Call Indiana a "red" state or a "blue" state, there's one thing that most of the country has agreed on for a while: Dick Cheney was a terrifying presence in political process for far too long.
Which for an embattled Dan Coats, is worth remembering as he reads headlines like "Coats hires Cheney spokesman."
Republican Sen. Dan Coats - hoping to be the once-and-future Senator from Indiana - has hired a high-profile spokesman - Kevin Kellems, the former communications director for Vice-President Dick Cheney often tasked with defending the controversial Saddam Hussein-al Qaeda link.
Kellems has an unusually heavy-duty White House-national security resume, coupled with deep Hoosier connections. The Indiana native - who recently served as a spokesman for Secretary of State Todd Rokita who passed on a bid against incumbent Evan Bayh, and served as a spokesman for Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) before his White House stint and ran unsuccessfully for an Indiana House seat in '00.
For what it's worth, this makes day six or so in which we haven't heard from Coats, who appears content to drink his hot chocolate and cozy up next to his custom-made fireplace in Virginia while his pay-to-play workers trudge around the state collecting signatures.
According to a short piece in The Hill, Coats didn't content himself with lobbying for the big banks that brought our economy to its knees - he also lobbied for foreign governments. In fact, his firm was involved with lobbying for the government of Yemen.
Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) said the foreign lobbying brings things to a whole new level for Coats.
"It's one thing to be a lobbyist; it's another to be lobbying for Yemen," she said. "He'll have that hung around his neck day in and day out.
"I think it's huge, and it's going to be really hard to overcome."
Maybe Dan should just go ahead and retire to North Carolina.
Oh boy. Things just don't appear to be going well for our good friend Dan Coats. First, his GOP friends in Washington convinced him to put aside his lucrative lobbying job and float a senate candidacy. Then he quickly bumbled out of the gate as word of his financial dealings and ambivalence toward the Hoosier State trickled out.
Now? Well, there's video evidence that as of two years ago the guy didn't even plan on setting foot back in the state in any real meaningful way ever again.
But Coats said Friday afternoon that he's put aside his plans to retire and will sell that house.
"We do have a second home in North Carolina," he said in an e-mail, "and had plans to spend more time there after retiring. Obviously, I now have no plans to retire, so it's likely we will be selling our North Carolina second home."
In other words, he was going to abandon the state, but now he's totally committed to ol' Indiana.
Well, not so committed that he, you know, wants to actually own property here. But based on the fact that he is flippantly talking about selling a $1.8 million vacation home in the Carolinas, something tells me he'll have a decent hotel room once he gets around to visiting the state.
If there was any doubt that Dan Coats had cut all ties with his "home" state, this damning footage from a North Carolina event in September of 2008 makes it clear that he had no use for Hoosiers until he thought he might be able to win a senate seat.
Rep. Mark Souder has always been a poor fundraiser, but to fall behind in the money race this early in the cycle has to be a bit worrying for GOPers in the northeast corner of this state.
Reports filed with the Federal Election Commission show that on Dec. 31, Hayhurst's campaign had $170, 949 in cash, compared to Souder's $165,697.
Souder may have to spend some of his money in a primary fight. He faces opposition from Phil Troyer of Fort Wayne as well as two DeKalb County residents, Rachel Grubb of Auburn and Charles Newman of Garrett.
You can check out Dr. Tom Hayhurst's campaign at www.tomhayhurstforcongress.com. Head on over and help him keep his cash advantage.
So are oppositional editorials, and that's what we have today from the Old Gray Lady and her uptight friends from across town on the subject of Dawn Johnsen's nomination to head up the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel.
Ms. Johnsen spent five years in the office during the Clinton administration, including time as its acting chief. She has criticized the Bush administration's interrogation and detention policies, and she joined in a statement of principles, signed by 19 former Office of Legal Counsel lawyers, that criticized the office's views on executive authority and its lack of transparency under Mr. Bush.
Those principled stands rankled Senate Republicans. In a letter to Senator Patrick Leahy, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, a group of Republican senators raised baseless concerns about Ms. Johnsen's fitness to help guide the war on terror and asked for her to be put through a second confirmation hearing.
Back in the day, Ms. Johnsen's efflorescent critiques of the Bush Administration's antiterror policies while a professor at Indiana University made her a darling of the left. In a 2008 blog about the Supreme Court's decision in Boumediene v. Bush, Ms. Johnsen claimed that U.S. detainee policies were "creating fertile conditions for the recruitment of terrorists." In March 2008 on Slate.com, she advised that the next Administration "must condemn our nation's past transgressions and reject Bush's corruption of American ideals."
That was all before the realities of fighting a relentless global terror network imposed themselves on the Obama Administration.
The Office of Legal Counsel's charge is to defend the President's authority in wartime. As well it is supposed to protect the Constitutional prerogatives of the executive in the normal tensions with Congress and the courts. The lawyers in the OLC are expected to provide legal guidance on executive actions, not work to check the power of the Presidency.
In other words, the Wall Street Journal believes it is now the Justice Department's responsibility to defend any and all action -- Constitutional or otherwise -- by the President of the United States. Because of terrorists.
Put another way, we're in mortal danger unless we put the Constitution and the concerns of our founding fathers on the back-burner for a while. Or even more accurately, defending the Constitution means the terrorists win.
Absolutely brutal - and spot on - email from the state party:
On behalf of Hoosiers everywhere, we'd like to welcome back Dan Coats to the State of Indiana.
After more than a decade working, living, and voting in Washington, D.C., it seems that Mr. Coats has decided to come back for a visit. The announcement that he is considering a run for the U.S. Senate has come as a surprise for those of us who haven't seen or heard from the Republican in a good many years.
No worries. Our welcome basket will soon be in the mail.
As soon as Mr. Coats lands, however, maybe he can find some spare time to talk to real Hoosiers about the issues that have been affecting this state while he was away. A lot has changed since Coats abandoned the Hoosier State for the posh life of a Washington insider.
While he's at it, perhaps Dan Coats can tell us about what he has been up to since he left town. He seems to have done well -- being a registered lobbyist for major financial institutions is a great job inside the Beltway from what we hear.
And with those banks receiving billions in TARP bailout money under his watch, it's hard to imagine Mr. Coats hasn't been reaping the benefits of that taxpayer money.
Between all of that lobbying, heading up the failed Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers, and championing Sarah Palin during the 2008 campaign, it's no wonder that Dan Coats was too busy to stop in and spend time in our state over the last decade.
Regardless, we wanted to extend our welcome -- if Mr. Coats would just let us know whether he wants the welcome basket to go to his Virginia address or his extended stay suite here in Indiana, that would be a great help.
If Coats is the hero the RNC is looking for, they must be really terrified of a Bayh vs. Hostettler race. And I'm not sure how Coats fits into the RNC's strategy against Bayh (as laid out by Greg Sargent):
NRSC spokesman Brian Walsh tells me the GOP response will be this: Target Bayh's wife, and the "Bayh family partnership."
GOP operatives point out that Evan and Susan Bayh have been criticized over her service on the boards of major insurers such as WellPoint, which reportedly earned her millions.
It's also interesting to note, as Chuck Todd did, that Coats' language on this has been very conditional: "allowing supporters to put his name on the ballot" and "as I test the waters for a potential challenge." Typical political posturing, or is there actually some hesitancy there?
I suppose any news is good news when you're launching a campaign and looking for free press, but Dan Coats appears poised to challenge this idea with a reported bid for office that seems to already be hitting choppy waters.
Politico reports the latest on Coats' struggles to convince people he's anything more than a Washington insider who was convinced to run by -- well -- other Washington insiders.
Coats, who resigned from the Senate in 1999, voted in the Virginia primary and general elections in 2000, according to data from the Virginia Secretary of State, provided by a Democratic source.
He voted in Virginia again in the 2002 and 2004 general elections, while he was serving as U.S. Ambassador to Germany; in the primary and general elections in 2005; and in general elections in 2006, 2007, and 2008. Data from the most recent election wasn't immediately available.
Coats residence, according to state election authorities, is in the Washington, D.C. suburb of Falls Chuch.
How much money will Dan Coats have to spend to actually qualify for the ballot? Collecting the 4,500+ signatures in the next few weeks is no small task, and the supposed campaign operation will no doubt have to expend serious resources to get anywhere near that number.
On the bright side, maybe these logistical issues will force Coats to come back to the state and stay for a long weekend -- he could use the time to get reacquainted with a state he hasn't spent much time in for a good many years.
Informed and reliable sources are telling Howey Politics Indiana that former U.S. Sen. Dan Coats will announce Wednesday he will challenge U.S. Sen. Evan Bayh.
The source, former aide Curt Smith of the Indiana Family Institute, said that Coats knows he has about two weeks to gather the 4,500 signatures - 500 per Congressional district - in two weeks.
Coats was up for re-election in 1998 when he decided to retire, citing the pressures of constant fundraising. Bayh went on that year to defeat former Fort Wayne Mayor Paul Helmke to reclaim his father's Senate seat.
Just to be clear, we're talking about a Bank of America lobbyist who by most accounts hasn't lived in Indiana for over a decade. Not exactly a recruitment coup d'etat.
But hey, at least he's not advocating for armed resistance to the federal government. Yet.
Last week, I speculated at the Capitol Watchblog that we'd see uncharacteristic enthusiasm from Lt. Governor Becky Skillman's supporters when it came to rumors that Secretary of State Todd Rokita could run for the now-open congressional seat in the Fightin' Fourth District. Why?
Quite plainly, they want to get rid of the guy any way they can.
It's no secret that both Rokita and Skillman have entertained delusions of gubernatorial grandeur as of late, and the prospect of a protracted (and costly) political battle has loomed on the horizon for a while now. With Rep. Steve Buyer's announcement that he will not be seeking reelection, a door was opened by which the Indiana Republican Party establishment could shove Rokita out to pasture for the foreseeable future.
Abdul notes this morning that the rumor mill is pointing pretty conclusively to a Rokita announcement in the coming days. But don't hand this seat to Rokita just yet -- his state money won't be of much use in a federal election, and he'll have a new primary contest to worry about with both State. Sen. Brent Hershman and former State Rep. Matt Whetstone readying a hat-toss in recent days.
For loyal Democrats such as myself, I can't think of anything more entertaining than watching those three tear one another apart.
For the Lite Guv, the result of all this jostling could be presumptive front-runner status as 2012 speculation continues. With Rep. Mike Pence unabashedly discussing presidential aspirations, Indiana Republicans appear willing to push Skillman front and center. For a politico who has never seemed capable of getting anyone's blood pumping -- or getting their wallets to open, for that matter -- Skillman still has a long way to go to prove her viability as a legitimate statewide challenger.
Encouraging words from the Indiana House leadership, as the Senate passed the latest version of a same-sex marriage ban yesterday. Quoth the Bauer:
House Speaker B. Patrick Bauer, D-South Bend, said the amendment is unlikely to receive a hearing this year, arguing the state's trial and appeals courts have upheld Indiana's marriage law.
"It's the same old song," Bauer said. "Some people don't have enough to do creating jobs and moving this economy forward, so they think up divisive things."
And just like that, confirmation from a reliable news source -- no offense, Abdul -- brings to an end the reelection bid of the Fightin' Fourth's Steve Buyer.
24-Hour News 8 has learned Indiana Congressman Steve Buyer (R-4th District) will announce he will not seek reelection during a news conference Friday.
Sources tell us Buyer, who's Frontier Foundation became the focus of a CBS investigation, chose not to run due to his wife's illness.
Buyer made changes to they way the foundation ran, moving it out of his campaign offices in Monticello, in August when questions were first raised about the fund.
Steve Buyer has made a name for himself over the last decade with habitually outlandish behavior and hyperpartisan rhetoric, but I think everyone can agree that he and his family deserve best wishes as they deal with a presumably difficult medical situation.
I'll be updating this post throughout the day with news as it develops.
Oh, the rumor mill is a-churnin' this morning, due in no small part to everyone's favorite WXNT radio host, Abdul.
He reports of unconfirmed whispers that Rep. Steve Buyer -- he of nuking Afghanistan, smoking lettuce, and shady scholarship fund fame -- is poised to step down amidst an investigation into the aforementioned "charity" work.
I'll be keeping tabs on this throughout the day, but while we wait, here's a classic blast from the past.
Our friends from the left coast chime in on the never-ending saga that is Dawn Johnsen's confirmation process. In short, they're tired of waiting.
The Office of Legal Counsel, which interprets law for the executive branch, became notorious in the days of John Yoo, a George W. Bush appointee who provided his bosses with specious legal opinions giving cover to the use of torture in the interrogation of suspected terrorists. Johnsen was scathingly critical of the Bush-era office, asking in one blog post: "Where is the outrage, the public outcry?!" Republicans who had no problem with the office interpreting the law to accommodate the Bush administration's tactics in the war on terror now fault Johnsen for supposedly harboring a liberal agenda.
But Johnsen isn't simply a Yoo in reverse. She was among a group of former Office of Legal Counsel lawyers who published a thoughtful position paper about its mission. "When providing legal advice to guide contemplated executive branch action," the paper said, "OLC should provide an accurate and honest appraisal of applicable law, even if that advice will constrain the administration's pursuit of desired policies."
That philosophy obviously is a rebuke of the way the Bush Justice Department operated. But it also could lead the office to take a more critical look at some dubious Obama administration initiatives, including the president's apparent intention to hold 50 Guantanamo detainees without trial.
Excerpts have already been released for tonight's remarks:
By the time I'm finished speaking tonight, more Americans will have lost their health insurance. Millions will lose it this year. Our deficit will grow. Premiums will go up. Co-pays will go up. Patients will be denied the care they need. Small business owners will continue to drop coverage altogether. I will not walk away from these Americans. And neither should the people in this chamber.
You can tune in on any news station, or online courtesy of our friends at the White House.
Via RedState, a copy of a letter to be sent out later today:
As many of you are aware, I have been approached about running for the United States Senate in 2010. Karen and I have been humbled by the outpouring of support and encouragement which we received from across Indiana, especially since there are several capable and qualified candidates already seeking the Republican nomination.
After much prayer and deliberation, I have decided to remain in the House and to seek reelection to the 6th Congressional District in 2010.
I am staying for two reasons. First because I have been given the responsibility to shape the Republican comeback as a member of the House Republican Leadership and, second, because I believe Republicans will win back the majority in the House of Representatives in 2010.
One year ago I was unanimously elected chairman of the House Republican Conference, the third ranking position in House Republican leadership. I accepted that responsibility because I believed that if Republicans returned to their conservative roots, they could win back the confidence of the American people. And I see it happening every day.
Pence got his free press, which is all he was probably interested in to begin with.
So you heard about that Rasmussen poll, did you? The one that says Senator Evan Bayh is toast and the only decision left is whether Mike Pence or John Hostettler will be the next junior senator from the great state of Indiana?
Well, news travels fast these days.
I, too, read the results of this latest survey yesterday, and I'll admit to being a little taken aback at first. I mean this was, after all, a shocking set of numbers, and coming on the heels of the media-fueled PenceWatch '10 spectacle, seemed to signal the start of a perfect political storm.
But let's take a step back and look at the situation. Aside from the fact that early polls are almost always terrible -- I can show you a few from this time in 2008 proclaiming a McCain victory over Hillary Clinton in Indiana -- and ignoring the fact that the campaign season has yet to even kick off for either side in this race, there are some simple logistical problems with this gem of a poll.
Here are just a few:
This poll is at odds with every other internal/external set of numbers we've seen. Way off. Outliers happen, folks.
The damn thing was taken during the Colts game. Let me ask you: would you trust any statewide survey that was taken during an AFC Championship game featuring Peyton Manning and the boys in blue? I didn't think so.
Rasmussen has become increasingly ideologically motivated, and timing is everything. Politico covered recent criticisms of the outfit earlier this month, and the fact that Republican money paid for this poll while Pence sits on the fence should tell you everything you need to know about the "fair and balanced" output of Rasmussen.
Now, all that aside, it's worth noting that these results are indicative of what is shaping up to be an extremely tough year for incumbents both here in Indiana and across the country. Senator Bayh is well aware of this, and echoed such sentiments this morning on MSNBC.
"People are mad at Democrats, they're mad at Republicans. They are just angry at the situation. I've seen polls that show me in a stronger position than the one probably you just showed your viewers. The important thing is we focus on what matters to people. Job creation, getting the deficit under control, health care reform that will matter to them right now. The polls take care of themselves. The poll in my case is illustative. The people like me personally, I'm happy to say. I'm doing a good job for them. It's all this other stuff in Washington that has them upset. You've got to change business as usual in Washington. If I have one message this morning, that's it."
Smart money is still on this whole fiasco just being a PR push on the part of the Pence camp, but regardless of who the Republican candidate ends up being, Senator Bayh has the resources, the infrastructure, and the campaign trail skills to bring his message to Hoosiers. And media clusterfunfest aside, that's something that no poll -- ideological or otherwise -- can change.
Yesterday brought word that the League of Women Voters challenge to Indiana's draconian voter identification law will be heard before our state's highest court in early March, presumably setting up a timeline that would allow a decision to be rendered well before November's elections -- and perhaps May's, as well?
Lesley Stedman Weidenbener gives a proper summary of the major developments thus far, including reaction to this most recent announcement:
Karen Kay Leonard, president of the League of Women Voters of Indiana, and Erin Kelley, president of the league's Indianapolis chapter, said in a joint statement Monday that they welcomed the Indiana Supreme Court's review.
"We are confident that after Indiana's highest court carefully examines the voters ID law, it will conclude that the burdens it imposes on otherwise qualified voters who vote in person are not justified by, or reasonably related to, its alleged purpose of preventing fraud," the statement said.
The league said the state's only recorded cases of voter fraud involve mail-in absentee ballots.
A three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals agreed with the league's argument, ruling that the law violated the state constitution's "equal privileges and immunities clause" because it doesn't require mail-in voters to show a photo ID.
In other words, the law makes it more difficult for ordinary Hoosiers to vote while the only instances of voter fraud in this state presumably continue unabated. Oh, and the fact that the Republican-sponsored law disproportionately affects low-income and no-income voters is worth noting as well.
All logos and trademarks in this site
are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, and
all other site content may be used for any purpose
without explicit permission
unless otherwise specified.
