Texas GOP Congressman Pete Sessions as chair of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) is charged with fundraising for his party's efforts to take back the Congress. Last week, his committee suffered a major defeat in the NY-23 special election, not just because his party's nominee lost, but because his committee spent nearly $1 million in the process. Oh, and after doing so, the GOP candidate dropped out and endorsed the Democrat who won.
That expenditure wouldn't be as painful if not for the weak fundraising by the NRCC as reported in this Politico piece.
If Republicans hope to make a play for dozens of Democratic-held House seats, they'll need a well-stocked campaign account to fund all their candidates. But right now, after spending money in two contentious off-year special elections, the National Republican Congressional Committee has a long way to go to raise enough money to compete across the national map.
The National Republican Congressional Committee ended September with just $4.3 million in the bank, less than one-third of the $14.7 million banked by its Democratic counterpart. So far this cycle, NRCC Chairman Pete Sessions hasn't improved the fundraising fortunes of the committee - he's raised $10 million less than his predecessor, Rep. Tom Cole, did at this same point in the past election cycle.
And the committee took an additional financial hit in the New York 23rd District special election, spending nearly $1 million on a race in which the GOP nominee, Dede Scozzafava, ended up quitting and then endorsing the Democratic candidate. Worse, the NRCC's decision to support Scozzafava's campaign has played a role in alienating conservative donors.
Pete Sessions certainly is no John Cornyn when it comes to fundraising. Maybe he's distracted by his Democratic challenger Grier Raggio who has raised over $25,000 in wake of Sessions's comments last week suggesting that it's ok for health insurance companies to categorically charge woman higher health insurance premiums than men.
This morning when I unfolded the front page of the Houston Chronicle the headline
GOP begins to show signs of resurgence
hit me in the face.
Really? A Republican resurgence?
I guess the fact that much of his N.J. constituency viewed Corzine as arrogant, corrupt and the dude who saddled his constituents with high property taxes while at the same time has strong ties to the thieves of all thieves, Goldman Sachs, had nothing to do with his loss.
And let's ignore the fact that Wall. St. and the financial sector is among the largest employer in the NYC and northern NJ area. Many mid to lower level employees in the financial sector received pink slips when Wall St. crashed. I guess these folks are not in the least bit angry at those who are or were part of the Wall St. establishment.
Earth to GOP obstructionists: incumbents even remotely tied to the Wall St. melt down and the thieving banks are going to get the boot unless Congress does something to regulate and demand transparency from the financial industry.
The once popular New York's former Democrat and now Republican billionaire mayor Bloomberg had to spend millions upon millions of his own money, outspending his opponents 10 to 1 to barely squeak by a win.
And a lackluster candidate in purple Virginia who ran a lackluster campaign in which he fled from a progressive agenda in a state that traditionally votes for a Governor who is not in the same Party as the President, is a sign of a GOP insurgence?
Voters don't vote if candidates fail to excite them. And no matter the party, voters will vote against corrupted and/or lying incumbents. Nor will they vote for a candidate who calls him or herself a progressive or conservative but whose words and deeds show they are anything but. Some Republicans may be able to fool the teabagging crowd and old white Independents with double talk and spin, but this crowd is a mere tiny minority. Just wait until Independents in Va. realize the newly elected governor, who pretended to be a centrist, is really a hard core conservative. Welcome to teabagger land, Indies. Maybe next time you won't be fooled by self-serving liars.
John Cornyn, of course, is gloating all over the place about two the Democratic gubernatorial losses.
These Republican victories clearly demonstrate a strong wave for our candidates in the 2010 midterm elections," said Sen. John Cornyn, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
And predictably, good ol' Taliban Pete Sessions is also salivating over the Democratic gubernatorial losses. Check out Matt Glazer's piece over at The Burnt Orange Report.
Usually when you contribute to losing a race that has been controlled by your party since the civil war, you lay low and avoid words like referendum and change. Pete Sessions hasn't read that memo.
Sessions, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, lost races in both California (not a surprise) and New York (huge surprise) and yet he is spending his day saying last nights election results are a referendum on the popular Democratic President. The big surprise is Sessions, like Tom Craddick in the State House, is so out of touch, he has directly contributed to helping increase the Democratic majority in Congress.
As mentioned today on the Plum Line, "NRCC chair Pete Sessions's statement says the gubernatorial wins prove independents are "dissatisfied" with Dems and will continue "moving away from them at a rapid pace."
The NRCC and Sessions came out strong against the Republican nominee and for the independent/conservative candidate. Yet, they lost.
Do we extrapolate then that Sessions is unpopular and the people of New York and the Republican Party as a whole made a referendum on the leader of the caucus? No. That is ridiculous.
What it does mean is that the Republican Party is still in total disarray and lost traction in local races and lost ground in Washington D.C. where the battle over health care reform, insurance reform, environmental reforms, clean energy reforms, and many many other initiatives are being fought. Clearly the people of California and New York both want Washington to move forward.
This is a signal that Democrats can continue to win tough races in fragmented parts of the country as long as Sessions, Cornyn, Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, and Rick Perry can't agree on what their party stands for and what sort of candidate they should field.
Both sides need to use last nights results and learn. 2010 is going to be tough and Democrats will lose seats in the U.S. Senate and House and in local races if the fail to mobilize and turnout. When Democrats can sweep in federal races but lose gubernatorial races perhaps we should stop throwing out buzz words and start asking why.
Why are Pete Sessions and John Cornyn gloating when their jobs just got harder? Why is this a referendum when VA has swapped parties with the President for nearly four decades? Why aren't we comparing Corizine and Bloomberg instead of comparing Obama to the whole Republican Party of New Jersey?
Let's start asking some questions and stop making blind, sound bite assumptions. Oh, and let's get to work for March and November.
According to the DCCC there are 67 House Republicans who voted against the stimulus package. But when these no voters are back in their home states they like to brag and swagger about bringing home the bacon. On a different level, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison joins these ranks. She voted against the stimulus bill and yet she criticized Rick Perry for turning down federal funding for extended unemployment benefits.
Texas has its fair share of outstanding hypocrites. Check the list below to see if your U.S. House Rep. is included in the GOP Hall of Hypocrites. I must admit that I am not shocked to learn that my U.S. Rep., John Culberson, is among them. I betcha your U.S. Reps are too.
(Really? Huh. - promoted by Karl-Thomas Musselman)
Pete Sessions was one of the first members of Congress to co-sponsor John Boehner's bill, H.R. 3571, to cut off Federal funding to "Any organization that has filed a fraudulent form with any Federal or State regulatory agency."
The bill was intended as a "de-fund ACORN" measure, but Democrats figured out right away that the broad wording of the bill could also cut funds to a long list of military contractors, effectively defunding the "military industrial complex."
Excuse me if I get a bit emotional, but I couldn't be more ashamed that Pete Sessions represents my congressional district (TX-32) than I am now.
It's bad enough that Sessions dishonestly claims that healthcare reform has been rejected by the American people when in fact poll after poll shows the completely opposite conclusion. It's also bad enough that Sessions has opposed anything that represents real progressive change in this country, including the Employee Free Choice Act.
Now Sessions has, in effect, allied with those who have toted guns during presidential events and have made hints of violence in placards seen during last week's teabagger protests.
Folks have a right to express their opinions, including those that strongly disagree with President Obama's policies and those of the Democratic leadership. But when my area's representative who also happens to be one of the main House Republicans made the statements that he did, it requires more than just mere comment. It requires that strong action be made to assure his defeat next year.
More below.
Progressives who don't know Pete Sessions have taken his his statement about disruptive town hall meetings out of context, as if he were challenging the screamers to "bring it on." But those of us in the District know that Pete Sessions is a coward. Re-read the Politico article and you'll meet a man who pines for a fantasy town hall meeting that never existed, where only "15 or 20 of your friends show up." But in today's town hall environment he's in his element. The screamers are his base. In this video, he answers a woman's health care concern by throwing them some red meat:
Death threats. Nazi signs. Hanging a Congressman in effigy. Welcome to the Tea Party.
It's no secret -- Republicans want health care to fail. Across the country, Republican leaders are encouraging their supporters to be afraid and be angry. Texas Senator John Cornyn straight-out said as much in The Hill:
"Fear, I would say, precedes anger, and I think there are a lot of people who tell me they are scared of what they see coming out of Washington in terms of spending and the debt and muscular federal intervention on everything from financial institutions to healthcare,” Cornyn said. “It’s almost like a part of the grieving process.” [...]
“No one would have ever thought six months ago we would be where we are today. I see real opportunities for us,” Cornyn said at a meeting with reporters. “2010 did not look like it was going to be a particularly friendly year for us.”
Artificially Inflate Your Numbers: "Spread out in the hall and try to be in the front half. The objective is to put the Rep on the defensive with your questions and follow-up. The Rep should be made to feel that a majority, and if not, a significant portion of at least the audience, opposes the socialist agenda of Washington."
Be Disruptive Early And Often: "You need to rock-the-boat early in the Rep’s presentation, Watch for an opportunity to yell out and challenge the Rep’s statements early."
Try To "Rattle Him," Not Have An Intelligent Debate: "The goal is to rattle him, get him off his prepared script and agenda. If he says something outrageous, stand up and shout out and sit right back down. Look for these opportunities before he even takes questions."
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX), chairman of the NRCC, has endorsed the strategy, telling the Politico the days of civil town halls are now “over.”
What are the consequences stoking such unbridled anger and hatred for health care? How do you make them afraid? What is it that Republicans are willing to do, exactly, to incite this fear and anger among there suporters?
Well, here's one example --
"Adolf Hitler, like Barack Obama, also ruled by dictate" -- Republican radio host, Rush Limbaugh: (Source)
A young man protests at the Austin health care rally. Photo courtesy of Paul Rhea.
And here's another one:
"This health care issue Is D-Day for freedom in America...If we’re able to stop Obama on this it will be his Waterloo. It will break him," he said. -- RepublicanSenator Jim DeMint: (Source)
Effigy of a Democratic Congressman in Maryland (Source)
I could go on and on, but you get the picture. The Democratic National Committee released this ad, highlighting the anarchy of the far-right:
The most important thing for Democrats to do, right now, is try to maintain a civil tone and document any protests at town halls.
FireDogLake is tracking town halls around the country -- if there's going to be one near you, let them know, or check their list and see if there's one you can attend near where you live or happen to be traveling.
5:20pm Update: Here's some information about how others are getting involved:
According to a Politico and Washington Monthly article, Session earmarked $1.6 million to a company he may or may not have questionable ties to.
[Sessions] steered a $1.6 million earmark for dirigible research to an Illinois company whose president acknowledges having no experience in government contracting, let alone in building blimps.
What the company did have: the help of Adrian Plesha, a former Sessions aide with a criminal record who has made more than $446,000 lobbying on its behalf.
Sessions has referred to earmarks in the past with unquestioning and unequivocal opposition. Saying earmarks are "a symbol of a broken Washington to the American people."
Of course, Pete Sessions staff member and spokeswoman Emily Davis defended the project before looking at a map. According to Politico, Davis said the airship project is a worthwhile use of federal funds and says it could eventually lead to thousands of new jobs in Sessions's Dallas-area district.
As mentioned above, the company is based in Illinois with a branch office in San Antonio.
Washington Monthly sums up the bizarre situation:
While lawmakers routinely support earmarks for their home district and/or state, this particular measure has nothing to do with Sessions' Dallas-area district. The company, Jim G. Ferguson & Associates, is based in a Chicago suburb. It has an office in Texas, but it's 300 miles from Sessions' district.
What's more, when Sessions submitted the earmark, he used a Dallas address for the company, but it was actually the address of a friend of one of the company's executives.
It looks a little suspicious. The leaders of Jim G. Ferguson & Associates admit they have no background in aviation or defense, and no expertise in engineering or research. It's why it seems odd that Sessions would direct $1.6 million to the company, most of which would go towards research and engineering on a dirigible project.
We use words like hypocrisy on this site a lot to sum up the Republican Party in Texas, but this extends well beyond a complex idea like hypocrisy. This seems, at the very worst, corrupt and at the very best, unethical.
Sessions is the National Republican Congressional Committee chairman (NRCC). He is in charge of both representing and electing Republicans to Congress.
