Hey Kissell, can we have our $485,795 back?

by: Chris Bowers

Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 18:53


With a vote looming on Saturday night, the whip in the House for the health care bill remains very close.  According to the whip count at The Hill, 43 Democrats are no, leaning no, or undecided.  With 258 House Democrats, if every Republican votes "no" then 41 Democratic defections will defeat the bill.

One new "no" vote that just appeared, and is not on the list at The Hill, is freshmen Democrat Larry Kissell.  This is noteworthy, given that in 2006 and 2008, Larry Kissell raised $485,795 on Act Blue.  Some of that was raised directly by the campaign, but most of it came in through blog-organized fundraising pages.

Larry Kissell is a terrible fundraiser, and has always struggled with it.  His Republican challenger already has more cash on hand than he does, which is a real rarity for Democratic incumbents.  It might be a nice bit of pressure tomorrow to call his campaign office tomorrow, letting him know that a vote against the health care bill will not only slow donations, but will result in thousands of people asking for refunds.

If you happen to have given money to Larry Kissell in the past, go ahead and contact his campaign office tonight, letting him know how you feel about his opposition to health care reform with a public option.  The number is 1-877-428-4048, and the email is info@larrykissell.com.

Chris Bowers :: Hey Kissell, can we have our $485,795 back?

Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Hey Kissell, can we have our $485,795 back? | 27 comments
This is a problem with ActBlue, too, (4.00 / 2)
who absolutely refuse to distinguish between more and better Democrats.

They keep saying that that's not their focus, but I've yet to hear a good explanation why.

In fairness (4.00 / 4)
Kissell ran as a liberal, but decided not to legislate as one once he won.

[ Parent ]
Yeah. But going forward, they won't, (4.00 / 1)
for example, attach a 'score' to every Democrat who uses their service. So if someone voted for the Military Commission Act and for TelCom immunity and against healthcare, etc., that's extremely apparent.
[ Parent ]
well (4.00 / 1)
It just opens a can of worms -- what votes should be scored, and which way?  

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.
[ Parent ]
Progressive Punch manages, (4.00 / 4)
as do a bunch of other groups. That seems fairly easy--as long as they're transparent about what they're scoring.

And it'd be hugely helpful for donors ... and another way to pressure elected officials. (Especially if ActBlue were willing to stop working with 'Bush Dogs' and the like. Yes, at some point that's subjective. So is politics.)

[ Parent ]
So why duplicate efforts? (0.00 / 0)
It seems to me resources are tight for everyone.  Why not just encourage Act Blue to link to Progressive Punch or any of these "bunch of other groups."  That would make more sense than saying Act Blue should commit resources to come up with its own scoring method.
[ Parent ]
Uh, as I understadn it, that's exactly what Joel recommends. (0.00 / 0)
And this sure would be a good solution. ActBlue should be a leader in transparency, and in holding politicans accountable. Adding Progressive Punch scorecards would be a strong move in this direction.
[ Parent ]
Judge it against the Democratic party platform (4.00 / 1)


John McCain won't insure children
[ Parent ]
True (4.00 / 1)
but Kissel wasn't an incumbent, you can't really predict how a person votes if they aren't in Congress yet.

[ Parent ]
Oh, absolutely. I mean with incumbents-- (0.00 / 0)
and with campaign promises, though those of course aren't nearly so clear.
[ Parent ]
That is, imagine if ActBlue contacted (4.00 / 2)
Kissell today and said, 'We're going to attach a nasty note on your fundraising page if you vote against health care. Just FWI. It's policy. Nothing personal, but every prospective dem donor who looks at you on ActBlue is gonna see this strike mark against you."
[ Parent ]
Why should that be ActBlue's job? (0.00 / 0)
Their mission is to be a clearinghouse to allow people to support all Democrats. You might not like that mission, but that is their choice. A better approach would be to create a rival site that only supports candidates which you approve of.
[ Parent ]
Or better yet (0.00 / 0)
create an Act Blue page that only has the people you approve of on it ... which is what sites like Open Left and Daily Kos already do.

Personally I would be pretty upset if Act Blue started determining on their own which elected officials in my state are progressive or not -- since undoubtedly it would not match MY list.  I am much happier deciding on my own who is worthy of my support.

[ Parent ]
That's like saying that there's no reason (4.00 / 3)
to have a union, we should all just negotiate with management by ourselves.

Collective action is more powerful. But clearly, ActBlue agrees with you, not me. I just think that's a great pity, and enables Blue Dogs.

[ Parent ]
Why should anything be their job? (0.00 / 0)
Because they choose that job. I complain because I don't agree with their mission; just like I complain about politicians whose missions I disagree with.
[ Parent ]
Just gave the voicemail an earful. (4.00 / 3)
Polite, respectful, but I really let 'em have it.
I reported (4.00 / 4)
a couple weeks ago that Kissell was a no in the public whip count before Pelosi decided on what kind of public option to use.

http://news.firedoglake.com/20...

Insert shameless blog promotion here.

This really sucks (4.00 / 5)
Here's my email tonight:

Dear Congressman Kissell:

I am a long-standing financial supporter of yours through Blue America at FireDogLake.  I supported your first campaign and your winning one as well.  I expected you to support health care reform without much of a fight.  It seemed to me to be a natural fit for the populist campaign you ran.   I was very disappointed to read at OpenLeft today that yours is a vote AGAINST the bill.

I lived in North Carolina in the 1970s and 1980s.  I know how families struggled -- even then! -- to afford basic health care.  I did.  I can't imagine it's gotten any better for the working poor of your district in the time you've served in Congress.

I hope this report of your NO vote is a mistake and that North Carolina families, and your longtime supporters from all across the country, can in fact count on your support for the health care reform bill.  Anything else would be a betrayal of the principles that made me support you, and a grave disappointment to me.

Thank you for reading this email and thank you for your service to the people of North Carolina and the United States of America.

Sincerely,


Thank Dog I contributed to Kissell (0.00 / 0)
If he votes no.. I'll send him more as a thank you from the bottom of my progressive heart.

What's wrong with my favorite bloggers? they are all pimping for a Blue Dog health insurance bill now! A bill that gets worse every day.

I searched my email (4.00 / 1)
and I don't appear to have contributed to him. But I did find an appeal from DFA for him, I wonder if they have contacted him to register their disappointment.  
Anyone know ... (0.00 / 0)
what the Obama winning margin was in Kissell's district?
Never mind .. (4.00 / 2)
I found it .. Obama won Kissell's district 53 to 47 .. and Kissell beat Hayes by 55 to 45 .. in a district that was R+2 ... according to the last Cook PVI I could find
[ Parent ]
53-47 (4.00 / 1)

[ Parent ]
Kissel's name is not included in any of the lists compiled by the Hill in the link? (0.00 / 0)
I live in NC and heard Larry Kissel speak  a couple of times during his campaign. His message never struck me as liberal. He had the support the higher ups of our state party precisely because his message was so centrist/conservative. The only appeal I heard him make that was the least bit liberal was, that as a school teacher he cared deeply about public education, and would do all he could to properly fund public education.

I am not surprised he has joined the Blue Dogs.

All that being said the whip count cited in the link does not include Kissel's name in either the Yes, No, or Reviewing the bill column. We should rightly criticize his centrist/Blue Dog votes.  But are we sure where he stands on health care reform?

Called (4.00 / 1)
I just called Kissell's office, the staffer said he has decided to "vote NO, because of Medicare cuts, and does not believe the bill is fair to seniors in the district".  Further said the congressman, believes there has not been "ample" time to debate all aspects of the measure...vomit.
[ Parent ]
So he cares more about seniors than the AARP? (0.00 / 0)
Big of him...
[ Parent ]
As for ActBlue (0.00 / 0)
why should they distinguish between good and bad candidates?  When we donate, we choose who to donate to.  It's our job to pick who we want.

If Kissell votes against healthcare reform, he's gotta know his funding will slow to a trickle from that source.  I wouldn't be surprised if he gets some DCCC money.

However, I suspect he's going to lose unless there is some external force getting Democrats to the polls, or his opponent runs as a rapid teabagger.  2010 turnout will not be as bad as it was this week, but it won't be close in NC to what it was for Obama.

It's been said before - we can afford to lose 20 Blue Dogs. I kind of hope we do, especially those who vote against healthcare.  If you replaced 20 blue dogs with 20 Republicans, we'd probably have a STRONGER healthcare bill going to the House floor.

Want a progressive global warming novel, not a right wing rant? Go to www.edwardgtalbot.com for a free audio thriller.

Hey Kissell, can we have our $485,795 back? | 27 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox