Et tu, Rob Portman? Ye of sensibility and rectitude? Ye of maturity and political resolve? Despite inquires from the Cincinnati Enquirer and Plain Dealer, Portman's campaign won't directly answer the question of whether the candidate believes that President Obama is a citizen. (Obama is.) So now, we're up to five Republican Senate candidates -- major ones, not including J.D. Hayworth in Arizona for the moment -- who have flirted with Birtherism.
Several of these candidates have later corrected their initial hesitation, but it is precisely that initial hesitation that contains so much information about what Republican candidates fear right now. No doubt that Portman and Marco Rubio know that Birtherism is bullshit. The gap between their private beliefs and how they articulate them publicly is fairly wide. I'm not a fan of stories that begin with X "refuses to denounce" Y -- I usually skip them. I make an exception here because the accusation is so reckless, so tied to race and culture, and so stupid that those who try to Wink at the Birthers are adding potency to a poison that everyone is forced to gulp.
Poison. You don't normally see our mainstream media using terms like this. It is dangerous poison.
As the days of Republicans obstructing legislation in the Senate continue to pass, momentum has built to change the rules of the filibuster. Talking Points memo has a story up talking about how Harry Reid is suggesting it's time to make a change and our Senator had this take:
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) added in his remarks that Democrats need to "crystallize" obstruction and showcase incidents like the Bunning blockade to highlight the real effects parliamentary tactics have on voters.
At the very least if they don't change the rules, they should make Republicans actually stand up and filibuster. Not play the games that they are. And Democrats need to clearly spell out what is going like the Senator says, because they can't continue to lose the messaging battle and expect to win at the ballot box. I would hope Senator Menendez, in his role leading the DSCC can push other members to make sure they are highlighting the obstruction on a more regular basis until permanent changes are made.
Senator Bob Menendez appeared on MSNBC the other day with Savannah Guthrie and Chuck Todd for the Morning Rundown show. When asked about what his members will say to the argument that using reconciliation for healthcare is an end run, which it's not but the media continues to perpetuate, he said:
Look, no matter how hard we tried, no matter how hard the President tried, the Republicans just weren't serious about solving the problems of millions of Americans that get denied health insurance because they have a pre-existing condition, of tens of millions of Americans that have no insurance whatsoever, and all the rest of us who have insurance and the price keeps going up, even though we get denied more and more when we make a claim with insurance companies.
You can see the segment here:On the campaign side, Menendez talked about how the DSCC will be supporting Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas in the primary, who now has a challenge from a Progressive candidate. He said they always support incumbents, but don't broadcast their strategy of what they will do to help out. Lincoln turned around and started attacking the public option, voiced her opposition to cap and trade and painted Washington as children in her latest ad. While Washington may be acting like Children, Lincoln is one of the people throwing dirt in the sandbox.
First up, President Barack Obama is at a 53% job approval rating (an improvement on the sub-50 showing last time). Disapproval is at 38%, so the the net +15 matches the margin he beat McCain by in 2008. His numbers with independents are 53-33.
On the other hand, the right track/wrong track numbers for the country are at 38-52, hardly surprising with 10% unemployment, massive deficits, and victory-less wars.
Democrats lead the generic ballot for U.S. Congress 47-39 with leaners. That doesn't exactly suggest many Democratic incumbents will be swept away, though I don't doubt NJ3 is a battlefield.
If the election were held today, Senator Bob Menendez would get 38%, a (hypothetical candidate) Tom Kean Jr would get 39%, Someone else gets 6%. Not the numbers we'd like to see, but not unfamiliar either. The pollster notes that Menendez did worse with the subgroup that was asked about him closer to the questions about health care reforms.
Senator Menendez is at 29-25, favorable-unfavorable, and Senator Frank Lautenberg is at 42-29. The negative ads of 2006 have been forgotten as Kean Jr is at 28-11. Kean was at 33-32 at the end of the last campaign, so you can see that campaigns matter.
As for health care reform, the numbers are lousy but not disastrous, as you know if you follow it in national polls. 37% think they will be better off and 42% think they will be worse off if health care reform passes. On the other hand, for the "country as a whole," "better" leaads "worse" 45-40. No doubt the numbers are dragged down by strong Republican opposition, but the two sets for independents are 31-35 and 41-33. The numbers are very striking by race, because only 28% of "Whites" think they'll be better off. Overall, 35% say they'd advise their memver of Congress to vote for a health care reform bill, 40% against, and 25% don't know. That 25% is more Democrats and Independents, so they need to be won over, perhaps by the reality of the bill helping them. (Cough, cough, too bad some genius designed most of the benefits to start years from now.)
The attempt to recall Senator Menendez is an affront to the voters of New Jersey and has no standing in law. One day these folks are trying to disprove human evolution, the next day they are challenging the constitutionality of the Constitution. These are radical people who chose Menendez off of a list of Democrats because of the sound of his last name.
With 27 states having borrowed about $30 billion from the feds to pay their unemployment claims, it is "just not possible" to cover all of the costs "in this budget climate," Menendez said following a meeting of New Jersey's congressional delegation with Gov. Chris Christie today. Menendez said he would work to delay New Jersey's interest payments, or perhaps forgive them entirely, to provide some degree of federal help.
It's too bad Christie contributed to this climate with his attacks on the stimulus, but after all, it worked out for him.
Meanwhile, Senators Lautenberg and Menendez are outraged that Republican SenatorJim Bunning continues to block unemployement insurance.
"At the stroke of midnight, more than one million jobless Americans lost critical benefits they rely on to help pay for housing, feed their families and afford health care," said Sen. Lautenberg. "Blocking unemployment insurance and COBRA benefits is proof positive that Republicans care more about scoring political points than helping working families survive these tough economic times. Families are struggling every day to make ends meet, and I will work to end this Republican filibuster as soon as possible."
I agree with 100% with Lautenberg, but as we asked before, what's he going to doabout it? If this is so critical, why was it left for the last weekend? Why did the Senate go into recess instead of working through the cloture delay all weekend? When will Democrats pledge to reform the rules against these endless filibuster delays, and why not threaten the Republican-created idea of the nuclear constitutional option? Why isn't the President on network TV denouncing this? (Okay, network TV is talking about Bunning.)
In the "surprising side effects category," it turns out that Bunning has also stopped the "Medicare fix" meaning that doctors get an immediate 21% reduction in their fees for seeing Medicare patients. These are the cuts that Republicans like Frank LoBiondo made law but now posture against. In addition, thousands of people have been thrown out of work by Bunning. It's pathetic, and while Republicans are responsible, Democrats are their enablers.
I wanted to bring your attention to an interesting post by Nate Silver of 538.com on The Myth of the Incumbent 50% Rule. He's prompted by the claim that incumbents get only the same percentage of the vote as they do in early polling, and therefore incumbents under 50% almost always lose. Here's his conclusion:
1) It is extremely common for an incumbent come back to win re-election while having less than 50 percent of the vote in early polls.
2) In comparison to early polls, there is no demonstrable tendency for challengers to pick up a larger share of the undecided vote than incumbents.
3) Incumbents almost always get a larger share of the actual vote than they do in early polls (as do challengers). They do not "get what they get in the tracking"; they almost always get more...
It is probably OK to focus on an incumbent's vote share in early polls while downplaying the challenger's number, but if you do, you need to add 6-7 percent to it to have the most accurate prediction of his likely performance in November.
Silver's data, which you can see by clicking through, shows that incumbents who poll 45% in January-June usually win -- like Frank Lautenberg in 2008, at only 45.7%, who got to 56% on election day -- and overall 19 of 30 incumbents under 50% end up winning. (Incumbents over 50% are safe.) In short, undecideds do not usually break overwhelmingly to the challengers as conventional wisdom tell us. Mark Blumenthal of Pollster.com says Nate is right, and explains that the "myth" is largely based on old races. I recall, but can't find the link, that kos recently found half of incumbents polling under 50% lose and half win. Many Democratic learned this lesson in the 2004 Presidential election, where Bush won despite many polls putting him under 50%. Here in New Jersey, Menendez won despite being below 40% (though he was appointed) and Corzine lost, but did get that 7 point surge.
I can't help but wonder if this speaks to the famous New Jersey election effect -- that Democrats poll too low. Perhaps instead of looking for a Jersey explanation, it's just that Democrats here poll the way incumbents do nationwide.
The White House obviously has a loser mentality -- but America rallies around winners. Polls show that in state after state, voters hate the Senate bill and overwhelmingly want a public option, even if passed with zero Republican votes. More than 50 Senate Democrats and 218 House Democrats were willing to vote for the public option before, and the only way to lose in reconciliation is if losers are leading the fight. That's why Democrats in Congress should ignore the White House and follow those like Chuck Schumer and Robert Menendez who know that the public option is a political and policy winner.
Now that we know he is the one of the first two names that come to mind when you think "winner," I trust Senator Bob Menendez will never think he doesn't get praise from the left.
Senator Menendez appeared this morning on MSNBC talking with David Shuster about the vote in the Senate yesterday to overcome a filibuster for the jobs bill and his signing onto the letter calling for the public option for healthcare reform. Both Senators Lautenberg and Menendez have signed onto the public option letter. You can see the segment here:
I received the following e-mail from Democracy for America today about the effort to get the Senate to pass the public option through reconciliation and while I was pleased to see that our state's senior Senator, Frank Lautenberg, was a signatory, NJ's junior Senator, Bankruptcy Bill Bob Menendez, who voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, has not signed on to date.
Bertin -
Our campaign for the public option continues to gain momentum!
Members of DFA, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, CREDO Action and MoveOn have made over 20,000 phone calls to Senate Democrats and QUADRUPLED the number of senators who signed the letter calling on Harry Reid to pass the public option through "reconciliation."
Working together, we've added Dianne Feinstein (CA), Barbara Boxer (CA), Frank Lautenberg (NJ), Jack Reed (RI), Roland Burris (IL), Al Franken (MN), John Kerry (MA), Patrick Leahy (VT), Bernie Sanders (VT), Barbara Mikulski (MD), Tom Udall (NM), and Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) to the original four Healthcare Heroes.
That's going from Zero to 16 senators signed-on in just two days. Who's next? Well, it's up to you...
Call Senator Robert Menendez right now and demand he sign on -- this is his moment to be part of history.
CLICK HERE FOR THE PHONE NUMBER AND A SHORT SCRIPT
Make the call.
And if you've called already, call again.
Democrats in Washington are finally starting to unite on a way forward for healthcare reform that includes passing a public option using reconciliation. Let's make sure Senator Menendez stands up to lead the fight today.
Thank you for everything you do,
-Charles
Charles Chamberlain, Political Director
Democracy for America
Please join me in calling our Senators to urge them to repeal the military's so called "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy that discriminates against gays and lesbians who want to serve their country in the US Military.
I'll spare you the reasons why discrimination sucks and simply remind you that this issue demands your urgent attention.
Lautenberg's contant info is (202)-224-3224
Menendez is at (202)-224-4744.
Timing is everything in Washington and now is the time to light a fire under our Senators to vote AND to fight to repeal this retrograde policy.
The Washington Post had an extensive story yesterday about Senator Menendez and his role leading the DSCC. The story went into looking at the Massachusetts debacle and found an anonymous White House official ready to air some dirty laundry:
One senior administration official, who was granted anonymity to speak frankly about the White House's grievances, acknowledged that there was plenty of blame to go around, especially in the failure to notice how intensely Republican voters were motivated. But the official also argued that Menendez bore a larger burden because it was his job to protect the seat.
"I don't understand how they could have missed how fundamentally unsound the candidate was," said the administration official. "They shouldn't have been surprised by it."
The anonymous source continued saying that his predecessor would never have allowed it to happen:
"Chuck Schumer would have been a rabid dog if he had one race in America and he wouldn't have rested, even if he had a 40-point lead," said the official, who argued the committee needed an A-team on the ground sooner. "They chose not to do that because it was a comfortable lead and they wanted to save their resources for what they thought were going to be really tough races."
But of course once the dirt was shoveled on Menendez, the official on the record comment completely contradicted the anonymous comments:
"That's not a view I share," said David Axelrod, White House senior adviser, adding that there was plenty of blame to go around. "I don't think any one institution or person bears a preponderance of responsibility for that. They have a very good staff over there, they do a very good job. This is not a case where you can say this was their fault."
While I agree with Axelrod that everyone shares blame, he's pretty much trying to close the gate after the horses have gotten out at this point. For his part, Menendez said the anonymous comments weren't helpful:
"Finger-pointing here is not only irresponsible, it risks misreading the political environment right now."
The bottom line is the DSCC is charged with paying attention to make sure that just this situation doesn't occur. Coakley shouldn't have been able to go dark for weeks after the primary and when they went off the reservation, the campaign should have been reigned back in. They can say Coakley wasn't the best candidate or who they would have wanted, but you have the candidate you have at that point. They tried to get more involved but at that point it was to late. Massachusetts needs to serve as a wake up call and an opportunity to be better prepared for the difficult road ahead. It's going to be a tough climate out there, but turning the attacks inward isn't going to make that job any easier. They all should have seen this coming and they all should work together to make sure it doesn't happen again.
Senator Bob Menendez appeared on the Rachel Maddow show last night to discuss the State of the Union and the state of play going forward. Rachel started asking him about a memo regarding driving a wedge between the tea party movement and Republican party.
He said it's a question of whose side you are on. He talked about the GOP sitting on their hands over the bank fee, contributions in elections and regulatory reform. He said they don't stand with the average citizen. Rachel questioned about Blue Dog defections sapping the strength of the argument, but Menendez said that he suspects these are issues that the Blue Dogs will have to be on board with. I'd say that remains to be seen. Menendez says this election needs to be a contrast. You need to define yourself, define your opponent and give the voters a choice. He then talked about strategies for both the primary and general. You can see for yourself:
There were some important votes yesterday in the U.S. Senate, so I thought they deserve a post of their own.
Ben Bernancke was confirmed by a vote of 70-30, with opposition coming from both the right and the left. Both Bob Menendez and Frank Lautenberg voted "aye" as expected. I've already said it's a blunder to re-appoint him, but in the Senate's defense, it's more President Obama's blunder.
Both our senators also voted for "pay-as-you-go" rules, in a 60-40 party line vote. The rules will require any new spending or pay cuts to be "paid for" by other spending cuts or tax increases. Of course, such rules are dropped once the conservatives get power, but with the deficit at such a high level it's a good idea in my opinion, if the economic crisis is ending. That's an "if."
"During the Clinton years, we had massive economic growth and record budget surpluses, in no small part due to these fiscally-responsible rules. We have emerged from a year in which the threat of a second economic Depression forced the need for recovery spending, which both conservative and liberal economists have credited with helping to keep our economy afloat. However, our long-term focus has always been to return to the fiscal responsibility that was present during the Clinton years. This was reflected in President Obama's first budget proposal, which would significantly cut the budget deficit in the coming years. Today is another major step out of many that will restore budget discipline and help the economy grow."
The pay-as-you-go rules were attached to the debt ceiling increase, with a party-line vote of Democrats supporting and Republicans opposing. I personally view this as amusing since just a few years ago the debt increases passed with Democrats against and Republican in favor. It's just kabuki, none of the Senators would plunge the U.S. into fiscal crisis (on purpose.) On the other hand, I do wonder why the debt increase isn't included in the normal budget legislation. Anyone know the answer?
Hopeful wrote yesterday about the effort to obstruct and hold up Judge Greenaway from confirmation to the Court of Appeals for the third circuit. Along with the calls from our Legislators, many groups are now coming forward calling for an end to the hold. The NAACP pointed out that the seat will be vacant for 4 years at the end of this month:
the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF) called upon the United States Senate to confirm immediately Joseph Greenaway to the Third Circuit Court ofAppeals.
President Obama nominated Judge Greenaway on June 19,2009. Greenaway has served as a district court judge in New Jersey for nearly fourteen years. He was rated unanimously well-qualified by the American Bar Associatiofl. The Senate has yet to vote on his nomination.
Greenaway was approved in the Judiciary committee unanimously and there isn't opposition, just an anonymous hold. They also noted the significance of his nomination:
LDF also noted that Judge Greenaway's confirmatjon would do much to promote diversity on the Third Circuit. TheoThird Circuit was home to the first African-American federal judge, William Hastie, appointed in 1949. "Over sixty years later, there is again only one African American on the court --Theodore McKe.e. This is very distressing."
And the people for the American Way also called for an end to the hold:
"In the last year, the level of obstruction displayed by the GOP has been unprecedented," said Baker. "Although there's been much attention to Republican delay tactics aimed at high-profile nominees and legislation, Judge Greenaway illustrates the fact that even consensus picks with broad bipartisan support are being held up. None of us are well served by that situation. Joseph Greenaway should be confirmed without any further delay."
You can see Senator Lautenberg's floor remarks on the holding up of the Greenaway nomination here:Ultimately as Hopeful wrote in the initial diary, the question is what will they do to end the hold. At least if someone is going to put a hold, they should have to say they're doing it. Right now it appears they are just trying to have the pressure build, but that doesn't ensure any action. Just take the nominee to head the TSA, who couldn't even have an attempted attack on an airplane end the blocking of his nomination, to which he eventually withdrew. That position is still vacant as well, see a pattern?
One thing I enjoy reading and writing about is how government and candidates for office are using technology. A story in the NY Times says that Republicans in the House are kicking some serious Democrat donkey butt:
It may have been sort of a counterintuitive thought at one time, but it's become pretty well-established that Republicans on Capitol Hill have embraced Twitter more than Democrats.
But just how much congressional Republicans are out-Tweeting the Democrats may be a bit of a surprise. According to a new study from the public relations firm Fleishman-Hillard, House Republicans have pecked away on Twitter more than five times more frequently than their Democratic counterparts - sending out 29,162 tweets all told through Jan. 3, compared to 5,503 for Democrats.
In New Jersey, @Rep_Albio_Sires and @FrankPallone are our lone members on twitter in the House. @SenatorMenendez uses twitter from our Senate delegation, but the GOP clearly has more members utilizing the medium to communicate:
The study also found that about two-thirds of Congress' 132 active Tweeters are Republicans.
But what type of communicating they are doing offers the caveat to these numbers:
Many congressional Twitter users don't follow others or reTweet items, Mr. Senak said in an interview. "It can be more like one-way communication, which is not really what Twitter was designed for," he said. Mr. Senak, who writes a blog about the F.D.A., said curiosity about how lawmakers were discussing health care was a major reason he started the Twitter study.
If they're not utilizing the medium to create a dialogue, they're not getting the complete potential. See Cory Booker for an example of how you can harness the power of social media. But on top of that, it's troubling that our leaders aren't embracing new opportunities to interact with their consituents. I know it's hard to convey public policy in 140 characters, but if you use more words no one listens, are you better off passing up the opportunity at a captive audience? If you are on twitter, even though your member of Congress may not be, you can find and follow us @BlueJersey
While the decision of Byron Dorgan to not seek re-election to his Senate seat complicates things for Senator Menendez in his role leading the DSCC, Roll Call says it may put him in line for bigger and better things in the Democratic Leadership. The retirement creates an opening for the head of the Democratic Policy Committee and the Senator seems to be on the short list:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will appoint Dorgan's successor. As a result, lawmakers will not campaign among colleagues for the gavel but instead make quiet entreaties to their leader.
Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) is considered a likely candidate. During his career in the House, Menendez headed the Democratic Caucus. Reid appointed Menendez to the Finance Committee in January 2009, a move colleagues interpreted as a reward for his agreement to lead the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) this cycle.
One Democratic aide said the likelihood of Menendez landing the job depends on whether Reid promised him special consideration, in addition to the Finance appointment, in return for running the DSCC. The aide said Menendez's claim would also hinge on his track record as campaign chief, a job that got a little harder with the retirements of Dorgan and Sen. Chris Dodd (Conn.), as well as tough challenges in Arkansas, Pennsylvania and Nevada.
It appears that if Menendez can help the party hold their own in the 2010 Senate contests, he could be in line for bigger and better things within the leadership of the Senate Democrats. He may want to pay attention to Massachusetts before he gets to the November races because that special election appears to be much closer than many would prefer or expect.
The news this week that North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan and Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd will not run again for re-election only complicates things for Senator Menendez in his role leading the DSCC. The Dodd news could actually prove to make the seat more secure for Democrats, but the Dorgan seat will be an uphill climb to hold. Here's what the Senator had to say about things yesterday:
DSCC chair Robert Menendez, the chief of Dem efforts to hold the Senate, acknowledged that the party faces a "challenge" next year, and declined to predict whether Dems would hold their super-majority.
But Menendez pushed back hard on the emerging media meme that the Dem retirements spell doom for the party, arguing that the GOP is defending six open Senate seats. Menendez also refused to concede that Byron Dorgan's Senate seat is a certain pickup for the GOP, as many argue, vowing a vigorous contest for it, though he conceded that Rep Earl Pomeroy, the most sought after Dem candidate, wasn't running.
Along with the Dorgan and Dodd seats for the Democrats, the Senator had more to say about the prospects for the GOP maintaining their seats:
"I would say the optics of having six Republican open seats is more significant," Menendez insisted, when asked to comment on the Dems' chances in the wake of the news about the retirements. "They have to run the table to be even at the end of the day,"
He added five of the races in those states - Florida, Kentucky, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Kansas - are "very competitive," and vowed that Dems would benefit from the "bloody" GOP primaries underway in them.
They do have to run the table, but the climate may be a difficult one for Democrats to compete in. Follow me below the fold because there is plenty more to look at.
Senator Menendez appeared on Fox News Sunday yesterday with Senators Spector, DeMint and Shelby. The roundtable discussion covered the attempted airline attack on Christmas night first. Here is the exchange:DeMint decided that this was the time to take a shot at Unions say it would be their fault if we gave collective bargaining to airport workers saying it was the top priority of the administration. They then turned to Healthcare reform where Senator Menendez had this exchange with host Chris Wallace:
WALLACE: Senator Menendez, as a member of the Democratic leadership in the Senate, will the House basically have to accept the Senate compromise, given the fact that you passed your version without a vote to spare?
Well, I'm sure the conference will yield some changes, but the reality is, having served in the House and its leadership, I understand sometimes its frustrations with the Senate, but if we are going to have a final law, it will look a lot more like the Senate version than the House version.
And I'm sure there'll be some compromises, but at the end of the day, I would expect that it will look very much like the Senate version.
Wallace then gave DeMint another chance to take shots at just about everyone asking if he would file suit over the healthcare bill. Make sure you check out the exchange between Wallace and Menendez on the agenda for next year where the Senator tries to put things in perspective for the host.
Limbaugh got his daily health care diatribe going by airing a sound clip of Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) on the Senate floor last night calling for people to "turn off" Rush Limbaugh and leave politics "in the cloakroom." Rush derided Menendez, calling him a "buffoon" and declared that ideology was the only way to beat the bill.
Here is the segment from Rush's show. First he played the Senator's comments and then made the statement:Well of course Rush is in charge of issuing the buffoon membership cards. I'm sure the Senator won't be able to sleep tonight knowing how Rush feels about him.
