Only five Republicans — including Coburn, DeMint and Sessions — had the guts to vote against this “compromise” abomination from Hell. “Temporary tax relief, permanent entitlements,” says Michelle Malkin.
Because yesterday’s cloture vote was the real decision, I almost forgot to blog about the final passage.
If you were wondering Friday why Sen. Bernie Sanders, Vermont Socialist, now apparently owns C-SPAN2, the answer — at least according to Arshad Hasan, Executive Director of Democracy for America (DFA) — is that he was following orders. This morning, Hasan sent this e-mail to DFA’s list:
It’s weeks like this that I’m reminded why I love working at DFA.
This week started off with a punch in the gut. The President had caved to Republican demands and agreed to extend the Bush tax cuts — not just to the middle class — but specifically to the very rich.
It was pretty awful news, but DFA members didn’t admit defeat. You told us that you were ready to fight — and fight we did.
On Monday, DFA members made over 12,000 calls to Congress demanding “No deal!” and joining thousands more calls made by members of MoveOn, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, CREDO Action, True Majority, and SEIU in a nationwide day of action.
On Tuesday, Senator Bernie Sanders on our DFA Live conference call with 5,000 DFA members committed to “do whatever it takes, including filibuster, to stop this deal.” Then, together with Sen. Sanders, we gathered signatures of over 50,000 Americans demanding Democrats in Congress reject the so-called tax “compromise.”
You know what? It worked.
On Thursday, House Democrats voted to reject the deal and Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she wouldn’t even bring it up for a vote. On Friday, Senator Sanders took to the Senate floor and held his own unconventional filibuster for hour after hour after hour. These bold leaders are showing everyone in Washington what it looks like when progressive Democrats stand up and fight for the middle class.
There’s no denying DFA members stood up, took action and delivered this week. You told us that you expected more from our leaders and together we delivered that message to Congress. You made them listen.
We’re not out of the woods yet. Corporate special interests are putting tremendous pressure on Democrats in Congress to cave and we need to keep fighting to make sure they stand strong.
I couldn’t be more honored to work with you every day. We can’t do the work that we do without you. Democracy for America depends on small contributions from members across the country to get the job done, so please contribute today so we have the resources to finish this tax cuts fight before Congress goes home for the holidays.
Please contribute $10 now and fuel our aggressive campaign to win.
Working together, we’re going to have a lot more weeks like this one.
-Arshad
Arshad Hasan, Executive Director
Democracy for America
Here’s a couple of screen shots from the DFA Web site to show how they’re promoting this “no deal” message:
So Hasan and DFA are taking credit for the Berniethon, the result of which will be . . .?
We don’t know yet. It is entirely possible that Democrats — who just suffered their biggest mid-term debacle since 1938 — will force so many changes to this compromise that Senate Republicans will be justified in saying, “No deal.”
And then everybody will get a tax increase on January 1.
Happy New Year!
What will then happen — as soon as the incoming House GOP majority is sworn in as the 112th Congress — is that Speaker Boehner and friends will pass a straight-up bill renewing the Bush tax cuts and making the old rates retroactive to Jan. 1. The Senate will then be forced to choose between passing this straight-up bill (not a compromise, no union-approved porky “sweeteners” for Democrats) or allowing the continuation of the higher tax rates. And every day the Senate delays passing that bill, more tax money will be drained from American paychecks, helping to prevent economic recovery.
All of which is to say, “Way to go, DFA! Way to ‘stand strong’ for your own political suicide! We’ll call your bluff and see how you like it in the 112th Congress, when John Boehner is ramming the GOP agenda down your throats!”
Here’s the situation: In order to get the deal, Obama needs Republican votes in the Senate. If the Senate GOP filibusters, there’s no deal. But the House Democrats don’t give a damn:
House Democrats have passed a resolution saying they’ll reject President Obama’s tax deal with Republicans. . . .
The House Democratic Caucus passed a resolution by voice vote saying members will vote against Obama’s tax deal in its current form. . . .
“If it’s take it or leave it, we’ll leave it,” said liberal Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., issued a statement saying House Democrats will continue to work with Obama and the GOP “to improve the proposal before it comes to the House floor for a vote.” . . .
Meanwhile, a group of 53 House Democrats led by Vermont’s Peter Welch sent a letter to Pelosi and urged her to hold their ground against the White House. The letter called the deal “fiscally irresponsible” and “grossly unfair.” . . .
Dear Madam Speaker,
We oppose acceding to Republican demands to extend the Bush tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires for two reasons.
First, it is fiscally irresponsible. Adding more than $900 billion to our national debt, as this proposal would do, handcuffs our ability to offer a balanced plan to achieve fiscal stability without a punishing effect on our current commitments, including Social Security and Medicare.
Second, it is grossly unfair. This proposal will hurt, not help, the majority of Americans in the middle class and those working hard to get there. Even as Republicans seek to add billions more to our national debt in tax cuts to the wealthy, they oppose extending unemployment benefits to workers and resist COLA increases to seniors.
Without a doubt, the very same people who support this addition to our debt will oppose raising the debt ceiling to pay for it.
We support extending tax cuts in full to 98 percent of American taxpayers, as the President initially proposed. He should not back down. Nor should we.
Sincerely,
PETER WELCH
Member of Congress
Looking at the list of more than 50 House Democrats who signed the Welch letter, I see several names — including Paul Kanjorski, Jim Oberstar and Alan Grayson — of Democrats who got beat in the mid-term election. Their careers are over and so they’ve got a political free-pass for these lame ducks to take a stand on “principle,” possibly resulting in a no-deal meltdown that results in Americans paying higher taxes next year. And maybe, as Larry Summer warns, pushing the economy into a double-dip recession.
New York Republican Randy Altschuler has conceded to Democratic Rep. Tim Bishop, bringing the final undecided House race of the 2010 election cycle to a close.
Randy Altschuler, Republican/Conservative candidate, this morning conceded the hard-fought race for New York’s 1st Congressional District seat. With approximately 977 absentee ballots left to be counted, unofficial numbers showed four-term Democrat incumbent Congressman Tim Bishop with a 263 vote lead over Altschuler, with a total of more than 194,000 votes cast. The 1st Congressional District was the last undecided House seat in the nation.
Additionally, the Altschuler campaign dropped its legal challenges to the remaining uncounted absentee ballots. This will allow the Suffolk County Board of Elections to count the remaining ballots. While the Altschuler campaign has uncovered numerous instances of absentee ballots that may have been unlawfully cast, the campaign is confident that the proper authorities will take the appropriate action concerning them and that their number is too small to alter the outcome of the election.
Randy Altschuler said, “After consulting with my family and campaign staff, I am ending my campaign and offering congratulations to Congressman Tim Bishop on his victory.
As LCR notes, this last decision finalizes the GOP’s gain in the mid-term elections at 63 House seats, providing incoming Speaker John Boehner with a 242-seat majority (compared to 193 for Democrats).
New York’s 1st District, encompassing eastern Long Island, remains the nation’s last undecided congressional race of 2010. Supporters of Republican challenger Randy Altschuler contend that incumbent Democrat Rep. Tim Bishop was the beneficiary of illegal votes:
Absentee ballot counting ground to a halt at 11 a.m. Friday in the only still-undecided congressional race in the nation, as lawyers and strategists for both candidates continued preparation for a showdown in State Supreme Court next week [i.e., starting today].
Republican challenger Randy Altschuler gained six votes on incumbent Democrat Tim Bishop in the count yesterday, narrowing the difference between the two candidates to 271 votes or 264 votes, depending on which side is doing the tally. (Bishop’s camp has his lead at 271 but the difference is only 264 according to Altschuler’s people.)
But more than 1,400 paper ballots remain uncounted — two-thirds of them because of objections raised by Altschuler — and the decision to count them or not will be made by Supreme Court Justice Peter H. Mayer . . .
Mayer will rule on the validity of an assortment of objections to the remaining absentee ballots . . . .
Of Altschuler’s approximately 1,000 outstanding ballot objections, about 650 of them are based on residency challenges. Altschuler’s lawyers are preparing to argue that the voters in question were improperly registered to vote in Suffolk County, according to Altschuler spokesman Rob Ryan.
Ryan said the Altschuler team’s investigation of those 650 challenged absentee ballots has turned up “hundreds” of voters that he contends should not have been allowed by the Board of Elections to register and vote in Suffolk County. He declined to give a specific number. The research is still continuing, he said.
The voters in question include people who own homes in New York City, have a New York City address on their drivers’ licences and, in numerous instances, voted in New York City multiple — even dozens of — times over the past decade or so. Some of them have gotten STAR tax relief — available only on one’s principal dwelling — on homes outside the 1st CD. Ryan said the Altschuler team has also turned up recorded mortgage documents in which some of the voters affirmed their NYC residences were their primary residences — and then voted in Suffolk County.
“That’s either voter fraud or bank fraud,” Ryan said.
Ryan accuses New York City Democrats of scheming to influence elections outside of the city. “They have taken proactive measures to encourage people to vote from their vacation homes,” Ryan said. He pointed to CountryVote.org, a website he said was established by a group of Democratic lawyers to encourage wealthy New York City Democrats who have second homes in the country to register at their country address — where their vote in an election will have more influence.
“It’s a move to stack the deck. The Democrats win in NYC by such wide margins, they don’t need the votes there, so why not put people in other places where their votes will count,” Ryan said. . . .
Read the whole thing. Sources close to the Altschuler campaign provided me with this timeline of the post-election events:
ELECTION DAY: New voting machines (scanners with retained paper ballots) are used for the first time in a statewide General Election. When the polls close returns are unusually slow coming in, not only in the 1st District, but across the state. The following morning Altschuler is presumed to have lost by over 3,400 votes.
FRIDAY, 11/5: The voting machines have been returned to the Board of Elections warehouse and the memory chips in the machines are downloaded and a swing of 3,800+ takes place. Altschuler ends the day up by 383. It appears that the reported vote on Election Night was riddled with human error caused by election workers who are unfamiliar with the workings of the new machines. (This same type of situation arose in November 2009 when the new machines were used in 7 of 11 counties that make up New York’s 23rd Congressional District. In this case one candidate gained over 2,500 votes when the memory chips were downloaded.) Almost immediately, the Bishop campaign starts calling for a hand-count of all ballots scanned by machines on Election Day; approximately 184,000 ballots. This came a day after they had ridiculed the Altschuler campaign for wanting a count of the absentee ballots.
TUESDAY, 11/8: Bishop goes to State Supreme Court wanting hand count of all 184,000 scanned ballots judge requests legal basis for the count. The Suffolk County Board of Elections starts a NY State mandated audit of 3% of all machines in the County. This is a statewide mandate to make sure that the new machines are working properly. The BOE finds no problems with the machines when the audit is completed 10 days later.
WEDNESDAY, 11/9: Suffolk County Board of Elections starts count of over 11,000 absentee, military and affidavit (emergency) ballots. This is includes a challenge process by which each campaign challenges ballots prior to them being opened and counted. These challenges can be based on a variety of issues ranging from late postmark to handwriting or residency issues. Challenged ballots are set aside by type of challenge and will not be opened or counted until the challenge is resolved.
TUESDAY, 11/23: Count of approximately 9,000 of the above referenced 11,000+ ballots is completed. Altschuler now trails by 230 votes with over 2,200 challenged ballots remaining to be counted.
MONDAY, 11/29: FOX NEWS runs story citing incidents of fraud in numerous absentee ballots that have been challenged. Under NY State law these are felonies and if convicted the voter can be sentenced to a year in jail. The ballots challenged on a residency basis revolve around individuals with residences in New York City or Florida with multi-million dollar vacation homes vacation homes in the Hamptons and Shelter Island.
WEDNESDAY, 12/1: At close of business Altschuler is behind by 259 votes.
THURSDAY, 12/2: Judge is review all challenges based on technical issues.
MONDAY, 12/6: Judge will start to review remaining challenges based on handwriting or residency issues.
Yesterday, Sarah Steelman, a former state treasurer and state senator, has announced plans to challenge McCaskill, setting the stage for what could be a hard fought primary. The Club for Growth came out this morning to applaud Steelman’s entrance into the race, with Club president Chris Chocola calling it, “a welcome sign for pro-growth conservatives.” By contrast, Chocola fired a preemtive strike against [former GOP Sen. Jim] Talent, who is believed to be considering a rematch against McCaskill. “With a record of support for government expansion and outrageous earmark spending, it would be more difficult for Jim Talent to successfully contrast his record with Claire McCaskill’s,” he said. You can already see the conservative outsider vs. establisment RINO narrative forming.
Democratic polling firm PPP has conducted an early poll of the race, and confirms that McCaskill is vulnerable, essentially tied with prospective challengers. She has a one point edge over Steelman, while trailing Talent and Lt Gov. Peter Kinder, another possible candidate, by two points each.
Although Jim Talent is certainly an “establishment” Republican, I don’t think anyone would accuse him of being a “RINO” of the Crist/Castle variety. There may be some specific reason the Club for Growth prefers Steelman over Talent — various measures Talent voted for during his congressional tenure that the Club opposes — but I see no need to throw around a slur like “RINO” against a guy whose reputation is as a loyal conservative Republican.
Kudos to Phil for the reporting — as I said last week, conservatives need to focus on the key Senate races for 2012. Let’s hope we have lots more contested Republican primaries like this one in Missouri, and hopefully some Tea Party candidates — businessmen, homeschooling moms, military veterans, county sheriffs, etc. — will throw their hats in the ring.
“We’ve got to stand up at some point and say, ‘We are not going to pay slavery reparations in the United States Congress.’ That war’s been fought. That was over a century ago. That debt was paid for in blood, and it was paid for in the blood of a lot of Yankees, especially. And there’s no reparations for the blood that paid for the sin of slavery. No one’s filing that claim.”
— Rep. Steve King, Iowa Republican
Congressman Steve King (R-IA) today issued the following statement after the lame duck Congress passed legislation appropriating $1.15 billion to fund the controversial and fraud-plagued Pigford settlement program. Although estimates suggest that the total universe of black farmers who could qualify for Pigford compensation only encompasses 18,000 people, over 94,000 people have submitted claims under the program. The Pigford funding request was included in H.R. 4783, the Claims Resolution Act of 2010, which passed the House of Representatives on a 256-152 vote yesterday afternoon. Congressman King voted against the legislation.
“The unaccountable lame duck Congress has irresponsibly voted to spend $1.15 billion on a Pigford settlement program that is severely compromised by fraud,” said King. “This means that people who have never farmed and people who have never been discriminated against by the USDA will be receiving tens of thousands of dollars in cash and debt relief simply for having filed a false claim. By ignoring Pigford fraud, Congress has allowed the program to change from one designed to address black farmers’ discrimination claims to one that now serves as a modern day slavery reparations program. The American people should be outraged by this vote and the new Congress should make an investigation of Pigford fraud a top priority.”
. . . think about Ann Marie Buerkle’s victory in NY-25. She is now six weeks away from being a member of Congress, but what about six weeks ago?
It was Sunday, Oct. 17, and Pete Da Tech Guy and I were driving on our way to cover the Buerkle campaign, when I got a call from the Lonely Conservative. The headline in that morning’s Syracuse Post-Standard was devastating:
The poll showed Maffei with a 51-39 lead. If this poll was accurate, Buerkle was doomed. When we stopped for lunch at a McDonald’s in Hancock, N.Y., I put up a quick blog post scoffing at the poll, but honestly? I was heartsick.
You can’t put too much stock in polls. “Polls Are Not Campaigns,” as I’ve said, but I feared that this poll, which was a big front-page headline in the Syracuse paper, would have such a demoralizing effect on Buerkle’s supporters that it would become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The Buerkle campaign had been kind of a late addition to my campaign radar — I didn’t blog about her until Oct. 12 — and at that time, I had no idea what an onslaught of attack ads she was facing. Maffei had a 5-to-1 money advantage, and he was piling on more than $200,000 a week in TV ads accusing Buerkle of everything you could imagine.
Pete and I attended a Buerkle event in Clyde, N.Y., and there were maybe 50 people there. Maybe. Here it was, two weeks before the election, and the Republican candidate was still speaking to small groups, while Maffei had 1,000 at his rally with Bill Clinton.
This was not encouraging.
The next day, we covered a press conference near Syracuse where Buerkle pushed back against a Maffei attack ad that accused her of failing to pay her taxes. Maybe there were 50 supporters there. Maybe. And just the fact that she was having to do a press conference to answer an attack ad . . .
Look: You answer a TV ad with a TV ad. That’s just Campaign 101. Buerkle was doing a press conference, counting on the media to convey her response to this ad, which indicated that she couldn’t afford to run TV ads answering Maffei’s attacks.
This was not encouraging.
So when Pete and I left NY-25, I was seriously worried about Buerkle’s prospects. She was fighting hard, but unless something happened to change the dynamic of the race, it didn’t look like she could pull it off.
Anyway, Election Night found me in Boca Raton, Fla., amid the happy chaos of Allen West’s victory party in FL-22. It was difficult to keep track of results elsewhere, but somewhere during that madness I saw (perhaps at the Lonely Conservative) that Maffei was ahead by 3,000 votes.
Oh, well, nice try. Close, but no cigar. You win some, you lose some.
And then, the next afternoon, Left Coast Rebel posted the news that, due to late returns from Wayne County, Buerkle was now leading by more than 600 votes!
What happened? How had this campaign — outspent 5-to-1 by the incumbent and trailing in the polls — managed to pull off such an upset?
Remember the old saying, “Where there’s life, there’s hope”?
About five days before the election — while I was on my way to VA-9 to cover Morgan Griffith — the Maffei campaign played the “extremist” card with this ad:
OK, game over, right? She’s a kooky “anti-choice” extremist wingnut. Somebody like that can’t possibly get elected in this supposedly moderate district, right? But the Lonely Conservative didn’t see it that way:
NY25 covers all of Onondaga and Wayne Counties, and part of Cayuga and Monroe Counties. But a large portion of NY25?s voters are in Onondaga County. I did some digging and found out that there were 147,332 Catholics in Onondaga County alone in 2000. . . . I’m sure enough of those Catholics are registered voters who could swing the election in Buerkle’s favor. This race hasn’t been about social issues. It’s been about the economy, the direction of our country, and the failed policies of the current administration and Congress. By running this ad Dan Maffei just gave undecided pro-life voters a reason to vote for Ann Marie Buerkle.
See? Buerkle needed a miracle to win and, by highlighting her pro-life record in the final days of the campaign, her opponent gave her that miracle. Out of more than 200,000 votes cast in NY-25, Buerkle won by 657 votes, and how many of those votes were decided on the pro-life issue?
Da Tech Guy says “nobody outside of me, Stacy and the Lonely Conservative thought [Buerkle] was a winner,” but I had given her up for lost on Election Night.
You see that she and her supporters had every reason to become discouraged and quit. But they kept hoping and fighting and, thanks to an unexpected miracle, they won.
So hang in there. Where there’s life, there’s hope.
