Bluestem Prairie: news about Tim Walz (MN-1)

Ixnay on the apple pie, too? WaPo reports House GOP votes against moms

We've been chronicling the financial and ethical woes of the NRCC and House Republicans for the last few days here at the Bluestem Prairie. And after Congressman Walz mentioned the nuisance votes that House Republicans, we went to Thomas and looked at the frivolous motions to adjourn that were impeding the people's business over the last few days..

But nothing prepared us for Dana Milbank's headline this morning in the Washington Post: Republicans Vote Against Moms; No Word Yet on Puppies, Kittens.  The details:

It was already shaping up to be a difficult year for congressional Republicans. Now, on the cusp of Mother's Day, comes this: A majority of the House GOP has voted against motherhood.

On Wednesday afternoon, the House had just voted, 412 to 0, to pass H. Res. 1113, "Celebrating the role of mothers in the United States and supporting the goals and ideals of Mother's Day," when Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), rose in protest.

"Mr. Speaker, I move to reconsider the vote," he announced.

Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), who has two young daughters, moved to table Tiahrt's request, setting up a revote. This time, 178 Republicans cast their votes against mothers.

It has long been the custom to compare a popular piece of legislation to motherhood and apple pie. Evidently, that is no longer the standard. Worse, Republicans are now confronted with a John Kerry-esque predicament: They actually voted for motherhood before they voted against it.

Republicans, unhappy with the Democratic majority, have been using such procedural tactics as this all week to bring the House to a standstill, but the assault on mothers may have gone too far. House Minority Leader John Boehner, asked yesterday to explain why he and 177 of his colleagues switched their votes, answered: "Oh, we just wanted to make sure that everyone was on record in support of Mother's Day."

By voting against it?

If Boehner's explanation doesn't make much sense, he's been under a great deal of stress lately.

There's the case of one member of his caucus, Rep.Vito Fossella (N.Y.); the father of three from Staten Island yesterday announced that he has a fourth, a 3-year-old love child with a woman from Virginia. . . .

. . .For the record, Fossella did not participate in the Mother's Day vote.. . .

. . . Boehner has enough trouble to preoccupy him here in Washington, where House Democrats have been passing their agenda with little thought for Republican preferences. "The majority has taken, once again, their go-it-alone policy," Boehner lamented yesterday. "It's time for Democrats and Republicans to work together."

To induce this working together, Boehner decided to stop the House from working at all. As House Democrats tried to pass legislation to ease the mortgage crisis on Wednesday, Republicans served up hours of procedural delays, demanding a score of roll call votes: 10 motions to adjourn, half a dozen motions to reconsider, various and sundry amendments, a motion to approve the daily journal, a motion to instruct and a "motion to rise."

The high point came just after 6 p.m., when, after one of the motions to adjourn, 61 members lined up to change their votes, one by one. Forty-six went from aye to no, while 15 changed from no to aye. The maneuver ate up 28 minutes in all -- and caused an eruption by Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, who accused the minority of a "filibuster by vote changing."

. . . the dilatory maneuvers continued, and the Democrats finally announced that they would postpone the vote on the mortgage bill until Thursday, thereby pushing a war spending bill to next week.

Finally, Republicans decided yesterday to suspend their shenanigans; it was time to catch flights to their districts. "Never underestimate the desire of members to go home," Boehner spokesman Kevin Smith explained.

They might also need some extra time with their mothers.

For the record, Congressman Jim Ramstad (R--MN-3) joined Minnesota's Democratic Representatives in voting for motherhood after they had voted for it. Representative Bachmann and Kline voted against motherhood after they voted for it.

Will baseball and the flag be next?

Update: Think Progress has the video.

Club for Stunting Southern Minnesota's Growth scorecard released

We just looked at the The 2007 Congressional Scorecard - House from the ultra-conservative Club for Growth (because everybody wants a little growth, right?), and are not surprised to find that the group's scoring system puts Congressman Walz near rock bottom.

Not only did Walz support the idea of listening to farmers in his district like Kevin Papp instead of Beltway ideologues on farm policy, he also voted "wrong" on other issues as well.

What does the Club for Growth think Walz did wrong?  Supporting fiscally conservative PAYGO rules, for one. Voting for increasing the minimum wage.  Requiring Health and Human Services (HHS) Department to negotiate drug prices with drug companies under the Medicare Part D program.  Voting to override the President's veto on the waters resources bill that provides funding for the Lewis & Clark Rural  Water System. Voting for increased CAFE standards. Expand flood insurance. Wrong, wrong, wrong, the Club for Growth would have voters believe.

When the  Club's starts telling First district voters about how naughty their congressman is, we hope the flood victims, people who want drinking water in Southwestern Minnesota, ag sector employers and workers, and others figure out that the group could use a good rebranding: the Club for Stunting Southern Minnesota's Growth. 

MinnPost: Walz may be "the state's most popular DFLer"

In a story at Minnpost about this past weekend's congressional district conventions, Doug Grow writes:

Tim Walz, perhaps the state's most popular DFLer, also was unopposed in winning endorsement in the 1st District Convention. His opponent is undetermined, because Brian Davis, the Republicans' endorsed candidate, will face state Sen. Dick Day, who skipped the endorsement process, in a September primary.

Amy Klobuchar may actually have Walz beat in the popular department, but the congressman certainly gets high marks.

We just returned from liveblogging the health summit in Owatonna (there's another in Winona, but we decided to return home and fine tune our vegetable garden plan).  Listening to a group of older women talk about the summit after the crowd cleared out, we were impressed that while most were talking about how great it was to have meetings like the one they'd just been to, what they were discussing mainly were the wide-ranging ideas presented to them.

That ability to get ordinary citizens engaged in considering what they want for their country may be the key to the Congressman's high marks. We've seen the same thing happen after other forums.

Meanwhile, Grow's statement about the primary is echoed in the Post Bulletin's convention coverage today. Matt Stolle writes:

Walz is seeking reelection after defeating GOP. Rep. Gil Gutknecht in the 2006 election that saw Democrats take over the U.S. House after 12 years of political exile.

State Republican leaders have made defeating Walz a top priority and hope to brand him as someone out of step with the district's values. But Republicans are currently caught up in their own intra-party dispute over a nominee.

Although Mayo Clinic physician Brian Davis won the GOP's endorsement last month, state Sen. Dick Day says he will challenge Davis in the Sept. 9 primary. Walz, moreover, boasts a large fund-raising lead over both candidates at the moment.

The lead:

Touting his work on veterans affairs issues, ethics reform and bringing a new accountability to Washington D.C., U.S. Rep. Tim Walz promised Saturday to run the "single largest grass-roots campaign" in the history of the 1st Congressional District as he accepted the DFL Party's endorsement for Congress.

"We're going to put to rest once and for all: You do not come to the people of America and ask them to send you to Washington based on fear, divisiveness (and) half-truths," Walz told applauding delegates.

Walz, a Mankato high school teacher and former football coach, was unanimously endorsed Saturday by delegates at the DFL 1st Congressional District in Southwest Middle School in Albert Lea. He was introduced by his wife, Gwen, who brought the convention to a standing ovation with a speech that related how Walz had proposed to her.

 

 

MFP editorial: support the Political Bloggers Protection Act

In Our View: Do not regulate political bloggers, the Mankato Free Press stands up for political free speech in the blogosphere:

Congress, regulators and the courts still aren’t sure how to treat the Internet and those who use it. From protecting kids from pornography to deciding if Internet sales should be taxed, the complexities, rapid changes and sheer size of the Web create complexities for government.

Such is the case before Congress relating to whether government can oversee some of what political bloggers can do.

The Federal Elections Commission — which ensures political campaigns are run within the law — has so far ruled that Internet users are protected from the strictures of campaign laws, the same way newspapers, broadcasters and other more traditional media outlets are exempted.

But many worry that future FEC boards, or judges, will remove that protection.

The problem grows from campaign laws that authorize the FEC to regulate “anything of value used to influence an election,” including “public communications.”

That language has led some judges to ponder whether a blogger who links to a politician’s Web site or writes things in support or in opposition to a candidate, should fall under FEC regulation.

The Blogger Protection Act now before Congress would ensure that political speech from bloggers has the same First Amendment protection as the writer of this newspaper editorial.

The Act should be passed.

When political bloggers — or any other Internet users — want to write about candidates’ issues, make fun of them, support them or deride them, they deserve protection from federal campaign laws. (Those compensated by a political party or candidate would — and should — still fall under campaign law oversight under the Act.)

While the Internet provides a different vehicle for public discourse, it should not bring new restrictions on people’s ability to voice their opinions. Whether someone starts a newspaper, a blog, or speaks in the town square, they have the right to espouse their political ideals without interference from the government.

This editorial hits the central issue right on the head: independent political bloggers should enjoy the same rights as the rest of the free press.  We bloggers can be as demure or as insolent as we wish, but so long as we're not compensated for our writing by candidates or political parties, the FEC and state-level regulators should just butt out.   

Things get a bit murkier when a blogger gets paid by a campaign or political party to do work other than posting on one's personal blog, but self-disclosure, combined with exposure by other bloggers when disclosure isn't forthcoming, prompts most bloggers to be open about compensation, whether for blogging or for other work. 

The author (and despite our annoying use of the editorial first person plural, there's only one of us) at Bluestem Prairie doesn't get compensated by a candidate or party for anything, much less the opinions on this blog. Should that change, we'll let you know.

Walz supports earmark reform legislation

The Walz congressional office sent the following press release about earmark reform:

Walz Co-sponsors Legislation to Require Transparency in Congressional Earmark Process
Legislation would require all Members to make public information similar to what Walz already discloses

(Washington D.C) - After taking the unusual step for the last two years of releasing his appropriation requests to the public, Congressman Walz announced today that he is supporting two pieces of legislation in Congress that will change the way all Members of Congress request federal money and require all Members of Congress to follow his lead in making their earmark requests transparent and publically available.

"The appropriations process has been abused in the past, so I believe it should be completely in the light of day," said Walz, who was the only member of the Minnesota Congressional delegation to publicly release his appropriations requests last year. "The Democratic Majority implemented new rules last year that require each Member's name to be attached to any request that is funded, and Members of Congress must publicly certify that they do not have any financial interest in the project they are requesting. Those were great first steps."

Walz continued, "In order for all Members of Congress to be more transparent and accountable for the money they are requesting, I have co-sponsored two bills introduced in Congress by Representatives Boyda and Kind. This legislation would require unprecedented transparency from all Members of Congress and would create a bipartisan, independent commission to examine congressional and executive earmark practices."

Representative Boyda's resolution (H.Res 1072 ) would require all Representatives to disclose their requests for federal earmarks on their Congressional websites within 24 hours.   Each description must include the earmark's proposed recipient, the amount requested, the project name, and additional background information.

Representatives Kind's bill, the Earmark Reform Commission Act of 2008 (H. Res 5755) would establish a newly formed commission to investigate the use of earmarks and recommend to Congress additional reforms that may be necessary.

We wrote about this topic in a post last week.

Post-Bulletin LTE: Walz gets the job done on U.S. 14

Steven Miller of Rochester writes:

Congressman Tim Walz should be commended for his strong efforts to improve the quality of life in southern Minnesota! He is doing this by bringing in federal funds to pay for local projects such as improving Highway 14.

Congressman Walz is making his funding requests in an open and transparent way that ensures accountability, makes the federal government more open and honest, and thus helps restore trust in the Congress.

AP and CQPolitics: Walz and Ramstad propose earmark reform

(Hat tip to Polinaut) Along with fellow Minnesotan Jim Ramstad, Walz has joined a bi-partisan group of Representatives advocating earmark reform.  The AP story from the LaCrosse Tribune:

U.S. Rep. Ron Kind, D-La Crosse, is one of several members of Congress calling for creation of a bipartisan commission to recommend reforms on Congressional spending for pet projects, commonly referred to as earmarks.

Kind — along with U.S. Reps. Tim Walz, D-Minn.; Jim Ramstad R-Minn.; Jim Cooper D-Tenn.; Melissa Bean, D-Ill.; Mark Udall, D-Colo.; and Wayne Gilchrest, R-Md. — on Tuesday introduced the Bipartisan Earmark Reform Commission Act of 2008.
“Abuse of the earmarking system has eroded the public’s trust in the process and overshadowed the worthy projects earmarks often fund,” said Kind, who has imposed a one-year moratorium on his own earmark requests while he works to reform the process.

“From a ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ to a rainforest in Iowa — any member of Congress, whether they are an advocate or foe of earmarks, needs to be accountable to the taxpayers for the staggering growth in earmark spending,” Kind said in a statement. The commission would examine:

Disparities in funding across communities and regions;

The practice of securing earmarks for for-profit companies;

The impact of earmarks on the federal budget; and

The usefulness and sufficiency of current disclosure requirements.

“This is clearly a bipartisan problem perpetuated by both the Congress and the White House, and it requires a bipartisan solution,” Kind said. “This type of ‘ATM politics’ is threatening good government.”

And from CQ Politics, there's Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Bill on Overhauling Earmarks Process:

House Democratic leaders gave little indication Tuesday of what changes, if any, they plan to make to the earmark process this year. But that has not stopped members of both parties from pushing for commissions and committees to study the issue and propose changes.

The latest effort — a bipartisan one — was spearheaded by Rep. Ron Kind , D-Wis., and proposes an independent commission to study the earmarking process in both Congress and the executive branch.

The commission would be charged with examining disparities in funding, the practice of securing earmarks for for-profit companies, the impact of earmarks on the budget and the effectiveness of current disclosure requirements.

Among other things, the commission would consider whether earmarks could be allocated based on merit or if a competitive grant process could be used for grant funding, effectively altering the very definition of earmarks as they are now understood.

The commission would be required to report its findings and recommendations within six months, with legislation incorporating the recommendations to be introduced within two months thereafter.

Kind’s bill has four Democratic cosponsors: Jim Cooper of Tennessee, Melissa Bean of Illinois, Mark Udall of Colorado and Tim Walz of Minnesota.

Two Republicans, both of whom are leaving at the end of this Congress, also are cosponsors: Jim Ramstad of Minnesota and Wayne T. Gilchrest of Maryland.

In a conference call with reporters, Kind and Cooper stressed the bipartisan nature of their bill and their hopes that it will be taken seriously.

“Congress needs to stop and re-evaluate the way we appropriate money for projects around the country,” Cooper said. “We shouldn’t wait for another indictment to be handed down before demonstrating that we take stewardship of taxpayer money seriously.”

Read the rest below the fold.

Caledonia Argus: Congressman Walz puts forth bold funding request for 2009

The Caledonia Argus reports in Congressman Walz puts forth bold funding request for 2009:

Congressman Tim Walz has put forth a bold funding request for his district for fiscal year 2009. Many of his proposals will have an impact on our immediate area.

Closest to home, the congressman has requested money for the Houston County flood damage reduction project.

“Funding would go for an Army Corps of Engineers feasibility study to determine potential flood reduction projects in Houston county,” said Walz.

In conjunction with that request, the congressman has also requested money for flood map modernization for Southeastern Minnesota.

“The funding would provide high-quality data for eight counties in southeastern Minnesota, to help local officials plan effective flood mitigation strategies,” he said.

Houston county would be included among the eight counties.

The NTU: When nonpartisan means you're not going to be told the details

Southern Minnesota's most beloved conservative blogger, Paleocon Strikes, touts the National Taxpayers Union's low rating for Tim Walz in a post yesterday. He borrows the group's self description (emphasis in original):

The non-partisan National Taxpayers Union (NTU) recently released its ratings for the 2007 session of Congress. The NTU rates all votes that affect taxes, spending, debt, and regulatory burdens on consumers and taxpayers.

We did a little reading about the group in order to discover why it might be so near to Mr. Paleocon's heart. Indeed, what we discovered in our ramblings across the tubes illustrated why this was a match made on the extreme right side of conservative heaven.

Here's some information about the group. We found this info about a past leader interesting:

Grover Norquist was NTU’s Executive Director before being tapped by the Reagan White House to head Americans for Tax Reform.

The current executive director is Duane Parde. Before joining the NTU, he served in leadership positions at the American Legislative Exchange Council and the Alliance for Affordable Health Insurance. Sourcewatch describes the former:

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) was established in 1973 by Paul M. Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation. It is a membership organisation of state legislators across the U.S. that drafts "model legislation" that is then often drafted into law.

ALEC is a conservative organisation that pushes legislation that favours big business and rollbacks environmental regulations. ALEC says that its membership exceeds 2,400 state legislators from both political parties, which is over 30 percent of all state lawmakers in America.

In 2002, two environmental groups, Defenders of Wildlife and the Natural Resources Defense Council, described ALEC as "corrosive, secretive and highly influential" and a "tax-exempt screen for major U.S. corporations and trade associations that use it to influence legislative activities at the state level."

In 2002, the American Prospect working at Outing ALEC: the most powerful lobby you've never heard of.

Parde worked in private industry--sort of--in between the stints at ALEC and the NTU, as a partner in Phoenix Strategies:

Phoenix Strategies www.phoenixstrategies.us 1425 K St. NW Suite 350 Washington, DC 20005 202.587.4799 dparde@phoenixstrategies.us Phoenix Strategies"..was established as a consultancy, our team includes seasoned and professional senior level members of the Bush administration with strong experience in Federal as well as state and local intergovernmental affairs and corporate relations. " The Hill reported on December 20, 2005: A new lobbying firm, Phoenix Strategies LLC, has formed on K Street to specialize in business development, lobbying and consulting. The partners of the firm are James M. Kelly, former special assistant to the president and deputy director for intergovernmental affairs at the White House; Ken Meyer, former deputy assistant secretary for intergovernmental and interagency affairs with the U.S. Department of Education; and Duane Parde, former executive director of the nationwide state-legislator group the American Legislative Exchange Council. They have represented industry areas in education, manufacturing, technology, pharmaceuticals, energy and associations.

The Media Transparency Project in its look at Recipient Grants: National Taxpayers Union. notes the money coming into the group from the usual suspects funding the right's ideological agenda.

We're taken by the ideological conservatism of these groups, as opposed to a sense of fiscal conservatism.  Indeed, the Scaife, Roe, Bradley, and other right-wing foundations might want to check out groups more carefully in the future.

After all, the Better Business Bureau's Charity Report says that the group doesn't meet five of its standards for accountability. The Charity Navigator, too, ranks it at one star.

That's some union of right wing ideologues, and they don't like Tim Walz. We  are shocked, shocked, that movement conservatives would rate Congressman Walz so low.

Owatonna People's Press: Praise for Walz on Highway 14

While GOP primary challenger Dick Day may have a love-hate relation with earmarks (it's in the hate column right now), and the party's endorsee quick copied Day's position, the paper in Day's home town doesn't share that GOP talking point.

In Highway 14, the OPP's editorial board concludes today:

While the odds are against more federal dollars being funneled to the Highway 14 project, specifically as it pertains to Owatonna, we commend Walz for trying to not only accelerate the work on the project, but also for trying to bring closure to work on one of the most dangerous highways in southern Minnesota.

Go read the entire editorial at the OPP.