Tag: House

Exxon Ed Whitfield has been trying to clean up his voting record for this election year. He knows it is a bad year for Republicans, and that he has been a shameless enabler of every failed policy of the Bush Administration. All the election year scuffling to clean up his record cannot hide the fact that he has been a constant, bitter opponent to reform of our healthcare system, and of providing equal access to those in poverty as those with wealth to healthcare. Lets look at some of Exxon Eddie’s votes to limit the access of healthcare to working Americans

Oh goodness, where to begin? There have been so many bad votes by Ed Whitfield on this issue, it boggles the mind. However, lets start with Whitfield’s vote way back in 2000 to try and turn over Medicaire Drug coverage to the insurance companies, who we all know can be trusted to look out for our interests over their profits. (NOT):

Voted YES on subsidizing private insurance for Medicare Rx drug coverage.

HR 4680, the Medicare Rx 2000 Act, would institute a new program to provide voluntary prescription drug coverage for Medicare beneficiaries through subsidies to private plans. The program would cost an estimated $40 billion over five years and would go into effect in fiscal 2003.

Reference: Bill sponsored by Thomas, R-CA; Bill HR 4680 ; vote number 2000-357 on Jun 28, 2000

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

You see, in the twisted world of men like Exxon Ed Whitfield, profits for Insurance and Oil companies always come before people. Think I am exagerrating? Lets keep looking at the record Eddie wants us to forget:

Voted NO on allowing reimportation of prescription drugs.

Pharmaceutical Market Access Act of 2003: Vote to pass a bill that would call for the Food and Drug Administration to begin a program that would permit the importation of FDA-approved prescription drugs from Australia, Canada, the European Union, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Lichtenstein, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland and South Africa.

Reference: Bill sponsored by Gutknecht, R-MN; Bill HR.2427 ; vote number 2003-445 on Jul 24, 2003

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

Yes, in Exxon Eddie’s world, the sick and elderly should be required to pay the high prices of drugs to protect the profits of drug companies, even when safe, cheaper drugs are available from trustable countries who don’t have a powerful drug lobby.

It gets even worse. Not only does Exxon Eddie believe Americans should pay higher drug prices to protect profits, evidently he believes some Americans who desperately need prescription drugs should not have access to them:

Voted YES on limited prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients.

Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act of 2003: Vote to adopt the conference report on the bill that would create a prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients. Starting in 2006, prescription coverage would be made available through private insurers to seniors. Seniors would pay a monthly premium of an estimated $35 in 2006. Individuals enrolled in the plan would cover the first $250 of annual drug costs themselves, and 25 percent of all drug costs up to $2,250. The government would offer a fallback prescription drug plan in regions were no private plans had made a bid.Over a 10 year time period medicare payments to managed care plans would increase by $14.2 billion. A pilot project would begin in 2010 in which Medicare would compete with private insurers to provide coverage for doctors and hospitals costs in six metropolitan areas for six years. The importation of drugs from Canada would be approved only if HHS determines there is no safety risks and that consumers would be saving money.

Reference: Bill sponsored by Hastert, R-IL; Bill HR.1 ; vote number 2003-669 on Nov 22, 2003

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

That makes perfect sense in the world of Exxon Ed Whitfield, Insurance profits before people, at all costs. Even if it means denying people the medications they desperately need and struggle to afford. However, it continues to get much worse. Not satisfied in denying life-giving medications, Exxon Eddie would deny treatment of the working poor too:

Voted YES on denying non-emergency treatment for lack of Medicare co-pay.

Vote to pass a resolution, agreeing to S. AMDT. 2691 that removes the following provisions from S 1932:

Allows hospitals to refuse treatment to Medicaid patients when they are unable to pay their co-pay if the hospital deems the situation to be a non-emergency

Excludes payment to grandparents for foster care

Reference: Reconciliation resolution on the FY06 budget; Bill H Res 653 on S. AMDT. 2691 ; vote number 2006-004 on Feb 1, 2006

In the world of Exxon Eddie, it makes perfect sense to let those who are making a profit decide whether it is an emergency for those who may not be able to pay to recieve treatment.

In keeping with the theme of protecting Insurance profits at all costs, once again we see how Whitfield would keep drug prices high, to protect his big money contributors:

Voted NO on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D.

Would require negotiating with pharmaceutical manufacturers the prices that may be charged to prescription drug plan sponsors for covered Medicare part D drugs.

Proponents support voting YES because:

This legislation is an overdue step to improve part D drug benefits. The bipartisan bill is simple and straightforward. It removes the prohibition from negotiating discounts with pharmaceutical manufacturers, and requires the Secretary of Health & Human Services to negotiate. This legislation will deliver lower premiums to the seniors, lower prices at the pharmacy and savings for all taxpayers.

It is equally important to understand that this legislation does not do certain things. HR4 does not preclude private plans from getting additional discounts on medicines they offer seniors and people with disabilities. HR4 does not establish a national formulary. HR4 does not require price controls. HR4 does not hamstring research and development by pharmaceutical houses. HR4 does not require using the Department of Veterans Affairs’ price schedule.

Reference: Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act; Bill HR 4 (“First 100 hours”) ; vote number 2007-023 on Jan 12, 2007

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

Now, if you think it could not get much worse than this, unfortunately you are sadly mistaken. Exxon Ed Whitfield puts profits over people, even CHILDREN!!! Yes, in the twisted world of men like Ed Whitfield, profits are so much more important than even the health of our children that he would vote not once, but twice to make sure that Insurance Company profits are protected at all costs, even over the well-being of American children:

Voted NO on adding 2 to 4 million children to SCHIP eligibility.

Allows State Children’s Health Insurance Programs (SCHIP), that require state legislation to meet additional requirements imposed by this Act, additional time to make required plan changes. Pres. Bush vetoed this bill on Dec. 12, 2007, as well as a version (HR976) from Feb. 2007.

Proponents support voting YES because:

Rep. DINGELL: This is not a perfect bill, but it is an excellent bipartisan compromise. The bill provides health coverage for 3.9 million children who are eligible, yet remain uninsured. It meets the concerns expressed in the President’s veto message [from HR976]:

It terminates the coverage of childless adults.

It targets bonus payments only to States that increase enrollments of the poorest uninsured children, and it prohibits States from covering families with incomes above $51,000.

It contains adequate enforcement to ensure that only US citizens are covered.

Reference: Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act; Bill H.R. 3963 ; vote number 2007-1009 on Oct 25, 2007

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

Of course, this bill was passed by more compassionate members of Congress, but vetoed by the biggest corporate profiteer of them all, President Bush:

Veto message from President Bush:

Like its predecessor, HR976, this bill does not put poor children first and it moves our country’s health care system in the wrong direction. Ultimately, our goal should be to move children who have no health insurance to private coverage–not to move children who already have private health insurance to government coverage. As a result, I cannot sign this legislation.

Reference: Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act; Bill H.R. 3963 ; vote number 2007-1009 on Oct 25, 2007

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

Yes, it would be a shame if uncovered children recieved coverage without huge profits for the Insurance companies. From those who are always lecturing us about our “Christian values” it would be a shame if they valued children as much as Christ did. From Mark 10: 13-16:

13 ¶ Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them.

14  But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

15  And he laid his hands on them, and departed thence.

Yes, Christian values dictate that the children be brought to be healed, but Exxon Eddie voted against Christian values on children not once, but twice:

Voted NO on Veto override: Extend SCHIP to cover 6M more kids.

OnTheIssues Explanation: This vote is a veto override of the SCHIP extension (State Children’s Health Insurance Program). The bill passed the House 265-142 on 10/25/07, and was vetoed by Pres. Bush on 12/12/07.

CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY: This Act would enroll all 6 million uninsured children who are eligible, but not enrolled, for coverage under existing programs.

Even after changes were made to accomodate President Bush’s concerns:

The bill makes changes to accommodate the President’s stated concerns.

It terminates the coverage of childless adults in 1 year.

It prohibits States from covering children in families with incomes above $51,000.

It contains adequate enforcement to ensure that only US citizens are covered.

It encourages securing health insurance provided through private employer.

The result? Another victory for big insurance, and another defeat for true Christian values:

LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME:Veto override failed, 260-152 (2/3rds required)

Reference: SCHIP Extension; Bill Veto override on H.R.3963 ; vote number 08-HR3963 on Jan 23, 2008

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

So, why would Exxon Eddie cast all these votes against the healthcare of even children if he is so Christian? Well, that is because the only god he worships is Mammon.

As seen here:

Health Professionals $99,601

Electric Utilities $39,266

Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $36,250

Railroads $29,300

TV/Movies/Music $22,750

http://www.opensecrets.org/pol…

And with the $215,000 in Insurance investments seen here:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pol…

So as you can see, Exxon Eddie is clearly lined up for profits, and against people.

Luckily, this time Exxon Eddie has a real challenge. Heather Ryan believes all Americans should have a fundamental right to healhcare, whether it brings insurance profits or not:

It is an absolute travesty that 50 million Americans struggle without health care in the wealthiest nation in the world.  What’s worse is when our representative votes against improvements in access to health services for children and the poor.  Unfortunately, these are both realities that we’ve experienced under the current leadership.  I propose that health care for every American is more important than tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy.  

It is time we had a representative who thinks about more than just how much money he can make when he helps pass legislation that benefits drug and insurance companies.  As the leaders of the free world, it is an embarrassment that we are the only industrialized nation that does not offer health care for our citizens.

http://www.ryanforkentucky.com…

In fact, near the end of my interview with her, Heather Ryan states that the first thing she wants to work on in Washington is the introduction of healtcare for all Americans:

New leadership will mean a new direction for Kentucky, and our country:

Please, go here to help us win this race. With the resources to get Whitfield’s terrible record out to the 63% of registered Democrats in this district, we can easily win this race, and alleviate Exxon Eddie’s complaints:

Please go here and support fellow grassroots Democrats in their quest to expand our Congressional majorities and move our country in the direction of progress for everyone:

Reiterating My OPPOSITION to Tolling I-80 as PA Turnpike Commission Reveals Plans to Spend I-80 Toll Money:

This week the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission released details of their plans to repair Interstate 80 using the funds generated from tolls paid by users of the highway.  It was stated by the Turnpike Commission and their consultants that “An assessment of the interstate showed that more than half its length has not been repaved since it was built some 40 years ago”.  In press accounts, Barry J. Schoch, identified as Project Manager, also detailed plans to build a “cashless open road tolling system” that will utilize the EZ Pass system to collect a portion of the tolls.  Mr. Schoch also described how vehicles not equipped with EZ Pass will have their tolls collected saying “a driver without E-ZPass will have his or her license plate photographed, generating a mailed-out bill for the vehicle owner”.  He also stated that this non EZ Pass system “is not currently used on any U.S. highway.”

As a county commissioner in a county that is on the I-80 corridor I have been, and remain, strongly OPPOSED to the tolling of I-80.  The press barrage this past week from the Turnpike Commission only serves to make me more skeptical of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s decision, via legislation known as Act 44, to turn the operation of Interstate 80 over to the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission.  

There are many disturbing aspects of this week’s announcement.  First, the statement that “An assessment of the interstate showed that more than half its length has not been repaved since it was built some 40 years ago”, I find ridiculous.  Anyone who regularly traveled I-80 over the last 40 years knows that annual maintenance is done to the roadway for at least 9 out of the 12 months each year.  I also find it hard to believe that there are portions more than “half it’s length” that have not been repaved since I-80 was built.  How often do travelers on I-80 deal with lanes being shutdown for months at a time or the infamous “rumble strips” before the abrupt crossovers that lead to miles and miles of 2 way traffic separated by concrete barriers.   These stretches of crossovers and 2 way traffic are typically done while the other lane is completely torn up and replaced.  

I also find the “cashless open road tolling system” to be a major concern.  It sounds to me like the Turnpike Commission is trying to move toward privatizing the collection of tolls.  If I were an employee working collecting tolls on the existing Pennsylvania Turnpike, I would be very interested to know what future plans the executives at the Turnpike Commission have for “cashless open road tolling systems”.  I also have grave concerns about any government entity tracking the movements of our free citizens.  Isn’t this what they did in the former USSR?

It is clear that Harrisburg still isn’t listening to the citizens, businesses and elected leaders from the I-80 corridor.  How many times do we have to state “NO TOLLS ON I-80” before they get the message?  Rural counties that rely on Interstate 80 as the only route to deliver commerce to and from our counties have designed our economic development and tourism promotion plans, both long and short range, around a toll free I-80.  In many situations we are at a disadvantage and this ill conceived plan just adds to our problems.

While I was optimistic that the US Department of Transportation could put a stop to this plan, I found the following quote from an AP story dated June 27th 2008 from US Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters.  When questioned about giving approval to tolling I-80, Secretary Peters said “If that’s the decision that state leaders make, then I think we should be in a position to support that or allow them to make that decision,” Peters said, according to The Patriot-News of Harrisburg. “I do not think the federal government should make that decision.”

FEC Second Quarter Reports Filed — Fundraising Goals Met:

July 15th was the deadline for the FEC Second Quarter Financial reports for all candidates running for federal office.  Campaign Treasurer Tim Fannin filed our reports electronically on Monday July 14th and the reports were up for public review late that day.  I want to stress the goals the campaign committee set for the second quarter reports were met.  As a campaign team, we wanted to make sure that we raised funds that would allow us to conduct all campaign activities necessary over the summer months.  That goal was easily achieved and we have been able to purchase all the campaign materials necessary to hand out to voters including campaign badges, lapel stickers, pens, magnetic bumper stickers, balloons and about a ton of candy for the parades.  We’ve also been able to travel all over the district and have had several successful “Meet the Candidate” events.  I want to give special recognition to Campaign Chair Henry Guthrie and his wife Molly, fundraising consultant Keith Bierly and Centre County Coordinator Tim Wilson for their hard work and dedication during the second quarter.  

While we met our goals and we are able to do the summer events, I need to stress to everyone that the campaign needs your help in raising money for the fall campaign.  We have the best message, the best ideas and the best people working on the campaign — but it will mean nothing if we are unable to run a competitive media campaign in the fall.  2008 is a year of great promise and opportunity, we just have to pull together and get the job done.

Weekly Review:

Tuesday and Wednesday were County Fair Days.  On Tuesday evening, Kelly, Amanda and I attended the Jefferson County Fair and Wednesday afternoon we made the long trip to Hughesville for the Lycoming County Fair.  Wednesday in Lycoming County was very hot but we spoke with a number of people while working about 4 hours at the Lycoming County Democratic Committee booth.

Our campaign events in Clearfield and Tioga counties this week went very well.  Thursday night in Clearfield we had a good turnout for the dinner.  I had the chance to speak with the people who turned out and we had some very good feedback about the campaign.

On Friday, Henry Guthrie, Tim Wilson and I traveled to Hills Creek State Park in Tioga County to attend a picnic event organized by Ann Gazda, Sarah Davis, Bonnie Kyofski and Jean Leibatt.  Everyone had a great time and I got the chance to speak with group and did a Q & A session were we talked about gas and oil prices, wind power, public education issues and other issues of concern in Tioga County.  This was my 7th trip up to Tioga County and I really enjoy seeing the people up there.

Photo from the Tioga County Picnic

NOTE — We postponed the Sunday reception in Lock Haven, Clinton County until a later date.

Mark B. McCracken

Your Candidate For Congress

————————————————————————————————–

This diary is cross-posted at McCracken’s campaign blog, PA’s Blue Fifth

Mark McCracken for Congress

ActBlue page

(From the diaries – promoted by James L.)

New GOP internal poll in WI-08, h/t Politico, from Public Opinion Strategies (7/8-7/9, likely voters):

Steve Kagen (D-inc): 46

John Gard (R): 42

(N=400, MoE=±4.9%)

There’s reason for concern in this district; Gard’s a former Wisconsin Assembly Speaker and very narrowly outraised Kagen last quarter. The poll also shows Gard with very high name recognition (88%). McCain leads Obama in the district 46-41.

Kagen, however, has plenty of cash on hand and personal wealth he can dig into if necessary.

SSP currently rates this race as Leans Democratic.

This may be another one of those cases where I should wait until there’s actually been an election. But there have been a number of instances lately where I commented on a particular district’s PVI and thought to myself, “Yeah, but that PVI is going to change a lot after this election.” Nobody is polling the presidential race at the level of individual districts (except, of course, the states that have only one House district), so short of breaking out the crystal ball, I can’t address House districts with much specificity.

However, what I can do is use current polling to predict likely percentage splits for each state in 2008, and plug those numbers into the PVI formula along with the 2004 percentages to calculate new PVIs for each state. (PVI, of course, is used in the context of House districts, but the formula is easy enough, and can be applied to pretty much any unit of analysis: states, counties, legislative districts, precincts, and so on. In fact, I’m surprised it isn’t, as a means of analyzing Senate races.)

For 2008 numbers, I’m just going to use today’s projection for each state from 538.com. (These numbers fluctuate a bit every day, so this post will already be out of date tomorrow.) Not to say that Nate’s prediction model is the be-all-and-end-all, just that it’s a good model for my purposes, since it basically pushes every leaner and accounts for third-party votes (so that each total actually adds up to 100). Over the flip, for each state, is the old PVI (reflecting the 2000 and 2004 elections), the new PVI (reflecting the 2004 and 2008 elections), and the difference.

Not surprisingly (since we’re measuring the same thing, although my numbers are blunted by being averaged out with 2004 results), the “difference” results look a lot like this map Chris Bowers put together at Open Left showing the biggest shifts in the new Obama electoral map. Big D+ shifts in the West and Great Plains, R+ shifts in Appalachia and the Northeast. (This doesn’t mean that, for instance, the Northeast is most rightward or going to give a smaller percentage to Obama than Kerry. It’s more like it’s standing still while the rest of the country moves left.)

State	00-04 PVI	04-08 PVI	Difference
Alabama	R+9.6	R+11.2	R+1.6
Alaska	R+13.6	R+8.1	D+5.5
Arizona	R+3.7	R+4.9	R+1.2
Arkansas	R+3.3	R+6.3	R+3.0
California	D+5.9	D+6.9	D+1.0
Colorado	R+2.8	R+0.5	D+2.3
Connecticut	D+7.5	D+6.8	R+0.7
Delaware	D+5.7	D+4.2	R+1.5
Florida	R+0.8	R+2.2	R+1.4
Georgia	R+6.6	R+6.3	D+0.3
Hawaii	D+7.3	D+6.6	R+0.7
Idaho	R+18.9	R+13.4	D+5.5
Illinois	D+6.1	D+5.9	R+0.2
Indiana	R+8.6	R+5.8	D+2.8
Iowa	D+0.2	D+1.5	D+1.3
Kansas	R+11.1	R+10.2	D+0.9
Kentucky	R+8.3	R+9.4	R+1.1
Louisiana	R+5.1	R+7.3	R+2.2
Maine	D+4.0	D+6.0	D+2.0
Maryland	D+7.8	D+7.4	R+0.4
Massachusetts	D+13.6	D+10.1	R+3.5
Michigan	D+2.6	D+1.9	R+0.7
Minnesota	D+2.0	D+3.8	D+1.8
Mississippi	R+8.7	R+7.8	D+0.9
Missouri	R+2.2	R+2.5	R+0.3
Montana	R+10.9	R+5.6	D+5.3
Nebraska	R+15.1	R+12.0	D+3.1
Nevada	R+1.1	R+1.3	R+0.2
New Hampshire	D+0.5	D+1.8	D+1.3
New Jersey	D+6.1	D+3.7	R+2.4
New Mexico	D+0.4	D+1.0	D+0.6
New York	D+11.3	D+8.7	R+2.6
North Carolina	R+5.8	R+4.2	D+1.6
North Dakota	R+13.3	R+8.2	D+5.1
Ohio	R+0.9	D+0.2	D+1.1
Oklahoma	R+12.8	R+12.8	R+0.0
Oregon	D+1.6	D+3.1	D+1.5
Pennsylvania	D+2.2	D+2.1	R+0.1
Rhode Island	D+13.0	D+10.6	R+2.4
South Carolina	R+7.8	R+6.4	D+1.4
South Dakota	R+10.6	R+7.0	D+3.6
Tennessee	R+4.1	R+7.4	R+3.3
Texas	R+10.6	R+8.1	D+2.5
Utah	R+21.8	R+17.9	D+3.9
Vermont	D+8.0	D+11.1	D+3.1
Virginia	R+3.6	R+2.1	D+1.5
Washington	D+3.7	D+4.6	D+0.9
West Virginia	R+4.3	R+5.4	R+1.1
Wisconsin	D+0.6	D+2.3	D+1.7
Wyoming	R+19.5	R+14.0	D+5.5

Now you might be sitting there thinking “Yeah, but I really want to know how Congressional District X is going to change!” Well, here’s a very rough method you might use: take the difference from the state where the district is, and apply it to the district. I’ll use my home district (WA-07) as an example. It’s currently D+30.3. Add D+0.9, and the adjusted PVI is D+31.2.

(Again, this is a rough method… different parts of different states are reddening or bluening at different rates. For instance, Seattle might not be bluening as fast as the sagebrush parts of the state; it’s kind of maxed out on liberalism, while eastern Washington has lots in common with Idaho, Montana, etc., where Obama is making up the most ground. On the other hand, because 2000 and the huge Nader effect that occurred is dropping out of the equation, maybe the PVI will shoot up even more in Seattle. Hard to tell, so just exercise your judgment.)

One last question, as a bonus. Does this rough method change the most and least liberal districts in the nation? Well, NY-16 is still safe in its position at #1, although it drops from D+43.4 to a nice moderate D+40.8. However, the most conservative district changes, as Utah is rapidly going one direction and Alabama is going the other. UT-03 falls from R+26.2 to R+22.3, while AL-06 goes up from R+25.2 to a batshit insane R+26.8.

This is it. The deadline for congressional candidates to file their second quarter fundraising reports with the FEC passed at midnight, and SSP has combed through hundreds of filings to bring you a collection of all the noteworthy numbers. While this list is fairly massive, it is by no means comprehensive. If we’ve missed anything, or if you spot any errors, please let us know in the comments. And remember: these numbers are adjusted for rounding. The second column shows cash-on-hand, and the third shows cycle-to-date fundraising.

A few notes before we begin:

• Candidates in Kansas, Michigan and Missouri will file their extended period reports by 7/24, which is why several rows are blank here. Candidates in Oklahama will file their reports by 7/17.
• All NC and IN filings cover the period from 4/17-6/30.
• All PA filings cover the period from 4/3-6/30.
• The MS-01 numbers cover the period from 4/24-630.
• The LA-06 and LA-01 numbers cover the period from 4/14-6/30.
• GA filings in italics cover the period from 4/1-6/25.
• All numbers are in thousands.

A few quick notes before I pass out:

• Democratic challengers who out-raised Republican incumbents: Ethan Berkowitz (AK-AL), Joshua Segall (AL-03), Debbie Cook (CA-46), Nick Leibham (CA-50), Betsy Markey (CO-04), Raul Martinez (FL-21), Suzanne Kosmas (FL-24), Joe Garcia (FL-25), Michael Montagano (IN-03), Jill Derby (NV-02), Dina Titus (NV-03), Vic Wulsin (OH-02), Linda Ketner (SC-01), Michael Skelly (TX-07), Larry Joe Doherty (TX-10), and Darcy Burner (WA-08).
• Republican challengers who out-raised Democratic incumbents: Deborah “The Defrauder” Honeycutt (GA-13), Anne Northup (KY-03), Chris Hackett (PA-10, William Russell (PA-12), Pete Olson (TX-22), John Gard (WI-08).
• PA-12: Who is William Russell, you ask? Answer: Someone, like Deborah Honeycutt, who has spent most of his money on fees to direct mail firms.
• ID-01: Someone help out Bill Sali. He’s been having computer problems and hasn’t been able to file his report.
• LA-06: Looks like the Prince of Pop will need that cash back on his Discover card before he’s back at the break-even point.
• AK-AL: Don Young is just circling the drain. Yet another quarter passes by where he hemorrhages more money: $251K spent vs. $106K brought in. Included in his expenditures are some hefty legal fees: nearly $50K to Akin Gump, $25K to Tobin O’Connor, and $55K to John Wolfe.
• There is a lot of great news for Democrats here, but in particular, the numbers for Jim Himes (CT-04), Ashwin Madia (MN-03), Martin Heinrich (NM-01), Darcy Burner (WA-08), Raul Martinez (FL-21) and Joe Garcia (FL-25) are absolutely stunning. In some races that are still under the radar, Democrats posted solid numbers, including Scott Harper (IL-13), Nick Leibham (CA-50), Sharen Neuhardt (OH-07), Jim Esch (NE-02), Dennis Shulman (NJ-05), Sam Bennett (PA-15), and Judy Feder (VA-10).

Stay tuned for SSP’s updated House and Senate ratings, as well as our next SSP Cash Power chart in the next couple of days.

DENVER AIRPORT UPDATE: One thing that I forgot to mention…

• MS-01: Greg Davis’ heart just isn’t in it anymore. Despite raising over $700K from April 24 through June 30th, the Nathan Lane lookalike took in under $10,000 in the month of June.

An interesting new article from NCEC (the National Committee for an Effective Congress) shows just how far the GOP has fallen from its late-90s glory days. They’re by no means the first to observe that the Republicans have increasingly painted themselves into a corner in the deep south with their divisive rhetoric and embrace of the religious right, but they put it into pretty stark relief with some excellent charts and maps.

I won’t reproduce their charts (please check out the link), but the takeaway is that fully 41% of the Republicans’ seats are now in the South. If the different states were stocks, the Dems would be seen as having relatively balanced portfolio, while the GOP has put most of its eggs in the southern basket, holding very little of the northeast or west anymore.

The outcome of elections since 1996 has exposed a far larger problem for Republicans, than Democrats faced in the South. More than 46% of Republican House seats emanate from southern and border states, possessing only 28% of House seats nationally.

Republicans now control only 25.9% of congressional districts in the East, which translates into a 41-seat deficit. At their nadir, Democrats still held more than 40% of all seats in southern and border states.

The article predicts this will be a long-term hole for the GOP, not just based on regional trends but also the strength of Democratic incumbents, pointing out in all the years following 1994, only three Democratic incumbents lost in non-redistricting-affected races. Update: Although by Swing State Project’s own calculations, that number should be seven.

This article focused on the current composition of Congress, and left me with a few more questions: where have we been, over the last couple decades, and where might we go? To wit, here’s how the regionalized breakdown of the House has evolved since 1992:

Congress	Midwest	Northeast	South	West
110th (2006)	50 D 50 R	68 D 24 R	61 D 84 R	57 D 41 R
109th (2004)	40 D 60 R	56 D 35 R 1 I	53 D 92 R	53 D 45 R
108th (2002)	39 D 61 R	55 D 36 R 1 I	60 D 85 R	52 D 46 R
107th (2000)	48 D 57 R	57 D 39 R 1 I	56 D 83 R 1 I	50 D 43 R
106th (1998)	51 D 54 R	59 D 37 R 1 I	58 D 82 R	44 D 49 R
105th (1996)	50 D 55 R	57 D 39 R 1 I	58 D 82 R	41 D 52 R
104th (1994)	46 D 59 R	51 D 45 R 1 I	62 D 78 R	39 D 54 R
103rd (1992)	61 D 44 R	54 D 42 R 1 I	88 D 52 R	55 D 38 R

[Note: I’m classifying my regions a little differently than the NCEC article (which uses 5 regions), consistent with how I’ve done regions before, i.e. I use the standard Census Bureau 4-region configuration, with one change: I include Maryland and Delaware as Northeast. Don’t forget that redistricting occurred between the 107th and 108th Congresses, in case you’re tinkering with these numbers and getting screwy results.]

As you can see, most of the last 14 years was a slow recovery from the 1994 debacle (where our losses were distributed pretty evenly across the country), followed by making up most of the rest of the loss in one feel swoop in 2006. Look at where the regional differences between now and 1992 (the last Democratic majority) are, though: the composition in the West didn’t change that much, and we’re down a bit in the Midwest from where we were, although things are even there now. We used to have a big majority in the South, which has turned into a deficit for us. And while the GOP used to be nearly even with us in the Northeast, they’ve been reduced to bit players there. (Which turns out to be a good trade-off, if you remember my piece on the “pivot point” from a few weeks ago: more Northeastern Dems and fewer Southern Dems means a more progressive Dem caucus, on average, than where we were during in Clinton’s first term.

Now let’s look at where we might be next year, using the same pessimistic/average/optimistic predictions that I’ve used before (pessimistic = 13 pickups, of SSP‘s tossups and lean Ds, average = 26 pickups, including lean Rs, wildly optimistic = 56 pickups, including likely Rs).

Congress	Midwest	Northeast	South	West
111th pessimistic	54 D 46 R	73 D 19 R	62 D 83 R	60 D 38 R
111th average	60 D 40 R	75 D 17 R	64 D 81 R	63 D 35 R
111th optimistic	66 D 34 R	78 D 14 R	77 D 68 R	71 D 27 R

The “average” scenario takes the total number of Dems back up to where they were in the House in 1992, but the regional balance will have totally changed. All three of these scenarios show an acceleration of the trend we’ve seen so far, though: the intensification of the Northeast as a Dem stronghold, and the marginalization of the GOP in the South (where, under the “optimistic” scenario, the GOP is left with almost 48% of its seats only in the South).

DEP Rejects Permit Application for PA Waste / Boggs Township Landfill.

I’m pleased to report the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection has rejected the permit application filed by PA Waste LLC to construct a 5,000 ton per day municipal waste landfill in Boggs Township, Clearfield County. As county commissioner, I’ve been working over the past 4 years, first with Rex Read and Mike Lytle, and now with John Sobel and Joan Robinson McMillen, to oppose the construction of this landfill in Clearfield County.

Elected leaders including State Rep. Camille George, county officials and many township and borough officials also worked to oppose this landfill.  However, there are more important people to congratulate for this outcome.  Since August of 2004 when it was first announced that the site in Boggs Township was being targeted for the development of a landfill, a group of committed citizens led by Darryl Lashinsky, Paula Norris, Randy Levin, Leo Knepp and others, met faithfully month after month to oppose the landfill.  

The announcement on Friday, July 11th that PA Waste’s permit application had been rejected was a direct result of citizen involvement and their expectations that government would protect the interests of the citizens over the interests of a corporate entity.  While PA Waste still has the right to appeal this decision or submit a new application at a later date, this is, at least for the time being, a small victory for the people of central Pennsylvania.  

Some people will question how the Boggs Township landfill is an issue for a congressional campaign.  With several communities in the 5th congressional district targeted for landfill development, our next congressman should be interested and involved in these issues.  Additionally, I feel our leaders in Washington should be paying more attention interstate commerce laws and try to control the flow of garbage.  Not only are states legally sending their environmental problems to other states, but, our nation’s fuel supplies are being depleted faster when thousands of trucks per day are moving garbage hundreds of miles to pristine rural areas like central Pennsylvania.  This is an issue I’ve been involved in and I hope voters in the 5th district will consider this when choosing their next congressman.

Cook Report Changes Rating for 5th District Race:

Recently, the Cook Political Report changed the race in the 5th District from “Solid Republican” to “Likely Republican”.  The Cook Report has a 7 position rating scale that runs “Solid Republican”, “Likely Republican”, “Leans Republican”, “Toss Up”, “Leans Democratic”, “Likely Democratic” and “Solid Democratic”.  While we’re not in a “Toss Up” race yet, this is positive news for our campaign and proves if we continue to work hard and spread our message, voters are listening and giving strong consideration to where we stand on the issues.  

As we move forward in the campaign I feel certain we will see additional positive gains in voter support and registration numbers.  One area where we can count on solid results is in Centre County.  They already have an impressive ground campaign underway, not only for Barack Obama, but for the entire slate of Democratic candidates.  We can also be encouraged by the solid support and interest we are receiving in all 17 counties throughout the 5th district.  Even more encouraging is that our efforts are getting recognition from a national entity like the Cook Report.  Can you feel the momentum building?

Scheduled Events for the Upcoming Week:

Tuesday July 15th — Jefferson County Fair — 5 to 9 PM*

* – May make additional appearance at Jefferson County Fair if time allows.

Wednesday July 16th — Lycoming County Fair — 4 to 8 PM

Thursday July 17th — Clearfield

McCracken for Congress Dinner

5:30 to 7:30 PM — Lawrence Township Fire Company Social Hall — Mill Road Clearfield

Cost – $20 per person

Event catered by The Country Butcher — Door Prizes

Thursday July 17th — Clearfield County Democratic Committee Meeting — 7 — 9 PM

IBEW Building, Clearfield, PA

Friday July 18th — Tioga County

McCracken for Congress Picnic

4-8 pm – Hills Creek State Park, Crabapple Pavilion

Cost – $10.00 per person, $18.00 per couple, $25.00 per Family

Hot Dogs, salads, desserts and water, iced tea and lemonade to be served.

RSVP by July 16th to either Ann Gazda at 570-724-1449 / email gazda@epix.net or Bonne Kyofski at 570-827-3231 / email kyofski@epix.net.

Saturday July 19th — Curwensville Days Parade — 6 PM

Sunday July 20th — Lock Haven — Clinton County

McCracken for Congress Dinner

3:30 to 5:30 PM — Sons of Italy Hall — Downtown Lock Haven

Cost – $20 per person.

After dinner, although not an official part of the campaign event, people are encouraged to take part in the concert held at the riverfront amphitheatre which will feature a performance from a band featuring classic rock. NOTE — bring lawn chairs in case the stands are filled.

Please contact mccrackenforcongress@verizon.net for additional details on the above events.

Weekly Event Wrap Up:

During this past week we attended the following events:

Monday: DuBois Democratic Committee Meeting

Tuesday: Potter County Democratic Committee Meeting

Thursday: SEIU Interview in Harrisburg, Visit to Lycoming County Democratic / Obama Headquarters in Williamsport,  Philipsburg Heritage Days / Democratic Booth

Saturday: Philipsburg Heritage Days Parade, Central PA Festival of the Arts — State College and a visit to Centre County Democratic Headquarters.  

Mark B. McCracken

Your Candidate For Congress

————————————————————————————————–

This diary is cross-posted at McCracken’s campaign blog, PA’s Blue Fifth

Mark McCracken for Congress

ActBlue page

I will make an admission. I don’t want anyone to think that here at Ryan for Kentucky we are not fair. Our Congressman, Exxon Ed Whitfield, besides supporting Big Oil, Energy, and their record profits has managed to do a little good. Yes, Exxon Eddie has managed to be a defender of horses. Now, at Ryan for Kentucky, we love animals too, and applaud Whitfield for being a defender of horses. But, we must ask, what about the PEOPLE?

Yes, Whitfield won praise for his work on horses, we cannot deny. He even won a huge endorsement for this work.  However, we would like to ask the Congressman, what about the people of this district? Where was Exxon Eddie when the PEOPLE of this district needed him? In fact, where was he when the Constitution needed him?:

On June 20 2008, Representative Ed Whitfield broke faith with the Congressional Oath of Office, in which every member of Congress solemnly swears to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Rep. Whitfield swore to do this, and yet failed to vote against H.R. 6304, the FISA Amendments Act. The FISA Amendments Act not only makes the misnamed Protect America Act permanent, but even expands upon it in its gutting of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. H.R. 6304 sets up a system:

* For the federal government to spy on you electronically

* Reading your email

* Listening to your telephone calls

* Watching what web pages you visit

* Following your financial transactions

* More than that, for the federal government to engage in physical searches

* Of your home

* Of your office

* Of your car

* Without any explanation of why they are doing it

* Without the ability of a judge to even stop it

* Without oversight by Congress

* Letting the government use information it obtains illegally

* Giving telecommunications companies retroactive immunity for helping the government do this, even when it was expressly against the law to do so

When a President of the United States has this kind of power at his disposal, she or he cannot be stopped. The power of the president becomes total and the president becomes a totalitarian. By failing to oppose this bill, Representative Ed Whitfield aided and abetted the advent of American totalitarianism.

http://www.progressivepatriots…

It seems very ironic to us that Exxon Eddie, who constantly seeks to lecture all of us on the size of the Federal Government votes to vastly expand the powers of that entity. Yes, the people of this district needed their Constitutional rights protected, and Exxon Eddie was nowhere to be found:

Rep. Ed Whitfield failed to vote against the ironically named Protect America Act. The Protect America Act is a law now passed by both houses of Congress which replaces judicial warrants with executive prerogative and substitutes blank checks for reasons. The Protect America Act gives the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence the power to spy on your emails, your web surfing, your telephone calls and other electronic communications. All this is carried out without a warrant, which is required by the 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

There is no supervision of the spy programs put in place by Gonzales and McConnell, except by Gonzales and McConnell. No one has the power to stop them any more. They can search your records, sift through your private messages, watch you go from web page to web page, on the pretext of protecting America from terrorists, all without a search warrant. No one has the power to tell them no.

Gonzales and McConnell have the power under the Protect America Act to order any American to help them conduct their electronic spying against other Americans. Under the new law, if they order you to take part in their spying operations, and you say no, they can throw you in prison. If you do not keep their spying on other Americans a secret, even from your family, they can throw you in prison.

The Protect America Act institutes Big Brother government in the United States. It betrays American liberty. And Representative Whitfield failed to vote against it.

http://www.progressivepatriots…

Of course his opponent, Heather Ryan spoke out in support of our Constitution. From an email:

Later this week, the Senate will be considering passage of the compromise on the FISA Bill. Since many voters in the First Congressional District of Kentucky have contacted me wondering what my stance on this legislation is, I felt compelled to speak on this issue.

While I was in Washington on that terrible day of Sept. 11, 2001 when planes crashed into the World Trade Center and in Western Pennsylvania, and the Pentagon, I can understand the passion that has fueled this bill. Having said that, I must urge the Senate to reject this FISA compromise as proposed and passed by the House of Representatives with H.R. 6304.

There are several reasons why I feel this bill is unnecessary. First, I think that we have lost focus on the fact that a competent Administration could have actually gone a long way in preventing this tragedy.  The Bush Administration was warned in advance of  9-11 and did nothing at the time to prevent it. I believe if the Bush Administration would have acted on the intelligence provided them, then the 9-11 tragedy could have been avoided through the laws that existed at the time.

I believe this law is an extension of the Bush Administration’s attempts to politicize the Justice Department. Prosecuting entities are provided by the Constitution with checks and balances on which to operate. They already have  very broad  powers and if they found a credible threat would have no problem getting a warrant in a timely fashion.  

I believe that FISA and this compromise are an abomination to the Constitution because it seeks to circumvent the checks and balances provided all of us by that document.  I strongly oppose giving  the Telecom Corporations immunity when they knew they were breaking the law when the Bush Administration asked them to break the law.

I saw where my opponent in this race, Exxon Ed Whitfield voted for this Legislation.  I think it is pretty ironic when the very Republicans that lecture us about the size of the Federal Government propose, and push through the House of Representatives a bill that broadens the powers of the Federal Government vastly. I think this is one issue that Liberals, Moderates and Conservatives should all be able to agree on.  There are certain things that none of us should ever compromise on, and the Constitution is one thing I will never compromise on as Representative of Kentucky’s First District.

His work against the Constitution did not stop there:

When the Head Start program of early childhood education came up for reauthorization in May of 2007, Rep. Howard McKeon tried to offer an amendment that would provide special permission for religious organizations to engage in employment discrimination when using government-provided funds to hire Head Start Workers. That sounds complicated, but what it boils down to is that the McKeon amendment would have let churches take government money to hire workers for the government-funded Head Start program, and yet refuse to hire particular workers because they were from the “wrong” religion.

The Head Start program is not a religious program in its content, so there is no substantive reason for this discrimination to occur. If churches want to run a preschool and discriminate on the basis of religion, they can already do so — they just have to pay for it themselves. If churches want to grab government money to run a government program, on the other hand, then the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is perfectly clear — government resources can’t be used to establish advantages for a religion or its adherents.

The McKeon amendment would have let government resources be used to discriminate against people who were not religiously correct. It fortunately was rejected in a roll-call vote. But Rep. Ed Whitfield didn’t help in that regard. By failing to vote against the McKeon amendment, Rep. Whitfield showed a disregard for the constitutional basis of American government.

http://www.progressivepatriots…

Then consider his failure to lead on H. Res. 68:

For more than three decades, the United States has been a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, better known as the Non-Proliferation treaty. This treaty requires the United States to “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament.” George W. Bush has been fond of using images of mushroom clouds and nuclear proliferation to push the country into war. Yet under George W. Bush, the United States has failed to pursue negotiations in good, middling or even bad faith on nuclear arms or nuclear disarmament, marking a violation of this treaty which is essential to international peace.

H.Res. 68 is a bill that calls on President Bush to issue a report indicating the means by which the United States will meet its numerous, legally-binding treaty obligations. Asking the president to obey the law seems like a no-brainer, right? Well, not according to Representative Whitfield, who has failed to cosponsor this bill. When you get the chance, please contract Rep. Whitfield and ask what gives.

Of course the last thing in the world Exxon Eddie would want to be caught doing is questioning any of the failed policies of the Bush Administration.

Whitfield also failed to lead in insuring that every vote cast in America is counted fairly in

H.R. 811:

Any reasonable person who believes that trust in America’s democratic institutions is important can see the value in being able to determine with assurance how a person has voted. It should be a matter of common sense, for instance, that when an electronic voting machine malfunctions and loses votes (as has happened in the past), a backup paper record of the actions of the machine would help elections officials set things right and make sure that every person’s vote has been counted. Yet today, despite a history of malfunctioning electronic voting machines, there is no requirement for a backup paper trail. It’s as easy as attaching a printer to a voting machine. It’s a matter of simple common sense for those who are interested in reliable verifiable, democracy. So why has Congressperson Whitfield failed to lend formal support to H.R. 811, a bill which would require the establishment of such a paper trail? It’s a mystery to me. Ask Congressperson Whitfield to leave a verifiable paper trail of support for H.R. 811 — in the Congress, that’s called cosponsorship.

http://www.progressivepatriots…

Of course, with  

H.R. 897 Whitfield failed to stand up to Corporate corruption and war profiteering:

H.R. 897 is a bill before the House of Representatives that would “require the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, Secretary of the Interior, and the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development to provide to Congress copies and descriptions of contracts and task orders in excess of $5,000,000 for work to be performed in Iraq and Afghanistan.” When Republicans controlled the Congress, they killed efforts to uncover corporate corruption and war profiteering. If there is really nothing going on with the contracts, then why is there a problem with looking at those contracts? Only those who think there is a problem and want to hide the problem could be opposed to Congressional oversight. Ed Whitfield apparently is comfortable with something being hidden, since the name of Rep. Whitfield does not currently appear in cosponsorship of this legislation. Contact Rep. Whitfield and ask why.

http://www.progressivepatriots…

Of course, it would be a shame if Whitfield stood up to the failed leadership of President Bush, and the fleecing of the American taxpayer by Corporate America.

With H.R. 1255 Whitfield once again showed failure of leadership, and cowered to the Bush Administration:

H.R. 1255, a bill that passed the house on a vote of 333-93 in the House of Representatives, was the work of a large congressional majority which believes that White House records belong ultimately to the people of the United States. When he entered office, George W. Bush issued an edict which assigned past presidents and their heirs the right to do with presidential records what they personally saw fit. This is a recipe for historically disastrous revisionism. H.R. 1255 reverses the Bush edict, returning the ownership of presidential records to the people of the United States and making them available (after a period of time) for complete and accurate, not gauzily redacted, historical research. Representative Whitfield failed to vote for this bill, prioritizing the prerogatives of those in power above the historical value of accuracy and the political value of openness.

http://www.progressivepatriots…

H.R. 1309 proved once again that Whitfield supports a move toward an authoritarian government, in another capitulation to President Bush:

H.R. 1309, a bill that has passed the House on a vote of 308-117, removes the authoritarian stain placed on the government of the United States shortly after George W. Bush took office — well, at least one of them. It used to be that citizens could access government documents through the Freedom of Information Act unless the government could affirmatively demonstrate the need for the document to remain private. George W. Bush changed that with an executive order in 2001, mandating that unless a citizen affirmatively demonstrated a lack of national security reasons for the disclosure of a document, the government could keep its documents off-limits. This is another authoritarian step in a nation founded on principles of openness and liberty. Ed Whitfield failed to vote for this bill. Rep. Whitfield made a most unfortunate stand against openness in favor of authoritarianism.

Even more disturbing are Whitfield’s failed leadership for children at home and abroad. Just look at H.R. 2620:

H.R. 2620, The Child Soldier Prevention Act, prohibits the government of the United States of America from providing military aid to any foreign government that uses child soldiers in its military, paramilitary forces, or other official or sanctioned armed groups. The Child Soldier Prevention Act also requires the Executive Branch to research and publish reports on the use of child soldiers around the world, providing important information that can be used to more effectively counter the use child soldiers.

There are some clauses that make the bill less strong than it could be. One gives the President of the United States to issue a waiver to the law when he decides that giving military aid to a government that uses child soldiers is in the interest of the United States. However, the President is required to register every such waiver, and report on the justifications for each waiver to the Senate and to the House of Representatives. Another clause permits support for armies that recruit volunteer child soldiers as young as 16 — because that’s what the U.S. Military currently does.

These clauses make the Child Soldier Prevention Act of 2007 an imperfect piece of legislation, but it’s pretty darned good, and it’s the only legislation to even address the issue. It is therefore a piece of legislation that all decent Americans ought to be willing to support, regardless of political party affiliation.

So why hasn’t Representative Whitfield offered cosponsorship of even this mild, unobjectionable bill? Something seems askew with Representative Whitfield’s priorities.

http://www.progressivepatriots…

Not only did he fail to show leadership for children around the world, but he voted against children right here at home:

Voted NO on Veto override: Extend SCHIP to cover 6M more kids.

OnTheIssues Explanation: This vote is a veto override of the SCHIP extension (State Children’s Health Insurance Program). The bill passed the House 265-142 on 10/25/07, and was vetoed by Pres. Bush on 12/12/07.

CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY: This Act would enroll all 6 million uninsured children who are eligible, but not enrolled, for coverage under existing programs.

PRESIDENT’S VETO MESSAGE: Our goal should be to move children who have no health insurance to private coverage–not to move children who already have private health insurance to government coverage. My Administration strongly supports reauthorization of SCHIP. [But this bill, even with changes, does not meet the requirements I outlined].

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hou…

Yes, Exxon Ed Whitfield actually stood with a failed President and the Insurance Companies over even uncovered children, AMERICAN CHILDREN!!!

What a sickening disgrace!! Exxon Ed Whitfield is so out of touch with the voters of the First Congressional District of Kentucky, ITS EMBARRASSING!!!

Heather Ryan on the other hand, believes all Americans have a fundamental right to healthcare, whether the insurance companies profit from it or not:

Health care:

It is an absolute travesty that 50 million Americans struggle without health care in the wealthiest nation in the world.  What’s worse is when our representative votes against improvements in access to health services for children and the poor.  Unfortunately, these are both realities that we’ve experienced under the current leadership.  I propose that health care for every American is more important than tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. It is time we had a representative who thinks about more than just how much money he can make when he helps pass legislation that benefits drug and insurance companies.  As the leaders of the free world, it is an embarrassment that we are the only industrialized nation that does not offer health care for our citizens.

http://www.ryanforkentucky.com…

As you can see, although Exxon Ed Whitfield has shown leadership for horses, and has followed blindly behind President Bush and the insurance companies, he has failed to show leadership in defending the very rights that generations of Americans have fought and died for. Exxon Ed Whitfield offers more of the same failed leadership, and cowardice in standing up to his party when it is wrong. Heather Ryan has already shown the courage to stand up for what is right against many in her party’s leadership on FISA. She offers courage, and new leadership for the voters of Kentucky’s First Congressional District:

Please join us in the fight to oust Exxon Ed Whitfield and replace him with a “Fighting Democrat”, who is not afraid to fight for what is right. Heather Ryan is a veteran, mother, and citizen of the First Congressional District that brings new ideas, new hope, and most of all courage to the citizens of this district. Please, help us fight for Progress, and expanded Congressional majorities here:

Best wishes everyone!!  

Candidate filing is now almost complete and whilst we won’t do as well as 2006 we still have candidates in at least 420 districts.

Below the fold for details and once again go and take a look at the 2008 Race Tracker Wiki.  

***I have included Cook PVI numbers where possible after blogger requests to do so!***

3 more House races have a Democratic candidate that has filed in the last three weeks:

LA-01 – R+18,

LA-07 – R+7,

NY-03 – D+2.1,

But two more races go back to being uncontested:

AL-01 – R+12, (Our candidate withdrew but it is my understanding that the party can nominate a replacement!)

VA-01 – R+9, (Our candidate has suspended his campaign. If he withdraws the party can nominate a replacement apparently.)

And two more races will not have a democratic candidate on the ballot in November:

LA-05 – R+10,

WI-05 – R+12,

So 420 races filled! This of course includes 236 districts held by Democratic Congresscritters.

But we also have 184 GOP held districts with confirmed Democratic opponents.

So here is where we are at (GOP Districts):

Districts with confirmed candidates – 184

Districts with unconfirmed candidates – 0

Districts with rumoured candidates – 1

Districts without any candidates – 1

Filing closed – No Democratic candidate – 13

The GOP held districts with confirmed Democratic challengers are as follows:

AL-02 – R+13,

AL-03 – R+4,

AL-04 – R+16,

AK-AL – R+14,

AZ-01 – R+2,

AZ-02 – R+9,

AZ-03 – R+6,

AZ-06 – R+12,

CA-02 – R+13,

CA-03 – R+7,

CA-04 – R+11,

CA-21 – R+13,

CA-24 – R+5,

CA-25 – R+7,

CA-26 – R+4,

CA-40 – R+8,

CA-41 – R+9,

CA-42 – R+10,

CA-44 – R+6,

CA-45 – R+3,

CA-46 – R+6,

CA-48 – R+8,

CA-49 – R+10,

CA-50 – R+5,

CA-52 – R+9,

CO-04 – R+9,

CO-05 – R+15.7,

CO-06 – R+10,

CT-04 – D+5,

DE-AL – D+7,

FL-01 – R+19,

FL-04 – R+16,

FL-05 – R+5,

FL-06 – R+8,

FL-07 – R+3,

FL-08 – R+3,

FL-09 – R+4,

FL-10 – D+1,

FL-12 – R+5,

FL-13 – R+4,

FL-14 – R+10,

FL-15 – R+4,

FL-18 – R+4,

FL-21 – R+6,

FL-24 – R+3,

FL-25 – R+4,

GA-01 – R+?,

GA-03 – R+?,

GA-06 – R+?,

GA-07 – R+?,

GA-09 – R+?,

GA-10 – R+?,

GA-11 – R+?,

ID-01 – R+19,

ID-02 – R+19,

IL-06 – R+2.9,

IL-10 – D+4,

IL-11 – R+1.1,

IL-13 – R+5,

IL-15 – R+6,

IL-16 – R+4,

IL-18 – R+5.5,

IL-19 – R+8,

IN-03 – R+16,

IN-04 – R+17,

IN-05 – R+20,

IN-06 – R+11,

IA-04 – D+0,

IA-05 – R+8,

KS-01 – R+20,

KS-04 – R+12,

KY-01 – R+10,

KY-02 – R+12.9,

KY-04 – R+11.7,

LA-01 – R+18,

LA-04 – R+7,

LA-07 – R+7,

MD-01 – R+10,

MD-06 – R+13,

MI-02 – R+9,

MI-03 – R+9,

MI-04 – R+3,

MI-06 – R+2.3,

MI-07 – R+2,

MI-08 – R+1.9,

MI-09 – R+0,

MI-10 – R+4,

MI-11 – R+1.2,

MN-02 – R+2.7,

MN-03 – R+0.5,

MN-06 – R+5,

MO-02 – R+9,

MO-06 – R+5,

MO-07 – R+14,

MO-08 – R+11,

MO-09 – R+7,

MS-03 – R+14,

MT-AL – R+11,

NE-01 – R+11,

NE-02 – R+9,

NE-03 – R+23.6,

NV-02 – R+8.2,

NV-03 – D+1,

NJ-02 – D+4.0,

NJ-03 – D+3.3,

NJ-04 – R+0.9,

NJ-05 – R+4,

NJ-07 – R+1,

NJ-11 – R+6,

NM-01 – D+2,

NM-02 – R+6,

NY-03 – D+2.1,

NY-13 – D+1,

NY-23 – R+0.2,

NY-25 – D+3,

NY-26 – R+3,

NY-29 – R+5,

NC-03 – R+15,

NC-05 – R+15,

NC-06 – R+17,

NC-08 – R+3,

NC-09 – R+12,

NC-10 – R+15,

OH-01 – R+1,

OH-02 – R+13,

OH-03 – R+3,

OH-04 – R+14,

OH-05 – R+10,

OH-07 – R+6,

OH-08 – R+12,

OH-12 – R+0.7,

OH-14 – R+2,

OH-15 – R+1,

OH-16 – R+4,

OK-01 – R+13,

OK-03 – R+18,

OK-04 – R+13,

OK-05 – R+12,

OR-02 – R+11,

PA-03 – R+2,

PA-05 – R+10,

PA-06 – D+2.2,

PA-09 – R+15,

PA-15 – D+2,

PA-16 – R+11,

PA-18 – R+2,

PA-19 – R+12,

SC-01 – R+10,

SC-02 – R+9,

SC-03 – R+14,

SC-04 – R+15,

TN-01 – R+14,

TN-02 – R+11,

TN-03 – R+8,

TN-07 – R+12,

TX-03 – R+17,

TX-04 – R+17,

TX-06 – R+15,

TX-07 – R+16,

TX-08 – R+20,

TX-10 – R+13,

TX-12 – R+14,

TX-13 – R+18,

TX-19 – R+25,

TX-24 – R+15,

TX-26 – R+12,

TX-31 – R+15,

TX-32 – R+11,

UT-01 – R+26,

UT-03 – R+22,

VA-02 – R+5.9,

VA-04 – R+5,

VA-05 – R+6,

VA-06 – R+11,

VA-07 – R+11,

VA-10 – R+5,

VA-11 – R+1,

WA-04 – R+13,

WA-05 – R+7.1,

WA-08 – D+2,

WV-02 – R+5,

WI-01 – R+2,

WI-06 – R+5,

WY-AL – R+19,

The following GOP held districts have a candidate that is expected to run but is yet to confirm:

None at this stage

The following GOP held districts have rumoured candidates – please note that some of these “rumours” are extremely tenuous!

VA-01 – R+9,

The following districts have not a single rumoured candidate:

AL-01 – R+12,

And last but not least the list I did not want to have to include.

The following Republicans will not have a Democratic opponent in 2008:

AL-06 – R+25,

AR-03 – R+11,

CA-19 – R+10,

CA-22 – R+16,

KY-05 – R+8

LA-05 – R+10,

TX-01 – R+17,

TX-02 – R+12,

TX-05 – R+16,

TX-11 – R+25,

TX-14 – R+14,

TX-21 – R+13,

WI-05 – R+12,

Finally due praise to those states where we have a full slate of house candidates – Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennesee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming.

Thats 42 states with a full slate!

There are also 6 states where filing has closed where we do not have a full slate: Arkansas, California, Kentucky, Louisiana, Wisconsin and of course Texas.

It is also great to see candidates in AZ-06, CA-42, FL-12, LA-06, MS-03, VA-04, VA-06 and WI-06; 8 of 10 districts we did not contest in 2006! The other 2, TX-11 and AL-06, will again go uncontested by Team Blue in 2008.

With 13 uncontested Republicans we will not reach our great 2006 effort of 425 races filled but we will do really well nonetheless.

*** Tips, rumours and what not in the comments please.***

Time for the thrilling conclusion to the Bang-for-the-Buck Index, begun yesterday with the Senate installment. Follow the link for full methodological nitty-gritty, but the main thing that you need to know is that this index shows which races are the cheapest media-wise (and thus where one netroots dollar gets stretched the furthest). This list covers all House races that Swing State Project projects as Dem pickup opportunities.

The middle column lists every media market that needs to be utilized in order to blanket the district, and the number next to each market is the number of thousands of TV households in that market. The more TV households, the more expensive the market. (When a market only grazes a small part of the district where there’s no major population center, I’ve deemed the market negligible, assuming that a smart media buyer wouldn’t use that market.) The number in the right column is the sum total of the thousands of TV households in all markets in the district, which provides a relative number that indicates how expensive a media campaign in that district is.

As you’ll see, there’s a huge amount of variation, depending on the number of ‘wasted eyeballs.’ The wasted eyeballs problem becomes huge in suburban districts in major metropolitan districts, where you may be paying to advertise to people in the adjacent 10 or 20 districts as well.

Let’s start with the cheap races:

District	Markets	Score
WY-AL	Cheyenne (54) Casper (52) Denver (1,415 *) Salt Lake City (811 *) Rapid City (91 *) Billings (103 *) Idaho Falls (115 *)	106 *
AK-AL	Anchorage (141) Fairbanks (32) Juneau (24)	197
LA-05	Monroe (174) Alexandria (93) Lake Charles (negligible) Lafayette (negligible)	267
LA-07	Lafayette (220) Lake Charles (94)	314
NE-02	Omaha (400)	400
AL-02	Montgomery (245) Columbus GA (205) Dothan (98)	548
SC-01	Charleston SC (284) Myrtle Beach (266)	550
IA-04	Des Moines (414) Rochester MN (143) Cedar Rapids (negligible) Sioux City (negligible)	557
LA-04	Shreveport (382) Alexandria (93) Lake Charles (94)	569
WV-02	Charleston WV (478) Clarksburg (109) Washington DC (2,253 *)	587 *
IN-03	South Bend (333) Fort Wayne (271)	604
ID-01	Boise (230) Spokane (390)	620
NV-03	Las Vegas (651)	651
NM-01	Albuquerque (654)	654
VA-02	Norfolk (705)	705
IL-18	Peoria (242) Champaign (378) Quincy (104) Davenport (negligible)	724
NY-25	Rochester (385) Syracuse (398)	783
OH-01	Cincinnati (880)	880
OH-02	Cincinnati (880) Columbus OH (negligible) Charleston WV (negligible)	880
OH-15	Columbus OH (891)	891
NV-02	Las Vegas (651) Reno (255) Salt Lake City (811 *)	906 *
SC-02	Columbia SC (373) Augusta (246) Savannah (296)	915
NM-02	Albuquerque (654) El Paso (291) Odessa (negligible)	945
KS-04	Wichita (447) Tulsa (510)	957

The more expensive races are over the flip…

District	Markets	Score
KY-02	Louisville (643) Evansville (289) Bowling Green (75)	1,007
VA-05	Richmond (511) Roanoke (440) Charlottesville (70) Raleigh (negligible)	1,021
CA-50	San Diego (1,026)	1,026
NY-26	Buffalo (644) Rochester (385)	1,029
IN-04	Indianapolis (1,054) Lafayette IN (63)	1,117
AL-03	Birmingham (717) Montgomery (245) Columbus GA (205) Atlanta (negligible)	1,167
MO-06	Kansas City (904) St. Joseph (46) Columbia MO (168) Ottumwa (51) Omaha (negligible)	1,169
PA-18	Pittsburgh (1,170)	1,170
MD-01	Baltimore (1,089) Salisbury (148)	1,237
FL-08	Orlando (1,346)	1,346
FL-24	Orlando (1,346)	1,346
OH-07	Columbus OH (891) Dayton (514)	1,405
FL-18	Miami (1,523)	1,523
FL-21	Miami (1,523)	1,523
NY-29	Buffalo (644) Rochester NY (385) Syracuse (398) Elmira (97)	1,524
OH-16	Cleveland (1,542)	1,542
MO-09	St. Louis (1,222) Columbia MO (168) Quincy (104) Ottumwa (51)	1,545
PA-03	Pittsburgh (1,170) Erie (159) Youngstown (277)	1,606
MN-02	Minneapolis (1,653)	1,653
MN-03	Minneapolis (1,653)	1,653
MN-06	Minneapolis (1,653)	1,653
AZ-01	Phoenix (1,660) Albuquerque (negligible)	1,660
AZ-03	Phoenix (1,660)	1,660
WA-08	Seattle (1,702)	1,702
FL-09	Tampa (1,710)	1,710
FL-10	Tampa (1,710)	1,710
CO-04	Denver (1,415) Colorado Spgs. (315)	1,730
CA-04	Sacramento (1,346) Chico (191) Reno (255)	1,792
OH-14	Cleveland (1,542) Youngstown (277)	1,819
NC-10	Charlotte (1,020) Greenville SC (815)	1,835
MI-09	Detroit (1,936)	1,936
TX-07	Houston (1,939)	1,939
FL-25	Miami (1,523) Ft. Myers (462)	1,985
FL-15	Orlando (1,346) W. Palm Beach (752)	2,098
FL-13	Tampa (1,710) Ft. Myers (462)	2,172
VA-10	Washington DC (2,253)	2,253
VA-11	Washington DC (2,253)	2,253
TX-10	Houston (1,939) Austin (589)	2,528
NC-08	Charlotte (1,020) Greensboro (652) Raleigh (985) Myrtle Beach (266)	2,923
PA-06	Philadelphia (2,926)	2,926
PA-15	Philadelphia (2,926)	2,926
MI-07	Detroit (1,936) Toledo (427) Lansing (257) Grand Rapids (732)	3,352
IL-06	Chicago (3,431)	3,431
IL-10	Chicago (3,431)	3,431
IL-13	Chicago (3,431)	3,431
PA-05	Pittsburgh (1,170) Buffalo (644) Harrisburg (707) Wilkes-Barre (589) Erie (159) Elmira (97) Johnstown (295)	3,661
IL-11	Chicago (3,431) Peoria (242) Davenport (308)	3,981
CA-26	Los Angeles (5,536)	5,536
CA-46	Los Angeles (5,536)	5,536
CA-45	Los Angeles (5,536) Palm Springs (143)	5,679
CT-04	New York (7,380) Hartford (negligible)	7,380
NY-13	New York (7,380)	7,380
NJ-05	New York (7,380)	7,380
NJ-07	New York (7,380)	7,380
NJ-03	New York (7,380) Philadelphia (2,926)	10,306
NJ-04	New York (7,380) Philadelphia (2,926)	10,306

You may have noticed a few asterisked races; I’ll explain each one. WV-02 is partially covered by the Washington media market, which reaches into the tip of the panhandle (which is rapidly turning into DC exurbs). Advertising in DC is prohibitively expensive, so I’ve excluded it even though the panhandle is a populous part of the district. Like Manchester, New Hampshire (which we talked about yesteray), however, this is an unusual situation where there’s a single station nearby that’s considered to operate within the larger DC market, in this case in Hagerstown, Maryland. It’s likely that most of the WV-02 advertising targeting the panhandle would go through this one station.

NV-02 is partly covered by the Salt Lake City market (the easternmost three counties). This area contains fast-growing Elko, so it can’t be written off entirely, but again, it’s unlikely that any media strategy here would include SLC.

And finally, Wyoming is a particularly perplexing case. Using just the in-state markets in Cheyenne and Casper, it’s the cheapest district anywhere. However, these two markets cover only about 50% of the state’s population; the rest is out-of-state markets like Denver and SLC, so a comprehensive broadcast-TV strategy would shoot Wyoming into very expensive district territory. Most likely, the outlying portions of Wyoming are targeted purely through direct mail, AM radio, possibly cable systems, and as Gary Trauner adeptly showed last time, face-to-face contact.

You may have also noticed a number of predominantly rural districts that should theoretically be cheap but in fact are very expensive; MI-07 and NC-08 are key examples, each of which are kind of located between major cities and wind up biting a corner out of a bunch of different markets. Poor PA-05 is the perhaps the worst example; it doesn’t even have any TV stations in its boundaries, but it takes bites out of about 8 surrounding markets. Districts like these, again, are probably dealt with creatively, with buys in some TV markets and more focus on cable and other media.

The focus on cable, direct mail, and the like also probably becomes more important in the most expensive urban markets (New Jersey, anyone?) where even the best-financed House candidate isn’t going to be able to go on the air much. As I said yesterday, much of this is conjecture (and I certainly welcome comment from anyone with more experience with campaigning in any of these districts, or media buying in general); it’s just a rough guide to help netroots donors find races where their dollars might be used particularly efficiently.