Filed under: 2012 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Corruption, Governors, Scandal, Senate | Tags: 2012, Affair, Bribery, Cindy Hampton, Doug Hampton, Extramarital Affair, John Ensign, Mark Sanford, Nevada, Paul Coggins, Republicans, Sarah Palin, Senate, Senate Ethics Committee
It looks like Republican Sen. John Ensign didn’t just have an extramarital affair with a married campaign staffer–he also paid her a substantial amount of hush money:
Sen. John Ensign’s attorney acknowledged Thursday that the Nevada Republican’s parents paid nearly $100,000 to the family of his mistress around the time she and her husband left his staff in April 2008.
Paul Coggins, Ensign’s attorney, said in a statement that the senator gave Doug Hampton, Cindy Hampton and their two children gifts worth $96,000 and that “each gift was limited to $12,000.”
[...]
His disclosure comes as the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington called on the Justice Department to investigate potential criminal wrongdoing of Ensign reportedly giving Cindy Hampton more than $25,000 in a severance package. The group says that under federal law, failing to report contributions of more than $25,000 can result in five years in jail.
[Emphasis mine]
I would be surprised if this hush money payout didn’t land Sen. Ensign before the Senate Ethics Committee–this is at least a serious breach of the public trust, if not a violation of public disclosure and accountability laws.
Mark Sanford, Sarah Palin, John Ensign–it looks like the GOP is continuing their long, slow collapse. At this rate, there won’t be anyone left to run for President in 2012.
Filed under: 2012 Election, Conservatives, Corruption, Government, Governors, Polls, Right-Wing Noise Machine, Scandal | Tags: 2012, Alaska, Corruption, David Frum, Ethics, Numbers, Quitter, Republicans, Sarah Palin
The verdict on Gov. Sarah Palin’s resignation is in–and things are not looking good for the soon-to-be ex Governor:
At the same time just 37% of Americans now say they believe Palin is fit to be President, while 55% say she is not. And while her move last week may not have hurt her overall favorability, it does seem to have negatively impacted voters’ inclination to some day put her in the White House. 57% of respondents said her resignation makes them less likely to support her in a future Presidential bid.
[Emphasis mine]
And, still, the reason for Gov. Palin’s resignation still isn’t clear. Was it for a presidential bid? To get her family out of the limelight? To deal with the various ethical charges that have been brought against her?
Well, subsequent interviews with Palin appear to point to the latter, with Palin basically claiming that the ethics charges against her were paralyzing. But that’s a pretty damn poor justification–resigning because there are so many ethical charges against you that you can’t possibly fight them all and still do your job. And it certainly doesn’t bode well for your political future when you basically have to admit that your state would be better off without you running it.
But, more importantly, Palin’s allegations that fighting the ethical charges against her would be too costly for the people of Alaska appears to be completely false:
During her resignation speech last week, Palin presented herself as a heroic defender of the taxpayer. She said that money being spent on government lawyers to defend against these “frivolous ethics violations” could be “going to things that are very important, like troopers and roads and teachers and fish research.” Palin repeated exactly the same point this week.
But David Murrow, a spokesperson for the Governor, said in an interview that much of this money was budgeted to the lawyers in advance and would have gone to them anyway, even if state lawyers hadn’t been defending against these ethics complaints.
In response to our questions, the Governor’s office provided us with a detailed breakdown of the millions Palin has claimed has gone to defending against ethics complaints. It does list roughly $1.9 million in expenditures.
But Murrow, the spokesperson, acknowledged to our reporter, Amanda Erickson, that this total was arrived at by adding up attorney hours spent on fending off complaints — based on the fixed salaries of lawyers in the governor’s office and the Department of Law. The money would have gone to the lawyers no matter what they were doing. The complaints are “just distracting them from other duties,” Murrow said.
In other words, while these lawyers might have been free to do other legal work for the state, the ethics complaints have apparently not had the real world impact Palin has claimed, and didn’t drain money away from cops, teachers, roads and other things.
[Emphasis mine]
Plus–according to TPM–there are only three outstanding ethics complaints against Palin, anyway.
Even conservative commentator and former Bush speechwriter David Frum thinks Palin is toast:
Between her speeches and her book deal, [Palin] can reasonably hope to earn $10 million over the next two years. She’ll fly in private jets, sleep in sumptuous hotel suites, receive rhapsodic applause.
Yet there will be no escaping another story line. Faced with exasperating criticism and the accumulating cares of public office—she quit to cash in. Her admirers can excuse anything, but to the much larger audience of non-admirers, Palin will look a lot like those CEOs who wrecked their banks and the national economy while accepting huge bonuses for themselves. John McCain’s slogan in 2008 was “Country First.” Palin’s in 2012? “I seen my opportunities, and I took ‘em.”
[Emphasis added]
Sarah Palin has become a fascinating story again; her abrupt resignation is so bizarre–there is no positive way to spin it, there is no real upside in quitting unless she plans never to hold elected office again.
Like I remarked a few days ago, we might have just borne witness to the steepest rise and fastest fall of any politician in modern American history; much like a meteorite crashing to earth, it’s hard not to watch in awe.
UPDATE: And then there’s this:
David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, told Newsmax that Palin has to stop complaining. “You’ve got to recognize that there are people who want you to fail,” he said. “And if you spend your time worrying about them, or whining about what they say, at the very least it’ll get you off your game.”
Filed under: 2010 Election, 2012 Election, Conservatives, Governors, Polls | Tags: 2010, 2012, Alaska, Fail, Gallup, Numbers, Quitter, Republicans, Sarah Palin
A new USA Today/Gallup poll has found that “Sarah Palin’s bombshell that she is resigning as Alaska governor actually has boosted her a bit among Republicans.” According to the poll, “two-thirds of Republicans want Palin…to be ‘a major national political figure‘ in the future”
[...]
Seventy-two percent of Republicans surveyed said they are “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to vote for her if she runs for president
[Emphasis mine]
So, there you have it–if you stab your constituents in the back, leaving them high and dry in the middle of a financial crisis, and quit your job two-thirds of the way through, Republicans will love you.
But I just can’t see Palin winning higher office. While her resignation will give her time to fly around giving speeches and raising money, it has all but destroyed her credibility–if she couldn’t even be trusted to serve out her one single term as Governor, how could she be trusted to fulfill any other promise or commitment she makes?
If Palin runs in 2012, her rivals are going to destroy her for having abandoned her responsibilities to her constituents. Beyond that, I don’t see how she could have a shot at the Presidency without holding another elected office–31 months as Governor of Alaska (several of those which she spent campaigning for the Vice Presidency) is not anywhere near enough experience for anyone to get close to the White House.
The GOP may love Sarah Palin, but the GOP isn’t the majority anymore, and Palin’s disappearing act destroyed any semblance of credibility or appearance of competence she may have had among Democrats and Independents. Nobody can predict the future, of course, but it looks to me that Sarah Palin’s career as an elected official is over.
And it speaks volumes about the GOP that being irresponsible makes you more popular among Republicans.
Filed under: 2010 Election, 2012 Election, Conservatives, Governors, Media, Progressives, Right-Wing Noise Machine | Tags: 2010, 2012, Alaska, Barack Obama, Chelsea Clinton, Democrats, Fail, Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama, Mitt Romney, Republicans, Resignation, Sarah Palin
I’ve spent some time in the past few days thinking about Gov. Sarah Palin’s sudden resignation, and I still think that her decision stemmed from either an impending scandal or an impending Presidential campaign.
But there have been a few other explanations I’ve heard and dismissed. For instance, some people are claiming that Palin is facing huge legal bills fighting off all the ethics complaints against her, which explains her resignation. But I find that hard to believe—her term as Governor is done in just a year and a half, meaning that she could hit up the paid lecture circuit and make those costs back several-fold come January, 2011.
Others are saying that being Governor would prevent Palin from going out there and campaigning for Republicans in 2010, putting her at a disadvantage against folks like Mitt Romney who no longer hold an office and thus have the time to campaign.
But, remember, Palin campaigned for Vice President while remaining Governor of Alaska; I find it hard to believe that she couldn’t just hand things over to her staff or her Lt. Governor every once in a while in order to speak at a rally or a speech.
Plus, being an effective Governor would probably help your presidential ambitions far more than quitting in order to fly around stumping for Congressional candidates–that’s something you do when you leave office, not something you leave office in order to do. Double plus, if 2010 isn’t a good year for the GOP—which it doesn’t look like it will be—then Palin would be better off staying in the Governor’s mansion.
Some people are saying that it’s normal for politicians to quit their current job to run for higher office. While that may be the case, they don’t usually quit 40 months before the election.
And a number of people are claiming that Sarah Palin is resigning in order to protect her family, but I don’t entirely buy that, either. When you run for office you become a public figure; you and your family are going to be in the spotlight.
Personally, I think families should be off-limits. To me, we should be focusing on the person running for office, not their husbands or wives or children; I don’t see the political point to be made in going after someone’s family. Still, we have to deal with the political reality we have, not the political reality we want—and in the political world we live in, the families of politicians are given a fair amount of scrutiny.
Palin should have known that, by being a public figure, she was putting her own family in the spotlight for good or ill. Plus, I feel that a lot of right-wing victimhood on this front seems awfully overblown–a lot of Palin’s supporters seem to believe that Sarah Palin is the most unfairly-attacked people in modern American history.
In that regard, I agree with ABC’s Cynthia Tucker, who said on Meet the Press this past weekend:
If [Palin] thinks she’s had it tough, I have two words for you: Hillary Clinton!
Conservatives are attacking Palin’s critics for allegedly targeting her family, but if you were to page through nearly any conservative blog out there and you’ll find plenty of unhinged attacks on Michelle Obama. And some of these same conservatives who are defending Palin and her family are the very same conservatives who spent the 1990’s unfairly attacking both Chelsea and Hillary Clinton.
Sarah Palin may have been subjected to some unfair criticism (and I should note that she was also subjected to a lot of perfectly fair, valid criticism as well), but she is not the first person to have dealt with that, and resigning her Governorship is an extremely poor way to deal with it. Hillary Clinton was a fighter; Sarah Palin is a quitter.
I also don’t believe the right-wing talking point that Sarah Palin’s early resignation is some kind of brilliant Nixonian political maneuver.
I mean, just think about the timing—if this was part of a brilliant political strategy, why announce it the Friday before Independence Day? Why try to bury it in the news cycle—why not make it front and center, try to draw as much publicity as possible that you can then take advantage of?
And if this was Palin’s brilliant political move, why did she sound like she was close to tears during her speech on Friday? Go listen–Palin sounds like she’s going to break down, not like she’s launching a cunning political strategy that will catapult her into the White House:
In the end, it just looks like Sarah Palin couldn’t take the heat so she quit. She promised the people of Alaska to serve as their Governor for 4 years but she broke that promise. If Palin does run for President, it should be remembered that, when things got tough, Sarah Palin turned tail and fled–not a quality any of us want in a President.
Honestly, though, I don’t think we have to worry about Sarah Palin running for President–I don’t think she’s going to recover from this. Whatever political career she may have had is probably over now; America loves fighters and hates quitters.
To make an analogy fitting of Gov. Palin, she grabbed the basketball and took off in the middle of the third quarter, leaving both teams to stand in the middle of the court, watching in utter befuddlement as she disappears off into the locker room.
UPDATE: Not only is Gov. Palin a quitter, she’s a hypocrite:
During a Women and Leadership event back in March 2008, Governor Palin was asked about Senator Clinton’s response to media scrutiny – and criticism – she received on the campaign trail during the Democratic primaries. Palin made it clear to moderator Karen Breslau of Newsweek that she considered Clinton’s conduct unbecoming. Hillary, she insisted, needed to just “plow through”:
“Fair or unfair, I think she does herself a disservice to even mention it…When I hear a statement like that coming from a woman candidate with any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism or, you know, maybe a sharper microscope put on her, I think, man, that doesn’t do us any good. Women in politics, women in general wanting to progress this country. I don’t think it’s, it bodes well for her — a statement like that…It bothers me a little bit hearing her bring that attention to herself on that level.”
[Emphasis mine]
So when Hillary Clinton gets media scrutiny, Sarah Palin thinks she should just shut up and push through it. But when Sarah Palin gets media scrutiny, she thinks it’s okay to play victim and quit.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Governors, Polls, Progressives, Senate | Tags: 2008, Al Franken, Democrats, Judiciary, Minnesota, Minnesota Supreme Court, Norm Coleman, Republicans, Tim Pawlenty
It’s been nearly 8 months since Election Day.
It’s been more than 6 months since Inauguration Day.
And, finally, Minnesota’s outstanding Senate race has been decided.
Minnesota’s Supreme Court has affirmed [PDF] that Al Franken is the duly-elected junior Senator from Minnesota, having garnered more votes than former Senator Norm Coleman.
Of course, Franken still needs a certificate of election signed by his state’s governor, Republican Tim Pawlenty. But Pawlenty said that he would abide by the Supreme Court’s decision:
Minnesota law does not allow the governor to sign an election certificate until the state court process is complete. And when it is, and they direct me to sign the certificate, I’m going to sign it. There’s not going to be any undue delay or the like. But I’m going to follow the direction of the courts in that regard and we’re going to be having a decision here in the coming weeks … I have to follow the law. If the Minnesota Supreme Court says, “You sign the certificate” — and there’s not an appeal or some other contrary direction from a federal court — you know, that’s my duty. I can’t just ignore that or say I don’t feel like following a directive from the Minnesota Supreme Court. That would not be the responsible thing to do.
[Emphasis mine]
There’s a chance that Coleman could appeal this decision to the federal judiciary, which may give Pawlenty room to once again put off signing a certificate.
But the Minnesota Supreme Court should be the final say in this case, and they have resoundingly affirmed that Al Franken is the junior Senator from Minnesota.
UPDATE: I should note that the decision was unanimous–the court ruled 5-0 in Franken’s favor.
Here’s the key part of the ruling:
For all of the foregoing reasons, we affirm the decision of the trial court that Al Franken received the highest number of votes legally cast and is entitled under Minn. Stat. § 204C.40 (2008) to receive the certificate of election as United States Senator from the State of Minnesota.
UPDATE II: Norm Coleman just conceded; congratulations to Senator Al Franken!
Filed under: 2009 Election, 2010 Election, Conservatives, Governors, Polls, Progressives | Tags: 2005, 2009, Attorney General, Bob McDonnell, Brian Moran, Creigh Deeds, Democrats, Republicans, Terry McAuliffe, VA-GOV, Virginia
With 60% of precincts reporting, Creigh Deeds (50%) leads Terry McAuliffe (26%) and Brian Moran (24%) in VA’s Democratic gubernatorial primary. That’s a pretty insurmountable lead, even with 40% of precincts outstanding; at the risk of being premature, I’m going to call this one for Deeds (who, in the interest of full disclosure, I voted for).
Deeds had a late surge in the polls to become the strong front-runner. Even though a lot of people had started to consider Deeds an also-ran due to his dismal early polling, primary elections are volatile and Deeds ended up emerging as the safest choice.
McAuliffe had a lot of money and connections but no electoral experience, and his checkered past as head of the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign flack was a major strike against him. Brian Moran portrayed himself as the progressive alternative to McAuliffe’s establishmentarian record, but Moran’s newfound progressiveness always rang somewhat hollow. And all of the sniping between presumed front-runners McAuliffe and Moran left Deeds virtually unblemished.
Deeds was the safest choice, being the only candidate in the race who had run for statewide office before. In fact, he ran against the GOP’s gubernatorial candidate, Bob McDonnell, for Attorney General; Deeds lost by only several hundred votes, the smallest margin in VA history.
A Deeds-McDonnell rematch is both poetic justice and welcome news, since VA is certainly more progressive-friendly than it was in 2005. As The Washington Post said, Creigh Deeds will be a Governor in the successful Warner-Kaine tradition.
UPDATE: File this under things I’ve never seen before–a Twitter concession from Brian Moran:
And make sure to stop on by and show your support for newly-minted Democratic gubernatorial candidate Creigh Deeds.
Filed under: Breaking, Governors, Progressives, Rights | Tags: Connecticut, Democrats, Gay Marriage, Iowa, John Lynch, LGBT, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont
New Hampshire Governor John Lynch signed legislation today that will legalize same-sex marriage in that state, making NH the sixth state (after CT, ME, VT, MA, and IA) to legalize same-sex marriage:
Lynch, a Democrat, had promised a veto if the law didn’t clearly spell out that churches and religious groups would not be forced to officiate at gay marriages or provide other services. Legislators made the changes.
“Today, we are standing up for the liberties of same-sex couples by making clear that they will receive the same rights, responsibilities–and respect–under New Hampshire law,” Lynch said.
[...]
Lynch said it is now time for the federal government to extend full equal rights to same-sex couples.
This means that every state in New England–save for Rhode Island–now recognizes the right of same-sex couples to marry.
Toward a more perfect union…
Filed under: Breaking, Government, Governors, Progressives | Tags: Connecticut, Democrats, Gay Marriage, Iowa, John Baldacci, Maine, Massachusetts, Same-Sex Marriage, Vermont
Maine Governor John Baldacci (D) just signed a bill into law that will legalize same-sex marriage in the Pine Tree State.
This makes Maine the fifth state to legalize same-sex marriage (after IA, CT, MA and VT) overall and the second state (after VT) to do it via legislation instead of a court decision.
Filed under: 2012 Election, Conservatives, Government, Governors, Scandal | Tags: Bobby Jindal, Hurricane Katrina, Lies, Louisiana, Republicans
It figures that the only way Republicans could use Hurricane Katrina to make themselves look good is by lying:
Looks like the game is up.
Remember that story Bobby Jindal told in his big speech Tuesday night — about how during Katrina, he stood shoulder-to-shoulder with a local sheriff who was battling government red tape to try to rescue stranded victims?
Turns out it wasn’t actually, you know, true.
[...]
[A] Jindal spokeswoman has admitted to Politico that in reality, Jindal overheard Lee talking about the episode to someone else by phone “days later.” The spokeswoman said she thought Lee, who died in 2007, was being interviewed about the incident at the time.
This is no minor difference. Jindal’s presence in Lee’s office during the crisis itself was a key element of the story’s intended appeal, putting him at the center of the action during the maelstrom. Just as important, Jindal implied that his support for the sheriff helped ensure the rescue went ahead. But it turns out Jindal wasn’t there at the key moment, and played no role in making the rescue happen.
[...]
The central anecdote of the GOP’s prime-time response to President Obama’s speech, intended to illustrate the threat of excessive government regulation, turns out to have been made up.
And Jindal couldn’t even admit his falsehood himself–he had a spokesperson do it for him.
First Bobby Jindal gives one of the worst speeches in modern political history, then it turns out that one of the central anecdotes in his speech–meant to illustrate his entire point about the role of government–was a lie.
Like I said right after Jindal’s speech, never have I seen a rising star fall so fast. I wonder if this is one-two punch will dog Jindal’s chances if he decides to run in 2012; blatant lying doesn’t tend to sit well with the American people.
Filed under: 2008 Election, Conservatives, Economics, Governors, Media, Polls, Progressives | Tags: 2008, Bobby Jindal, Budget, Democrats, Federal Spending, Gail Collins, Hypocrisy, Republicans, States, Stupidity, Taxes
Louisiana has gotten $130 billion in post-Katrina aid. How is it that the stars of the Republican austerity movement come from the states that suck up the most federal money? Taxpayers in New York send way more to Washington than they get back so more can go to places like Alaska and Louisiana. Which is fine, as long as we don’t have to hear their governors bragging about how the folks who elected them want to keep their tax money to themselves. Of course they do! That’s because they’re living off ours.
Here are the top ten states that receive the most federal tax money per every dollar they pay, color-coded by how they voted in the 2008 Presidential election:
- New Mexico
- Mississippi
- Alaska
- Louisiana
- West Virginia
- North Dakota
- Alabama
- South Dakota
- Kentucky
- Virginia
Here are the top ten states that receive the least federal tax money per every dollar they pay, color-coded by how they voted in the 2008 Presidential election:
- New Jersey
- Nevada
- Connecticut
- New Hampshire
- Minnesota
- Illinois
- Delaware
- California
- New York
- Colorado
[Source]
So, if we actually listened to Republicans and cut federal taxes, the Republican-voting red states would be hurt the most. Turns out that the GOP’s grandstanding on taxes is nothing more than hot air–they have no problem railing against high taxes while simultaneously taking tax dollars hand-over-fist from blue states.
Filed under: 2009 Election, Governors, Polls, Progressives | Tags: 2009, Brian Moran, Creigh Deeds, Jody Wagner, Mount Vernon Democratic Committee, Mount Vernon Democratic Committee Straw Poll, Primaries, Terry McAuliffe, Virginia, Virginia Attorney General, Virginia Lieutenant Governor, Virginia Secretary of Finance
This past weekend, at the Mount Vernon Democratic Committee straw poll, Democratic candidates for Virginia Governor, Virginia Lieutenant Governor and Virginia Attorney General made their cases to the voters and faced their first hurdle toward winning statewide office.
Every candidate showed up with just one glaring exception: Gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe, who didn’t even bother to show. For someone who’s shown so little interest in Virginia politics before he decided to run for Governor, skipping one of the state’s biggest cattle calls doesn’t bode well for his campaign.
In McAuliffe’s absence, Brian Moran brought down the house and won the straw poll in a landslide:
83 – Brian Moran
43 – Creigh Deeds
33 – Terry McAuliffe
You know what they say–if you don’t show up and ask for people’s votes, you won’t get them.
For Lieutenant Governor, Jody Wagner–VA’s Secretary of Finance–beat the other contenders by a healthy margin:
62 – Jody Wagner
44 – Jon Bowerbank
18 – Pat Edmonson
15 – Mike Signer
10 – Rich Savage
Delegate Steve Shannon, the only Democrat running for Attorney General, won universal praise for his campaign.
As it stands, the Gubernatorial race seems to be shaping up as a two-man contest between McAuliffe and Moran, while Deeds is quickly fading. One of the problems for Deeds is that he’s holding onto his seat in the Virginia Senate, which means he’s bound by campaign finance laws in terms of when and how he can raise and spend campaign cash.
Couple that with the fact that Deeds’ base is in sparsely-populated Southern Virginia–as opposed to Moran and McAuliffe, who hail from heavily-populated Northern Virginia–and you have a recipe for near-certain defeat.
McAuliffe is the well-known, well-funded establishment candidate while Moran is the progressive underdog; that’s the current dynamic of the race and it leaves nearly no room for Deeds. He should have a bigger role in the race, considering that he ran for statewide office in 2005 and lost by an extraordinarily slim margin; unfortunately for him, he’s just not out there aggressively selling his angle enough. Unless he takes some drastic action to change that, the dynamics of this race will leave him on the sidelines.
The Democratic Primary is June 9th. In all likelihood–barring some major change in the race–I will be voting for Brian Moran. But a lot can happen between now and the primary, so this certainly isn’t set in stone just yet.
On The Web:
Filed under: Conservatives, Economics, Governors | Tags: Bobby Jindal, Economic Stimulus Package, Greed, Louisiana, Unemployment
Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal is turning down $90 million in stumulus funds that would have helped 25,000 Louisianans in need:
In all, Jindal turned away nearly $100 million in federal aid for his state’s unemployed residents. Further, as the National Employment Law Project projected on Febuary 13, EUC extension alone would have benefited 24,981 Louisiana residents. Jindal justified his decision by claiming that expanding unemployment benefits would result in tax increases for businesses.
[...]
But it is not clear why participating in the expanded unemployment insurance program would result in tax increases for business. By Jindal’s own estimate, the recovery package would have funded his state’s unemployment expansion for three years, at which point the state could — if it chose to do so — phase out the program.
As New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin suggested earlier today, perhaps Jindal’s presidential ambitions are “clouding” his judgement.
So there you have it–the ‘Party of No’ in action. To Bobby Jindal, keeping corporate taxes low is worth leaving 25,000 of his own citizens out in the cold.
Of course, Jindal’s supposedly-principled opposition to the stimulus won’t keep him from taking the rest of the funds slated for his state; he’s just rejecting that which would have helped those with the most need.
I think they have a saying down there in Louisiana for something like this–’Heckuva job, Bobby.’
Filed under: 2008 Election, 2010 Election, Conservatives, Governors, House, Senate | Tags: 110th Congress, 2008, 2010, Congress, Democrats, Jay Nixon, Kenny Hulshof, Matt Blunt, Missouri State Treasurer, Primaries, Republicans, Roy Blunt, Sarah Steelman, Tom DeLay
Former Missouri State Treasurer–and failed 2008 Gubernatorial candidate–Sarah Steelman will challenge former House Minority Whip Roy Blunt for MO’s open Senate seat in 2010:
“I’m in the process of laying the groundwork that I need to get done before making an official announcement,” Steelman told POLITICO. “I’m definitely strongly leaning towards doing this.”
[...]
In the interview, Steelman took some sharp jabs at Blunt, describing the seven-term congressman Blunt as being part of the “old-boys’ network” who has spent too much time in Washington.
“Roy Blunt is another white guy in a suit, and I think the public wants change,” Steelman said. “There’s a good old boys’ network out there that’s hard to penetrate… and it’s not always in the best interest of the party or for conservative principles.”
[...]
In an interview with the St. Louis-Dispatch, Blunt flatly said that “Steelman can’t win the primary.”
I smell a bruising primary fight.
Blunt is part of the failed GOP establishment–he was the interim Majority Leader after Tom DeLay’s resignation and served as the #2 Republican in the House during the 110th Congress. In addition, his son Matt served an unremarkable term as Missouri’s Governor.
But Steelman’s record leaves a bit to be desired. She served one term as the State Treasurer before losing the Republican Gubernatorial primary to Kenny Hulshof, who went on to lose to Democrat Jay Nixon in the general election.
Personally, I think Steelman would be a better bet if for no other reason than all of the political baggage Blunt brings into the race. No matter what, though, it looks like there’s a bloody primary fight brewing, which could very well cripple the GOP’s shot at holding onto this seat.
Filed under: Conservatives, Economics, Government, Governors, Progressives | Tags: Bobby Jindal, Congress, Democrats, Economic Stimulus Package, Job Creation, Jobs, Republicans, Unemployment
If Republican oppose the stimulus package so much, then I think they should put their money where their mouth is by refusing to accept any stimulus funds for their state:
Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, a potential 2012 GOP presidential candidate, has suggested his state may not be interested in all of the roughly $4 billion allotted to it in the economic stimulus package to be signed by President Obama today.
“We’ll have to review each program, each new dollar to make sure that we understand what are the conditions, what are the strings and see whether it’s beneficial for Louisiana to use those dollars,” Jindal said
Every Republican Congressman and Senator–save three–should be telling their state’s Governors not to accept any federal funds from the stimulus. None. If they don’t want the money–and the jobs and economic recovery they will bring–then they shouldn’t accept them.
In fact, only one or two states would need to do this. Then we could compare those states to the states that accepted funding and see where their economies end up a few years out from now. Sure, there’s a chance they’ll be alright–but with so many states facing budget shortfalls and cuts in vital services and infrastructure, I highly doubt it. I bet that any states refusing stimulus funds will be worse off economically than any states that does accept funding.
Of course, this is all moot. Most Republican Governors–in defiance of their doctrinaire national party–know that the stimulus is vital to their states and will accept the money; I doubt even Bobby Jindal can keep his hands off of everything. And thus cements the hypocrisy of the GOP–they’ll rail against the stimulus while it’s being considered, but gladly come hat-in-hand once the funds are approved and ready to go.
Filed under: 2010 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Government, Governors, House, Progressives, Senate | Tags: 2010, Congress, Democrats, Jennifer Brunner, Lee Fisher, Ohio, Ohio Lieutenant Governor, Ohio Secretary of State, Republicans, Rob Portman, Ted Strickland, Tim Ryan
Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner will run for Ohio’s open Senate seat in 2010:
Democrats have their first candidate in the Ohio Senate race to succeed retiring GOP Sen. George Voinovich.
Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner will announce that she’s running, according to a senior Ohio Democratic operative. She will declare 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.
Brunner will face a primary challenger in Ohio’s Lieutenant Governor, Lee Fisher, who has also announced his candidacy for Senate:
Fisher will be making his announcement this evening at the Ohio Statehouse in Columbus with Gov. Ted Strickland by his side. Strickland will be endorsing Fisher — high-profile backing that will test his own political clout heading into the 2010 election.
Fisher had earlier formed an exploratory committee to begin raising money for the campaign.
The primary will set up a clash between two of the party’s leading statewide officials in the race to succeed Sen. George Voinovich, the two-term Republican who recently announced he would not seek reelection in 2010.
Fisher will also pick up the endorsement of Rep. Tim Ryan.
Whoever wins the primary will face likely Republican candidate–and former Bush administration official–Rob Portman.
I don’t know why the OH GOP thinks running a Bush protege is a good idea, but I certainly won’t stand in the way of them handing the Democrats their 60th Senate seat.
Filed under: 2010 Election, Corruption, Government, Governors, Progressives, Scandal, Senate | Tags: Congress, Crime, Democrats, Illinois, Perjury, Rod Blagojevich, Roland Burris
He hasn’t even been in office for two months and Roland Burris is already under investigation:
Sangamon County state’s attorney John Schmidt is reviewing documents provided by Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan to determine whether perjury charges should be filed against U.S. Sen. Roland Burris.
[...]
Burris caused an uproar by releasing an affidavit in which he supplemented his testimony before a legislative impeachment committee that asked whether he had had any contact with anyone close to former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, including the former governor’s brother Rob Blagojevich, who was in charge of fundraising for the impeached governor.
Burris did not mention any contact with Rob Blagojevich in his testimony before the impeachment committee but said in his affidavit dated Feb. 4 that the governor’s brother had, in fact, asked him to raise money for the former governor before Blagojevich appointed Burris to the Senate.
In other words, Burris deliberately withheld the fact that he was approached by Blagojevich’s camp and asked for money in exchange for a Senate appointment.
Unless the Senate gets fed up with Burris’ antics and expels him, it looks like Roland Burris will be an embarrassment to the Democratic Party and the state of Illinois until at least early 2011.
Even if he’s around that long, though, there is a silver lining–this scandal should make it easier for Burris to be defeated in a primary, ensuring that the Democrats put fourth a competent Senate candidate in the 2010 elections.
UPDATE: It looks like Burris is being sent to the Senate Ethics Committee.
UPDATE II: Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is calling for Burris to be expelled from the Senate.
Filed under: 2010 Election, Breaking, Conservatives, Governors, Progressives, Senate | Tags: Republicans, Democrats, New Hampshire, 2010, Judd Gregg, John Lynch, J. Bonnie Newman, Bonnie Newman
New Hampshire Governor John Lynch has chosen J. Bonnie Newman to fill the rest of Judd Gregg’s term in the Senate:
Newman was described yesterday as tough, independent and smart by longtime associates excited that she was in position to become the next U.S. senator from New Hampshire.
Newman, 63, was Sen. Judd Gregg’s chief of staff when he was in the U.S. House in the 1980s. She has a long resume in the private and public sectors, highlighted by her roles as assistant to the President for management and administration in the George H.W. Bush White House, an assistant commerce secretary in the Reagan administration, interim president of the University of New Hampshire and executive dean at the Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.
[...]
Newman has also been a director of the Business and Industry Association of New Hampshire and president of the New England Council. She is currently a director of FairPoint Communications Inc.
Newman is saying that she will only fill the remainder of Gregg’s term and will not run for re-election in 2010; she is also saying she will not endorse a candidate in that election.
What does this mean for 2010? It’s hard to say. It might be easier for Democrats to win this seat now that they won’t face an opponent with the benefits of incumbency. On the other hand, an open seat gives the Republicans a chance to run someone with a clean record and few connections to the failed national Republican Party, who could be difficult to defeat.
