This is a class blog for the students of POLSCI 426: Congressional Politics at the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee.
Groundhog Day
PS: Its my favorite holiday because it happens to be my birthday --this has caused me to be the recipient of more than a few comments through the years, and NO I did not see my shadow Friday morning!
McCain blasts 'vote of no confidence'
Senate Hearing on Congressional War Cessation
Minimum wage bill heads to negotiations
US Congress debates rebuke Bush on Iraq
This is an article about Congress sending troops to
"Duke-stir" Not Sunk Enough...Yet.
On an aside, where can I sign up for a cheesy nickname? Randall "Duke" Cunningham, Kyle "Dusty" Foggo, Irving Lewis "Scooter" Libby. Ah well, guess I'm on the wrong side of the isle for that.
"Duke-stir" Not Sunk Enough...Yet.
On an aside, where can I sign up for a cheesy nickname? Randall "Duke" Cunningham, Kyle "Dusty" Foggo, Irving Lewis "Scooter" Libby. Ah well, guess I'm on the wrong side of the isle for that.
Doyle calls on congress to pass stem cell legislation
"I think the president's position is becoming more and more untenable," Doyle said Wednesday after meeting with Senate Democrats on the issue. "The political debate on this is over."
In response to Doyle's comments, the White House referred to a "statement of administration policy" on the stem cell legislation, which said the bill "would compel all American taxpayers to pay for research that relies on the intentional destruction of human embryos for the derivation of stem cells, overturning the president's policy that funds research without promoting such ongoing destruction."
In my personal opinion I do not believe that we should use federal money to fund such a morally controversial issue. I have no problem seeing the private sector develop this, and I believe Wisconsin would be a great place to start this. At this point in time, there are over 100 different cases that have benefited from adult stem cell research and embryonic stem cell research has yet to provide even one case, therefore it is hard to determine the affects it will have.
Speaker Pursues military flights
The office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is pressing the Bush administration for routine access to military aircraft for domestic flights, such as trips back to her San Francisco district, according to sources familiar with the discussions. The sources, who include those in Congress and in the administration, said the Democrat is seeking regular military flights not only for herself and her staff, but also for relatives and for other members of the California delegation. . Mrs. Pelosi's request is not new for a speaker, who is second-in-line in presidential succession. A defense source said the speaker's regular access to a military plane began after the September 11, 2001, attacks. Rep. J. Dennis Hastert, Illinois Republican, who was speaker at the time, started using U.S. Air Force planes for domestic travel to and from his district for security reasons. A former Hastert aide said the congressman did not use military planes for political trips or regularly transport his family.
These requests were sighted for security purposes and good communications to conduct legislative business.
Biden Unwraps ‘08 Bid With an Oops!
Senate Allies of Bush Work to Halt Iraq Vote
South Dakota legislator censured for misconduct
Appaerently a censure. Which in this case actually seems fair. Too bad the page was a male. Seriously, if it were a female the senator would probably get the same punishment (censuring does nothing in S.D.), except it is pretty likely he'll pay for this with his job down the line. If it were a woman on the other hand, he'd probably get a jump in the poles. PS. I'm sure your all wondering what his party ID is (JSOnline doesn't say); even though his website has nothing but red, he's a democrat.
Tie CEO pay to performance, Bush says in State of the Economy speech
A proposed house bill would limit executives' tax-deferred pay packages at $1 million a year. What did the business community think of that?
"Still, even Bush's words on pay were met with complete silence from the business crowd he addressed." (article linked in title, USATODAY 1/31/07)
Here's another quote for you...
"President Bush can deliver all the economic pep talks he wants, but the fact remains that his failed leadership has led to the worst job recovery on record, stagnating household incomes, a rise in poverty and record deficits," said Stacie Paxton, spokeswoman for the Democratic National Committee.
The President says it's not the governments role to limit CEO's wages, I agree. Yet he fails to take responsibility for an ever growing NAFTA strength that promotes offshore banking, job-exporting, and a pay scheme that is remeniscent of the three-musketeers (in referece to dollars) "one for all (the workers), and all for one (CEO)."
Bush's solution comes down to increased transparency for stockholders. If I can find it I'll post todays JSonline article about the new democrats ignoring big businesses greedy demands. Maybe they'll win Kansas over after all.
The House passed a $463.5 billion spending bill Wednesday that covers about one-sixth of the federal budget.
The powerful veterans' lobby won a $3.6 billion increase from the House for medical care, while low-income college students would receive a $260 boost, to $4,310, in the maximum Pell Grant.
Rep. Thelma Drake, R-Va., complained about a $3 billion cut from Bush's budget to put in place the base closings. Obey said the money would be restored in an upcoming war funding bill.
paul ryan
Reid Land Deal Raises Questions
Doyle proposed $225 million plan to help UW Colleges.
Pelosi heads to Afghanistan as bill is discussed to limit aid to Islambad
Feingold to Chair the Hearing on Congress's Power to End the War
More on Feingold in upcoming posts, I'm sure.
House voting rights widen
Big States’ Push for Earlier Vote Scrambles Race
Senate Committee Approves Lt. Gen. David Petraeus for Command of U.S. Forces in Iraq
Bush seeks over $10 billion in aid for Afghanistan
Cheney Calls Reporter's Question About Gay Daughter's Pregnancy 'Out of Line'
A winter of GOP discontent
Congresswoman Gwen Moore and H.R. 5
Doyle asks for smoking ban
Foreign Relations Committee Opposes More Troops
Senate Republicans block minimum wage hike
Kerry will not seek White House in 2008
Welcome to Spring
The primary function of this blog will be to keep up with current events as a group during the semester.
Scandal-hit Jefferson wins Louisiana runoff
Jefferson, despite a current federal bribery investigation, wins re-election against a fellow democrat. Which makes me wonder two things, first how are the democrats going to deal with this, and second what type of primary system does Louisiana use that allows elections between two members of the same party? Just seems odd.
109th Congress winds down
Kohl working for Wisconsin
Senate approves Gates as defense secretary
Robert Lorge campaign
Cowboys
Astro Boy
Nuke Threat
Animals
Enjoy!
Bayh For President
Should Dems ignore the Southerns?
Essentially, the two sides are arguing over whether the Democratic Party should focus energies on keeping the Southern Democrat base within the party or whether party officials should just ignore the South.
In the second piece, I found this quote quite good:
Sure, the overall trend has been toward the GOP, but that's hard to avoid,
since the starting point was a one-party Democratic region.
New Congress unlikely to rush toughest issues
The main issues that are being discussed are the following:
Iraq
Wiretap policy
Immigration
Dems warn Iraq government: No rubber-stamp support
At least they have a plan, it's better than nothing. LOL
Looking Beyond 2006
The conservative era in American politics, which has coincided with my
entire adult lifetime, came to an end two weeks ago.
Amazing that he can come to such a conclusion and the Democrats haven't even formally taken power yet. And he goes on to say:
So, if I'm correct that the conservative era is kaput, what comes next? No
one knows! But perhaps we can speculate about some of the candidates for
successor. Here are four possibilities, moving from left to right.
The four possibilities: A New Progressivism, Clintonism Continued, The Muddled Middle and Bushism Without Bush.
I think either an era of Clintonism Continued or Bushism Without Bush remains the most likely ones of the four mentioned in the article. And I think a Clintonism Continued would be my guess for how the American public shapes the scope of the political landscape in years to come -- particularly in 2008.
Sort of relating to Congress..
It's a mistake to regard such Gestapo tactics as compromising freedom, he told the young officers in training. "This [antagonistic] view is shortsighted. Its definition of freedom - one utterly divorced from civic responsibility - is superficial and is itself a grave threat to the liberty and security of the American people".
Only days earlier, vice president Dick Cheney had denounced an August court decision in Michigan that found the NSA wiretap program unconstitutional as "an indefensible act of judicial overreaching".
It should surprise no one that the Bush administration is mounting a PR campaign to sell its illegal mass wiretap program, even though it's hardly a hot news item at the moment (the Michigan decision is being appealed). The sales job is directed toward the lame duck Republican Congress, in hopes of having the domestic spying program legalised after the fact, before Democrats take control of the Hill."
So does anyone think that they'll be able to get it pushed through? I personally don't; isn't trying to get it legalized to "supplement" the authority that already exist rather pointless to if it was already legit? I think even if they tried to push this through it'll take something to let the general public know and from them I'm sure the general feeling will be of displeasure. Time will tell.
We should pat ourselves on the back...unless you didn't vote..then don't pat yourself on the back
That is one of the most striking findings about the state in an examination of exit poll data from across the country.
Voters age 18-29 made up 17% of the Wisconsin electorate - more than anywhere else except Montana (also 17%). Nationally, young voters made up between 12% and 13% of the electorate.
"We lost all these college-town seats," Janesville congressman Paul Ryan said. "The marriage amendment clearly complicated the turnout situation, which did not play to our benefit in many ways."
According to a preliminary national estimate by the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement at the University of Maryland, about 24% of eligible voters between 18 and 29 went to the polls Nov. 7, up from 20% in the last midterm in 2002. National turnout for voters of all ages is estimated at a little more than 40% in 2006."
Texas loses lengthy clout in Congress
This article has it all –distribution of power, junior members and redistricting. Enjoy.
House Democrats Pick Their Leader
Lieberman: Payback Time?
Could quicker Rumsfeld exit have kept GOP in power?
"I could argue the politics of it either way," White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten told CNN. "It might have been disheartening for people to see a sudden change at that moment, two or three weeks before the election. But however you view the politics of it, it doesn't matter. The president wasn't ready to make the decision until the last week. And he was determined not to inject politics into one of the most important national security decisions he has got to make."
I don't think it would have made much of a difference either way. Most people most likely would have shrugged it off and voted the way they wanted. Also, it has been discussed before on a few political cable news shows that a significant amount of people voted absentee, including me, so whatever the circumstance it would have been too late or fruitless to make an impact.
Disenchanted Chafee may bail on GOP
Redistricting: Home to Roost
Political Parties in a Critical Era
Iraq: Ailing Democratic Party since 2006
The story talks about how Iraq had fallen off of the media's radar and how a bloody and violent month of October overseas helped to raise the profile of the war again to a point where Democrats could use it as a means to Congressional ends.
But the White House helped too, they say:
Republicans, normally sure-footed this decade, reacted with a tentativeness that they called evidence of a divergence between a White House that viewed a victory in Iraq as central to Mr. Bush’s image and Republican candidates who saw the war as poisoning an already difficult re-election environment.
Senior Republican strategists said they told candidates to avoid talking about the war, and even to distance themselves from it, and urged the White House to change its approach, at least through November. But that strategy was undercut by Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney, who kept making the case for victory in forum after forum, ensuring that the issue remained in public view.
What a novel approach for Democrats.
After Years On the Outs, New York Comes Back In
- Chuck Schumer
Democrat win in Montana
Bush appoints new Secretary of Defense
Democratic Majority in Senate
Dems take House as GOP clings to Senate, CNN projects
Liberman Wins
Readings for Wednesday
Information on what wisconsin is voting on
The link is a webpage full on information on issues and candidates that Wisconsin will be voting on today. Please read carefully on all issues and don't forget to vote.
The NRCC is doing a robocalling smear campaign..
Bush Says U.S. Pullout Would Let Iraq Radicals Use Oil as a Weapon
Republican Scandals
The fact that they cannot surprises several of the participants, and brings light to issues people didn’t even know existed. The man on the street approach, makes the ad more accessible in comparison to the political commercials that simply degrade a candidate’s position, and the clever premise keeps the audience watching.
This is a perfect example of how politicians can attract voters who have learned to tune out the traditional vote for this guy's ad.
Plans to build atomic weapons...brought to you by your friendly GOP members of Congress and President
"The documents, roughly a dozen in number, contain charts, diagrams, equations and lengthy narratives about bomb building that nuclear experts who have viewed them say go beyond what is available elsewhere on the Internet and in other public forums. For instance, the papers give detailed information on how to build nuclear firing circuits and triggering explosives, as well as the radioactive cores of atom bombs."
"The director of national intelligence, John D. Negroponte, had resisted setting up the Web site, which some intelligence officials felt implicitly raised questions about the competence and judgment of government analysts. But President Bush approved the site’s creation after Congressional Republicans proposed legislation to force the documents’ release."
"Peter D. Zimmerman, a physicist and former United States government arms scientist now at the war studies department of King’s College, London, called the posted material “very sensitive, much of it undoubtedly secret restricted data.”
Ray E. Kidder, a senior nuclear physicist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, an arms design center, said “some things in these documents would be helpful” to nations aspiring to develop nuclear weapons and should have remained secret."
The stupidity of some of our government never fails to amaze me.
"Let's stop the world from getting nukes!"
"Ok, how do we do that?"
"By releasing information to help them on their paths to building nuclear weapons of course!"
What the hell? Is there ANY oversight? I guess not since plans to build nukes got released into the wild. I am rather curious now what the looked like though.
Rally with President Bill Clinton in Milwaukee
New NYT/CBS Poll
Nearly 70 percent of Americans said Mr. Bush did not have a plan to end the war, and an overwhelming 80 percent said Mr. Bush’s latest effort to rally public support for the conflict amounted to a change in language but not policy.
Only 20 percent said they thought the United States was winning in Iraq, down from a high of 36 percent in January.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/?p=530
Green and Doyle Bring on Support!
Kerry insults GOP
I guess negative campaigning is going on even in person, and why not? It works.
Milwaukee Event
I have to work, but you guys should go and tell me how awesome it was.
Some statistics
House (35 contested races)
Leans GOP 5
Toss-Up 17
Leans Dem 13
Senate (9 contested races)
Leans GOP 0
Toss-Up4
Leans Dem5
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/campaign06/countdown.html
A dirrrrty campaign season?
The race features a commercial in which Nelson has "XXX" in a twisted-logic sort of way to brand Kind.
The story talks about this race and how this campaign season seems to be getting more and more personal. Nelson is quoted in the story:
"Negative campaigning is vicious personal attacks," he said in an interview. "This (commercial) isn't personal at all."
Later in the story:
The National Republican Campaign Committee is spending more than 90 percent of its advertising budget on negative ads, according to GOP operatives, and the rest of the party seems to be following suit.
I haven't been paying too much attention to the commercials, to be honest, except for the Doyle-Green gubernatorial race, which is certainly a pretty negative race.
Does anyone have any feelings on whether this campaign season has been any dirtier or more negative than past ones?Lurid Excerpts
"No-Brainer" Could It be Last Out-Cry to Rally Republicans
Mr Cheney replied: "Well, it's a no-brainer for me." He went on to say that he was not condoning torture but said you can have a robust interrogation programme without torture". Does this looks likes a stunt to rally the hard-core Republicans, who might not be feeling very upbeat lately, less than 2 week before elections. It's hard to say if these kinds of statements will work for or against the Republicnas.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6093298.stm
Middle class is abandoning the GOP
I'll place any money that in the future thought the GOP will try to align themselves differently to gain back some of the voters since they can't fight against the "war" that's turning away the majority of the middle class.
Herb Kohl: 'Benign' re-election
I found this paragraph intriguing:
When you've been in the Senate for 18 years, when you own the Milwaukee Bucks basketball team, when you're wealthy enough to own a Van Gogh if you chose to, and when your face is on television as often as you want it to be, running for re-election can seem like a pretty benign matter. Especially if you add one factor: The other major party has all but withdrawn from the battlefield.And it made me wonder: Would Jacobson and Stewart say that Kohl's re-election campaigns are "benign"? Sure, he's had it easy in terms of political opponents, but something tells me that Kohl is still nervous about the re-elections, even if that nervousness seems misplaced.
Partisanship: The Enemy of the People
The people elect representatives, and they should do precisely what their title dictates; represent the people. However, the growing wave of partisanship has our “representatives” standing for something else; party lines. This militant adherence to which side of the spectrum they sit on only serves to worsen their ability to govern the people.
The party in power sets the stage with no due recourse, and with only a few notable exceptions, the party members fall in, whether they believe in the course of action they are taking or not. Issues that split party lines never get solved; instead they worsen as debate quiets in the chambers and heats up on the streets.
The two party system is responsible for this debacle, with each side pushing and tugging for power and influence to further their agenda, while PACs and special interest groups tug the strings attached to their wallets.
The only resolution to this problem is the abolition of the two party system, which is an impossibility in modern American politics. However, if each of us held our representatives truly responsible maybe some change would come.
In order for this to happen people must be willing to send letters, make calls, and do whatever it takes to get politicians to enact our will.
GOP terrorism ad sparks Democratic furor
This article is basically about how the Democrats feel that the Republicans are using Osama Bin Laden to strike fear into the voters to vote for the GOP in the election that is looming. Fear-mongering is sometimes a good ploy, albeit ridiculous when it comes to the informed voter, but I believe that it won't work this time.
It states from beginning in the article that the "Republicans took a page from President Johnson's Cold War-era presidential campaign with an advertisement set to air this weekend called "The Stakes," which prominently features al Qaeda leaders threatening to kill Americans."
I can only assume that since things are not looking great for the Republicans what the GOP are doing is basically saying that Bin Laden is in support of the Democrats which is ridiculous and is a desperate move. What do you all think?
Poll: 74 percent of Americans say Congress out of touch
Poll: Half of Americans think Congress is corrupt
I agree with the opinion of this article. Corruption flows throughout the branches government. Everything and anything has lost it's true purpose; governing for the good of the people, not individualistic ideals has been forgotten. Within the span of the GW Bush regime people have lost confidence in the government and it would take a stronger/wiser leader to gain back the faith of the people.
Minnesota 6
What is intersting about this article in particular is that the race has been very close up until this point and they consider the possiblity that this surge in points is a direc result to the Foley scandal.
It seems likely that one of the seats to be gained by the Dems, or in MN the DFL, may well be the MN 6th.
The Worst Congress Ever
Their 10 worst representatives:
Dennis Hastert (R-IL)
James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-WI)
Don Young (R-AK)
William Jefferson (D-LA)
Jerry Lewis (R-CA)
Tom Tancredo (R-CO)
Dick Pombo (R-CA)
Curt Weldon (R-PA)
Hal Rogers (R-KY)
Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO)
Another corrupt politician?
The raids by Federal Bureau of Investigation agents took place today at the Philadelphia-area homes of Karen Weldon and her business associate, Charles Sexton, according to FBI spokeswoman Debra Weierman.
Weierman said those raids were among six carried out by the FBI ``in relation to a pending investigation.'' She said four were in the Philadelphia area and two were in the Jacksonville, Florida, area."
I wonder, with all these stories about Republicans coming out now, maybe it's possible that others were holding onto them in an attempt to use them near elections to get them out of office? If it really happened as early as it says in the article and it didn't make the news then, or even if it did, but is being restated so soon to the election period then I think it's possible it was saved as ammo.
In Final Weeks, G.O.P. Focuses on Best Bets
U.S., Japan seek N. Korea sanctions vote
Mr. Mark Foley and the House of Representatives
The Speaker's Feint
Mr. Hastert would assign the wrong mission to his 'high-caliber' adviser.
Friday, October 6, 2006; Page A22
HOUSE SPEAKER J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) yesterday came up with yet another ploy to shield himself and his colleagues from scrutiny while pretending to do the opposite.
The issue is how House leaders dealt with warnings that Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) had sent inappropriate e-mail to a teenage page. The speaker announced with considerable satisfaction that he hopes to appoint an independent "person of high caliber" -- but not to do what is obviously needed, which is investigate whether the House botched the response, thereby endangering more pages. Instead, Mr. Hastert said, he wants someone "to advise us on the page program." He floated the idea of naming former FBI director Louis J. Freeh but pulled back when Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) wouldn't go along.
Let's save the speaker, and whoever his eminent person turns out to be, some time by offering advice right now: No congressman should harass pages. No one should send them what White House press secretary Tony Snow dismissed as "naughty e-mails." And if there's even a hint that one of your colleagues is doing so, or wants to, don't brush it off. "The buck stops here," the speaker said yesterday, declaring that "we're taking responsibility." But announcing that doesn't make it so.
Yesterday's gambit followed an earlier tack, which was to turn the matter over to the FBI. The FBI has a role to play in determining whether criminal violations occurred, but the appropriate constraints on the bureau -- in the scope of its investigation and its ability to share information with the House and the public -- make it an ill-suited vehicle "for us to try to find out what happened," as the speaker put it. Meanwhile, responding to the uproar with finger-pointing suggestions that the other side leaked the matter, as Mr. Hastert did yesterday, isn't going to fly. Would he be happier if the information hadn't come out?
The House ethics committee's announcement yesterday of an investigation is a development to be taken more seriously. As we've said previously, there are legitimate questions about the panel's ability to handle something with this much political sensitivity, given Republican efforts to undermine its power and independence and given its dysfunction during the Abramoff scandal. That's why an independent investigator -- a "person of high caliber," in the speaker's phrase -- would have been the best way to ensure a thorough investigation and unsparing conclusions.
That apparently wasn't seriously considered, though, so now the ethics committee's integrity is on the line. It should resist calls for haste (including from Ms. Pelosi, who risks appearing more interested in electoral timelines than a thorough inquiry), but it also must work briskly and without regard for political fallout.
How the Democrats Would Rule the Hill
Two pretty obvious things they say include that Pelosi will likely be the Speaker and that of course the issues of focus would certainly change; they mention the minimum wage and the stem cell debate.
They also, however, discuss how the majority would be only slight leaving the democrats no room to lean too far to the left. They suggest that regardless of the outcome, a middle ground (with regards to partisanship) will be necessary, especially since we will be coming into a presidential election cycle.
GOP's Hold on Evangelicals Weakening
Bush defies Congress, and can apparently edit security reports
President Bush, again defying Congress, says he has the power to edit the
Homeland Security Department's reports about whether it obeys privacy rules while handling background checks, ID cards and watchlists.
In the law Bush signed Wednesday, Congress stated no one but the privacy officer could alter, delay or prohibit the mandatory annual report on Homeland Security department activities that affect privacy, including complaints.
But Bush, in a signing statement attached to the agency's 2007 spending bill, said he will interpret that section "in a manner consistent with the President's constitutional authority to supervise the unitary executive branch."
The American Bar Association and members of Congress have said Bush uses signing statements excessively as a way to expand his power."
I'm not sure what he's doing is completely legal, but I suppose if he's the head of the executive branch and thus in charge of everyone else of that branch he can "force" the guy to change his reports. But even then that's pretty borderline for legality but with it inching towards not being legal. I'm much too tired to figure out anything further then this.
SPORTS TAKE OVER CONGRESS
I may be treading on the toes of a long held tradition, but it seems to me to be a giant waste of time. We elect these people to guide and shape the future of our country, and while important legislation stagnates in committee for years, senators are proposing and passing bills that are the equivalent to a pat on the back for winning a game.
I’m certain that not a single player on last year’s Pittsburgh Steelers team was elated and ecstatic to hear that Senator Rick Santorum passed a bill congratulating , or anyone from the University of Wisconsin hockey team stared longingly into a television tuned into CSPAN to make sure he got his thanks from Senator Russ Feingold.
These teams are already praised in the national sports media, which is now bigger and more influential then ever, they are praised by their coaches, team owners and institutions, they have parades held in their honor, are given keys to their respective cities. People even spend their own money to buy shirts and hats that proudly state which team won which game. They already get thanks enough, so is it really necessary for our senators to sign their congratulations into law?
Bush Says Democrats Shouldn't Be Trusted!
Slate follows Senate races; Dems leading
The races seem to show that overall, the races that are in contention are leaning Democrat. Is this a result of the "referendum on Iraq" or can this be explained by something else?
If it is a national sign of the public's stance on Iraq, then it would be wise of the public to think less about the short-term instabilities and more about the long-term ramifications of any policy in the country before casting a vote on Nov. 7.
Probably not too suprising
Foley Scandal and High Morality.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5400536.stm
Out of No Where, New Troubles for GOP
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/01/washington/01foley.html?hp&ex=1159761600&en=72f54d420adcb9e2&ei=5094&partner=homepage