Reid also declares that Olympia Snowe was negotiating in bad faith, that she was never going to support a health care bill, and that talking to her was a waste of time.
Given that both Lieberman and Snowe were negotiating in bad faith, we should have been pushing for reconciliation as hard as we were pushing for the public option.
Then again, Kissell only leads a potential primary challenger 49-15, and only 28% of Democrats know he voted against the bill. For an incumbent, those are pretty weak primary numbers-someone could actually knock him off. However, the North Carolina primary is on May 4th, so it is unlikely that a strong primary campaign would be able to gear up in such a short time.
Ned Lamont's main opponent in the Democratic primary for Governor in Connecticut has dropped out. Current polling on the campaign indicates that Ned is now the strong favorite in both the primary and the general election. Get ready for Governor Lamont!
It turns out that if I delete content from a website that I--quite literally--own, then I am engaging in censorship. I don't remember the part of the first amendment that declares everyone is allowed to use everyone else's printing press.
This is the last day to submit your comments to the FCC in support of Net Neutrality. Go do it, now.
The FDIC is trying to limit risky bank behavior by linking it to limits on executive pay. The good news not just the ruling, but that the ruling is causing blowback from the conservative members of the FDIC. This is a perfect example of the type of fights Democrats have to pick with financial institutions in 2010. As I wrote yesterday, banks must be portrayed as the culprit, and Democrats have to come across as fighting the banks father than colluding with them.
Keep picking fights like these, and pick them as publicly as possible.
As posted last night in Quick Hits by Daniel de Groot, the Obama administration want to use leftover TARP funds to pay down the debt. I guess the idea is that China's economy needs more stimulating than our own:
The Obama administration, under pressure to show it is serious about tackling the budget deficit, is seizing on an unusual target to showcase fiscal responsibility: the $700 billion financial rescue.(...)
The Treasury Department said about $210 billion in TARP funds remains unspent, including about $70 billion returned from financial institutions. A further $50 billion is expected to be repaid in the next 12 to 18 months.
This is a terrible, terrible idea. There are times when paying down the debt is prudent--like the early part of this decade--but right now we need that money to create jobs. Immediately.
Paying down the debt now would just send the $210 billion left in the TARP funds to China and other countries to who we owe money. A much better use would be for it fund a $200 billion jobs package that Congress is looking to move over the next one to three months.
Unfortunately, the administration's idea of using the remaining bailout money to pay down the debt is already catching on with Blue Dogs and Republicans. Anti-health care, pro-coathanger, Representative Larry Kissell has introduced, and is gathering cosponsors for, a bill in Congress to match the Obama administration's plans. Here is a Dear Colleague letter he is circulating in the House right now, trying to gather more co-sponsors on top of the four Republicans, four Blue Dogs, and freshman Ann Kirkpatrick who have already joined up:
(The letter Kissell is sending to other House members can be found in the extended entry.)
Just sent out the following email to 955 Larry Kissell donors. In 2006, these donors gave a total of $24,689.51 to Larry Kissell's campaign:
Does Larry Kissell Owe You Money?
Dear Chris Bowers,
This weekend, the House of Representatives is pushing for a vote on a health care bill that will cover 36 million currently uninsured Americans while reducing the deficit. Right now, Democrats do not have the votes to pass this bill, and Congressman Larry Kissell has merged as a potential vote against reform.
In 2006, and possibly again in 2008, you contributed money to help elect Congressman Kissell. With the vote expected this weekend, today is ideal for campaign contributors, like you, to contact Congresman Kissell's re-election campaign office. Tell the campaign that, if Congressman Kissell votes against health care reform this weekend, you will be calling again on Monday to ask for your money back.
The number for the campaign office is 1-877-428-4048
The email is info@larrykissell.com
A handful of progressive members of Congress are opposing the bill because they want a stronger version, but Congressman Kissell is not one of them.
Campaigns are obligated to return donations from unhappy donors. Contact Congressman Kissell's campaign office now, and say that you want your money back if Congressman Kissell votes against health care reform this weekend:
The number for the campaign office is 1-877-428-4048
The email is info@larrykissell.com
You received this email because you contributed to Larry Kissell on the Netroots Candidates Act Blue page back in 2006. If you are not already signed up for Open Left Action, this is a one-time only email sent to you on an urgent piece of legislation in the House. You will not receive any further emails from Open Left Action unless you choose to sign up to our email list. You can sign up here:
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.
It is worth noting that Larry Kissell is the only one of these six who also voted against the "Help Families Stay in Their Homes" Act. So let's sum up his economic position:
Bad: Money for homeowners about to be foreclosed upon.
Good: Taxpayer funded million dollar bonuses to Wall Street.
Have a fun time explaining that one to your constituents, Larry. What a relief the DCCC spent $2.4 million getting Kissell elected,
I'm glad that I refused to raise money for this guy in 2008. At the time, it was because I asked him if he supported either the FISA re-write or the Iraq blank check. Turned out that he supported both. Glad to see he is maintaining such a stellar record.
In the last couple days, there have been several posts across the blogosphere citing what various candidates running for Congress have said on FISA and retroactive immunity for the telecoms. But so far, it's been all over the map. I'll try to corral all their statements into this diary, so you can see who the "good guys" are.
First, let's start off with the current House and Senate members who voted against this bill. They do deserve credit, as it's their jobs on the line.
Follow me below the fold to see the dozens of Democratic challengers who are standing up for the Constitution, and are against this FISA bill and retroactive immunity.
In an email sent out to some Kissell supporters on October 07, 2006 by his campaign manager Leanne Powell with the subject heading "Please be on the look out for Hayes Commercial" was this paragraph clarifying Kissell's position on immigration (emphasis mine throughout):
"As for immigration Larry's position is more conservative the [sic] Congressman Hayes. Mr. Hayes supports the President's amnesty plan and protection of businesses that employ illegals. Larry says our immigration policy should be based in sound public policy not hate, that said, he believes that we have to secure our borders, deport illegals, prosecute those that bring them over the border and hold employers responsible that employ them. Larry believes that illegal aliens are just that-- illegal and to offer amnesty is to penalize the law abiding people waiting patiently and following the rules to be able to persue [sic] the American Dream."
"Kissell's immigration plan will use the vast technology resources of the newly formed Homeland Security Department to identify and track down illegal immigrants...."
I like Larry Kissell a lot, and I gave him money last cycle. Calling for the deporting and/or demonizing of immigrants though is problematic. It's morally atrocious and it's politically unsound for progressives and Democrats. Perhaps it'll work to get Kissell elected, and I hope he beats Robin Hayes, but our candidates shouldn't have this as a mandate.
First let me say right from the start that I would love to have seen Larry Kissell bring in $500,000 this quarter. He brought in a little over $80,000 to put toward 2008 and he brought in almost $30,000 to pay off debt from last cycle's efforts. Kissell raised over $110,000 and he did not lose ground, he did not go into debt, he's well ahead of where he was this quarter last cycle and his poll numbers are kicking ass.
Third quarter 2005 Larry Kissell hadn't raised enough to report to the FEC. If you add the money he's raised toward 2008 and the money raised on the old account for debt reduction, Larry Kissell has raised $309,018.27 which puts him about $309,018.27 ahead of where he was this time last cycle. As a matter of fact, it wasn't until the October quarterly reported in 2006 that Larry had raised over $300,000 and it was still less than where he stands today.
Fifty-nine percent (59%) of voters reject amnesty for phone companies that may have violated the law by selling customers' private information to the government, preferring to let courts decide the outcome. Again intensity favors opponents of amnesty, with 48% "strongly" opposed. Fewer than 1-in-3 (31%) support amnesty for the phone companies, with just 1-in-5 (22%) strongly supporting amnesty.
Opposition to amnesty is also widespread, cutting across ideology and geography. Majorities of liberals, moderates, and conservatives agree that courts should decide the outcomes of these legal actions (liberals:67% let courts decide, 28% give amnesty; moderates: 59% let courts decide, 28% give amnesty; conservatives: 52% let courts decide, 37% give amnesty). Large majorities in every part of the country also reject amnesty: 60% in the West (29% give amnesty), 61% in the Northeast (32% give amnesty), 59% in the Midwest (33% give amnesty), and 57% in the South (30% give amnesty). Seventy percent (70%) of Democrats and 61% of independents say let the courts decide. Republicans are evenly split (45% give amnesty, 44% let the courts decide) with equal intensity on both sides of the divide.
And again, spread across the ideological and partisan spectrum, people want individual warrants.
Sixty-one percent (61%) of voters oppose allowing courts to issue blanket warrants for wiretapping American citizens that would not have to name any specific individual, with a near majority (49%) "strongly" opposing blanket warrants. Fewer than 1-in-3 (31%) support blanket warrants.
I'm starting to collect candidate statements on the FISA fight in reaction to Bush's call for amnesty for the phone companies that broke the law and spied on Americans and the expansion of powers Congress is considering making permanent.
This past Saturday, Ambassador Joe Wilson came to Charlotte, NC to support Larry Kissell in his second bid to unseat Robin Hayes in North Carolina's 8th Congressional District.
I had not had the pleasure of meeting Joe Wilson prior to Saturday's event and was honestly expecting the man to be just a wee bit of a stuffed shirt. I found instead, a man who is generous, patient and funny. He did not leave the event until he had met each person who desired an introduction, stood for pictures with all waiting in line and signed every spare scrap of paper, every book and every Creative Loafing shoved in front of him. That's quite a chore when the total attendance is over 200 people.
In this Roll Call piece on Larry Kissell, Stuart Rothenberg spends the whole column talking about how Kissell was ignored but came surprisingly close even though 'no one thought he could' early on. Rothenberg then mentions that this time Kissell is going to get lots of establishment support. At no does he mention the $200k that small dollar donors shipped to Kissell via Actblue, or the local blog support that identified Kissell early as a possible upset. We're 'no one'.
This is not to pick on Rothenberg specifically, it's just something I've noticed. Darcy Burner's blowout online fundraiser of $125k, and the subsequent win over moderate Rodney Tom, got almost no press or institutional pickup. There are certain 'liberal' narratives the press likes to cover, such as primary campaigns like the one against Lieberman or 'intense pressure from the antiwar base'. But the support of candidates who then go on to win, or the more effective strategies we use to identify candidates, they go unreported.
STATE BLOGS
This past Saturday, Ambassador Joe Wilson came to Charlotte, NC to support Larry Kissell in his second bid to unseat Robin Hayes in North Carolina's 8th Congressional District.