Open Letter To Every California Democrat Running For Congress

The Responsible Plan to end the war in Iraq is the first tangible and conprehensive strategy to not only end the war, but to reform the structures that caused this disaster in the first place.  It accords with the first principles of all Democrats, to responsibly protect our citizens while restoring our moral and political authority at home and abroad, renewing our capacity to self-determination in our national economy, and return the rights and protections of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to the American people.  I urge you to watch the presentation and read the Responsible Plan, as I have done.  And then please understand that, speaking just for myself, the only way you can earn my support in your electoral battles in 2008 is by endorsing it.

When I say “support” I do not mean voting; I would happily vote for any California Democrat over any California Republican in a head-to-head matchup.  I mean my SUPPORT.  That means my time, my energy, my effort, my enthusiasm, and my dollars.  For five years, progressives have stood by helpless as they watched their country taken to war based on deception, and kept in an occupation based on fecklessness.  While this plan, which encompasses not just the military, humanitarian and diplomatic solutions for Iraq, but stopping torture, restoring habeas corpus, starting a new green energy economy, media consolidation reform, ending the use of signing statements, and all of the other structures that have brought us to this point, parallels in its comprehensiveness the Contract With America, there is one crucial difference.  Newt Gingrich supplied the Contract With America from the top-down, giving it to Congressional candidates as a tool to use in their campaigns (also, he didn’t do it until 6 weeks before the election and it was used mostly as a media tool).  This is a candidate-written, candidate-implemented, candidate-structured proposal from a group of progressive challengers who hold no current power in the Congress or the leadership of the party, culling from the ideas and concerns of the rank and file to put forth a full set of policy options to end the war and radically change how we view national security.  This is the FIRST plan that citizens can use to do something real and tangible to truly revolutionize the debate in Washington.  This is coming from the bottom up, and as a Congressional candidate you can catch the wave and join the commitment of the people, or sit at home.

As a California Congressional candidate, you have a unique role to play in this debate.  You can support this plan and avow that you are committed to this nation’s security, and earn my support, or you can choose not to support it, and earn nothing.  This is non-negotiable.  There are 10 candidates signed on to this plan, and plenty of others that I’m sure will welcome the support from myself and millions of others like me who are desperate to end this war and change our failed national security strategy.  We are the people who stuff envelopes and walk precincts and write about candidates and generate buzz and enthusiasm.  And we will work like hell for the candidates behind the Responsible Plan.  And they will win, and receive a mandate to implement these policies and change the conversation on national security in this country.  

Incidentally, as a California congressmember, you have the ability to co-sponsor a number of these initiatives, as they have been introduced in the House already.  Please do so immediately.  Thank you.

David Dreier Caught Up In An Ethics Scandal

( – promoted by David Dayen)

In recent days we’ve been talking about how incompetent individual Republican congressmen have been as guardians and stewards of public money. The current catastrophe on Wall Street flows directly out a GOP ideology of greed and selfishness that takes the laissez faire approach to such extremes that abuses, like the ones being exposed now, are positively invited. But that isn’t the only financial scandal congressional Republicans are choking on. We’ve talked about the billions of dollars “missing” in the Iraq mess, missing meaning stolen by defense contractors who are kicking it back to their Republican patrons. With a policy of GOP obstructionism in full force, it will take Henry Waxman’s Committee on Oversight and Government Reform years to sort that all out. But still another Republican financial mess is one they actually do want to get to the bottom of– and pronto.  

One of their own, National Republican Congressional Committee Treasurer Christopher Ward, has been systematically embezzling hundreds of thousands, probably, millions of dollars in campaign contributions– and not just from the hapless (and broke) NRCC, but also from dozens of individual GOP congressmen who hired Ward to run their fundraising operations. So far, it doesn’t look like any of them were party to the embezzlement– but they are certainly guilty of gross incompetence. This guy has been stealing them blind for most of the past decade.

Most of the victims are trying to hide the fact from the public that they have been suckered, but it’s starting to dribble out, one congressman at a time. Frankly, I don’t know if California’s David Dreier was ripped off by Christopher Ward or not; I can’t get a straight answer out of his office. But I expect we will find out that Dreier was indeed one of the victims of this Republican’s Republican. This morning Roll Call did disclose that this would certainly not be the first time Dreier has been less than scrupulous is watching out his financial obligation.

They are reporting that Dreier “failed to disclose tens of thousands of dollars in profits he made on stock sales on his annual financial disclosure forms for the past several years.” That’s a crime. Now that he’s been caught, Dreier is scurrying around trying to amend his disclosure forms for 2004, 2005, 2006, “listing 86 separate stock sales for which his profits were not previously disclosed, totaling between $85,000 and $263,000 in income.” Dreier claims it was not intentional. So I guess he’s pleading… incompetence?

Since 2003, Dreier’s disclosure forms have reported his stock transactions, including the total value of each sale, but have not indicated how much profit he earned from those sales. For example, Dreier reported in 2005 that he sold Motorola stock with a total value of between $15,001 and $50,000. But his list of income sources for that year reported only $1-$200 worth of “dividends” from the Motorola stock, making no mention of the more than $5,000 in profits that Dreier netted from the sale.

Under House rules, each Member of Congress files a personal financial disclosure form every year listing income, assets, liabilities and transactions. The ethics committee provides instructions for filling out these forms that stipulate that capital gains from stock sales must be listed as income in “Schedule III”– the income table– of the form. A stock that is sold in its entirety is to be listed as having no value at the end of the year (because the Member no longer owns it), but any dividends earned prior to the sale and any income from the sale are to be listed in the various ranges provided on the form– $1-$200; $201-$1,000; $1,001-$2,500, etc.

The same sales must also be recorded in “Schedule IV”– the transaction section– indicating the date of the sale and the total value of the transaction, in broader ranges of $1,001-$15,000; $15,001-$50,000, etc.

This year Dreier faces the toughest opposition of his political career, progressive Democrat Russ Warner. Russ’ campaign manager, Kristin Points explained to the local media that “These are basic rules that everyone in Congress is required to follow– the Ethics Committee even has workshops and handouts to make sure they are understood. The idea that David Dreier, who has been in Congress for 27 years, wouldn’t know how to fill out a basic financial disclosure form is absurd.” Actually, it’s worse than absurd since he’d been filling them out properly until 2003.

Russ brought up a good point that I hadn’t connected when I real the Roll Call story. Dreier was one of the leaders of the fight to kill the new ethics legislation last week. At the time, I couldn’t understand why he was so adamantly opposed to putting some teeth into the ethics process. I do now.

“I guess it’s no surprise given these repeated failures to comply with House ethics rules that David Dreier just recently voted against the tough new ethics rules the House of Representatives just passed. I’m running for office because we deserve better than the scandal-plagued culture of corruption that has taken root in Washington.  David Dreier has been in Congress for 27 years, and it is time for a change.”

You like the idea of clean– and competent– government? Blue America has endorsed Russ Warner and his contribution site is open, 24/7.

“It’s a paradigm shifting election.” An interview with Nick Leibham

I shared breakfast with Nick Leibham last week and discussed where he stands on a number of issues.  I mostly just lobbed topics and let him talk; this is the relevant transcript edited to be a remotely reasonable length and minus fun stuff like us chatting with the waitress and our occasional divergence into non-relevant shop talk.  Some parts I liked, some parts less so. But here it is.  Note this is a contested primary.

Iraq

Each and every day we remain in Iraq we’re compromising our national security further. It’s a blood feud that goes back 1400 years between the Sunnis and Shiites. American military forces are not going to be able to sort this out for them and at the end of the day they’ve got to want peace; they’ve got to want their own stable form of government; they’ve got to want democracy more than the American Marine Corps wants it for them

The longer that we’re there, the more strain it puts on our own men and women in uniform. They’re going out on third, fourth, fifth tours of duty, and you read about it all the time of course because we’re just miles away from Camp Pendleton

We need to come out and we need to set a date certain for when we are going to redeploy out of Iraq.

Military and Security

There’s one…threshold question that needs to be answered whenever even the thought of American military use is involved, and that is ‘Is it in the interests of the United States of America; Is it in the national security interest?’  Obviously the United States military has a role to play in ferreting out al Qaeda, in ferreting out terrorist organizations, in…making sure that our own interests abroad are taken care of.

But the United States military has no business in trying to create whole cloth [or] molding different societies.  It’s kind of antithetical- democracy can’t be imposed at gunpoint.  

They’ve got to figure it out for themselves. It can’t be the United States government doing it for them.

Immigration

The most fundamental job of a nation is to protect its sovereignty, and when you can’t secure your borders and ports you can’t protect your sovereignty…As a nation we need to recognize that we are going to have to put a significant amount of money, time and effort into suring up our southern border.

As a former prosecutor…if you really want to dry up illegal immigration, you hold employers accountable, and I’ll be the only one up on stage that has ever prosecuted an employer for hiring illegal immigrants. After that’s done, you get to other questions.

Health Care and SCHIP

We should be providing health care to kids and Brian Bilbray has staked out a position of essentially rabid ideology at the expense of some 10 million American kids…I think that it’s a disgrace that he decided to stand on ideology and stand with the President as opposed to providing these kids with proper medical care.  I think it’s just very mean-spirited and worse, it’s bad public policy.

My endpoint [on health care] is that every family should be able to see a family doctor of their choosing. The way in which we get there I think is going to be a battle royale come January 2009. And what is being pitched today out on the campaign trail- there isn’t going to be even a shade of resemblance once this thing actually gets done.

There is a little bit of overlap between Democrats and Republicans on a few issues. One, I think all parties agree that you’re going to have to see rapid and massive adoption of information technology and digital patient files.  That will cut down on everything from medical errors to back office expense.  And the estimates on what that would shave off- I’ve seen 10-12% of the total healthcare dollars. Secondly, another overlapping area is preventative care.  There are certain areas of medicine where this makes a lot of sense. This makes a lot of sense in the area of inoculations…it makes a lot of sense as it concerns preventative screening for certain diseases.  From a cost benefit analysis and a quality of years lived analysis.

You’ve got to have a very serious debate on how else you get there. we’re the only westernized country in the world that tells the pres drug companies that they can charge anything they want and it doesn’t matter…I think that’s something that needs to be addressed.

What that final product is going to look like, I’m not exactly sure.  But I know that…we need to look at that end goal…and say let’s try to get there.

FISA

we spoke briefly about the general nature of modern privacy before FISA

What’s much MUCH more disconcerting to me is the entire FISA bill…As somebody who has been a prosecutor and dealt with the 4th Amendment, I can tell you that this happened to have been the one amendment in the Bill of Rights that all the Founding Fathers could agree upon; that in order for the government intrusion there had to be probable cause signed off on by an independent magistrate that says you may have committed a crime. I find the entire FISA process to be constitutionally dubious. That doesn’t mean that it couldn’t be made constitutionally valid but I think that anytime you have wiretaps involved…that deals with an American citizen, you’ve gotta have a court sign off on it.  The only question in my mind is whether or not that has to be done prior to there warrant being executed or whether or not there is some grace period.  There is no doubt in my mind that the executive branch itself cannot act as both overseer and executioner (of warrants or wiretaps). That, I think, is constitutionally impermissible; I think it’s a violation of the judiciary’s proper role of interpreting laws.

As a former prosecutor [and] law clerk in the US Attorney’s office in the Major Frauds and Economic Crimes section…I’ve never heard of anybody being given immunity when you don’t know what they’ve done. It’s not how the immunity process works.  You don’t say to somebody ‘Whatever you’ve done, don’t worry about it.’…It’s unthinkable to me as a lawyer and as somebody who will have…sworn to uphold the Constitution that I could ever support that.

California Emissions and the Environment

I’m not a scientist, but from what I have read…the EPA seems to have made their decision to deny California its waiver based on faith based science. That’s not good enough. If it’s warranted by the facts and the evidence, it should be granted.  During the next administration, if it’s a Democrat, I think we’ll get a fair hearing. And if we don’t, that’s ripe for congressional action to clarify the rule. Because it’s the congress that makes the laws, the executive branch simply carries out those laws.

The debate on the science (of global warming) is over. There is no doubt in any serious scientist’s mind that global warming is happening. There is virtually no doubt that mankind is directly causing global warming. The only question at this point is ‘What is the causal relationship and what are the consequences going forward?’

The role of government as it concerns energy and the environment I think is going to be crucial in the next 5, 10, 20 years. One of the things I very much hope to work on as a member of Congress…is pursuing and advocating for alternative energy in the areas of wind, solar, some biomass, hydrogen. And the role of the government here is to set high standards, it’s to help foster innovation- especially in the very early stages of research and development- and then I think it’s to turn it over to the market who does a great job of packaging this up…and if people can make a…fortune doing it, great. It makes good public policy, it’s good politics, I think it’s a good way to return some manufacturing to…the Americas.

It’s also an issue of national security. We send hundreds of billions of dollars each year to…Middle Eastern regimes many of them hostile to our interests. We know…that some of that money ends up with Hezbollah; that it ends up with Hamas; some of it filters down and ends up with al Qaeda. We’re funding both sides of the war in this particular time.

Then there is the great moral calling of our time which is addressing the global warming problem itself…There is no doubt that our kids will bear the full brunt of this, and we need to figure out now a way to mitigate it because to do anything other than that is nothing short of…long-term child abuse.

Economy

Two prime reasons (for the current economic situation).  One, it has been fiscal insanity on the part of the Bush administration…We see that in everything from the weakness of the dollar which hits you…at the pump and in the grocery aisle, to being able to sure up many of those social programs which we know have a pending disaster: Medicare, Social Security, our infrastructure, etc.  Secondly, the war. You cannot talk about anything else in this campaign until you address the war.

We are spending- the estimates are- $10-12 billion a month.  We have direct outlays to Iraq…upwards and including $500 billion.  For one single solitary day of war making in Iraq, we could have sent 160,000 low-income students to college for a year.  For 3 1/2 months of war in Iraq we could have provided healthcare coverage to those 10 million…American kids for 5 years under SCHIP.  Until we end that, again, we are committing long term fiscal child abuse.  Because we’re not paying for it…we’re borrowing money from…foreign creditors to finance this thing. It’s completely and totally irresponsible and it must end.

There’s some middle class tax cuts that…we should retain. We should retain the 15% capital gains rate as opposed to seeing it revert back to 20%. More than 50 million Americans at this point have 401Ks; hat benefits them greatly.  We need to once and for all end the AMT.  These last couple years it has snagged a whole cross section of our population that it was never meant to hit, and the doubling of the child tax credit is a positive thing. It’s a positive thing for San Diego families and San Diego parents.  Of course, the recklessness as it concerns the Bush giveaways in terms of the top 1%- no. That’s fiscal insanity and I will be a voice to end it.

Most interesting for me was an interlude about halfway through the interview where we lapsed into discussing this year’s election in an historical context:

We win this fight because their platform is old and it’s worn out…The Reagan Revolution…which started really in 1964 with Goldwater’s defeat…it culminated in 1980 and 1994 and the end of the Bush years are a bookend. It’s tired, it’s played out, and it no longer offers up a positive agenda for America. This isn’t just a change election in the sense of Democrats or Republicans.  This is a paradigm shifting election and Democrats can capture that…they’ve got a lot of work to do but we can capture it and I think the pendulum is swinging our way.

A Responsible Plan for America’s Iraq involvement

(It’s live now. Check out the stream. – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

At the NOI blogger summit yesterday, Darcy Burner, who is running for Congress against Dave Reichert in Washington’s 8th District, dropped by to talk about her plan for Iraq. She ran a very strong race in 2006, and local Democrats have high hopes for the race.  But Burner, who got an influx of cash from the Burn Bush Fundraiser, isn’t just running on the same old milquetoast campaign.  She’s running a policy focused campaign, a rarity in modern politics.

Her latest effort, is the Responsible Plan. The link will go live at about 5:30 EDT/2:30 PDT. At the launch of the site, Darcy will be hosting a launch live here at TBA that will be streamed live here.  Already 10 congressional challengers have signed on to the plan, and hopefully more will sign on soon. This could be a really big boost to the anti-war movement in Congress. This will be a clear mandate to those who are elected that they should end the Iraq war.

Over the flip, I’ve posted the stream channel. If it works properly, I’ll boost it up.

General John Johns talks about the Responsible Plan for Iraq.

CA-41: Public Integrity Unit Investigating Jerry Lewis Disbanded

Congressman Jerry Lewis sleeps well at night knowing there is a Bush Justice Department, from The Recorder (reg. required) (h/t TPM):

Federal prosecutors who work public corruption cases in Los Angeles had a vastly different week than their counterparts in Manhattan.

While the East Coast AUSAs enjoyed national celebrity for bringing down Gov. Eliot Spitzer, Los Angeles U.S. Attorney Thomas O’Brien disbanded his public integrity unit last Monday. Those 17 attorneys will be redistributed among the major fraud and organized crime sections, which now will have a mandate to battle corruption, spokesman Thom Mrozek said.

Yes, it is that LA USA office:

Wong Yang was heading up the investigation into Rep. Jerry Lewis’s (R-Calif.) ties to a lobbying firm and the millions of dollars in contracts the firm’s clients received from Congress. Wong Yang, the first Asian-American woman to serve as a U.S. attorney, left her post with Justice to become a partner at Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher, the law firm representing Lewis. She will co-chair the firm’s crisis-management practice group, along with Washington, D.C., partner Theodore B. Olson, a former Bush administration solicitor general.

Looks like the ultimate in crisis-management. Wow.

The Final, Final, Final Numbers from the Feb. 5 Primary

OK, on Saturday the Secretary of State’s office released the final official canvass of the vote in California.  The statewide numbers are here.  The district-level numbers are here.  A few notes:

• Turns out that, in final balloting, Hillary Clinton surged to 62.88% of the head-to-head vote in CA-51, giving her a 3-1 split in that district.  So the final delegate numbers will be 204-166.  So Clinton got 54.4% of the head-to-head vote against Barack Obama, and 55.14% of the delegates.

• The final percentage spread between Clinton and Obama was 8.3%, noticeably lower than previous reports.

• We had over 5 million voters participate in the California Democratic primary.  That’s 55% of the total votes cast and over SEVENTY-FOUR PERCENT of registered Democratic voters.  Wow.  Those numbers are here.  We also received two million more votes in the Democratic primary than in the Republican primary.  The total turnout was the highest ever by raw numbers, and the highest as a percentage of registered voters since 1980, when some guy named Reagan was on the ballot.

You can get to all the numbers from here, a lot of fun stuff in there.

Take Back America

Another day, more bloggers.  I began the day hanging out at the “blogger boulevard.” The Cafepress folks came by with news that Obama is clinging to his lead in the random buying-stuff primary (with a substantial lead in the T-shirt and thong(huh?) categories).  Dave Johnson, Chris Bowers, Gina Cooper, and lots of other cool people were haning out there.

I’m now sitting in a health care session with Jacob Hacker, Ezra Klein and a few others.  Oh, and Jack Layton, the leader of the NDP in Canada is here. It’s quite interesting hearing these people together. You have single payer, PDA folks arguing for their plan. You have Hacker and, to a greater extent, Klein arguing for political realism. Take Back America is a really interesting mix of old style activism with new school communications. I’m looking forward to some of these sessions this week.

Nuñez’s House Cleaning

Because I’m dumb: corrected to Portantino from Portafino

Rep. Anthony Portantino got a fax last week informing him that he was no longer chairing the Education Committee.  Rep. Hector De La Torre lost his chairmanship of the Rules Committee and won’t even get to stay on the committee.  The LA Times and the Pasadena Star News, along with Capitol Weekly, paint the moves as some combination of retribution for running for Speaker (both ran against Karen Bass) and lining up Bass’ preferred leadership ahead of her taking over the Speakership.

Steve Maviglio, in his normally flowery language, said simply “it’s an internal caucus matter.”  Both Portantino and De La Torre have said they spoke to Bass and she told them she knew nothing about the demotions.  If you’ve been living under a rock lately, you may have missed that Education is rather a hot topic about now in the halls of the Capitol, so a shakeup at the top of the committee is notable.  And the Rules Committee is always a big deal, so swapping out a recent Bass (and Nunez) competitor for Ted Leiu (who’s long been in Nunez’s and Bass’ respective camps) and dropping De La Torre all the way off the committee, well…that’s also notable.

If anything, it brings into stark contrast two competing governing theories.  Some people want to govern surrounded by the folks who get to the top based entirely on their merits, some prefer to be surrounded by the folks they work best with.  Certainly this isn’t a cut-and-dried contrast between the two options, but I’m sure it sets (or reinforces more likely) a standard of discouraging people for aspiring to higher positions lest they be punished for it.

Building a solid global warming plan?

Yesterday at the NOI blogger summit, I attended the energy and environment discussion group hosted by some of the good energy folks at the Center for American Progress. A great chunk of it was devoted to the possible plans for a cap and trade system. Do we sell the credits in an auction process, or do we do, as industry favors, just hand out the credits to the major global warming gas emitters. In the sulfur dioxide cap and trade system used to fight acid rain, we handed out the credits to the major polluters. The acid rain cap and trade system was enormously successful despite the concern over the possible benefits to current polluters, much of which concerns favoring current businesses over new businesses.

Acid rain was a big deal, sure, but global warming might end up being the challenge of our generation, and the ensuing generations, in a way that acid rain never was.  Over in Europe, they have a cap and trade system where they handed the credits out.  In the end, they had to take them all back and auction them off to make the system really work.

Today the discussion comes to California, as the Air Resouces Board meets at the CalEPA building this afternoon to discuss possibilities for a cap and trade system to impliment AB 32.  It's not clear that cap and trade is the only answer.  We could, of course, just regulate emissions, but the free market folks love these experiments in the “invisible hand.” The creation of such a system was actually a significant holdup in the passage of AB 32.  But, the Air Resources Board seems set on creating such a system.

However, if we do this, we need to carefully consider how this done. We need to look to Europe, and look at the past cap and trade systems.  And, oh, yeah, costs.  Given the current budget environment, the answer as to whether we should sell or give the credits away seems obvious. If we auction the credits, we can use the revenue to help encourage methods to eliminate carbon in our atmosphere and allow new corporations to enter the market  at an even playing field.   So, let's see what Mary Nichols has to say.