Democrats are affronted. Right in the middle of the Statuary Hall service for the late Tom Lantos, a Republican went to the floor -- just steps from the solemn proceedings -- and called a procedural vote, apparently out of pique.
The Republican was the aforementioned Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-FL). This kind of behavior is petty and disrespectful of a man who spent his life fighting for human rights across the world. Completely unacceptable.
Update (Lucas): If (when) Diaz-Balart doesn't apologize, you may want to look up his Democratic challenger: Hialeah Mayor Raul Martinez.
Update (Bob): Props to the first Democrat to file a censure resolution -- apology or not.
Representative Tom Lantos has succumbed to esophageal cancer today in Washington, DC. The 80-year-old Congressman has represented parts of San Francisco and the Peninsula for the better part of thirty years.
He was a commanding figure in both the Capitol and in the Bay Area. His personal story was amazing and powerful. He escaped the Holocaust with the assistance of Raoul Wallenberg, a Swedish diplomat who issued passports for those fleeing the Nazi death camps, but most of his family perished in the Holocaust.
While I didn't always agree with Rep. Lantos, I always knew that his motivation was always the best interests of America and the pursuit of human rights across the globe. Rep. Lantos' voice will be missed.
Rep. Tom Lantos of California, the only Holocaust survivor to serve in Congress, has died, his spokeswoman said Monday.
Lynne Weil said that Lantos, 80, passed away at the Bethesda Naval Medical Center in suburban Maryland.
Lantos was the only Holocaust survivor in Congress and had a long record on human rights issues.
Lantos, who was elected to the House in 1980, founded the Congressional Human Rights Caucus in 1983. In early 2004 he led the first congressional delegation to Libya in more than 30 years, meeting personally with Moammar Gadhafi and urging the Bush administration to show "good faith" to the North African leader in his pledge to abandon his nuclear weapons programs. Later that year, President Bush lifted sanctions against Libya.
Lantos had already announced his retirement because of the cancer. He becomes the second California member of Congress to succumb to cancer in this session after Juanita Millender-McDonald who passed away in April.
Tom Lantos was a giant and will be missed both as a legislator and a person.
Update: Capitol Alert notes there will be a special election for the seat before November, possibly in tandem with the June election.
(Bumped as a sign of respect for a campaign I can't see declaring. But I believe that despite the reasoning jumps in this diary, if this were to happen this deserves more exposure. - promoted by Bob Brigham)
I'm a big fan of Larry Lessig's blog, which used to be called Lessigblog, and now Lessig 2.0. Howard Dean blogged there in 2003 and for the 2008 nomination he's supporting Barack Obama. His work at Stanford and legal/philosophical work is legendary. So it was with great excitement I found a diary at Daily Kos published earlier in the week, with a little bit of supporting evidence, suggesting that Lessig could announce he's running for congress. It might even be as soon as this week:
Rep. Tom Lantos has been diagnosed with esophageal cancer and will not be running for re-election. Here is a bit of background on Lantos and his statement: examiner.com
Lantos, 79, is the only Holocaust survivor elected to Congress and is known for his dedication to human rights issues. He is serving his 14th term as a House member.
"It is only in the United States that a penniless survivor of the Holocaust and a fighter in the anti-Nazi underground could have received an education, raised a family, and had the privilege of serving the last three decades of his life as a member of Congress," Lantos said in a statement. "I will never be able to express fully my profoundly felt gratitude to this great country."
I am sad to hear of Lantos's illness. He has indeed lived a remarkable life, though I differ greatly from his hawkish positions with respect to Israel.
This does mean that there will not be a primary challenge in this district. Jackie Speier had already announced that she would be running against Lantos. I am bummed, that would have been a fun race and one that the blogosphere would have been heavily involved in. Look for Sen. Leland Yee to also run for this seat. It is not that often that there is an open House seat in the bay. This is a deep blue district and it deserves to be represented by a progressive.
(Huge news for Speier, Tourk is top-notch! - promoted by Bob Brigham)
(This is more of a quick hit than a diary, but I thought this news was just too juicy to ignore.)
It looks like Jackie Speier is pretty seriously considering running in CA-12 against Tom Lantos.
Demo derby: Former state Sen. Jackie Speier has just signed Mayor Gavin Newsom's onetime campaign manager Alex Tourk to help launch her still-unofficial campaign to unseat Peninsula Congressman Tom Lantos in next June's Democratic primary.
"She hasn't declared yet, but she asked me to join her team - and I'm honored to be part of it," Tourk said Friday. "And I'm confident when people are reminded of her record and talk to her one-on-one in house meetings, there will be no doubt her time is now."
Tourk was Gavin Newsom's campaign manager and deputy chief of staff ... until it was revealed that Newsom was sleeping with Tourk's wife, Ruby Rippey-Tourk. I don't know much about Tourk but he has a reputation for being a skilled political consultant so this is another sign that Speier is getting closer to running for CA-12.
Updated with a swell picture from Russiablog. -Lucas
Via TPM , word of internal polling from Jackie Speier that shows her with a huge 30 point lead over incumbent Tom Lantos. Speier's camp quotes a 57%-27% lead over Lantos is a straight "who would you support" poll of the 12th district.
The goodwill and name recognition that Speier built up during her primary run for Lt. Governor last year seem to be serving her well out of the gate. I'm sure Lantos will bounce back from numbers like these, especially once the incumbent protection kicks in. But if these numbers prove to be remotely accurate, it's gonna be a heckuva race on the peninsula.
(I received an email with this piece from a fellow public policy grad of Berkeley, Richard Harris Smith. Mr. Smith argues that Lantos could be more effective from outside of the halls of Congress than from within. It's a valid and reasonable point. Check it out here. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
There's another report on the Jackie Speier primary challenge for Tom Lantos in today's Matier and Ross:
she told us late Friday that she hasn't made a final decision - and that when she does, we'll be among the first to know. "The good news is Congressman Lantos has finally come back to the district," she said, a digging reference to his trip home this week for the holidays and to attend a congressional subcommittee hearing on the Coast Guard's role in the big bay oil spill.
Challenge or not, Lantos, who will turn 80 in February, said through his spokeswoman: "I fully expect to win the primary in June and the general election next November. "As always, I intend to run a positive, constructive campaign," he added, "and I trust that any opponents will do the same."(SF Chron 11.24.07)
This district is literally 2 blocks from my home, as it knifes through the middle of San Francisco, but it's far different from Pelosi's seat. By any measure, it's a very progressive seat, but different factors are in play. It's a heavily minority seat, primarily Asian-Americans, but Speier was easily elected in her final run for state senate in 2002. (The districts don't perfectly overlap, but it's close.)
As has been mentioned around here a couple of times, Lantos has been known to use his Holocaust survivor history in discussions of foreign policy. And while these experiences are valid, questions remain about whether he can accurately represent the anti-war sentiments of the district. He supported the initial invasion, and has been fairly hawkish on Iran. However, he's been a vocal critic of recent Iraq strategy, and has been a useful voice for the Speaker as she seeks to promote better diplomacy.
It seems reasonably clear at this point that the Speaker would not be pleased to see Lantos taken out in a primary challenge. Lantos is a strong Pelosi supporter, and any way, the Speaker is no vocal supporter of primary challenges. However, given her relationship with Lantos, one would suspect that she would take this very seriously. Most assuredly we would see a strong Pelosi endorsement of Lantos, likely along with some money and a bit of her time if the race is close as we approach June.
There are a lot of competing forces at play here, a challenge to Lantos would be a very bold step for Speier, but it's still an open question at this point. However, Speier seems to have some tentative support in the netroots.
The Capitol Alert AM Email raises an interesting point:
If Speier does jump in, that may open the door for a third candidate -- Sen. Leland Yee, who replaced her in the Senate. All three represent San Francisco's South Bay and, unlike Lantos or Speier, it's the middle of the election cycle for Yee, who wouldn't have to risk his own seat to run.
But there is another issue lurking in the back here: Will Leland Yee run if Jackie runs. A three-way race would likely favor Lantos, but that's hardly clear. Here's the thing for Yee, if he doesn't run and then Jackie wins, the seat is out of play for another 20 years. If Lantos wins, then he can run in an open seat whenever Lantos retires. While it's not totally clear how he would affect the race, I think it's almost a no-brainer for Yee if Speier enters.
Yee has been something of an enigma in the City. On the Board of Supervisors, he represented a heavily Chinese district, which, for the City, is/was fairly conservative. In the Assembly he was known primarily for going after video games. He has come up with some interesting legislation, but isn't particularly loved by some of the major clubs in the City. However, the power of the Chinese vote would assure him a decent result if he ran.
This should be very interesting. It looks like Jackie Speier, who was a fine state Senator who just missed in a there-are-no-losers primary for Lt. Governor with John Garamendi last year, is going to run for Congress in a primary against longtime incumbent Tom Lantos.
"It's Time!" declares an e-mail circulated by supporters to "friends" and "fans" this past week, announcing the first organizing meeting of the Jackie Speier for Congress Exploratory Committee on Tuesday at a home in Hillsborough.
Speier has been consulting with friends and supporters about a run since a poll conducted by allies in January showed her a 2-1 favorite among voters in the 12th Congressional District, which covers northern San Mateo County and parts of San Francisco.
Speier has since hired at least one staffer to start gearing up. Nonetheless, she told us late Friday that she hasn't made a final decision - and that when she does, we'll be among the first to know.
I don't often (or ever, really) bring up the CA state Bar on this site, but they are a major player in Sacramento. But I thought I should point out that Jeff Bleich, the new (since 9/29/07) president of the California State Bar shares some of our values. In his inauguration speech (PDF) he spoke of increasing pro bono work by attorneys, and his resume reads well. He's the Vice-Chair of the CSU Board and was appointed Director of the White House Commission on Youth Violence by President Clinton. He gives to a wide range of Democratic candidates, from DiFi (ugh) to Kerry and Edwards.
And oh yeah, he actively supported the campaign of a challenger to Congressman Tom Lantos in the 2004 Democratic Primary, Ro Khanna. In the video, you'll see him talking about Mr. Khanna, an attorney who was recently honored with the SF Democratic County Central Committee's Trailblazer Award, and the problems with Rep. Lantos.
While I understand the hesitance to challenge Rep. Lantos, as many assume he will retire soon, he's been getting more and more Lieberman-esque in his golden years. He chairs the House Foreign Relations Committee, and has been a bad vote, and a bad voice on a wealth of issues regarding the so-called War on Terror. And, oh yeah, he told the Dutch that they can't complain our gulag-esque prison camp in Gitmo because they didn't protest about Auschwitz enough. As Lucas so aptly pointed out in that post, the leaders Rep. Lantos was talking to weren't even alive during the Holocaust. And, oh yeah, the Netherlands had already been conquered at the time of the opening of Auschwitz, and many were fighting to protect minorities (see The Diary of Anne Frank). Mr. Bleich was dead on when he said that Lantos no longer properly represents the district. See the flip for my "Why Primaries Are Important" List.
The conservative blogosphere has been abuzz for a few days now over comments made by our own Tom Lantos to Dutch lawmakers over Guantanamo. A delegation of Dutch legislators toured the prison facility and later met with Lantos in DC. Delegation members debated the withdrawal of Dutch troops from Afghanistan and Dutch Green Party member Mariko Peters commented that "We have to close Guantanamo because it symbolizes for me everything that is wrong with this war on terror." Well, Rep. Lantos didn't take too kindly to the sentiment, and angrily called out the group for being, well, soft on the Holocaust:
Europe was not as outraged by Auschwitz as by Guantanamo Bay.
But nope, he wasn't done. World War Two, it seems, preempts any criticism from Europeans towards the United States, possibly forever. Lantos went on to declare "You have to help us, because if it was not for us you would now be a province of Nazi Germany." No mention as to whether French aid during the Revolutionary War disqualifies American criticism of the French, but presumably that would create some sort of physically unstable vortex of disallowed indignation. I can't speak to the ages of the delegation members, but I would imagine that many were but a gleam in their father's eye during the Holocaust. Certainly I'm two generations removed. I wonder whether I, having failed to react strongly to Auschwitz, am also disqualified from moral judgment. It wouldn't seem as though these comments leave any allowance for, or even aspiration for, an improving world.
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.
(Here is a link to the article. Just to clarify probing weakness isn't a push poll, but speaking of polls please take the one in the extended entry - promoted by blogswarm)
The SF Examiner reported today that a phone poll has recently been conducted pitting Lt. Gov. primary loser and former SF Peninsula St. Sen. Jackie Speier against Congressman Tom Lantos. Also included in the poll were South San Francisco Assemblyman Gene Mullin and San Mateo County Supe Jerry Hill. Mullin and Hill denied sponsoring the poll.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she would call a vote on the increase, trying to isolate Bush and put Republicans on the spot. Democratic leaders in the Senate also said they would schedule a debate next week on a symbolic measure expressing opposition.
Key Bay Area Democrats like Foreign Affairs Committee chair Tom Lantos and Ellen Tauscher, who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, were part of a small delegation that met with the President yesterday.
Pelosi is on offense, putting the GOP on the spot. But Bush is too, going after the only two Democrats of the Bay Area delegation who screwed up when he fooled them the first time.
Tauscher needs to stop talking to Bush and start following Pelosi.
"It was not a confrontational meeting," said Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher (D-Alamo), who said she emphasized the importance of the Iraqi government making political progress. "I think he understands that, at some level, this is the last best chance."
Why the hell was it not confrontational? Tauscher needs to go.
