th District Congressional candidate and state Sen. Mark DeSaulnier to remove all references in his campaign materials to his endorsement from former congresswoman Ellen Tauscher, who is now undersecretary for Arms Control and International Security at the U.S. State Department.
While a legal adviser to the U.S. State Department concludes that the endorsement broke no laws or policies, "Under Secretary Tauscher is committed to the highest standards of ethical conduct. To avoid even the appearance of impropriety, on behalf of Undersecretary Tauscher, I have asked Senator DeSaulnier to remove all references in his campaign material of any endorsement she may have made," wrote James Thessin, deputy legal adviser and designed agency ethics official.
The DeSaulnier campaign is fingering John Garamendi for complaining to the State Department about the use of Tauscher's name. Actually, the complaint was made by Jason Bezis, an individual who claims not to be affiliated with any campaign, but who apparently enjoys filing complaints with the State Department and the FEC (he filed one there against DeSaulnier's campaign over a health care mailer). It looks like the DeSaulnier campaign won't change current materials already printed, but will consult the State Department "about what qualifies and what doesn't under their request."
I actually question whether this means as much as the DeSaulnier team seems to think, but their strategy all along has been to gather up local endorsements.
The more I find out about the CA-10 poll John Garamendi released on Monday, the worse it smells. The press release about this poll from the Garamendi campaign gave out limited information as to how the poll was conducted, which raised a number of questions. However, Peter Charles left a comment at Calitics where he shared more information about the details of the poll. Those details exposed three glaring errors that jumped out from the information that was provided to the poll's participants.
When the participants were given bios of the three Democratic candidates, here's what they heard about Mark DeSaulnier, Joan Buchanan, and John Garamendi:
3a. Democrat State Senator Mark Desaulnier has served in the state legislature since 2004. Before that he served on the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors from 1996 to 2004. His top priority issues will be rebuilding the country's economy, implementing clean energy programs, and regulating Wall Street banks. He is endorsed by Congress members Ellen Tauscher and George Miller, local firefighters, teachers, police and environmental groups.
3b. Democrat State Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan was elected to the State Assembly last November. Before that she served for 10 years on the San Ramon (ruh-MOAN) Valley school board. Her top priority issues will be more jobs and improving the economy, increasing renewable energy programs, and reforming public education. She will likely be endorsed by local elected leaders, school board members, teachers, and civil rights and womens groups.
3c. Democrat John Garamendi is California's Lieutenant Governor. He has lived in the Sacramento portion of Congressional District 10 for 30 years. He previously served as Deputy Secretary of the Interior for Bill Clinton. He is running for Congress to continue reforming health care, rebuild our economy around clean energy, and reform bank and credit card laws. He will be endorsed by local nurses, firefighters, teachers, police officers as well as former President Bill Clinton and Al Gore.
The problem here is that the pollster misrepresented all three candidates, and he did it in a way that predictably favored the candidate who hired him.
You have to ask yourself this question. If a pollster will lie about both his own candidate's and the opposing candidates' biographies, what else will he lie about?
And those aren't the only problems. To get into the really wonkerific world of why Garamendi's polling sample is all wrong, flip it...
There have been a few voices suggesting California Lt. Governor John Garamendi abandon his bid to replace Liebermanesque Ellen Tauscher and instead run in California's third congressional district against Dan Lungren.
And if you are a Democrat - especially a Progressive Democrat - that is good news. Strategically, such a move would be counterproductive for Democrats.
It Makes No Sense for California Democrats
The biggest problem in California is the Republican Veto. This means that Democrats may have a majority in the legislature, but not a functioning majority. With the artificial budget control by Republicans, it actually hurts Democrats if a legislator ascends to congress in a Special Election. With state Senator Mark DeSaulnier and Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan both running for Tauscher's seat, in all likelihood a Democratic legislator will win unless Garamendi runs.
With his fourth run for Governor failing to get traction, Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi yesterday announced his plan to run for Congress in the East Bay's 10th District - in a special election to replace Ellen Tauscher. On name recognition alone, Garamendi will be the front-runner in a crowded field - although State Senator Mark DeSaulnier has key endorsements that will make it competitive. But while running for Congress is a smart move for Garamendi, it would be far better for Democrats - and progressive politics - for him to run in District 3 against Republican incumbent Dan Lungren. Tauscher's seat is safe for Democrats regardless of who runs in the special election, while Garamendi is probably one of the few candidates who can win District 3. He has deep roots in the 3rd District - which includes a large swath of the Sacramento suburbs, along with Garamendi's native Calaveras County. It is traditionally a "red" district, but Barack Obama carried it last November - and Lungren came unexpectedly close to losing to an under-funded Democratic challenger. At a time when Democratic activists are pushing the Party to take back "Red California," Garamendi's choice of districts could not be more disheartening and misguided. Expect this to become an issue at this weekend's State Democratic Convention.
(Let's welcome the Lieutenant Governor to Calitics. - promoted by David Dayen)
I am proud today to announce that if current Rep. Ellen Tauscher is confirmed by the U.S. Senate to serve in the Obama administration, I expect to run for the 10th Congressional District, a district that includes parts of Contra Costa, Solano, Alameda, and Sacramento counties. I am excited by this unexpected potential opportunity in my own backyard, and with your support, I will return to Washington to help shape a better future for California, our country and a very special Congressional District.
As a Lieutenant Governor, former Deputy Interior Secretary under President Bill Clinton, twice elected California Insurance Commissioner, University of California regent and California State University trustee, state legislator, and chair of the State Lands Commission and Commission for Economic Development, I have led the fights against an insurance industryrun amok, seemingly yearly student fee increases, California's broken budget process, and off-shore oil and liquefied natural gas drilling.
I am ready to lend a progressive and pragmatic voice to find solutions on debates ranging from renewable energy to green collar jobs to universal "Medicare for All" health care to water policy to equality for all to market oversight to mass transit to the importance of fully funding education. As I learned during my time in the Peace Corps, developing solutions first requires being able to ask the right questions.
The biggest news out of the CA-10 race today is that, according to Lisa Vorderbrueggen, both Ellen Tauscher and friend of Calitics Rep. George Miller have endorsed Sen. Mark DeSaulnier for the future special election. That's a fairly big deal. There are essentially four power structures in the political scene CA-10, and DeSaulnier has swallowed up three - Tauscher, Miller, and Tom Torlakson. Considering that he's the chair of the Senate Labor Committee, the fourth power structure, the local unions, should be his as well.
Nevertheless, other prospective candidates are making news as well. Joan Buchanan's operatives clearly dropped a poll to Politico, showing her leading DeSaulnier narrowly:
The poll shows Buchanan leading DeSaulnier 21 to 18 percent, with Republican San Ramon mayor Abram Wilson at 14 percent and former GOP Assemblyman Guy Houston at 13 percent.
Neither Republican has yet expressed interest in the race.
Despite DeSaulnier's experience representing the area in the state legislature, both Democrats have comparable name recognition, according to the poll. Buchanan is recognized by 34 percent of voters, while 31 percent offer an opinion on DeSaulnier.
That was a survey of 400 voters with a high margin of error (4.9%), so I wouldn't take it too seriously. Buchanan would see institutional support dry up fast, but could leverage an outside group like EMILY's List.
The insufferable California Blue Dog is floating that former Mod Squad member Asm. Joe Canciamilla, who previously announced he was considering the race for Attorney General, might jump in, but DeSaulnier hasn't just beaten him in the past, he's beaten his whole family (DeSaulnier beat Canciamilla's wife in a Senate primary in '08).
Meanwhile, there's "one of SF's top political minds," if he does say so himself, Adriel Hampton, who is intent on dropping a press release a day to get reporters to chase coverage. Yesterday he urged passage of S. 582, the Interest Rate Reduction Act, which is actually a solid policy goal to cap interest rates on credit cards and loans, sponsored by Bernie Sanders. Today he went hard negative against DeSaulnier:
California 10th Congressional District candidate Adriel Hampton (D-Dublin) is not mincing words in his criticism of State Sen. Mark DeSaulnier considering leaving the Legislature just months after being elected. If Sen. DeSaulnier were to resign his seat, it would result in a minimum of 112 day period where an additional Republican vote would be need to pass a budget or raise revenue under California's unique 2/3 requirement.
"When DeSaulnier ran for his office, he signed up for a four year hitch, not a few-month fling," Hampton said. "His fickle recklessness would strengthen the Republican bargaining position and could cost Californians billions in cuts to health care, education, and public safety."
Restaurant-owner DeSaulnier was sworn in to the state senate just last December. If he runs for Congress, it would be the third different office he has run for in as many years. If legislative Republicans believe he has a chance of winning, it would incentivize them to stall a budget compromise until after the election, further extending the period of gridlock that would result in Sacramento by his candidacy.
There's a lot about this that is arrogant and ridiculous ("restaurant-owner DeSaulnier" is kind of a lame epithet to put on a guy who's been elected by these same constituents multiple times), but Hampton raises a point I raised as soon as Tauscher announced she was leaving. The merry go-round of special elections will put Democrats in the legislature down a body or two well into next year, and in the case of Buchanan threatens the loss of the seat. Now, this logic maybe appeals to a junkie like me, but my guess is it will have approximately no appeal to those inside the district, who will want to pick the best candidate for the job. In addition, this is a hard negative message that only argues for someone not in the legislature to be elected, and since the field has in no way assembled fully, I don't see that as a political winner. Not to mention the pose that DeSaulnier is a fickle part-time legislator made by someone who apparently is still working a full-time job and thinking he can run for Congress at the same time.
Oh, and Sully Sullenberger won't run, either. In case you were wondering. But there are more candidates who may enter, FYI.
Conveniently answering two questions in one press release, Assemblymember Tom Torlakson is announcing that he will continue to run for State Superintendent of Public Education, and will endorse State Senator Mark DeSaulnier for Tauscher's seat - which is the first clear indication that DeSaulnier will actually be running for that seat:
Assemblymember Tom Torlakson, D-Antioch, said today he will continue his campaign for state schools chief and not run for a congressional seat currently held by Rep. Ellen Tauscher....
In making the announcement, Torlakson, who has held elective office in Contra Costa County for 30 years, said he would endorse Senator Mark DeSaulnier, D-Concord, to succeed Tauscher....
"The East Bay has been fortunate to have been served by Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher the past 12 years, and I wish her well as she prepares for this important new position with the Obama Administration," said Torlakson. "Mark DeSaulnier is the best person to continue her tradition of strong and effective leadership in Congress. He has the experience, intelligence, and character necessary to represent the residents of the district. I am pleased to endorse him and offer my full support for his upcoming campaign."
There's been some speculation that Asm. Joan Buchanan will run for the seat as well, which is possible, but it looks like the establishment is moving to unite behind DeSaulnier. Will that create an opening for a progressive candidate in the race? We shall see.
"For the past 13 years, I have had the honor and privilege of serving you in Congress. Representing California's 10th Congressional District always has been and remains - especially in these trying times - my first priority."
"Last week, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton asked me to serve as Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security."
"While her offer is both generous and flattering, I did not take the decision lightly. I accepted it after much soul searching and long discussions with my family and friends."
Her mission will be an important one - to fulfill the Obama Administration's goal of eventually ridding the world of nuclear weapons, and in the near term reducing stockpiles through trade agreements with Russia and ensuring the security of loose nuclear materials around the world. Given that she has supported the Reliable Replacement Warhead system in the past, which would usher in a new generation of nuclear weapons and work directly counter to proposals like the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, I am dubious that this is her best role:
Those of us who are interested in working toward a world free of nuclear weapons realize that progress will involve many steps, some large, some small. One important step will be ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). Some CTBT supporters suspect that the outlines of a deal are coalescing: those who want the RRW will try to make the CTBT and the RRW a package deal, arguing that we will be able to maintain a reliable, safe nuclear deterrent without testing, as the CTBT would require, only if the weapon labs are allowed to proceed with weapon modernization. The Congressional Strategic Posture Commission interim report appears to be at least sympathetic to this view. This artificial link is based on both faulty logic and a long list of unstated and unsupportable assumptions.
The assertion that our nuclear weapons need any modernizing implies, usually implicitly, that current weapons are antiques that are not quite up to snuff. Chilton, in the article cited above, specifically links U.S. modernization to Russian and Chinese nuclear weapons. This superficially makes sense: after all, we don't send our military out to fight with World War II vintage tanks, ships, and airplanes. Certainly the United States should be armed with the latest and best nuclear weapons; at the very least, our weapons have to be at least as modern as any possible competitors, right? The simple analogy to conventional weapons doesn't hold because of the types of tasks assigned to nuclear weapons and some confusion about just what a "nuclear weapon" is [...]
Simple uranium bombs with high reliability and yields of twenty kilotons (or the power of the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima) or more would be easy to manufacture. We could design such a weapon, perhaps build one or two, and put the plans on the shelf in case we ever needed it. I can't help but imagine those language-free schematic assembly instructions that come along with unassembled Ikea furniture, describing how to put a bookshelf together without special skills or complex tools. We should design the Ikea Bomb. The DOE's arguments for a new nuclear bomb design would be a lot more convincing if DOE were eagerly trying to design themselves out of a job rather than looking at a future that has them building nuclear weapons forever.
Nuclear weapons modernization is a complete myth, and Tauscher has perpetuated it. Regardless of the positives of her leaving Congress, she is a terrible choice for the safety of the world. I'll leave it to you to determine the relative benefits of the trade-off.
The Governor will not need to announce any special election for this seat until Tauscher is confirmed, which could take "weeks, if not months," as she notes. District sources tell me that labor's voice matters here, and all the serious candidates come from the legislature, in particular Asm. Tom Torlakson and Sen. Mark DeSaulnier (who lives outside the district in Concord, but that's not required under state law). Of the two, only one will run, and Torlakson has been gearing up for a statewide run for a while, though Congress may offer a more attractive platform. While Buchanan has seemingly been groomed for this position, it's probably too soon for her to make the jump, and AD-15 does not have a deep Democratic bench and would be likely to flip back to the Republicans if she vacates. Either way, we're looking at a special election for Congress, followed by another special election for the legislature. At this rate, the legislature will be missing bodies until early 2010. And that's horrible news, given the conservative veto and the need for every single vote on budget and tax issues.
A California congresswoman with experience in military matters is the Obama administration's choice to be under secretary of state for arms control and international security.
Congressional and administration sources told The Associated Press on Tuesday that Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher is the administration's pick. The sources requested anonymity because the announcement is not official.
Could this joyous news be true? Could one of the bankers' best friends and leader of the DLC-like New Democrats in the House be taken off our hands by the Obama Administration? We will see - and we will hope.
This would open up yet another special election here in California to fill the seat. Who would be some of the most likely Democratic candidates to run for the seat?
Tom Torlakson. Former State Senator, now serving his third and final term in the Assembly (AD-11; his first two terms were from 1996-2000). He's currently planning a run for State Superintendent of Education in 2010, but might be interested in moving to the Congressional seat should it open up. He's probably got the highest political profile of the field owing to his 12+ years in the Legislature.
Mark DeSaulnier. Replaced Tom Torlakson in SD-7 when he was termed out last year. DeSaulnier and Torlakson are close and would probably not challenge each other for the seat, so if Torlakson decides to stay in California, DeSaulnier could make the move to DC. He has spoken out on the need to fix California's broken government and for action on global warming.
Joan Buchanan. Elected last November to the Assembly from AD-15. As a newly elected state official she may have a lower profile than Torlakson or DeSaulnier, but can't be ruled out as a possible candidate.
I'm sure there are other possible candidates out there who could fill this seat but those are the folks who have been generating the most discussion in the last 24 hours. We'll see what happens next. I for one will be glad to be rid of Ellen Tauscher and hopefully we can get someone more progressive to represent the 10th District.
Late last week, Democrats temporarily shelved a bill that would allow bankruptcy judges to modify the terms of mortgages on primary residences (also known as "cram-down"). Moderates who put the hold on this legislation, particularly former Wall Street investor Ellen Tauscher, crowed about it to the media.
This hardly amounts to a breakthrough win for party moderates - or a major concession by the speaker. But it was a consequential moment in the minds of moderate leaders who often find themselves marginalized in a caucus dominated by liberals.
"It shows we have bench strength, and it shows we can flex," said California Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher, who chairs the New Democrat Coalition and played a central role in negotiations over the bankruptcy bill [...]
Moderates worry Pelosi is routinely staking very liberal positions to push House versions of big bills as far to the left as possible to enhance their standing in negotiations with the historically centrist Senate. This might be a smart tactic, but it often hurts Democrats who rely on Republican votes to win reelection. Put bluntly, it makes them look too liberal [...]
That prompted lawmakers, like Tauscher, to limit the scope of the bankruptcy bill as much as possible, even though this measure is only loosely related to the president's broader proposal.
Tauscher's New Democrat Coalition teamed with their natural allies in the Blue Dog Coalition to impose 10 significant changes, including requirements that bankruptcy judges use federal guidelines to determine the fair market value of a home and that modified loans must be "unaffordable and not just underwater" to prevent wealthy homeowners from taking advantage of the process, according to a widely distributed e-mail from Adam Pase, executive director of the New Democrat Coalition.
This, of course, angered some liberals. "The New Dems' position is the banks' position," a senior Democratic aide involved in the bankruptcy negotiations complained on Friday. "New Democrats are shills for the banks."
It's confounding that any New Democrat thinks their constituents give a ring-a-ding about banking industry concerns, and are not in fact the very people struggling to keep their homes that this legislation would help.
More, including Tauscher staffers lying to bloggers, on the flip...
Chris Bowers advises that the House will be going ahead with housing legislation tomorrow that would allow bankruptcy judges to modify the terms of mortgages to reflect current home values and allow homeowners to avoid foreclosure (commonly known as "cram-down". As I discussed with Rep. John Conyers, the author of this bill, this would not encourage bankruptcy but help people avoid it, giving them a level playing field to get banks to follow through with loan modifications. While practically every other property someone owns can have the terms rewritten by a bankruptcy judge, primary residences are excluded. That is arbitrary and wrong, and changing it would reduce foreclosures and homelessness and bring some stability to the housing market. This legislation is supported by the President and included in his housing plan, but a change in the law like this should be passed by the Congress to make it a federal statute.
Bowers writes:
Tomorrow, the House will vote on Representative Conyer's bankruptcy cram down. The whip count is unclear right now, but some Blue Dogs and New Democrats, including Melissa Bean (D-IL), Dennis Moore (D-KS), and New Democratic chair Ellen Tauscher (D-CA), are working on behalf of the financial services industry to water down the legislation. Tauscher in particular is problematic, both because of her leadership role in one of the ideological caucuses, and also because rumors are that she has organized up to two dozen members thus far. It is about time that Tauscher, and the Representatives she is organizing, stop listening to industry lobbyists who do not have the public interest in mind.
So, let's make Representative Tauscher listen to someone else right now. Contact Ellen Tauscher, and urge her to stop organizing other Democrats to water down HR 200. She needs to listen to honewoners, not to the financial industry that got us into this economic disaster.
Here is the contact information:
Email form (California residents only)
D.C. office: 202.225.1880
Ellen Tauscher's New Democrat ways haven't surfaced much since the threatened primary challenge in 2007, but torpedoing this bill would bring that back all over again. She needs to know that people are watching her and want to be sure that she is protecting homeowners and not the big banks and lenders.
They're not two of my favorite California Congresswoman. But their leadership on repealing don't ask don't tell comes to a head with a hearing today, chaired by Davis.
Democrats in Congress hope to ignite a drive to reverse the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy Wednesday with the first hearing on the subject since 1993, when President Clinton said gays could serve in uniform if they kept quiet about their sexual orientation.
Without this hearing, said former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman John Shalikashvili, "you will never repeal the law. It's a great idea." He is among more than 50 retired generals and admirals who have said it is time to rethink the policy [...]
Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee tried to have a hearing on the policy in April 2007, but opposition from conservatives in their party sank the idea.
Since then, "There's another year in the war," says Rep. Susan Davis, a California Democrat who chairs the military personnel subcommittee. "We want to start a conversation" that could put the issue on a front burner again.
Democratic Rep. Ellen Tauscher of California, the lead sponsor of a bill to repeal the policy, said she knows what military leaders would say if they testified.
"The military leadership will tell you that this is the law they've been given to operate under and that's what they do," she says, "which is a very different question of off-line and off-the-record, 'Personally, admiral, what do you think?' That's the only way they could answer ... differently."
The Pentagon may be ducking this hearing, but they can't hide from public opinion. Over 75 percent of Americans would like to see DADT repealed. The arguments about "unit cohesion" have been shown to be ridiculous, and the case of Arabic translators being fired for being gay have highlighted not only the absurdity of this policy, but the national security harm it's actually doing.
The most fitting part of all of this is that Larry Craig supports Don't Ask Don't Tell. Yeah, he would, wouldn't he? I'm sure he'd love to change the title to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Just Tap Three Times," but then...
UPDATE: Rep. Patrick Murphy (from my hometown) had a great hearing. He kicked a little butt today. Video on the flip:
Kos has an important post on 2010 marking a pivot for the grassroots and netroots from trying to take back the federal government from Republicans to reforming our Party and holding Democrats accountable.
If your local congresscritter is one of the bad apples, start organizing locally. Plug into existing networks or start your own. Begin looking for primary challengers. Do the groundwork. Don't expect help from the local party establishment, they'll close ranks. So tap into alternate infrastructures. Find allies in the progressive movement. If your local shitty Democrat is anti-union, approach the unions. They'd love to send this kind of message. If the Democrat is anti-choice, work with the women's groups. If the Democrat is anti-environment ... you get the idea. If you have access to professional networks and money, start organizing those.
Of course, this takes more than just bitching about your frustrations on a blog, damning a whole party for the actions of a minority more scared of Mr. 28% than of protecting the Constitution they swore to protect. This takes hard work. But now is the time to start.
Indeed. The activists that meet campaigning this fall will form the core of next cycle's primary efforts. Kos suggests looking at The Capitulation Caucus with emphasis on those who are also Blue Dogs. In California, that means:
Joe Baca, Dennis Cardoza, Jim Costa, Jane Harman, and Adam Schiff
Kos also praises Loretta Sanchez as one of only four Blue Dogs who didn't cave on defending the Constitution from retroactive immunity. And remember, Ellen Tauscher was a member of the Blue Dogs until she saw the successful primarying of Joe Lieberman and occupies a district designed for a challenge from the left (and west).
The following California Democrats caved on retroactive immunity and disregarded their oath to, "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic":
Joe Baca, Howard Berman, Dennis Cardoza, Jim Costa, Jane Harman, Jerry McNerney, Nancy Pelosi, Brad Sherman, Adam Schiff, Ellen Tauscher
Pete Stark did not vote. This is the list of those who are potential targets of the Blue America PAC vs Retroactive Immunity which as of now has raised $310,673 to, "fund accountability for congressmembers supporting retroactive immunity and warrantless wiretaps." This money isn't going to send thank you cards to the members who did defend the constitution, this is primary money and cold cash to dump Steny Hoyer from leadership (Rahm Emanuel also capitulated).
As the battle moves to the Senate, all eyes are on Barack Obama nationally and Dianne Feinstein locally [(202) 224-3841].
As for 2010 primaries, it will be interesting to see what comes out of this. Carole Migden's 3rd place finish showed that entrenched politics matters less in a modern media environment. Ellen Tauscher is again practically begging to be primaried and in that district she's walking on thin ice. Joe Baca deserves particular scorn as the only Californian to sign the Blue Dog letter to Pelosi pushing capitulation (and a primary of Baca could probably receive significant institutional support from former members of the Hispanic Caucus). McNerney has outdone himself in contracting a full-blown case of Potomic Fever during his first term, every time he makes a move I think about asking for a refund. And Harman and Berman voting to cover-up warrantless wiretapping isn't going to do much to quell the rumors that they are pushing this because they are worried about their own culpability on the issue.
If you live in one of this districts, please call your member and ask them why. Comments and diaries with responses are highly encouraged.
[Tauscher] then raced to catch the last minutes of an Armed Services Committee hearing, just in time to question Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. As five women from the antiwar group Code Pink stood in protest, Tauscher asked two quick questions: Why didn't Bush's budget increase production of the C-17, a plane based at Travis? And how much would the president's troop increase cost?
[...]
But Code Pink activist Zanne Joi, whose shirt read "Stop Funding, Start Impeaching," was not impressed. She said she was horrified that Tauscher hadn't challenged Gates about Iraq, that she had treated the increase as a done deal. "We need her to stand up and end this war," said Joi.
Woohoo! Jerry did it! Jerry McNerney has managed to become the most un-progressive Democrat of the entire California congressional delegation. For those keeping score at home, Jerry's 82.45 was about a half point lower than the next CA Dem, Jim Costa, that progressive stalwart, at 82.97. And for all the talk of Harman changing her ways, she's still worse than even Joe Baca, almost 7 points worse from a very safe Dem seat.
For all of you CA-45 fans, "moderate" Mary Bono came in with a stellar 4.42 Chips are Down score. So, for all the bluster of the SCHIP vote, she's still dancing the same jig as the rest of her party.
On thing must be said, the Speaker has done an excellent job at preserving unity amongst the caucus. Whether that means she's being too incremental and/or ineffective, or just laying down the law is the big question. The reason her approval rating, and the Congress in general, is down has a whole lot to do with the fact that little has changed on the Iraq front. So, would it be better to have a speaker who is more willing to take risks? Perhaps, but the impediment of the president always lingers over her head, veto pen in hand. So, whether the unity is really there, is an open question. Full data over the flip.
(I was working on a similar post, but I'll still post my own, with all CA data and some other miscellany. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
The problem with most scorecards is that they are written by lobbyists concerned with always getting the votes of potential supporters. Thus, there is an equal weighting while in the real world not all votes are equal. In fact, regardless of everything else, some votes are dealbreakers and when they show up on scorecards as one of 12 votes or something, it looks silly. However, Progressive Punch has a new "when the chips are down" scorecard. After the flip is the ratings of CA's congressional delegation, in descending order.
I'm guessing that at tonight's Calitics' Actblue Celebrations there will be a lot of discussion about the votes to condemn MoveOn. The CA delegation split 50-50 in the senate and 16 yea and 17 nay in the house -- wedged successfully by the GOP in half. After the flip is the scorecard.
I apologize for inaccuracies contained in any earlier correspondence. I want to set the record straight on my actions. I am a co-sponsor of two bills to remove Gonzales from office. On May 22, I co-sponsored H. Res. 417, which declares that the House of Representatives and the American people have lost confidence in Attorney General Gonzales. It calls on the President to nominate a new candidate capable of serving as the head of the Department of Justice. Additionally, I am a co-sponsor of H. Res. 589, introduced yesterday by Rep. Jay Inslee of Washington, which directs the House Judiciary Committee to initiate an impeachment investigation of the Attorney General. The resolution requests a formal investigation of the facts surrounding the Attorney General's actions in order to allow Congress to determine whether articles of impeachment are appropriate [...]
You have to appreciate someone who can admit they were wrong.
