Via Talking Points Memo, you can read their analysis of the flailing (and failing) Republican campaigns centered around Washington insders. Virginia North Carolina's own Dan Coats gets special mention.
In CD 03, you need to keep your eye on the second challenger of U.S. Rep. Mark Souder (R) to the right, Fort Wayne and Indianapolis car dealer Bob Thomas (R). We're hearing that the former head of the national Ford dealers council, a Princeton and Harvard alum, has assembled an impressive cadre of handlers and is budgeting $500,000 to be spent between now and the first week in May.
That's a serious amount of coin, especially against a habitually bad fundraiser such as Souder. I'll be keeping an eye on this contest as it develops.
Kudos to Ed Feigenbaum for another great scoop. If you haven't considered a subscription to one of his great publications, you should do so today.
According to the mysterious voices of Twitter, it is to be so. Star political columnist sent this missive this morning in response to one of his colleagues:
This includes my column. RT @SpaldoBusiness: Starting Sunday, IndyStar will embargo A1 stories from the Web for 48 hours. Go print edition!
This will certainly give new meaning to their "Behind Closed Doors" column. Thoughts?
To recap yesterday's developments, Republican Attorney General Greg Zoeller -- to his credit -- has gone on an all-out offensive over the National Republican Congressional Committee's skirting of Indiana's ban on automatic dialing calls, or "robo"-calls.
Reports say the healthcare-themed calls were placed in three congressional districts, and it doesn't take a lot of thinking to figure out which ones we're talking about.
Republican challengers in those districts -- to their detriment -- have remained notably silent over the intrusions into the households they supposedly want to represent.
One of these challengers, State Rep. Jackie Walorski, owes even more of an explanation to the people of Indiana's Second District.
See, back in 2007, Walorski supported HB 1046, which would have strengthened Indiana's robocall ban. You can see her "Yea" vote here.
Flash-forward to 2010, and Walorski's nowhere to be found while her friends in Washington laugh in the face of Hoosier privacy on her behalf with thousands of invasive phone calls to voters in Northern Indiana.
For a candidate who describes herself so often as a politician of principle, every passing day of silence proves more and more that Walorski is willing to talk the talk, but not walk the walk.
Via friend-of-the-site and former Libertarian congressional candidate in the Fightin' Ninth District Eric Schansberg, we get this latest update on Debategate:
The March 18th debate in Jasper has been canceled.
Why?
Travis Hankins is on the record as being willing to debate anytime, anywhere, anyhow.
Todd Young challenged Mike Sodrel to multiple debates in January. Sodrel seemed to accept and promoted "open debate" in his promotional tour. But as is annoyingly common in such matters, the "negotiations" often break down and little/nothing is accomplished-- an apt analogy to Congress in general! This is an embarrassment within the Republican Party. In any case, if you want more of the same in Washington DC, you have two candidates from which to choose!
As I mentioned a while ago, despite the public agreement between Sodrel and Young to debate early and often during this primary election season, neither has been able to find the testicles time to agree to an actual public forum.
Such cowardice just screams "good representative," doesn't it?
Democratic inboxes around the state just received a message from Senator Evan Bayh, and he had nothing but strong support for Congressman Brad Ellsworth as he begins his campaign for the US Senate.
I have known Brad for many years, first through his work as Sheriff in Vanderburgh County and then as a member of Indiana's U.S. House delegation. "Protecting and serving" Indiana communities is at the heart of everything he believes.
Brad will bring common sense Hoosier values to his work in the Senate. He will work to get the economy moving again, and he will make sure the Senate stays focused on progress not politics, solutions rather than slogans.
That is why I am urging you to support Brad Ellsworth for the United States Senate.
You can donate to the Ellsworth for Indiana campaign via his website.
The more and more I think about the Jim Shella story I linked to below regarding the NRCC's use of pseudo-robocalls in Indiana -- and their subsequent refusal to stop -- the more and more I think that the Republican challengers in the affected districts owe it to their potential constituents to condemn the NRCC's tactics.
To recap, all three major political parties in Indiana signed a "treaty" months ago pledging to not use automated phone calls in the upcoming election cycle.
Not only is the legality of robocalling in question right now, but at the end of the day, people hate these calls. The treaty was widely seen as a win-win for both the political organizations and ordinary Hoosiers.
Clearly, though, the NRCC didn't get the memo. And when Attorney General Greg Zoeller pointed it out, they gave Hoosiers the political equivalent of a middle finger.
All of which leads me to a simple question: Will any of these candidates step forward to condemn the NRCC's flagrant disregard for what Hoosiers want?
Attorney General Greg Zoeller this morning found himself in the uncomfortable position of criticizing his own party's congressional campaign committee over their efforts to circumvent the tri-partisan treaty that banned the use of recorded political calls in the state.
Attorney General Greg Zoeller, a Republican, cited the National Republican Congressional Committee today for violating the spirit of the state's ban on robo calls.
The calls use a live operator who asks permission to play a recorded political message, a legal tactic.
[...]
Zoeller says he asked the NRCC to stop the calls and it declined.
Oh, that's cute.
As if the Washington-based meddling in the Indiana Republican Party wasn't bad enough already (see: Coats, Dan), this fight makes it clear that for all of the talk about Indiana's resurgent GOP (see: Daniels, Mitch), the national organization still lacks a basic respect for Hoosiers.
One of the nice things about the unceremonious way in which the Washington insiders behind Dan Coats' bumbling candidacy have attempted to shove his campaign down the throats of Hoosier Republicans is that Democrats have been able to sit back and watch while the right, the far-right, and the ultra-far-right have tripped over one another to slam the Virginia lobbyist's tactics.
Take for example this recent post from a conservative observer, who recounts with great detail the supposed crisis of leadership (or lack thereof) taking place within the Coats camp:
It would appear the campaign is being run by Washington insider Kevin Kellums, who also hails from Kentucky, although my source tells me that there is mass confusion inside the campaign about who is running it and who is making decisions. Perhaps Anne Hathaway, or staff members in Washington? Here's an open question for the Coats for Senate Campaign, who's running things right now? You have some of the best consultants in the state, the best that money can buy, but where is the campaign?
Good question.
The last place finish at the Warsaw Tea Party event on Saturday may have caused some internal problems, for some reason there is surprise in the Coats campaign that tea party members can't seem to see the logic in a lobbyist coming back to rescue the party. What's the next step for the now named "Washington for Coats" campaign? Emails and blog posts today suggest a line-up of "conservative leaders" will tell tea party activists and conservative grass roots groups what's best for them. Take it from me, Mayor Costas tried that last year and I think Attorney General Greg Zoeller won convincingly.
When I was on Abdul recently, I said one of the biggest problems facing the mainstream Republican Party was how to turn the energy and activism of the Tea Party folks into something, well, productive. Dan Coats appears to be providing a blueprint for exactly what not to do.
I did hear just Friday that some member churches of the Indiana Family Institute, where Kurt Smith is now President and was reportedly a central part of the recruiting effort, may be looking at how firm their commitments are to the organization.
...and so goes the Evangelical vote, so goes the primary? Perhaps not, but suffice to say there are more than a few of my GOP friends who are beginning to question whether throwing good money after bad is the best course of action for a Coats campaign that has been a distraction (and a disaster) since the first day his name was leaked out of that smoke-filled room in Washington.
Political prognosticator Charlie Cook hasn't exactly been brimming with optimism as of late when it comes to the Democratic prospects for holding the House and Senate come November. In fact, he's been a downright Debbie Downer.
Which makes his observations as to the state of the Republican field in the Indiana Senate race all the more damning. To be sure, Cook believes that Dan Coats represents a legitimate challenge to Congressman Brad Ellsworth. Or, at least, he might have been...
If former GOP Sen. Dan Coats had never retired and was simply running for re-election, he would be in strong shape.
But even having retired, he would have been better off had he gone back to Indiana after his stint as ambassador to Germany, instead of moving to Northern Virginia to become a Washington lobbyist.
And if he weren't on videotape effectively telling a North Carolina audience he intended to retire there but please don't tell the folks back in Indiana, he would have been stronger still.
Suffice to say Coats is a bit damaged, and House Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence might have been a better candidate.
As to John Hostettler -- widely seen as the only real challenge to Coats' candidacy -- Cook is even more brutal with his honesty.
Hostettler made no friends at the National Republican Congressional Committee. Indeed, when he finally did lose, the feeling seemed to be, "Good riddance. In a cycle or two we'll get a Republican in that seat who will be worth defending and won't need to be bailed out every election year."
As a Senate candidate, Hostettler is likely to be a disaster, unless he has gotten a complete political makeover. He or a Tea Party type could lose what otherwise would be a fairly safe race.
Will this be a hard-fought contest either way? Sure.
But if one thing has become clear in recent weeks, it is that any advantage in momentum the Republicans had in the aftermath of Bayh's retirement announcement was squandered as part of the disastrous Coats roll-out. Game on, folks.
...I told you so. And so did quite a few other organizations around this state.
I'm talking about the Mitch Daniels Plan for Tax Salvation, wherein he urged the State of Indiana to assume 100% of public school operating costs, shifting the tax burden from the hated-but-stable property tax to the slightly-less-hated-but-instable sales tax.
ISTA hated it, and I echoed what may were saying in this 2007 post:
Doesn't it make more sense to leave the operating funds with the more stable funding source and move the building projects under the umbrella of a tax structure that might face shortfalls during times of economic recession? If we were facing a big deficit in revenue at the state level, would you rather that school building projects were put on hold, or that remedial ISTEP tutoring was ended for the students that need it?
Well, we got our answer.
The Courier & Press took a look at the growing problems associated with the current funding scheme, and determined that legislators have only themselves to blame.
The current fiscal downturn began just months after the change took effect - a fact that forced legislators to make some tough choices in June 2009, as they prepared the biennial budget.
Legislators had to decide who would feel the most pain - urban and rural districts with declining enrollment but greater challenges, or rapidly expanding suburban districts where class sizes are growing quickly.
The funding formula they came up with left all sides somewhat displeased.
In a lot of ways, the public school crisis mimics the approach toward public programs that we've seen from Daniels and his crew from Day One: if you starve them, cuts will come.
The Hill takes an interesting look at the ongoing partisan war over the nomination of Indiana University School of Law's Dawn Johnsen to head up the White House Office of Legal Counsel.
In short, Republicans have spun themselves into a corner in their rush to portray Professor Johnsen's criticism of the Bush Administration's torture policies as a deal-breaker.
"Those issues indicate the importance of the OLC position and the need to have someone of innate experience in that position," Senate Judiciary ranking member Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said.
Added Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah): "In this day and age, someone is always going to say you're a hypocrite, but [Johnsen's] positions are off the wall."
But the argument is a tricky one for Republicans, who in making their case against Johnsen open themselves up to criticism for actions taken during the Bush years. The same report they cite in support of their effort to block Johnsen, one of President Barack Obama's most controversial nominees, was critical of the office during the Bush administration.
Tricky, indeed. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse didn't waste much time taking the bait:
"It's a remarkable exercise in backwards logic," Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said. "Their argument states that because our party went and wrecked the place, we don't want your party going in there."
While most eyes in the state have been acutely focused on Senatefest 2010, State Rep. Trent Van Haaften has been quietly assembling a team for his planned congressional bid in the 8th Congressional District.
As Eric Bradner of the Courier & Pressexamined, Van Haaften has a reputation among his fellow legislators that may go a long way toward making the case that he is the right person to replace the exiting Brad Ellsworth.
But as he leaves behind a Statehouse in which his star was on the rise among Democratic leaders, the question is, will such a campaign resonate?
The House Public Policy Committee, which Van Haaften chairs, is assigned bills related to the regulation of drugs, gambling and alcohol, as well as crime and sentencing. He won praise from fellow committee members for his handling of those issues.
"I think Trent's been a phenomenal committee chairman," said Rep. Matt Bell of Avilla, the top-ranking Republican on the committee.
Bell said on that legislative panel, "we are able to work in a bipartisan fashion. These are not issues that fall on party lines. And he's promoted that culture of exchange."
I'm not aware of a campaign website for the Van Haaften effort, but I'll let y'all know as soon as one is launched.
After being approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee last Spring, Indiana University School of Law professor Dawn Johnsen was left unconfirmed at the end of year, forcing President Obama to renominate her a few months ago. After weeks of Republican-sponsored stall tactics and mysterious postponements, today finally brought successful vote to move Johnsen's appointment back to the full Senate.
Johnsen's nomination heads to the Senate floor on a 12-7 committee vote amid repeated and intense GOP attacks that she would bring "partisan" and "extremist" views to her role as counsel. Johnsen's nomination has already been blocked once by the Senate.
The back-and-forth between Republican and Democratic senators Thursday was as much a referendum on Johnsen's qualifications for the Office of Legal Counsel as it was on the Bush administration Justice Department. Johnsen had testified before the committee that she believed torture, including waterboarding, should be considered illegal
Yesterday I posted a video from the recent WTHR investigative report that revealed Governor Mitch Daniels and his minions -- namely Mitch Roob, of FSSA privatization infamy -- have been a bit generous in their job creation numbers.
As in, roughly 40% of the jobs they're citing don't exist.
Daniels wasn't featured in the first report, but yesterday's follow-up brought out Bad Mitch. You know, the spiteful, snarling Mitch that can't stand it when people question his judgment.
(See also then-OMB director Mitch Daniels dismissing critics of the Iraq War by calling their $200 billion price tag "very, very high" -- the current tab has pushed past $1 trillion.)
Regardless, it appears that the Mitch's got their signals crossed:
To help clarify how many job commitments have resulted in actual jobs, WTHR asked the governor if the state would release specific information to show which job commitments have been fulfilled and which ones have not, along with the number of jobs each company has created in Indiana.
"The IEDC board meetings are public, and plenty of enterprising reporters choose to attend them and those numbers are available there," Gov. Daniels replied.
His statement contradicts what Roob told 13 Investigates a week ago when WTHR asked for the same information.
"Most of what IEDC has is sheltered from public disclosure for competitive reasons," Roob explained. "That is a competitive weapon that companies believe can be used against them by their competitors... the confidentiality we promise to companies that do business in Indiana is very important to us. That is confidential information."
In the four stages of crisis recovery that Mitch Daniels has used, we're almost to step four. For those of you keeping track, we've gone through (1) Ignore, (2) Dismiss, (3) Irrationaly Defend, and are almost back to...(4) Ignore.
It appears that either the report from The Hill on Sunday (or the leaked poll results they received) were a little off, so here are the actual figures from that Research 2000 survey:
Brad Ellsworth (D) 36 Dan Coats (R) 37
Brad Ellsworth (D) 34 John Hostettler (R) 40
Baron Hill (D) 37 Dan Coats (R) 37
Baron Hill (D) 36 John Hostettler (R) 42
Former gubernatorial candidate Jim Schellinger was also included in the poll, and didn't fare any better or worse than the congressionals, all things considered.
The bottom line for Republicans is sobering, though. Their establishment-supported candidate has established only one thing in his nearly month-old campaign: his unfavorables. Coats fared far worse than any of the other Republicans or Democrats tested, with only +4 favorable/unfavorable.
Ellsworth, for his part, boasted the best (+17).
As for the illusion that Hostettler poses much of a threat to Ellsworth, I'm just not impressed. To be sure, this will be a hard-fought race. But Ellsworth's dominating performance in the 2006 cycle made it clear that in a head-to-head contest, Johnny Ho can't hold a candle to the former sheriff.
After what has been widely described as one of the worst candidate roll-outs in decades, Dan Coats and his Washington-based handlers have finally started to allow the guy to pop up occasionally around the state -- so long as the room is friendly, of course.
But this recent quote was too funny to not highlight:
"Our candidate will be chosen by the people, theirs will be chosen by the party bosses without the people's say," Coats said in an interview.
This is a rehashing of something that Republicans have tried to make stick over the last few weeks. Smoke-filled rooms! Intrigue! Behind closed doors!
Look, folks. Not only will the doors to the State Central Committee meeting be wide open, they'll be in Indiana, which is more than we can say about the Coats candidacy. In case you've forgotten, his campaign was arranged by a Texan, behind closed doors in Washington, via telephone to Coats in Virginia.
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.
Republican challengers in those districts -- to their detriment -- have remained notably silent over the intrusions into the households they supposedly want to represent.
