Month: February 2009

To paraphrase Mary McCarthy, every word Michele Bachmann utters is moronic, including “and” and “the.” Delightfully, Dump Bachmann caught her doing an interview on wingnut radio the other day, and Steve Benen has excerpted the best goodies:

• ACORN is “under federal indictment for voter fraud,” but the stimulus bill nevertheless gives ACORN “$5 billion.” (In reality, ACORN is not under federal indictment and isn’t mentioned in the stimulus bill at all.)

• Many members of Congress have “a real aversion to capitalism.”

• the stimulus bill includes a measure to create a “rationing board” for health care, and after the bill becomes law, “your doctor will no longer be able to make your healthcare decisions with you.”

• The recovery package is part of a Democratic conspiracy to “direct” funding away from Republican districts, so Democratic districts can “suck up” all federal funds. Bachmann doesn’t think this will work because, as she put it, “We’re running out of rich people in this country.”

• The “Community-Organizer-in-Chief” is also orchestrating a conspiracy involving the Census Bureau, which the president will use to redraw congressional lines to keep Democrats in power for up to “40 years.” When the host said he was confused, noting that congressional district lines are drawn at the state level, Bachmann said Obama’s non-existent plan is an “anti-constitutional move.”

God I love Michele Bachmann. The only thing that would have made this interview more perfect would have been some hot anti-light rail fulmination. But I’m sure she’ll get right on that next weekend.

It looks like Tim Ryan will be staying out of the race for retiring GOP Sen. George Voinovich’s Senate seat, but he isn’t staying out of the primary war between Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner and Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher:

Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), who mulled running for the Senate seat, will now be endorsing Fisher according to a senior Ohio Democratic source.

So it begins. Expect more movers and shakers to pick a side in the near future. One key player to keep an eye on: Sherrod Brown.

But hey, at the very least, with Ryan taking a pass on the Senate race, we won’t be seeing Capri Cafaro in Congress anytime soon.

Quinnipiac (2/10-15, registered voters):

David Paterson (D-inc): 23

Andrew Cuomo (D): 55

Kirsten Gillibrand (D-inc): 24

Carolyn McCarthy (D): 34

(MoE: ±4.6%)

David Paterson (D-inc): 43

Rudy Giuliani (R): 43

Andrew Cuomo (D): 51

Rudy Giuliani (R): 37

Kirsten Gillibrand (D-inc): 42

Peter King (R): 26

(MoE: ±3%)

In the political chess game, David Paterson may have felt he was thinking ten moves ahead by picking Kirsten Gillibrand to fill the vacant Senate seat, by picking a young, charismatic woman with monster fundraising capacities who may well be holding the seat 40 years from now. However, it’s starting to look like, in doing so, he wasn’t thinking two moves ahead… as Quinnipiac now shows both Paterson and Gillibrand highly vulnerable in the 2010 primary. Picking Andrew Cuomo to fill the Senate seat would have killed two birds with one stone in the short-term for Paterson (get a Senator who’s known statewide and ready to stand on his own, and give his electoral archrival something to do other than challenge him in the 2010 election). Instead, he gambled on long-term dividends, and it’s possible neither he nor Gillibrand will be around to enjoy them.

The Gillibrand/McCarthy numbers seem likely to evolve over time, as 39% remain undecided. And both candidates seem largely unknown outside their respective corners of the state; Gillibrand’s favorables are 24/9 with 65% “haven’t heard enough,” (and 81% “haven’t heard enough” in the NYC Suburbs) while McCarthy’s are also 24/9, with 66% “haven’t heard enough” (with 88% “haven’t heard enough” upstate). An uncontroversial two years for Gillibrand, combined with tacking left on guns and immigration issues, should bring her numbers up (although revelations like the one today that she keeps two guns under her bed can’t be helping matters). Gillibrand has little trouble disposing of Rep. Peter King in the general (there’s no polling of an all-LI slugfest between King and McCarthy).

Paterson, however, trails Cuomo by a 2-1 margin, and, unlike Gillibrand, everyone knows who he is. His favorables are a fairly grim 41/35, while Cuomo clocks in at 63/15. Cuomo also dominates a hypothetical matchup against Rudy Giuliani while Paterson only ties him. Much of this does, in fact, seem to be blowback from the senator selection process. Paterson gets a mark of 35/52 for approval/disapproval of how he handled the process, down from 44/42 from last month. We may be looking at a truly epic miscalculation from Paterson here, one for the history books.

Politico:

Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner will be announcing that she’s running, according to a senior Ohio Democratic operative. She will be declaring her candidacy in a statement to be released this afternoon.

If elected, Brunner would become the first woman elected to the Senate from Ohio.

Brunner will be receiving the endorsement of the women’s group EMILY’s List, which will help her raise the millions necessary for a statewide campaign.

This comes as something of a surprise, as Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland was engaged in something of a blocking pattern for his Number One, Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher — who has himself set up an exploratory committee and was expected to announce a decision within a few weeks. It remains to be seen whether Strickland and Fisher would want to go ahead with a major primary skirmish.

Two recent polls have actually shown Brunner in slightly weaker shape than Fisher against Rob Portman (PPP and Quinnipiac), although Brunner may be suffering a bit from a contentious election (and post-election) season after engaging in a number of battles with the Ohio GOP on early voting and the drawn-out OH-15 saga. (Although, according to Quinnipiac’s latest, voter resentment on this score may be fading away.)

In any case, holding Brunner’s SoS seat will be imperative for a lot of reasons. (UPDATE by Crisitunity: Of course, there’s making sure that there’s no voter suppression in Ohio in the 2012 presidential election. But Democrats also desperately need to hold the SoS seat for purposes of state legislative redistricting (decisions for which are made by a 5-member board, one member of which is the SoS). Dems hold a 3-2 advantage on the board right now, so holding the SoS seat is necessary to crack the current ridiculous pro-GOP gerrymander of Ohio legislative districts.)

UPDATE (James): Fisher is now in, too. Get ready to rumble. (Hat-tip: LeftistAddiction)

LATER UPDATE: Brunner announcement video available here.

Our friends over at Public Policy Polling are letting their readers choose their next freebie state poll of hot (or potentially hot) 2010 races. So please take a moment to drop by the PPP blog and cast your vote. The choices this time are Connecticut, Delaware, and Texas — a very difficult choice to make, indeed.

Tell us how you voted in the comments!

Needless to say, this would be a major game-changer:

It now appears that Freudenthal may well seek a third term in 2010 — thanks to a series of legal and political maneuvers that began more than two decades ago.

After Democratic Gov. Ed Herschler served three consecutive terms into the mid-1980s, the state legislature passed a bill limiting Wyoming’s chief executives to two terms. Then, in 1992, voters passed a ballot initiative that brought term limits to the state legislature in the finest “If it’s good for the goose, it’s good for the gander” tradition.

Fast-forward 12 years to a lawsuit brought by two term-limited legislators — a Democrat and a Republican — challenging the constitutionality of such limits. The state Supreme Court unanimously agreed that the term limits could not be imposed by ballot initiative, ruling that an amendment to the state constitution would be required.

While that decision did not apply to Wyoming’s five statewide offices — including governor — there is a strong sense that if Freudenthal challenged the constitutionality of his own term limits, it would be a slam-dunk victory for the incumbent.

Freudenthal seems an unlikely sort to pursue this kind of challenge – but he’s leaving the door wide open:

Asked about the possibility that Freudenthal would seek a third term, his spokeswoman Cara Eastwood said only: “When the governor has something to announce, he will announce it.”

Putting aside my own feelings about term limits & voter referenda, this would be great news for Democrats, of course. And here in NYC, it doesn’t appear that Bloombo is paying a price for extending his own term limits (despite far worse optics and behavior), so I suspect Freudenthal could pull it off.

Harry Reid: Leave, legislator, you don’t belong in this Chamber!

Roland Burris: It was not by MY ego that I was once again given government office!  I was appointed here by ROD BLAGOJEVICH, who wished to pay ME tribute!

Reid: Tribute?  He destroys politicians’ careers, and makes them his pawns!

Burris: Perhaps the same could be said of all scandal-plagued politicians.

Reid: Your words are as empty as your ethics!  The people of Illinois ill need a Senator such as you!

Burris: What is a Senate seat?!  A miserable little pile of campaign efforts!  But enough talk…have at you!

The economic stimulus bill generated a lot of talk about taxes. As we work our way out of this economic mess, we need innovative, effective solutions to taxes – not just short term band-aids. We need to move in a new direction. Here’s a big idea: let’s phase in a carbon tax, to protect our planet and reward productive investments.

How does this work? Raise the cost of carbon-based fuels through some form of federal tax on carbon emissions; these new revenues should be fully or partially offset by cuts in the income, payroll, or corporate income taxes.

In other words, let’s tax the things we don’t want and use the revenues to reduce taxes and costs on inventors, investors and innovative new businesses in the development of alternative energy sources. By permanently cutting taxes on workers and investors, we can help the economy recover through growth and higher employment- and have a cleaner, greener environment.

It’s extraordinary that groups ranging from the Sierra Club to the American Enterprise Institute recognize that a carbon tax makes sense for America. If you are up for a good read, check out: http://www.brookings.edu/~/med…

And, to shamelessly plug my own writing on the topic, http://finance.yahoo.com/exper…

In addition, let’s ensure that the stimulus bill starts this process, by shifting the transportation funding formulas to increase the amount that is dedicated to mass transit. Historically, only 20% of federal funding goes to transit with the remaining 80% focused on automobile infrastructure. This is out of whack with the future.  By investing more in transit, and removing various administrative hurdles, we can create more sustainable communities throughout the nation.

I know that the transition to a carbon tax will not be easy, but our current path is reckless and short-sighted. It must change.

I’m running for Congress in the 5th District in Illinois, because more than at any other point in my lifetime, good policy truly matters. I’m an economics expert who can bring big ideas – and practical solutions – at a time this is needed most.

Our national and local economy is the single most important issue in this election. We’re all scared. We’ve lost jobs. We’ve watched our retirement and college savings shrink, or disappear. We put our trust in our financial system, and it robbed us. Congress must act to stop the downward spiral and- more importantly- take steps to make sure this can never happen again. The carbon tax is one tool in our toolbox that can fix our energy and environmental issues for the long term.