Chris Bowers advises that the House will be going ahead with housing legislation tomorrow that would allow bankruptcy judges to modify the terms of mortgages to reflect current home values and allow homeowners to avoid foreclosure (commonly known as “cram-down”.  As I discussed with Rep. John Conyers, the author of this bill, this would not encourage bankruptcy but help people avoid it, giving them a level playing field to get banks to follow through with loan modifications.  While practically every other property someone owns can have the terms rewritten by a bankruptcy judge, primary residences are excluded.  That is arbitrary and wrong, and changing it would reduce foreclosures and homelessness and bring some stability to the housing market.  This legislation is supported by the President and included in his housing plan, but a change in the law like this should be passed by the Congress to make it a federal statute.

Bowers writes:

Tomorrow, the House will vote on Representative Conyer’s bankruptcy cram down. The whip count is unclear right now, but some Blue Dogs and New Democrats, including Melissa Bean (D-IL), Dennis Moore (D-KS), and New Democratic chair Ellen Tauscher (D-CA), are working on behalf of the financial services industry to water down the legislation. Tauscher in particular is problematic, both because of her leadership role in one of the ideological caucuses, and also because rumors are that she has organized up to two dozen members thus far. It is about time that Tauscher, and the Representatives she is organizing, stop listening to industry lobbyists who do not have the public interest in mind.

So, let’s make Representative Tauscher listen to someone else right now. Contact Ellen Tauscher, and urge her to stop organizing other Democrats to water down HR 200. She needs to listen to honewoners, not to the financial industry that got us into this economic disaster.

Here is the contact information:

Email form (California residents only)

D.C. office: 202.225.1880

Ellen Tauscher’s New Democrat ways haven’t surfaced much since the threatened primary challenge in 2007, but torpedoing this bill would bring that back all over again.  She needs to know that people are watching her and want to be sure that she is protecting homeowners and not the big banks and lenders.

Please contact her now or in the morning.

They’re not two of my favorite California Congresswoman.  But their leadership on repealing don’t ask don’t tell comes to a head with a hearing today, chaired by Davis.

Democrats in Congress hope to ignite a drive to reverse the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy Wednesday with the first hearing on the subject since 1993, when President Clinton said gays could serve in uniform if they kept quiet about their sexual orientation.

Without this hearing, said former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman John Shalikashvili, “you will never repeal the law. It’s a great idea.” He is among more than 50 retired generals and admirals who have said it is time to rethink the policy […]

Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee tried to have a hearing on the policy in April 2007, but opposition from conservatives in their party sank the idea.

Since then, “There’s another year in the war,” says Rep. Susan Davis, a California Democrat who chairs the military personnel subcommittee. “We want to start a conversation” that could put the issue on a front burner again.

Democratic Rep. Ellen Tauscher of California, the lead sponsor of a bill to repeal the policy, said she knows what military leaders would say if they testified.

“The military leadership will tell you that this is the law they’ve been given to operate under and that’s what they do,” she says, “which is a very different question of off-line and off-the-record, ‘Personally, admiral, what do you think?’ That’s the only way they could answer … differently.”

The Pentagon may be ducking this hearing, but they can’t hide from public opinion.  Over 75 percent of Americans would like to see DADT repealed.  The arguments about “unit cohesion” have been shown to be ridiculous, and the case of Arabic translators being fired for being gay have highlighted not only the absurdity of this policy, but the national security harm it’s actually doing.

The most fitting part of all of this is that Larry Craig supports Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.  Yeah, he would, wouldn’t he?  I’m sure he’d love to change the title to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Just Tap Three Times,” but then…

UPDATE: Rep. Patrick Murphy (from my hometown) had a great hearing.  He kicked a little butt today.  Video on the flip:

Kos has an important post on 2010 marking a pivot for the grassroots and netroots from trying to take back the federal government from Republicans to reforming our Party and holding Democrats accountable.

If your local congresscritter is one of the bad apples, start organizing locally. Plug into existing networks or start your own. Begin looking for primary challengers. Do the groundwork. Don’t expect help from the local party establishment, they’ll close ranks. So tap into alternate infrastructures. Find allies in the progressive movement. If your local shitty Democrat is anti-union, approach the unions. They’d love to send this kind of message. If the Democrat is anti-choice, work with the women’s groups. If the Democrat is anti-environment … you get the idea. If you have access to professional networks and money, start organizing those.

Of course, this takes more than just bitching about your frustrations on a blog, damning a whole party for the actions of a minority more scared of Mr. 28% than of protecting the Constitution they swore to protect. This takes hard work. But now is the time to start.

Indeed. The activists that meet campaigning this fall will form the core of next cycle’s primary efforts. Kos suggests looking at The Capitulation Caucus with emphasis on those who are also Blue Dogs. In California, that means:

Joe Baca, Dennis Cardoza, Jim Costa, Jane Harman, and Adam Schiff

Kos also praises Loretta Sanchez as one of only four Blue Dogs who didn’t cave on defending the Constitution from retroactive immunity. And remember, Ellen Tauscher was a member of the Blue Dogs until she saw the successful primarying of Joe Lieberman and occupies a district designed for a challenge from the left (and west).

The following California Democrats caved on retroactive immunity and disregarded their oath to, “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic”:

Joe Baca, Howard Berman, Dennis Cardoza, Jim Costa, Jane Harman, Jerry McNerney, Nancy Pelosi, Brad Sherman, Adam Schiff, Ellen Tauscher

Pete Stark did not vote. This is the list of those who are potential targets of the Blue America PAC vs Retroactive Immunity which as of now has raised $310,673 to, “fund accountability for congressmembers supporting retroactive immunity and warrantless wiretaps.” This money isn’t going to send thank you cards to the members who did defend the constitution, this is primary money and cold cash to dump Steny Hoyer from leadership (Rahm Emanuel also capitulated).

As the battle moves to the Senate, all eyes are on Barack Obama nationally and Dianne Feinstein locally [(202) 224-3841].

As for 2010 primaries, it will be interesting to see what comes out of this. Carole Migden’s 3rd place finish showed that entrenched politics matters less in a modern media environment. Ellen Tauscher is again practically begging to be primaried and in that district she’s walking on thin ice. Joe Baca deserves particular scorn as the only Californian to sign the Blue Dog letter to Pelosi pushing capitulation (and a primary of Baca could probably receive significant institutional support from former members of the Hispanic Caucus). McNerney has outdone himself in contracting a full-blown case of Potomic Fever during his first term, every time he makes a move I think about asking for a refund. And Harman and Berman voting to cover-up warrantless wiretapping isn’t going to do much to quell the rumors that they are pushing this because they are worried about their own culpability on the issue.

If you live in one of this districts, please call your member and ask them why. Comments and diaries with responses are highly encouraged.

In last year’s front page Washington Post story on Ellen Tauscher, Iraq took center stage:

[Tauscher] then raced to catch the last minutes of an Armed Services Committee hearing, just in time to question Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. As five women from the antiwar group Code Pink stood in protest, Tauscher asked two quick questions: Why didn’t Bush’s budget increase production of the C-17, a plane based at Travis? And how much would the president’s troop increase cost?

[…]

But Code Pink activist Zanne Joi, whose shirt read “Stop Funding, Start Impeaching,” was not impressed. She said she was horrified that Tauscher hadn’t challenged Gates about Iraq, that she had treated the increase as a done deal. “We need her to stand up and end this war,” said Joi.

Interestingly, at the Petraeus hearing last week, it was Tauscher with the most interesting line of questioning. And two weeks ago, at what was billed as a “major address” before the Contra Costa Council, Ellen Tauscher went hard against Iraq:

A former stockbroker rated as a political moderate by the National Journal, Tauscher is well-liked at the Contra Costa Council, a group largely made up of dues-paying business leaders.

But her ardent Iraq war views engendered limited vocal enthusiasm among the more conservative crowd.

That did not slow Tauscher, who devoted at least half of her speech to Iraq.

Back to the Washington Post story, remember this?

But Kos points to Harman as a perfect example of how the Net roots can keep Democrats in line. He said Harman used to be a constant irritant, a go-to quote for reporters looking for a Democrat to tweak liberals — until she had to fight off a primary challenge from the left in 2006. “She’s been great ever since,” he said. Now Harman even writes on the liberal Huffington Post blog.

Kos can imagine a day when Tauscher still holds her seat but is no longer distasteful to the left. “That’s what victory would look like — a more responsive representative,” he said. So when Tauscher praises Pelosi as “perfect on substance, perfect on optics,” it’s hard to know if that’s a result of personal evolution, political trends, or blogospheric pressure, but it’s music to Kos’s ears. It’s helpful to Democratic leaders, too.

Said Rosenthal, the Working for Us founder: “We want them to understand what we’re doing helps and enhances the majority.”

Indeed.

Woohoo! Jerry did it! Jerry McNerney has managed to become the most un-progressive Democrat of the entire California congressional delegation. For those keeping score at home, Jerry’s 82.45 was about a half point lower than the next CA Dem, Jim Costa, that progressive stalwart, at 82.97. And for all the talk of Harman changing her ways, she’s still worse than even Joe Baca, almost 7 points worse from a very safe Dem seat.

For all of you CA-45 fans, “moderate” Mary Bono came in with a stellar 4.42 Chips are Down score. So, for all the bluster of the SCHIP vote, she’s still dancing the same jig as the rest of her party.

On thing must be said, the Speaker has done an excellent job at preserving unity amongst the caucus. Whether that means she’s being too incremental and/or ineffective, or just laying down the law is the big question. The reason her approval rating, and the Congress in general, is down has a whole lot to do with the fact that little has changed on the Iraq front. So, would it be better to have a speaker who is more willing to take risks? Perhaps, but the impediment of the president always lingers over her head, veto pen in hand. So, whether the unity is really there, is an open question. Full data over the flip.

(I was working on a similar post, but I’ll still post my own, with all CA data and some other miscellany. – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

The problem with most scorecards is that they are written by lobbyists concerned with always getting the votes of potential supporters. Thus, there is an equal weighting while in the real world not all votes are equal. In fact, regardless of everything else, some votes are dealbreakers and when they show up on scorecards as one of 12 votes or something, it looks silly. However, Progressive Punch has a new “when the chips are down” scorecard. After the flip is the ratings of CA’s congressional delegation, in descending order.

Senate:

92.86 Boxer, Barbara
90.45 Feinstein, Dianne

House:

100.00 Pelosi, Nancy
98.43 Sánchez, Linda T.
97.49 Capps, Lois
97.18 Lee, Barbara
96.43 Richardson, Laura
96.24 Solis, Hilda L.
95.92 Woolsey, Lynn C.
95.91 Filner, Bob
95.30 Matsui, Doris O.
95.19 Becerra, Xavier
94.98 Farr, Sam
94.67 Honda, Michael M.
94.65 Lofgren, Zoe
94.03 Roybal-Allard, Lucille
93.42 Napolitano, Grace F.
93.42 Thompson, Mike
93.38 Eshoo, Anna G.
93.31 Waters, Maxine
93.20 Miller, George
93.10 Davis, Susan A.
93.10 Tauscher, Ellen O.
92.79 Sherman, Brad
92.45 Schiff, Adam B.
92.38 Berman, Howard L.
91.80 Watson, Diane E.
90.51 Lantos, Tom
90.28 Baca, Joe
90.19 Sanchez, Loretta
89.49 Waxman, Henry A.
87.74 Stark, Fortney Pete
84.86 Cardoza, Dennis A.
83.86 Harman, Jane
82.97 Costa, Jim
82.45 McNerney, Jerry

I’m guessing that at tonight’s Calitics’ Actblue Celebrations there will be a lot of discussion about the votes to condemn MoveOn. The CA delegation split 50-50 in the senate and 16 yea and 17 nay in the house — wedged successfully by the GOP in half. After the flip is the scorecard.

Senate
Yea
Diane Feinstein

Nay
Barbara Boxer

House
Yea
Joe Baca (CA-43)
Dennis Cardoza (CA-18)
Jim Costa (CA-20)
Susan Davis (CA-53)
Anna Eshoo (CA-14)
Sam Farr (CA-17)
Jane Harman (CA-36)
Tom Lantos (CA-12)
Jerry McNerney (CA-11)
Grace Napolitano (CA-38)
Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Loretta Sanchez (CA-47)
Adam Schiff (CA-29)
Ellen Tauscher (CA-10)
Mike Thompson (CA-1)

Nay
Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Howard Berman (CA-28)
Lois Capps (CA-23)
Bob Filner (CA-51)
Mike Honda (CA-15)
Barbara Lee (CA-9)
Zoe Lofgren (CA-16)
Doris Matsui (CA-5)
George Miller (CA-7)
Linda Sanchez (CA-39)
Brad Sherman (CA-27)
Hilda Solis (CA-32)
Pete Stark (CA-13)
Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Diane Watson (CA-33)
Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Lynn Woolsey (CA-6)

What happened? Right after the 2006 election of Jerry McNerney, there was a lot of talk here at Calitics and over at the Big Orange about how there was going to be a primary challenger to Ellen Tauscher because she was too much of a loyal Bushie for her district and her eager servile support for the Bankruptcy Abomination bill.

So what happened?

I, for one, am kinda tired of listening to the Dems (when they are out of power) saying that they want to change things, and then the corporations wave some checks around and … poof! ‘CCA’ or ‘Corporate Cash Amnesia’ sets in.

The question for the blogosphere is:  “Are we going to fall for their crap again?” Just because they are ‘Democrats’, or just because Nancy Pelosi ‘likes them’ now, are we going to support the same old ‘Dem’ centerists who betray us time after time?

Has Nancy Pelosi been a disappointment or what? 

At least the Rethugs are consistently anti-middle class. Doncha just hate it when some hypocrite tells you how they “Support the troops(TM)”, while betraying them, or, they say ‘The Bankruptcy Bill Should Be Changed’ while doing absolutely NOTHING to change it?

Save me from ‘Dem’ Judas Iscariots.

–Lefty!!!