From 2006-2008, DCCC spent $14,421,187 on Democrats who will vote "no"

by: Chris Bowers

Fri Mar 19, 2010 at 15:03


It turns out that the biggest support of Democrats who will vote "no" on health reform is not the health insurance industry, but the Democratic Party itself.  Just take a look through the independent expenditure archive at Swing State Project, and compare them to David Dayen's latest whip count.

From 2006-2008, the DCCC made $14,421,187 in independent expenditures on behalf of elven members of the House of Representatives who are currently either "hard no" votes, or confirmed Stupak bloc, on the health reform bill.  Those eleven members of Congress are Adler (NJ-03), Arcuri (NY-24), Bright (AL-02), Childers (MS-01), Donnelly (IN-02), Driehaus (OH-01), Griffith (AL-05), Kissell (NC-08), Kratovil (MD-01), Minnick (ID-01), and Shuler (NC-11).

Additionally, the DCCC spent $21,328,946 on eleven members who are currently undecided: Altmire (PA-04), Carney (PA-10), Dahlkemper (PA-03), Ellsworth (IN-08), Kosmas (FL-24),  Hill (IN-09), Kanjorksi (PA-11), Mitchell (AZ-05), Perriello (VA-05), Space (OH-18) and Teague (NM-02).

The DCCC also spent a pile of money on the special elections featuring Travis Childers,  Bill Foster, Scott Murphy and Bill Owens in 2008-2009, although I could not find exact figures on how much they spent.  A safe assumption is that another $10,000,000 was spent in those campaigns, upping the overall total to around $45,000,000 on Democrats who are opposed, or undecided, on the health reform bill.

Furthermore, the DCCC spent $6,703,898 on just Dahlkemper, Donnelly, Driehaus and Ellsworth, all of whom are either Stupak bloc or "Stupak curious."

And to top it off, the DCCC is still actively raising money for nine "no" votes, (Adler, Arcuri, Bright, Childers, Driehuas, Kratovil, McMahon, Minnick, and Nye) along with a slew of undecideds (Carney, Dahlkemper, Foster, Hill, Kosmas, Mitchell, Scott Murphy, Owens, Perriello, Space and Teague).

The DCCC is the easily the largest source of funds for the Democrats who are holding up the health reform bill.  And, they show no signs of turning off the spigot for 2010.

There is a lot of buzz in the blogosphere about how Progressives in Congress are bad negotiators.  I'd have to say that serving as the Democratic Party serving as the primary source of funding source for the opposition to its legislative agenda takes bad negotiation up a couple orders of magnitude.

Oh yeah--and two committee chairs, Peterson and Skelton, oppose the health reform bill, too.  Sweet.

Update: Perriello is now a "yes" vote. So, the "undecided" numbers go down by $720,548.

Chris Bowers :: From 2006-2008, DCCC spent $14,421,187 on Democrats who will vote "no"

Tags: , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

No money for the DCCC (4.00 / 3)
If I didn't already need a reason to divert my money elsewhere.

Thanks for tracking this information down. Very helpful to know.  


All donations from progressives have to be only to individual progressives. (4.00 / 3)
No more "sharing" with bluedogs.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
since there is no practical difference between (0.00 / 0)
the bluedogs and progressives, it seems you have to avoid giving any money to any democrat to accomplish your objective.  You should also avoid giving money to wfp!

My blog  

[ Parent ]
3 committee chairs... Collin Peterson/Ag. also a "no" (0.00 / 0)
Collin Peterson/Ag. also a "dick"

John McCain won't insure children

He mentioned Peterson ... (0.00 / 0)
I think you mean Rahall .. who is the third

[ Parent ]
Surely this is good news (4.00 / 4)
for Rahm Emanuel. And Dana Milbank will be explaining the genius of it all to us very shortly.

DCCC (0.00 / 0)
Was Rahm the DCCC head for this great class of No votes or Van Hollen? I like Van Hollen but hope he wasn't responsible for this group of wankers.  

[ Parent ]
I don't know the answer to that (4.00 / 1)
but regardless, it's certainly in keeping with Rahm's strategic agenda, n'est-ce pas?

[ Parent ]
Actually the chain of command starts at WH... (4.00 / 1)
... then to Pelosi and then Van Hollen. Indeed, who has done more to egg on these Blue Dogs than Rahm and Obama? No one that I can think of.

But all this "holdout" kabuki is mostly just a matter of certain people securing a nice pay day for themselves. Keep the melodrama going until someone floats the right number and then jump on board.

So while I'm willing to concede that cultist ideologues like Stupid, er Stupak, do have some bizarre principles they can pretend to have, in the end they just want their day in the financial sun... and another opportunity to "stick it" to the little people to boot.

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates


[ Parent ]
re: stick (4.00 / 1)
and another opportunity to "stick it" to the little people to boot.

it's dc's favorite pastime


[ Parent ]
Heh. (4.00 / 1)
It's my understanding that the game of Stick Ball is played very differently in the District.

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates

[ Parent ]
It was Rahm and his screwing of Dean's 50-state strategy. (4.00 / 4)
Since '06.

Then, in '08, it was viewed as too extreme for Wall Street to handle in the face of the 'credit collapse.'

They only call it class war when we fight back.


[ Parent ]
Department of Redundancy Department, anyone? (0.00 / 0)
I'd have to say that serving as the Democratic Party serving as the primary source of funding source for the opposition to its legislative agenda takes bad negotiation up a couple orders of magnitude.

Nothing to add, it just made me laugh.

Our Dime Understanding the U.S. Budget


Forestalling strong reform was a shadow plank (4.00 / 2)
in the Obama corporate campaign. It worked to get him elected when it was only him and a few others negotiating with big business.

But Senate kabuki, Reid's 60-vote requirement, bleating for bi-partisanship and 'villain rotation' (see Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com) blew the cover off.


They only call it class war when we fight back.


Chris, I was there side by side in 2005 when 50 state project started (0.00 / 0)
pushing the envelope as hard as possible to get challengers in every congreesional district.  Force the GOP to spend money where they normally didn't have to.  Pushing hard here in the MI-09 when Nancy Skinner almost won in 2006 but where Gary Peters was successful in 2008.  

And your work here brings to light a very important issue with our party.  Why is so much money being spent to win these districts when we get so little in return especially on the big votes.  

Yanking financial support seems to be one of the biggest carrot/sticks that the leadership could emply on these members instead they seem to almost promise to open the spigot wider.  They also seem to personify the "C" voters that Nate Silver describes, No voters that want the bill to pass.


This just in.... (4.00 / 3)
... Per D-Day, it looks like Stupid, er Stupak, is going to get his standing vote on his lovely misogynist amendment later.

Ding! Fries are done! Or are they?

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

Tune in to As The Stomach Turns tomorrow, as we hear the loquacious Nancy say, "Er, um, so what? Rich white women will be just fine, thank you very much! And if I don't cave to these cultist moonbats, the White House will say I'm rude. I don't want to be called rude."

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates


can we sell more people out? (4.00 / 3)
yes we can

[ Parent ]
Pfffftt! As if women are "people"! n/t (4.00 / 2)


[ Parent ]
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox