DSCC

Two New Polls Show Noriega In Dead Heat With Cornyn In Texas

Matthew Miller, DSCC

Republican Senator below 50 in both Research 2000, Rasmussen Reports polls, only leads by four

Two new polls released this week show John Cornyn in serious trouble, leading state Representative Rick Noriega by a mere four points, and never breaking the 50% threshold. In a Rasmussen Reports poll, Cornyn leads Noriega 47% to 43%, and in a Research 2000 poll, he leads 48% to 44%. The margin of error for each poll is four points, putting Cornyn in a dead heat with Noriega.

“One of the great myths of 2008 is that Republican Senators in supposed red states can thumb their noses at their constituents’ demand for a change in the way business is done in Washington without paying the price at home,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “On critical issues like children’s healthcare, education and help for struggling homeowners, John Cornyn has turned his back on Texans for six years, and now Texans are returning the favor. If these polls tell us anything, it’s that John Cornyn should be very nervous because Texans are ready for new leadership.”

In April 2007, a poll conducted for the DSCC had Cornyn leading a generic Democrat 47 to 38, but Noriega – a state legislator and Afghanistan veteran – has closed that gap to four after his successful primary victory. In that same 2007 survey, 41% of Texans viewed Cornyn favorably and 16% viewed him unfavorably. While his favorability ratings have increased slightly – both polls have that figure at 50% - his negative ratings have more than doubled. In the Rasmussen poll, 37% of Texans have an unfavorable opinion of Cornyn, and in the Research 2000 poll, a full 41% view Cornyn unfavorably.

Cornyn Voted Against Children’s Health Care Six Times in 2007. John Cornyn voted six times in 2007 to block a bipartisan bill to expand health care to an additional 462,000 children in Texas. [Families USA Report; Vote 307, 8/2/07; Vote 352, 9/27/07; Vote 353, 9/27/07; Vote 401, 10/31/07; Vote 402, 11/1/07; Vote 403, 11/1/07]

Cornyn Tried to Slash $9 Billion in Funding for, Education, Medicare, other Domestic Priorities – And Then Voted Against The Entire Bill. John Cornyn voted to slash $9 billion in funding for essential priorities in the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and Education, such as No Child Left Behind funding, research for medical cures, child care assistance for working families, and Pell Grants. After his attempt to slash funding failed, Cornyn was one of only 19 Senators to vote against final passage, splitting with Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. [Vote 390, 10/23/07; Vote 391, 10/23/07; CQ Today, 10/23/07; Los Angeles Times, 2/6/07; Education Week, 2/12/07]

As the mortgage crisis costs Texas families, Cornyn voted to do nothing. John Cornyn voted against the Foreclosure Prevention Act which would have directly prevented a quarter of the expected Texas foreclosures and the resulting lost value to surrounding homeowners. It would have also helped communities turn over foreclosed properties so that they don’t sit unoccupied, attracting crime and blight and further hurting homeowners. Cornyn was not even willing to debate the merits of the bill or try to change the provisions he didn’t like – he voted to block the bill from being considered. [Vote 35, 2/28/08]

Cornyn Twice Voted Against Amendment To Set Minimum Amount of Time Between Troop Deployments. In September 2007, Cornyn voted against Senator Jim Webb’s bipartisan proposal to specify minimum periods between deployments of U.S. troops in Iraq. Specifically, the Webb amendment would have extended home stays for troops for periods at least as long as their last combat tours before they can be redeployed. Cornyn also opposed the measure in July 2007. [Vote 341, 9/19/07; Washington Post, 9/19/07; Vote 241, 7/11/07; Richmond Times Dispatch, 7/10/07]

Smith Lying About Merkley's Record In New Attack Ad

Matthew Miller, DSCC

It’s Clear GOP Senator Fears Merkley Most, Trying to Influence Close Primary Election

Merkley Victory In Primary Would Send Smith Home to Oregon

Last night Gordon Smith began airing an ad solely attacking Jeff Merkley and lying about Merkley’s record. It's clear from this new ad that Smith fears Merkley most and is trying to influence the outcome of the primary election. The truth? While Jeff Merkley refused to take a dime from state lobbyists or special interests during the Oregon legislative session, Gordon Smith was in Washington raising hundreds of thousands of dollars from special interests and then voting their way in the Senate.

“Gordon Smith is lying about Jeff Merkley’s record because he knows that Jeff Merkley can beat him in November,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “The truth is that Smith took hundreds of thousands of dollars from the oil and pharmaceutical industries and their lobbyists in Washington, and then voted to protect their profits instead of giving lower prices to consumers. Smith knows he can’t defend his record, so instead he’s launching false negative ads against Jeff Merkley.”

Merkley led historic bipartisan legislation in the Oregon legislature to ban gifts from lobbyists, close the revolving door for legislators, and restore an independent Ethics Commission. Merkley even went beyond the rules for federal candidates and refused to accept any funds during session from state lobbyists and special interests.

Smith Has Taken Over $296,000 From Lobbying Industry Over His Career.> Since his first run for Congress, Smith has taken $296,871 from the lobbying industry. [Center For Responsive Politics]

Gordon Smith and his Friends in the Oil Industry

Smith Has Taken Over $276,000 From the Oil and Gas Industry. Over his career Smith has taken $276,825 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry. [Center for Responsive Politics]

Smith Has Voted to Protect Oil Company Profits and Give Them Tax Breaks Seven Times. Since coming to Congress, Smith has voted at least seven times to protect billions of dollars in tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies already reaping record profits. Smith’s votes included a vote last year that would have gutted a provision of the energy bill that rolled back oil and gas tax breaks in favor of renewable fuels. In 2006, Smith voted for provide $5 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for the oil and gas industry and in 2005 Smith voted for a bill that contained $9 billion in tax breaks and subsidies. Smith also twice voted against imposing a windfall profits tax on the sale of crude oil above $40 a barrel. Smith even voted for the 2003 energy bill which contained $11.9 billion in tax breaks to the oil and gas industry. [Vote 222, 6/21/07; Senate Finance Committee Markup, 6/19/07; Dow Jones, 6/19/07; AP, 6/19/07; Vote 118, 5/11/06;Vote 331, 11/17/05; Vote 341, 11/17/05; Vote 213, 7/29/05; Houston Chronicle, 11/17/05; Las Vegas Review-Journal, 11/18/05; Environment and Energy Daily¸ 11/18/05; Vote 456, 11/21/03]

· Smith Voted to Gut Big Oil Tax Package And Let Big Oil Keep Their Billions. In June 2007, the Senate considered a bipartisan package to provide tax incentives for alternative energy development by taxing big oil and gas companies. Smith voted to impose a trigger that gutted the package and let the big oil companies keep the $29 billion they would have been forced to give up to fund alternative energy. [Senate Finance Committee Markup, 6/19/07; Dow Jones, 6/19/07; AP, 6/19/07; Chicago Tribune, 6/21/07; Vote 222, 6/21/07]

· Smith Voted Against Collecting Nearly $11 Billion From Big Oil Companies to Fund Alternative Energy. In June 2007, the Senate Finance Committee approved a bill to provide $32.1 billion in tax incentives for alternative energy development by taxing big oil and gas companies. Before the package passed, though, Smith voted for an amendment that would have allowed the oil and gas companies, who are already reaping record profits, to keep $10.7 billion of that revenue. [Senate Finance Committee Markup, 6/19/07; Dow Jones, 6/19/07; AP, 6/19/07]

· Smith Voted for $5 Billion Tax Break for Big Oil in 2006. In May 2006, Smith voted to provide $5 billion in tax breaks to big oil companies over five years. This money could have been used to provide tax cuts to the middle class that were instead eliminated. [Vote 118, 5/11/06; Washington Post, 4/26/06; Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 5/11/06; New York Times, 12/9/05]

· Smith Provided More than $9 Billion in Tax Breaks to Big Oil in 2005. In July 2005, Smith voted for a pork-riddled energy bill that gave billions to the oil and gas industries, which were already making more than enough money as gas prices were rising. Oil and utility companies such spent at least $367 million pushing Congress to pass the energy bill, which the St. Louis Post-Dispatch criticized as “unlikely to affect prices now.” [Vote 213, 7/29/05; CNN, 7/28/05; Wall Street Journal, 7/18/06; AP, 7/21/06; New York Times, 3/27/06; Bloomberg, 7/27/05; St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 7/31/05]

· Smith Twice Rejected Windfall Profits Tax for Big Oil in 2005. In November 2005, Smith voted against imposing a temporary 50% tax on oil company profits from the sale of any crude oil above $40 a barrel. Revenues from the tax would be used to provide income tax rebates to consumers. The same day, Smith voted against a separate but similar windfall tax amendment that would use the revenue to provide a $100 income tax credit for every personal exemption. [Vote 331, 11/17/05; Vote 341, 11/17/05; Houston Chronicle, 11/17/05; Las Vegas Review-Journal, 11/18/05; Environment and Energy Daily¸ 11/18/05]

· Smith Voted for an Energy Bill that Gave the Energy Companies Big Tax Breaks, While Shortchanging Renewables. Smith voted to invoke cloture on a Bush-backed energy bill that gave $11.9 billion in tax breaks to the oil and gas industry, $2.5 billion to encourage “clean coal” plants and provide liability protection for ethanol producers for using the dangerous additive MTBE. The bill would also make it easier for utility mergers and ease ownership on who could own a power-generating utility. [Vote 456, 11/21/03]

Smith Voted Against Measures to Promote Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions or at Least Three Times. Since coming to Congress Smith has voted against measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at least three times. [Vote 148, 6/22/05; Vote 149, 6/22/05; Vote 420, 10/30/03]

Smith Has Voted Against Measures to Increase Fuel Economy Standards or to Encourage Fuel Efficiency Four Times. Since coming to Congress Smith has voted against measures to increase fuel economy standards at least four times. Smith’s votes included a vote against an amendment to boost Café standards by 40 MPG in both 2005 and 2003 and a vote to halve the subsidies for car companies to research fuel efficient engines. [Vote 157, 6/23/05; Vote 309, 7/29/03; Washington Times, 7/30/03; www.LCV.org; Vote 309, 7/29/03; Vote 48, 3/13/02]

Smith Voted to Allow Drilling in ANWR Three Times. Since coming to Congress Smith has voted to allow drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge at least three times. [Vote 74, 3/16/06; Anchorage Daily News, 3/17/06; Vote 364, 12/21/05; AP, 12/20/05; Vote 303, 11/3/05; Los Angeles Times, 11/4/05]

Gordon Smith and his Friends in the Big Drug Industry

Smith Has Taken Over $271,000 From the Pharmaceuticals Industry. Over his career Smith has taken $271,959 in campaign contributions from the pharmaceuticals industry. [Center for Responsive Politics]

Smith Twice Voted To Kill Amendments to Allow Government to Negotiate Drug Prices Through Medicare. Smith has voted against lowering drug prices by allowing Medicare to negotiate with drug companies for lower prices at least twice. In November 2005, Smith voted to kill an amendment that would have allowed the federal government to negotiate drug prices. The amendment which was introduced by Maine Republican Olympia Snowe, would have authorized the Secretary of HHS to negotiate prescription drug prices through Medicare, but specifically not have allowed him to set prices. In March 2005, Smith voted against a similar measure. [Vote 302, 11/3/05; Vote 60, 3/17/05]

Smith Opposed Every Attempt to Fix Flawed Medicare Part-D Plan…

Smith Voted to Kill Amendment that Would have Required Part-D Enrollees to be Made Aware of Doughnut Hole. In November 2005, Smith voted to kill an amendment to the Budget Reconciliation bill that would have required enrollees in the Medicare Part D to be made aware of possible coverage gaps. The amendment would have required enrollees to sign a statement before enrolling that stated they were aware of the potential gap in coverage created by the “doughnut hole” in between levels of coverage, causing many enrollees to shoulder the full burden of the prescription drug costs. [Vote 297, 11/3/05]

Smith Voted To Kill An Amendment That Provided $60 Billion to Eliminate Gap in Coverage for Drug Costs Between $4,500 and $5,800 Annually. In 2003, Smith voted to kill an amendment that aimed to eliminate a feature of the prescription drug bill that denied coverage for drug costs between $4,500 and $5,800 annually. The amendment would extend prescription drug cost sharing between Medicare and beneficiaries up to $5,800, when full catastrophic coverage would take over. “We should not have a plan that stops and starts,” Boxer said, advocating an extra $60 billion to close the gap. [Vote 236, 6/24/03; AP, 6/24/03]

Smith Voted Against Extension of Medicare Part-D Enrollment Four Times. Since 2003, Smith has voted to block attempts to extend the enrolment deadline for Medicare Part-D four times. In March 2006, Smith voted against an amendment that would have created a deficit-neutral reserve fund to adjust the budget and pay for the impact of any legislation to extend Medicare’s prescription drug program open enrollment period to the end of 2006 and allow a one-time change of plan enrollment during 2006. Earlier in 2006 and in 2005 Smith voted against other amendments that would have removed the penalty for seniors who did not sigh up for the drug plan by the deadline. [Vote 49, 3/15/06; Vote 5, 2/2/06; Vote 342, 11/17/05; Vote 234, 6/24/03; Hartford Courant, 6/25/03]

· Smith Voted Against Creation of Fund to Pay for Extension of Medicare Part D Enrollment Deadline. In March 2006, Smith voted against an amendment that would have created a deficit-neutral reserve fund to adjust the budget and pay for the impact of any legislation to extend Medicare’s prescription drug program open enrollment period to the end of 2006 and allow a one-time change of plan enrollment during 2006. [Vote 49, 3/15/06]

· Smith Voted Against Improvements to Medicare Part D, Including Extending the Enrolment Period. In February 2006, Smith voted to kill and amendment that would have made several changes to the Medicare Part D prescription drug plan. The amendment would have extended the initial enrollment period for the Medicare prescription drug benefit through 2006. It also would have made program changes, including providing for federal reimbursement to pharmacies, states and individuals, costs that should have been covered by the prescription drug benefit but were incorrectly charged during rollout. [Vote 5, 2/2/06]

· Smith Voted To Kill Amendment that Would Have Extended Medicare Prescription Drug Enrolment Deadline. In November 2005 Smith voted to kill an amendment to the Tax Reconciliation Bill that would have extended the enrollment period for the Medicare Prescription Drug plan. The amendment offered by Senator Nelson of Florida, would have extended the deadline by six months, giving seniors until the end of 2006 to enroll. [Vote 342, 11/17/05]

· Smith Voted Against Allowing Open Enrollment in Medicare Drug Plans Through 2008. In 2003, Smith voted to kill an amendment that allowed open enrollment in Medicare drug plans through 2008. The amendment extended, until the end of 2007, the period for beneficiaries to enter or exit the Medicare prescription drug plans and Medicare Advantage plan. The amendment failed 55-42. [Vote 234, 6/24/03]

Schaffer/Abramoff Fail As Law To End Human Rights Abuses Enacted

Matthew Miller, DSCC

Abramoff lobbied against extending U.S. protections to Mariana islands, Schaffer carried out Abramoff strategy in attacking human rights advocates, opposing change

President Bush today signed a bill that overwhelmingly passed both houses of Congress to extend U.S. labor law to the U.S. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. In the most notorious Washington lobbying scandal in recent history, the islands hired jailed lobbyist Jack Abramoff to represent them in opposing the change, and Abramoff enlisted the help of Republican members of Congress including Bob Schaffer, who carried out a strategy that had been literally designed by Abramoff himself.

“The exploitation of workers on the Mariana islands comes to a close today, but only because Congress finally rejected attempts by jailed lobbyist Jack Abramoff and his crony Bob Schaffer to allow the human rights abuses to continue,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “Abramoff was able to delay this much-needed reform for years by corruptly influencing the Republican Congress, but with Abramoff safely behind bars and Schaffer safely at home in Colorado, it finally passed this year. Now that an overwhelming bipartisan majority and the president have endorsed this reform, maybe Bob Schaffer will apologize for his shameful assistance of a corrupt lobbyist who was helping the factories exploit their workers.”

Bill an explicit repudiation of the Shaffer-Abramoff position. The new law signed today extends U.S. immigration laws to the Northern Mariana islands and “was a response to concerns about unfair immigration policies and labor practices for workers in the islands’ garment industry. In part, it is also a response to the legacy of convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, whose clients included the territorial government.” [CQ, 4/29/08]
Schaffer Took Trip to Marianas Islands Funded by Jack Abramoff Front Group. Last week, it was reported that a finding trip to the North Mariana Islands taken by Schaffer was partly arranged by the firm of former lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Schaffer, along with his wife, stayed for free at a “palm-studded beach resort” and met with clients of Preston- Gates, according to a copy of the trip’s agenda archived in Schaffer’s congressional papers. Schaffer’s $13,000 trip was paid for by the based Traditional Values Coalition, which Schaffer described as a religious group “concerned with human rights.” Later investigations showed that TVC was a front group for Abramoff’s lobbying operation. [Denver Post, 04/10/08]
1999 Memo Linked the Schaffer Trip to North Mariana Island to Abramoff’s Firm. The AP reported that a 1999 memo from Schaffer’s staff indicated that Abramoff’s lobbying firm arranged the travel. The AP said, “His (Schaffer) staff let him know that the travel arrangements had been made by a lobbying firm and they were looking into what role the firm had in the trip, according to a memo from Schaffer’s congressional archive first reported in The Denver Post. The firm was Preston-Gates, Abramoff’s firm, and Schaffer’s staff noted that the schedule for the trip included a lunch with current and former Preston-Gates clients -- including U.S. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands government.” [AP, 04/11/08]
Schaffer Followed Abramoff’s Strategy for Combating Opponents of Marianas Island Textile Manufactures. In 1998, Abramoff sent a memo to Willie Tan, a Marianas Islands textile tycoon that laid out a strategy for combating efforts by Interior Department officials to change labor standards on the island after reports of worker abuse. In the memo Abramoff wrote, that his strategy would be to “defund, or more likely, severely limit the activities of the Office of Insular Affairs. This office, led by (then-OIA boss Allen) Stayman, has been the main source of difficulty for the CNMI.” Abramoff said that they would prepare “questions and factual backup for the friendly Senators and Congressmen…outlining our hearing campaign and ensuring our lead friends in the House and Senate are ready to conduct our game plan.” Then in a 1999 hearing Schaffer followed Abramoff’s strategy aggressively questioning OIA officials about a memo’s that they had prepared on the reported labor abuses on the island. In a second hearing in 2000, Schaffer again aggressively questioned OIA officials about how a memo from Abramoff had been leaked to the press. [Denver Post, 04/12/08; TPM, 4/15/08]
Schaffer Twice Endorsed Abramoff Ally That After Winning Election Pressured to Have Abramoff’s Contract Renewed. Last week it was reported that Schaffer supported Benigno Fitial, a candidate for Speaker of the House of the North Mariana Islands and an ally of Abramoff. Schaffer endorsed Fitial in ads in the island newspaper. According to the Denver Post, Schaffer’s endorsement “was part of a concerted and public campaign by Republicans on the House Committee on Natural Resources to boost Fitial’s public career when he became key to extending a multimillion-dollar lobbying contract for Abramoff from the island’s government.” After Fitial was elected speaker he pressured the Governor of the Marianas Islands to renew Abramoff’s lobbying contract. [Denver Post, 04/11/08]

New Ad: Smith Stands With Special Interests, Not With Oregon

Matthew Miller, DSCC

New DSCC television ad responds to Smith’s negative attacks; view the ad here

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee today responded to Gordon Smith’s attack ads against Democratic Senate candidates with a new television advertisement exposing Smith’s support for tax breaks for special interests that ship jobs overseas, big oil companies, and the wealthy instead of help for Oregon families.

“Instead of supporting Oregon families at a time when they need it most, Gordon Smith stands up for the special interests that ship jobs overseas and keep gas prices through the roof,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “Gordon Smith knows he’ll lose a campaign that centers on his record in Washington, so he’s already started running personal attacks rather than debate his history of siding with the special interests.”

The new ad can be viewed here.

DSCC “Losing Ground”

Copy/Visual

Documentation

Narrator: In Oregon, Gordon Smith talks about common ground…

Visual: Common Ground

Smith: “I’ll Find Common Ground.” In his first campaign ad of 2008, Gordon Smith states, “…no matter who our next President is, him or her, I’ll find common ground for the change we need.” [Smith Campaign Ad, 4/29/08]

Narrator: while working families are losing ground.

Visual: Losing Ground

Thousands of Oregon Homes “Are Being Foreclosed Or Are On the Verge of Foreclosure.” In March 2008, The Sunday Oregonian reported, “In Portland, 963 homes are being foreclosed or are on the verge of foreclosure, according to RealtyTrac, a firm that tracks foreclosures. In Multnomah County, the mortgages of 3,191 homes are in distress, RealtyTrac says.” [The Sunday Oregonian, 3/23/08]

Headline: “Dealing with the downturn” In April 2008, The Oregonian reported, “Much has happened in the past year to erase the double-digit profits that home sellers were taking for granted. The number of houses on the market, for instance, has increased almost sixfold since 2006, giving buyers the upper hand. Houses are lingering on the market far longer than they did two or three years ago. The multiple offers and bidding wars common among prospective buyers as recently as 2005 have been replaced by sellers trimming asking prices 10 percent and more to keep buyers from shopping elsewhere.” [The Oregonian¸4/10/08]

Economic Downturn is Leading to Job Losses in Oregon. In March, a factory that produces manufactured housing announced plans to shut down operations, calling it “a business decision driven by significant housing and general economic market factors.” The Silverton plant employs 160 people. [AP, 3/26/08]

Narrator: Because in Washington, Smith has stood with George Bush and the special interests…

Visual: Bush & Special Interests

Smith Votes With Bush 85% of the Time. In the last seven years, Gordon Smith has voted with President Bush 85% of the time. In Bush’s first term, though, Smith supported Bush an average of 94% of the time. [CQ Member Profile, accessed 5/5/08]

Smith Has Received Over $275,000 From Oil and Gas Industry. Over the course of his federal career, Smith has received at least $276,825 from the oil and gas industry. [Center for Responsive Politics, accessed 5/5/08]

Smith Has Received Over $270,000 From Pharmaceutical/Health Products Industry. Over the course of his federal career, Smith has received at least $271,959 from the pharmaceutical/health products industry. [Center for Responsive Politics, accessed 5/5/08]

Smith Has Received Nearly $300,000 From Lobbyists. Over the course of his federal career, Smith has received at least $296,871 from lobbyists. [Center for Responsive Politics, accessed 5/5/08]

Narrator: Supporting tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas…

Visual: Jobs Going Overseas
Vote 63, 3/17/05; Vote 83, 5/5/04

Smith Voted To Maintain The Deferral Tax Subsidy For Companies That Offshore Manufacturing. In 2004 and 2005, Smith voted twice in opposition to amendments that would repeal the deferral tax subsidy for companies that outsource production of goods for sale in the U.S. market. In 2005, Senator Smith voted against a Dorgan (D-ND) amendment that would “repeal the tax subsidy for certain domestic companies which move manufacturing operations and American jobs offshore.” In 2004, Smith voted to table, effectively killing, an amendment that would “partially repeal a tax deferral regulation for U.S. multinational companies by requiring those companies to pay federal income taxes on foreign factories when goods are reimported back into the United States,” according to CQ. [Vote #63, 3/17/05; CQ Floor Votes, 3/17/05; Vote #83, 5/5/04; CQ Floor Votes, 5/5/04]

Vote “Upheld A Subsidy In The Tax Code” For Companies That Offshore Manufacturing, Then Sell The Product Back The U.S. As described by the Kansas City Star, Smith and a majority of Senators “upheld a subsidy in the tax code that enables U.S. corporations to defer taxes on profits resulting from sales by foreign subsidiaries in the United States.” The Dorgan amendment, which Smith voted to kill, “sought to end deferral in cases where a company moves operations overseas, makes the same product, then sells the product in the United States just as it did before going offshore.” The Kansas City Star was referring to Sen. Dorgan’s 2004 amendment to the corporate tax bill. [Kansas City Star, 5/8/04]

Narrator: tax cuts for the wealthy …

Visual: Tax Cuts For Wealthy
Vote 196, 5/23/03; Vote 170, 5/26/01

Smith Cast Crucial Vote for Bush’s Final 2003 Tax Cut Package. In May 2003, Smith cast a crucial vote to approve the final version of President Bush’s $330 billion tax cut plan, which passed 50-50 with Vice President Cheney breaking the tie. The bill benefited taxpayers with income from investments, lowering taxes on capital gains and stock dividends to 15% Previously, investors paid as much as 38.6% tax on dividends and 20% on capital gains. The bill also accelerated the 2001 income tax cuts. [Vote 196, 5/23/03; CQ Floor Votes, 5/23/03; AP, 5/23/03]

Smith Supported 2001 Bush Tax Cut. Smith voted for the final 2001 Bush tax cuts, which reduced taxes by $1.35 trillion through 2010 with income tax rate cuts, relief of the marriage penalty, a phase-out of the federal estate tax, doubling the child tax credit, and providing incentives for retirement savings. The top income tax rate of 39.6% would drop to 35% under the bill. [Vote 170, 5/26/01; CQ Floor Votes, 5/26/01; Chicago Tribune, 5/27/01]

Bush Tax Cuts Shifted Tax Burden to the Middle Class. Reporting on a Congressional Budget Office Study in 2004, the Washington Post noted that “President Bush's tax cuts have shifted federal tax payments from the richest Americans to a wide swath of middle-class families.” The CBO report “found that the wealthiest 20 percent, whose incomes averaged $182,700 in 2001, saw their share of federal taxes drop from 64.4 percent of total tax payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year. The top 1 percent…saw their share fall to 20.1 percent of the total, from 22.2 percent.” On the other hand, “taxpayers with incomes from around $51,500 to around $75,600 saw their share of federal tax payments increase. Households earning around $75,600 saw their tax burden jump the most, from 18.7 percent of all taxes to 19.5 percent.” [Washington Post, 8/13/04]

Narrator: tax giveaways to big oil.

Visual: Big Oil Giveaways
Vote 213, 7/29/05; Vote 332, 11/17/05

Smith Voted For Billions In Tax Breaks For Big Oil And Gas Companies. Smith voted to adopt the final 2005 Energy Bill, which provided for $14.6 billion in energy-related tax incentives, according to Congressional Quarterly Weekly. The tax package, “provides far less support for alternative energy and efficiency than many lawmakers had urged,” with 58% going to “traditional energy industries, including oil, natural gas, coal, electric utilities and nuclear power,” according to the Washington Post. Specifically, “the bill provides $2.6 billion in tax benefits for oil and gas production and refining.” [Vote 213, 7/29/05; Washington Post, 7/28/05; Congressional Quarterly Weekly, 8/1/05]

Smith Voted Against Repealing Billions In Tax Benefits For Oil And Gas Companies. In November 2005, Smith voted against an amendment to the Tax Reconciliation Bill that would repeal certain tax benefits relating to oil and gas wells intangible drilling and development costs. According to CQ Today, the amendment “would have eliminated an existing tax break that allows oil and gas companies to write off in a single year so-called intangible drilling costs of exploration and development. Such costs include items like labor, fuel, and repairs to drilling equipment. Other businesses typically have to recover such costs through depletion or depreciation. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that the entire provision costs $2.4 billion over five years, though the Feinstein amendment would apply only to major integrated oil companies.” [Vote 332, 11/17/05, CQ Floor Votes, 11/17/05; CQ Today, 11/17/05]

Narrator: Gordon Smith says he’s independent…but his record says different.

Visual: Independent?

Smith Claims He Is “Thinking Independently.” In his campaign ad, Smith says, “I’ve shown a better way, thinking independently…” [Smith Campaign Ad, 4/29/08]

Smith Led Bush’s Oregon Re-election Effort. In 2004, Smith served as Co-Chair of the Bush-Cheney ’04 Oregon campaign and was one of Bush’s top national fundraisers. “President Bush's steady leadership is resonating with the people of Oregon,” Smith said at the opening of the Bush-Cheney ’04 Oregon headquarters. “The President's pro-growth policies are rejuvenating our economy.” [Gannett News Service, 9/2/04; Bush-Cheney ’04 Press Release, 4/13/04; AP, 10/17/03]

Narrator: And in today’s economy…we need a Senator on our side.

Visual: We Need a Senator on Our Side

Narrator: The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising.

Visual: Paid for by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, www.dscc.org and not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising.

Baucus leads charge to fix nation's health-care system

Helena Indepentent Record

Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Max Baucus on Tuesday kicked off the first in a series of hearings aimed at a drastic revamp of the American health care system.

With 47 million uninsured Americans and increasing numbers of workers and companies struggling with health insurance costs, Congress must act so that everyone has access to health care, senators and witnesses agreed.

The Montana Democrat noted that the country has debated health care reform for at least a century but that those efforts all failed.

"We must try again," Baucus said. "This committee must prepare for the challenge of building consensus. I am confident that this time we will succeed."

The Finance committee oversees health care programs like Medicare and Medicaid and tax subsidies to finance health care. Baucus said there is widespread agreement on the need for universal coverage and to slow the growth in health care costs, but no answers yet on how to accomplish those goals. That debate will happen next year, he said.

It is way past time for a new course in Iraq and Afghanistan

Union Leader

By Jeanne Shaheen

As Congress takes up another supplemental Iraq war funding bill this week, there will be a lot of debate about skyrocketing foreign and domestic spending, policies that are putting significant strain on our military and how we best support this newest generation of veterans who have sacrificed so much to serve our country. Yet American tax dollars continue to pour into Iraq while the Bush administration and its allies in Congress fail to hold the Iraqis accountable for Iraq.

Meanwhile, top military and civilian commanders, as well as our own intelligence agencies tell us that the war there has left us more vulnerable to terrorist threats than at any time since 2001.

It is long past time for us to set a new course. Over the past six years, instead of pursuing a national security policy that makes us stronger and more secure, our policies have stretched us to the limit and made us less safe. We need to move in a new direction. And we need to start in Iraq.

Our men and women serving in Iraq have done a remarkable job. They have done everything we've asked them to do. We should all be proud of their service.

But our soldiers are in the middle of a civil war as Iraqis fight each other for control. Military and civilian leaders agree the ultimate solution to Iraq is political, not military. Iraqis must find a way to solve these power struggles. The strategy of the last five years has failed to produce the political gains necessary to bring stability to Iraq.

It's time to begin the work of bringing our troops home safely and responsibly -- by setting a firm date to begin, and by planning a phased withdrawal with guidance from our top military advisers that protects the safety of our troops. It's time to send a clear message to Iraq's political and military factions that we will help, but that it is their responsibility to choose their country's future.

Part of Iraq taking responsibility for its own future means paying its own bills. For five years, U.S. taxpayers have funded Iraq reconstruction. As far back as 2003, the Bush administration promised Congress that the U.S. would not foot the entire bill for rebuilding Iraq -- that Iraqi oil revenues would be used. That has not happened. So while the Iraq government is earning more than $50 billion a year in oil revenues, American taxpayers are funding reconstruction in Iraq, spending an estimated $47 billion so far.

If we want an independent Iraq to emerge, we must end Iraq's dependence on U.S. tax dollars, just as we must end its dependence on the U.S. military.

Only by ending our involvement in Iraq's civil war can we more effectively focus the power of the United States military on defeating our most dangerous enemies.

Put energy profiteers over a barrel

Portland Press Herald

It's time to crack down hard on those who gouge Americans while earning record profits.

By Congressman Tom Allen

Families and small businesses evrywhere work hard to pay for fuel. They demand leadership to end shady oil speculation, stop giveaways to Big Oil and impose strict penalties on profiteers to make them pay for the hardship and anxiety they cause.

Since January 2001, crude oil has risen from $25 per barrel to $120 last week. Heating oil has gone from $1.44 to $3.79 per gallon. In Portland, unleaded gasoline has jumped from $1.54 to $3.60 per gallon and diesel from $1.65 to $4.33 per gallon.

Local filling stations and oil dealers are not responsible. Like everyone else, the price crunch hits their bottom lines.

One sector of the economy has reaped a bonanza the last seven years. In 2001, the "Big Five" -- Exxon-Mobil, Shell, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and BP -- posted combined profits of over $40 billion. In 2007, their profits topped $123 billion, with Exxon-Mobil's $40.6 billion smashing the record for highest profit of any U.S. company in history.

On April 24, I wrote the chairmen of the Federal Trade Commission, Commodity Futures Trading Commission and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the secretary of energy and attorney general of the United States.

I again requested an immediate investigation of price fixing, manipulation, rampant speculation and other unscrupulous behavior in the petroleum markets. I called for prosecution and punishment to the full extent of the law of inappropriate or criminal behavior by oil companies, their subsidiaries, their agents or their employees.

To provide some immediate relief, I support suspending the gasoline tax this summer. We can do this and make up the lost revenue needed for our crumbling highways by rolling back tax breaks for Big Oil contained in the 2005 energy bill.

In 2006, I cosponsored the Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act to give the FTC explicit authority to investigate and punish those who artificially inflate the price of energy, especially those at the top of the chain, like Exxon-Mobil.

The bill creates civil penalties that aren't just a slap on the wrist but a trip to the woodshed to make them regret ever gouging a single Maine family or business. The House passed the bill, but Big Oil's friends have stalled it in the Senate.

It's also time to go after off-market energy speculators whose high rolling practices are unseen and unregulated, but affect household budgets from Portland, Maine to Portland, Oregon. These are the greedy crooks behind the California and Enron scandals. I support the Close the Enron Loophole Act to hold them accountable to the same rules that already govern on-market traders.

The 2005 Cheney energy bill gave Big Oil $14 billion of unjustified tax breaks. It was a disgrace then. Today, with Big Oil's astronomical profits, it is an outrage to American taxpayers.

I voted against the 2005 tax breaks and am pleased that the House, under new leadership, voted to roll them back. But in the Senate, Big Oil's allies have blocked a rollback vote.

Udall: Cut gas prices by halting stockpiling

The Daily Sentinel

In an attempt to lower gasoline prices, Rep. Mark Udall, D-Colo., has proposed halting the government’s stockpiling of crude oil in the Department of Energy’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

Udall, who unveiled his proposal Tuesday, said gasoline prices could fall by 25 cents a gallon by not storing away millions of barrels of oil every month.

“We know from history that it’s worked when you suspend filling the (Strategic Petroleum Reserve),” Udall said.

The United States began storing crude oil in the wake of the shortages of the 1970s.

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve, according to the Energy Department, held 702 million barrels of oil as of Tuesday.

Congressman John Salazar, D-Colo., said he likes Udall’s plan to stop storing oil away in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

“I would support putting a moratorium on that, so that we can actually make more available on the marketplace,” Salazar said. “That always seems to have an immediate impact.”

Salazar represents most of the Western Slope and southern Colorado.

Udall said he hopes to combine his plan for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve with eliminating tax breaks for oil companies, increasing drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and removing barriers to ethanol imports, which should lower gas prices over the long term.

“We’re not going to drill our way out of this,” Udall said.

According to AAA, the average price of a gallon of regular gasoline in Colorado sold for $3.516 on Tuesday; a gallon of regular was selling for $3.541 in Grand Junction.

Hagan wins Senate primary, turns attention to beating Dole

Associated Press

Kay Hagan celebrated her victory in Tuesday's U.S. Senate primary with an invitation.

The state senator from Greensboro, who moves from an easy primary win to what promises to be a grueling general election matchup against incumbent GOP Sen. Elizabeth Dole, implored supporters of former rival Jim Neal to join her ranks.

"I want to invite them to come on board, and I certainly need their support," Hagan said.

Neal immediately obliged, vowing to do whatever he can to help a candidate he had harshly criticized for months win in November.

"Elizabeth Dole's in for the race of her life," said Neal, who finished a distant second. "This could be in the year in which Sen. Dole can be beaten, and Kay has my full support as the nominee to do that."

Hagan has said she needs about $10 million to unseat Dole - about seven times more than she has raised thus far. The $1.5 million she raised for the primary was plenty to push her past four opponents - she grabbed 60 percent of the vote, according to unofficial results.

The 54-year-old lawmaker was the only Democratic candidate to buy television advertising, which she used to boost her name recognition across the state.

Thad Beyle, a professor of political science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said Hagan's performance in the primary could be a positive sign for Democrats itching to unseat Dole, who has a national reputation after serving in two presidential cabinet posts and leading the American Red Cross.

"If Hagan has been able to pull this out so well, she may be able to use those skills to overcome Dole's apparent lead and make it closer," Beyle said.

Schumer Statement On Kay Hagan's Primary Win

Matthew Miller, DSCC

North Carolina State Senator to challenge vulnerable incumbent Elizabeth Dole

Senator Charles E. Schumer, Chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, made the following statement today on State Senator Kay Hagan’s win in the North Carolina Democratic primary to challenge Republican Sen. Elizabeth Dole:

“North Carolina Democrats chose a nominee for Senate today who will make the state proud. Kay Hagan has already shown in the legislature that she can be a leader for North Carolina and over the past few months she has shown on the campaign trail that she has what it takes to win in November. Kay is smart, energetic and dedicated to making people’s lives better, and as voters get to know her better over the next six months they will see that she can bring the change to Washington that the country needs.”

A poll released last week shows Hagan trails Dole by only seven points, despite the incumbent’s near-universal name recognition. Hagan proved to be a successful fundraiser in her primary race and is now poised to build on the thousands of new Democratic registrants and overwhelming turnout in today’s primary to build a campaign for the fall.

New Poll shows Dole weak against Hagan. A poll released last week shows that State Senator Kay Hagan is in striking distance against Elizabeth Dole. Despite near-universal name recognition, Dole only leads Hagan 48 to 41. Furthermore, the North Carolina Republican’s favorability rating comes in at a low 44%, and a full 41% of North Carolinians view her unfavorably. [Research 2000, 5/1/08]

165,000 new Democrats registered in North Carolina. Approximately 165,000 new Democrats have registered in North Carolina this year, many of them first-time voters. [AP, 4/25/08; Cox News Service, 4/28/08]

Registered Democrats Outnumber Republicans. As of May 3, 2008 there were over 2.6 million registered Democrats in North Carolina, compared to over 1.9 million registered Republicans. In total, there are now almost 700,000 more registered Democrats than Republicans in North Carolina. [North Carolina State Board of Elections]

Coleman Votes Against Safer Skies, Fewer Air Delays

Matthew Miller, DSCC

Opposes legislation to modernize air travel

Norm Coleman today voted against the Aviation Investment and Modernization Act which would modernize air travel by improving air safety and enhancing passengers’ rights. Coleman’s vote comes despite hundreds of flights cancelled last month due to safety problems and reports of passengers trapped on planes for hours with overflowing toilets and no food.

“Norm Coleman is clearly out of touch if he thinks the current state of air travel is just fine,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “Travelers are tired of waiting for massively delayed flights and fixes to safety concerns, and Minnesotans are tired of waiting for Norm Coleman to stand up for their interests.”

Main Provisions of the Aviation Investment and Modernization Act (S. 1300)

Improve Air Safety. Modernization of the old, analog air traffic control system with a modern digital system to improve safety in the increasingly crowded skies; requires development of a plan to reduce runway incursions.

Improve Passengers’ Rights. Require airlines to put up on their websites updated lists of chronically late flights and develop plans to deal with extended tarmac delays.

Improve Service to Small Communities. Increases funding and provides for other incentives for the Essential Air Service program.

Air Travel Benefits for Service Members. Gives all active duty service members access to the lowest ticketed fares.

Collins Votes Against Safer Skies, Fewer Air Delays

Matthew Miller, DSCC

Opposes legislation to modernize air travel

Republican Senator Susan Collins today broke with Sen. Olympia Snowe by voting against the Aviation Investment and Modernization Act which would modernize air travel by improving air safety and enhancing passengers’ rights. Collins’ vote comes despite hundreds of flights cancelled last month due to safety problems and reports of passengers trapped on planes for hours with overflowing toilets and no food.

“Susan Collins is clearly out of touch if she thinks the current state of air travel is just fine,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “Travelers are tired of waiting for massively delayed flights and fixes to safety concerns, and Mainers are tired of waiting for Susan Collins to stand up for their interests.”

Main Provisions of the Aviation Investment and Modernization Act (S. 1300)

Improve Air Safety. Modernization of the old, analog air traffic control system with a modern digital system to improve safety in the increasingly crowded skies; requires development of a plan to reduce runway incursions.

Improve Passengers’ Rights. Require airlines to put up on their websites updated lists of chronically late flights and develop plans to deal with extended tarmac delays.

Improve Service to Small Communities. Increases funding and provides for other incentives for the Essential Air Service program.

Air Travel Benefits for Service Members. Gives all active duty service members access to the lowest ticketed fares.

McConnell Votes Against Safer Skies, Fewer Air Delays

Matthew Miller, DSCC

Opposes legislation to modernize air travel

Mitch McConnell today voted against the Aviation Investment and Modernization Act which would modernize air travel by improving air safety and enhancing passengers’ rights. McConnell’s vote comes despite hundreds of flights cancelled last month due to safety problems and reports of passengers trapped on planes for hours with overflowing toilets and no food.

“Mitch McConnell is clearly out of touch if he thinks the current state of air travel is just fine,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “Travelers are tired of waiting for massively delayed flights and fixes to safety concerns, and Kentuckians are tired of waiting for Mitch McConnell to stand up for their interests.”

Main Provisions of the Aviation Investment and Modernization Act (S. 1300)

Improve Air Safety. Modernization of the old, analog air traffic control system with a modern digital system to improve safety in the increasingly crowded skies; requires development of a plan to reduce runway incursions.

Improve Passengers’ Rights. Require airlines to put up on their websites updated lists of chronically late flights and develop plans to deal with extended tarmac delays.

Improve Service to Small Communities. Increases funding and provides for other incentives for the Essential Air Service program.

Air Travel Benefits for Service Members. Gives all active duty service members access to the lowest ticketed fares.

Dole Votes Against Safer Skies, Fewer Air Delays

Matthew Miller, DSCC

Opposes legislation to modernize air travel

North Carolina Senator and former Secretary of Transportation Elizabeth Dole today voted against the Aviation Investment and Modernization Act which would modernize air travel by improving air safety and enhancing passengers’ rights. Dole’s vote comes despite hundreds of flights cancelled last month due to safety problems and reports of passengers trapped on planes for hours with overflowing toilets and no food.

“Elizabeth Dole is clearly out of touch if she thinks the current state of air travel is just fine,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “Travelers are tired of waiting for massively delayed flights and fixes to safety concerns, and North Carolinians are tired of waiting for Elizabeth Dole to stand up for their interests. Elizabeth Dole may have been Transportation Secretary in the eighties, but today she took a pass on bringing air travel into the twenty-first century.”

Main Provisions of the Aviation Investment and Modernization Act (S. 1300)

Improve Air Safety. Modernization of the old, analog air traffic control system with a modern digital system to improve safety in the increasingly crowded skies; requires development of a plan to reduce runway incursions.

Improve Passengers’ Rights. Require airlines to put up on their websites updated lists of chronically late flights and develop plans to deal with extended tarmac delays.

Improve Service to Small Communities. Increases funding and provides for other incentives for the Essential Air Service program.

Air Travel Benefits for Service Members. Gives all active duty service members access to the lowest ticketed fares.

Chambliss Votes Against Safer Skies, Fewer Air Delays

Matthew Miller, DSCC

Opposes legislation to modernize air travel

Saxby Chambliss today voted against the Aviation Investment and Modernization Act which would modernize air travel by improving air safety and enhancing passengers’ rights. Chambliss’ vote comes despite hundreds of flights cancelled last month due to safety problems and reports of passengers trapped on planes for hours with overflowing toilets and no food.

“Saxby Chambliss is clearly out of touch if he thinks the current state of air travel is just fine,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “Travelers are tired of waiting for massively delayed flights and fixes to safety concerns, and Georgians are tired of waiting for Saxby Chambliss to stand up for their interests.”

Main Provisions of the Aviation Investment and Modernization Act (S. 1300)

Improve Air Safety. Modernization of the old, analog air traffic control system with a modern digital system to improve safety in the increasingly crowded skies; requires development of a plan to reduce runway incursions.

Improve Passengers’ Rights. Require airlines to put up on their websites updated lists of chronically late flights and develop plans to deal with extended tarmac delays.

Improve Service to Small Communities. Increases funding and provides for other incentives for the Essential Air Service program.

Air Travel Benefits for Service Members. Gives all active duty service members access to the lowest ticketed fares.

Hall of Shame: Liddy Dole

Republican Senator Elizabeth Dole (NC) has had quite the shameful week. Not only did she vote against pay equity, she's refusing to distance herself from an offensive ad produced by the North Carolina GOP.

Merkley's past far from 'establishment'

The Oregonian

Before being Oregon House speaker, the candidate was a globetrotter, bike racer and inner-city Portland advocate

In his mid-20s, Jeff Merkley hopped a bus with a friend in Los Angeles and headed south for what would become a hairy, life-changing journey through revolution-torn Central America.

The 1980 trip, which included a tense ride with a group of armed Nicaraguan soldiers, reached its climax in Guatemala City.

"I stumbled across a person who had just been assassinated," Merkley recalls. "I mean, literally, I was the first person after the man was shot down on the street. . . . I rushed up because I thought he had been hit by a car. His whole torso had been blown away."

It wouldn't be the last encounter with guns and violence for Merkley, the tall, unassuming Democrat currently trying to trade his job as Oregon House speaker for the far bigger political prize of the U.S. Senate.

There was the incident from the early 1990s, when he was director of Habitat for Humanity in Portland. A woman pulled up outside the office and pulled a loaded shotgun from her car, then drove away without firing. Before that, a man from his Washington, D.C., neighborhood was shot dead at a nearby pay phone.

Merkley raced midget motorcycles as a child, and once owned -- and crashed -- a Harley. He roomed with an impoverished family in Ghana as a teen, hitchhiked across Israel as a young man and went on, as he puts it, to help shut down one of Portland's worst crack alleys.

"I've lived," he says, "a pretty unconventional life."

Yet for all that, he has become best known as the "establishment" candidate in a field of less-experienced upstarts. In the race to take on Republican Sen. Gordon Smith, Merkley's the buttoned-down stiff next to the wisecracking Steve Novick or homespun Candy Neville.

With party iconoclasts faring well this year, the image has hurt Merkley, who trails Novick in recent polls. He was granted automatic front-runner status when he entered the race after being courted by the national party. Now he's running to catch up.

He says his personal resume, some of which sounds as if it could have been written for a Steven Spielberg movie, gives him a solid, diverse background that would make him a good senator. So far, however, it has gone largely unnoticed.

"I started this race unknown to Oregonians," Merkley says. "What they hear is 'speaker of the House.' That sounds pretty uninteresting. There's no way to convey in a 30-second ad the history of your life."

"Why Africa?"

Life started humbly enough for Merkley. The son of a millwright, Merkley grew up in a working-class neighborhood in outer Southeast Portland. Money was neither plentiful nor terribly important to the gangly kid who relied on brains and tenacity to get what he needed and go where he pleased.

As a 16-year-old junior at David Douglas High School, Merkley was among a group of students selected to spend the summer abroad. Most asked to go to Europe. Merkley chose Africa.

"They asked me, 'Why Africa?' I said I wanted to go someplace completely different." He was sent to a village in Ghana, where he lived with a family that had two "luxuries" -- a bicycle and a clothes iron.

The mother washed the clothes, Merkley says, and the father ironed them proudly. The experience began to form the roots of a career devoted to helping house the underclass.

Neither of his parents went to college, but Merkley's father pressed his son to set his educational sights high. And Merkley did. He excelled in math and science and got accepted to Stanford -- a rare feat for a David Douglas kid. He majored in international relations and soon felt the tug of politics. He took a year off to work at various internships in Washington, D.C., intrigued by the newly inaugurated President Carter.

He studied international law of the sea. He went door to door to promote energy conservation. Later, he would use his connections and political credentials to land fellowships and jobs that took him into the bowels of the Pentagon, to Brussels, Belgium, on an assignment with NATO and into the cubicles of the Congressional Budget Office. By then, he was writing reports on U.S. and world nuclear weapons capacity.

But strolling the halls of power wasn't enough for Merkley, who also craved adventure among, as he puts it, "real people, real communities."

After an internship with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and before entering Princeton for graduate work, Merkley traveled through Central America. It was 1980, and guerilla warfare raged. Merkley wanted a closer look.

Inhofe’s Senate seat is target of state Democrat Rice

Enid News and Eagle

State Sen. Andrew Rice believes in personal responsibility, and he told Garfield County Democrats Monday night he would be accountable to them and the people of Oklahoma if he’s elected to the U.S. Senate in November.

Rice was guest speaker at a Garfield County Democratic Party fund-raiser, held at Napoli’s Italian Restaurant, along with Anita Norman, vice chairwoman of the 3rd Congressional District Democratic Party, and Ivan Holmes, chairman of Oklahoma Demo-cratic Party.

“I believe in public service and that the government has a legitimate role to play,” Rice said. “As the state of Oklahoma, we can’t afford the kind of irresponsible and immature leadership we’ve had from our senior senator.”

Rice is running against Sen. Jim Inhofe, who has represented Oklahoma in the U.S. Senate since 1994. Inhofe, described on his Web site as “outspoken, opinionated and right wing,” is well-known for his stances on immigration and environmental issues.

Rice said he’s confident, but not naive, about running against an incumbent.

“There’s a big opening for change,” Rice said. “An abrasive, partisanship style doesn’t help peoples’ anxieties.”

Bipartisanship is a major theme in Rice’s campaign. He said there are some issues he will be “hard-core Democrat” on, but on others, “you need to cross the aisle.”

Rice praised Sen. Patrick Anderson, R-Enid, for being an independent-minded individual who works well with others.

“You’ve got to be able to find common ground,” Rice said.

Rice was elected to the Oklahoma Senate in 2005, representing District 46 in Oklahoma City. He said he’s relatively unknown outside of the metro area, but has spent time visiting other communities around the state.

During his tenure in the Senate, Rice co-sponsored and helped pass the “All Kids Act,” led an effort to make it easier for local governments to donate abandoned properties for use by Habitat for Humanities, helped create the Hunger Task Force and was an advocate for “Steffanie’s Law,” a measure that would require insurance companies in Oklahoma to cover the cost of clinical trials for cancer treatment.

Kristi Balden, a member of GCDP and an organizer of the fundraiser, said this is first time the group has held an event of this kind. About 100 people were in attendance, she said.

“If we can’t get this young man elected, shame on us,” Sandra Stuart, president of GCDP, said. “And if we don’t get together as Democrats and speak out, we only have ourselves to blame.”

Stuart said Rice reminds her of a young John F. Kennedy.

Noah Ynclan, an Afghanistan war veteran, said he was at the event to support Rice’s candidacy.

“It’s an unfortunate stereotype that members of the U.S. military don’t support members of the Democratic Party,” said Ynclan, who introduced Rice at the fundraiser. “I also believe members of the opposing party seem to pay lip service to the troops — and then vote against measures which would support them.”

Harkin Looks Safe In '08

Real Clear Politics

Though he has run a series of close re-election bids during his four terms in the Senate, Republicans this year failed to field a strong challenger against Iowa Democrat Tom Harkin, and a new poll shows Harkin is a safe bet for re-election in November.

The survey, conducted by Research 2000, tested Harkin against Republicans former State Rep. George Eichhorn, businessman Steve Rathje and businessman and Navy veteran Chris Reed. Conducted for KCCI-TV and KCRG-TV between 4/21-23, the poll contacted 600 likely voters for a margin of error of +/- 4%. The sample was made up of 33% Democrats, 30% Republicans and 37% independents and other parties.

54% of Iowa voters approve of the job Harkin is doing in the Senate. As chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee and as the fourth-ranking Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, Harkin has been able to bring back a number of big projects and benefits to Iowa.

Coleman the chameleon

Minnesota Daily

Sen. Norm Coleman's precarious proclivity for interchanging identities shouldn't be anything new to Minnesotans.

Sen. Norm Coleman can be a staunch politico at times, but there are some moments when intellectual equilibrium is achieved and he transcends party lines. This was of course most apparent when Coleman left the Democratic Party in 1996 and joined the GOP during his tenure as mayor of St. Paul. But there have been many moments when the words that come out of Coleman's mouth are anything but bipartisan. One of these moments came in 2002 when the senator introduced President George W. Bush at a rally.

"George Bush is a leader for our times. When we sing 'God Bless America,' it is a prayer, and I believe this person is part of God's answer."

Coleman's brazen pandering to Republican voters continues. Just before the 2004 election, Coleman declared on a national trip, "I'm a rah-rah guy for the party."

In March of last year, a terrorist plot on Fort Dix was foiled after six foreign-born Muslims brought video footage of themselves firing automatic weapons to a store with the hope of transferring it to DVD. During a congressional debate about immigration soon after this incident, Coleman said, "Just this month we saw a terror plot unfold in Fort Dix that might have been prevented sooner, had the local officials who pulled the suspects over on numerous traffic violations been able to inquire about their immigration status. Make no mistake - this is a national security issue."

Just last month, however, Coleman criticized a letter to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement written by Republican representative of Minnesota's 6th District Michelle Bachman. "I don't think anyone is talking about local law enforcement being in the business of enforcing immigration."

In the discussion of Bachman, he then turned to her support of the Senate version of Wellstone's mental health parity bill: "I signed onto the bill as soon as I got into the Senate. I know it was close to Sen. Paul Wellstone, his heart and I want to congratulate United States Rep. Jim Ramstad. R-Minn., for getting it done there as well."

Coleman's unconscious bipartisanship continued, "I think the House bill is a better bill, because it's a stronger bill. And I'm glad the House move forward on it … My concern is, if we don't get it done right now, I'm worried that this is going to be pushed to the side. So we need to find common ground and compromise. In the Senate, you've got to get to 60 votes to get it passed."

This is a commendable stance for Coleman to take. Not only is he crossing party lines to really show Minnesotans how able he is to work with the Democrats, but it also shows how his spirit has been renewed after telling Capitol Hill newspaper that he was a "99 percent improvement" over Wellstone.

After Wellstone's former spokesman Jim Farrell called the comments a "shameful, self-serving assertion" and a former senior aide deemed them "sickening" and show Coleman to be a "selfish, classless" individual, Coleman corrected himself. What Norm actually meant by this comment six months after Wellstone's death was that he was an improvement to serve Bush.

As a man of his word, Coleman fulfilled his duty of serving the President - at least until his campaign for re-election discovered it was in dire need of a makeover. Supporting the President just isn't in good taste anymore.

Somewhere between voting with Republicans 92 percent of the time in 2003, 91 percent in 2004, and 77 percent in 2005 and 2006, Coleman's record from 2007 shows that he is now a man of dissent - he only voted with Republicans 64 percent of the time.

Having a Bush spokesman call you "one of the party's most effective spokesmen and advocate for the President's message," (as did Steve Schmidt in 2004) is no longer a desired quote in his introductions.

Senator Jack Reed: A profile

Providence Journal

Dawn is yet to break when Senator Jack Reed awakens on this morning not so long ago. He goes into the kitchen of his small townhouse near Washington, D.C., makes tea, reads the newspapers, and puts away dishes left to dry after last night’s dinner. His wife, Julia, and baby daughter, Emily, are still asleep.

At 7:07 a.m., Reed telephones a Rhode Island radio talk show and speaks on air for a few minutes about the economy and the presidential primaries. Then he gets into his car, a 1991 Ford Escort that shows its age, and drives through heavy traffic to the Hart Senate Office Building, in the shadow of the U.S. Capitol. He will not have time this morning for his customary workout in the Senate gym, or for a run along the National Mall, another way he keeps in shape.

Reed rides the elevator from the garage to his office on the seventh floor, checks his BlackBerry, which he carries in a holster, and prepares comments he will make at two hearings today. Then he meets with senior policy adviser Elizabeth King, 1 of the 23 members of Reed’s Washington staff. The senator has recently returned from his 11th trip to Iraq, and King, who has traveled there with him nine times, is prodding her boss to complete his report, which he began writing, by hand, on the long flight home. Reed promises he will finish in a day or two.

It’s a few minutes past 9 a.m.

The Iraq discussion concludes and Reed, 58, heads for a hearing room in the nearby Dirksen Senate Office Building. He walks fast and purposefully –– always fast and purposefully — the gait of a man who found the discipline for his life’s work, though he did not yet know what it would be, at Providence’s La Salle Academy. He was a young teenager then, the second son of a housewife and a janitor from Cranston. Reed wanted to attend the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, no place else. His father, a World War II veteran who rarely talked war, and President Kennedy were men the boy admired. His mother and her sister, Reed’s godmother, who lived in and owned the small house where he grew up, were among the women he admired.

Two of the nation’s top intelligence officers await Reed and fellow senators on the Senate Armed Services Committee in the hearing room, where wood-paneled walls and a lofty ceiling evoke gravity, if not grandeur. Mike McConnell, director of National Intelligence, and Lt. Gen. Michael D. Maples, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, are briefing the senators on worldwide threats to U.S. security. (A classified session will follow in a sound- and bug-proof chamber.) Maples was Reed’s West Point classmate. They’ve been friends for more than 40 years.

The intelligence officers finish their opening statements and Reed leaves for another hearing, of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions, chaired by Sen. Edward Kennedy, of Massachusetts. Reed speaks in favor of a bill that would broaden breast cancer research and then he returns to Armed Services.

“Senator Reed?” says Chairman Sen. Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan.

Reed thanks the intelligence officers for coming to the Hill and asks the first of his 13 questions, all that time will allow.

“There are many fault lines in Iraq,” Reed says. “One of them is the legislation that is passed but is somewhat nebulous and depends upon implementation, so I wonder: Do you have a sense of whether the legislation that was passed with respect to reconciliation and oil distribution, etcetera, will have any real effect going down the road?”

Maples and McConnell answer. Reed, a prominent critic of President Bush’s Iraq strategy, continues with questions and observations. Senators pay attention. Reed, Washington leaders agree, speaks with authority.

“Everyone listens to Jack,” says Kennedy, second-ranking Democrat on Armed Services.

Says Sen. Chuck Hagel, Republican from Nebraska: “He is one of the most dedicated, committed, thorough, thoughtful members of the United States Senate. He studies the issues, he knows what he’s talking about, he always makes a contribution. He’s always very respectful, very civil. He handles himself very well. And everybody likes him.”

Hall of Shame: Bob Schaffer

When U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer told the Denver Post that the United States ought to follow the guest-worker model used in the Mariana Islands, it raised a few eyebrows. After all, the Mariana Islands sweatshops are notorious for labor and human-rights violations. Imported workers are kept as virtual prisoners and subjected to humiliating and dangerous living conditions. Why in the world would Bob Schaffer not only support that business model – but want it brought to the United States?

Hall of Shame: Roger Wicker

When Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour appointed Republican Roger Wicker to temporarily fill retiring Trent Lott's Senate seat, Wicker began a race against the clock. Could he introduce himself to Mississippians and establish a clear track record before the November elections?

As we recently learned, the answer is yes. In just one week, Wicker told Mississippi exactly what kind of Senator he wants to be.

Hall of Shame: Mitch McConnell

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell earns a third spot in the Hall of Shame for his blatant pandering to oil companies, for which he’s been amply rewarded with campaign cash. It’s no surprise to find a wealthy Republican Senator in bed with oil barons, but McConnell’s recent decision to call himself an environmental leader adds an extra element of shamefulness to his already disgraceful behavior.

Hall of Shame: John Cornyn

Texas Republican John Cornyn earns his second spot in the Hall of Shame today for opposing a provision that would increase the use of renewable energy. While Republicans opposing renewable energy solutions might not seem like anything out of the ordinary, what makes Cornyn's opposition to the provision so shameful is that the proposal would potentially enable Texas to build on its growing advantage in wind energy to sell clean energy credits to other states.

Hall of Shame: Mitch McConnell

Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell makes his second appearance in the Hall of Shame for putting George Bush above Kentucky children. Today McConnell voted against the bipartisan Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization bill - a bill that will provide health insurance to millions of kids nationwide.

Hall of Shame: John Cornyn

The latest inductee to the hall of shame is Texas Republican Senator John Cornyn who ended the Senate session with not one, but two incredibly irresponsible votes. First up is Senator Cornyn's vote against the Senate Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization bill (SCHIP). The bipartisan bill which passed the Senate will help provide insurance to over 500,000 children in the state of Texas alone - but apparently Senator Cornyn doesn't support improving healthcare for his state's kids.

Hall of Shame: Norm Coleman

Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman earns his place in the Hall of Shame this week for saying one thing and doing another. Coleman will probably spend the next 18 months trying to convince Minnesotans that he's a centrist despite voting for President Bush's right-wing agenda over 90% of the time, so it shouldn't come as much of a surprise that this week Coleman voted against a number of issues he claims to support.

Hall of Shame: Mitch McConnell

The newest inductee into the Hall of Shame tried mightily to hide his shameful actions from public view. But despite Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's efforts, his secret hold on campaign finance legislation has been uncovered.

Hall of Shame: Chuck Hagel

Earlier this week Republican Senator Chuck Hagel called a massive press conference in his home state of Nebraska to announce, well... nothing.