Last night, the House failed to pass the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act. The bill needed a 2/3 majority to pass, but the final vote was 255-159. Indiana's Congressional delegation split their votes along party lines: Carson, Donnelly, Ellsworth, Hill, and Visclosky voted for the bill, while Pence, Burton, and Buyer voted against it.
This piece of legislation was named after NYPD detective & 9/11 responder James Zadroga, who died at the age of 34 after developing a disease attributed to inhaling toxic chemicals. Zadroga dedicated 450 hours to helping with rescue and recovery efforts and Ground Zero. This bill would have provided medical care to responders and nearby residents who continue to suffer the after-effects of the terrorist attack.
Today, the GOP wants to talk about arcane rules of procedure or NY Rep. Anthony Weiner's (justifiably) angry speech on the House floor. But that's just because they don't want to talk about this bill or their votes.
While the GOP, including our Hoosier delegation, has never hesitated to call these responders heroes in the past, this vote revealed how little they actually care about the sacrifice of those Americans. When it's cheap to praise them, Reps. Pence, Burton, and Buyer are there. But when it comes to doing the right thing and standing by our heroes, they're nowhere to be found.
Steve Buyer serves on the committee that initially heard the bill, and he followed the GOP script on this bill to perfection. He offered a meaningless, redundant amendment to make doubly sure that no undocumented immigrants would be eligible to receive money under the fund - something already explicit in the text of the bill. Before voting against the bill in committee (PDF), Buyer criticized the bill as costing too much and being a parochial giveaway, saying:
"If we want to talk about New York City and Congress only acting for the benefit of New York City, that's what this bill is about." (Source: NY Daily News)
I think it's clear from the GOP's vote what this what about: protecting tax loopholes for foreign companies instead of protecting the heroic Americans who responded to the 9/11 attacks.
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.
After completely misstating the effect of this bill on veterans, and then screaming like a madman on the floor of the United States House of Representatives, Buyer went back to his office and counted the hundreds of thousands of dollars he, his family, and his campaign staff have indirectly (and in some cases directly) received from the pharmaceutical industry through his fake charity.
The Star this morning takes aim at Rep. Steve Buyer's increasingly fervent claims that his non-charitable charity is too legit to...investigate.
Specifically, they compare the finances of Buyer's Frontier Foundation with the charitable activities of two other Hoosier lawmakers.
Buyer's Frontier Foundation was launched in 2003 with $25,000. He has said he doesn't recall the original source of the money. It has grown to more than $880,000, almost all coming from companies and trade organizations that have issues before the House Energy and Commerce Committee on which Buyer serves. He's held golfing events in the Bahamas and at Walt Disney World to raise cash.
And, so far, he's given out only $10,500, of which $4,500 was being refunded, saying he was trying to raise $1 million before handing out scholarships.
And on the other side...
Bayh began his foundation in 2002 with $658,700 in leftover funds from his gubernatorial campaigns.
He made no donations in 2003 but has done so in every subsequent year. In 2008, the donations totaled $146,500.
Visclosky began his foundation in 2001 with $38,590 that his press secretary, Jacob Ritvo, said came from a pay increase that Visclosky felt he should not accept.
Congressman Steve Buyer continues to assert that he has absolutely nothing to do with the "charity" organization that has raised nearly a million dollars over the last five years, of which over $250,000 has been spent to compensate members of Buyer's campaign staff and immediate family.
Our friends over at TPM list just a few of the reasons why Buyer's bold-faced denial doesn't add up:
The foundation shares an address and phone number with Buyer's campaign headquarters on North Main Street in Monticello, IN.
Buyer's daughter Colleen was the president of the foundation until August 1 of this year.
His son Ryan is a director of the foundation, according to filings with the Indiana Secretary of State.
Answering the phone number of the campaign office (and foundation) today, Stephanie Mattix, until recently the secretary-treasurer of the foundation, told TPMmuckraker that the foundation shares the office but works out of "a separate room."
The real estate company that owns the space says the lease is for Buyer, and adds that the foundation is not subleasing the space. Mattix told TPMmuckraker, though, that the foundation does pay rent.
While drawing an annual salary in the $12,000-$17,000 range from the foundation, Mattix also served as the executive director of Buyer's Storm Chasers PAC. She is currently the finance director of his campaign and the webmaster of the campaign Web site.
Buyer was listed as the "honorary chairman" of the foundation on a 2004 donor solicitation, sent from Buyer's office, the Lafayette Journal & Courier reported.
Companies have made donations to the Frontier Foundation "in honor of" Buyer.
Buyer has helped the foundation with its fundraisers.
Justin Elliott of TPM is doing great work on this story -- be sure to check back in the coming days for any updates he has.
Starting in August, the GOP apparently - and suddenly - became stalwart defenders of Medicare. Republican chairman Michael Steele unveiled a new "Seniors Bill of Rights", vowing to protect Medicare from cuts during the health reform debate. Indiana's Mike Pence was at the forefront of this GOP push, urging his house colleagues to avoid
''harmful cuts'' to Medicare that would ''result in millions of seniors losing their health coverage.'' [1]
What Mike Pence hasn't thought to mention lately is that in April 2009, he - along with fellow Hoosier Republicans Dan Burton and Steve Buyer - voted to kill Medicare. Not to cut its funding or to limit its benefits, but to end the Medicare program, leaving elderly Americans to the whims of Wall Street insurers.
In April, during the budget hearings, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) introduced an "alternative" GOP budget document. This plan called for the elimination of Medicare and providing subsidies so that those 65 and older could buy a private insurance plan. In all, 137 Republicans were willing to vote for a budget that killed Medicare. (The only member of the Hoosier GOP delegation to vote against the bill was Mark Souder.)
Do Hoosiers actually believe that, in less than six months, Mike Pence has gone from wanting to kill Medicare to wanting to "protect" it from plans that would reduce waste and fraud? Of course not - we can see through his political opportunism in opposing Obama, even when it means opposing the positions he took just months earlier. But it's still sad to see a Hoosier give in to beltway thinking.
Rep. Steve Buyer won election in the 90s by carrying around his dusty combat boots and plunking them down like a cheap prop at every campaign stop he made. His service as a JAG officer during portions of the Persian Gulf War was played up by the Republican, who was swept into office during the bloodbath of '92.
Since then, the 4th CD represenative has come under constant fire from veterans groups, who were especially incensed by his deference to Bush administration requests when he headed the Veterans' Affairs Committee. Now in the minority, Buyer still can't stop himself from taking a holier-than-thou stance on military issues.
During World War II, over 200,000 Filipinos served with the United States Military. The U.S. government promised all of the benefits afforded to those serving in the Military of the United States. However, in 1946, the United States Congress passed the Rescission Act which stripped Filipinos who served during WWII of the benefits as promised. Of the sixty-six countries allied with the United States during the war, the Philippines is the only country that did not receive military benefits from the United States.
Fast-forward to today, and the passage of the economic stimulus bill that includes the aforementioned long-ago promised benefits.
Congressional supporters and the remaining veterans - about 18,000 out of some 250,000 - lauded a $198 million provision that will give lump-sum payments of $15,000 to Filipino veterans who are American citizens and $9,000 to those who are noncitizens.
Some veterans said they would have preferred monthly pensions, an idea that had been proposed before in Congress.
"It's better than nothing," Manuel B. Braga, 81, said of the lump-sum payments. Mr. Braga was a guerilla fighter in the Philippine jungles and now lives near San Diego.
Enter Rep. Steve Buyer, champion of the veteran:
Representative Steve Buyer of Indiana, the ranking Republican on the committee, opposed the benefit, saying, "I hope Americans will stop to ponder the distorted values of those who crafted this bill."
In a press release put out yesterday, Nels Ackerson-- democratic candidate for Indiana's fourth congressional district-- calls out incumbent republican Steve Buyer, pointing to the many ties he has with spreading corruption in Washington. From the the release:
"The incumbent Steve Buyer has shown his loyalty to oil industry executives and corporate PACs who have contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund his campaigns. Since taking office 16 years ago Steve Buyer has taken over $160,000 from energy companies, and voted repeatedly to stop reforms that might reduce his fundraising perks."
Congressional records show that Buyer has consistently voted against restricting the influence of lobbyists and against legislation that would forbid Congressman like himself from receiving gifts. Among the positions Buyer has supported are:
Voting against the investigation into Jack Abramoff's illegal lobbying activities (3/30/06, RC#76);
Voting against stronger reporting requirements for lobbyists involved in fundraising for candidates (5/24/07, RC#420);
Voting against repealing weak House ethics rules (4/27/05, RC# 145); and
Voting for allowing groups to pay for a Congressperson's travel, and lobbyists to cater dinners to their offices (1/7/03, RC#4);
I think its safe to say this race is closer than many people think. Ackerson's willingness to go after Buyer has helped him down the stretch, and rightly so. Do we have another upset brewing? Only time will tell but one things for certain, its looking better with each passing day.
Rep. Steve Buyer seems to be having problems with his usual modus operandi, as the Republican congressman's bi-annual refusal to debate in front of the 4th District is being met with some strong push-back from Democratic candidate Nels Ackerson. This story in the Bedford Times-Mail includes some great quotes from our great candidate.
"We have accepted every debate proposal, and I think there have been six of them," Ackerson said Wednesday morning. "My opponent has declined, not responded, or indicated he has time conflicts."
But Ackerson is confident Buyer will eventually accept an invitation to debate.
"I don't believe he wants the people of this district to think he's afraid to face me or afraid to face his record," he explained.
Ackerson was in Bedford Wednesday to appear on WBIW's "Talk of the Town." While he conceded the incumbent has the advantage of name recognition, he notes his campaign is building momentum.
"It's been fabulous," he said of his multiple visits to Lawrence County. "I'm having a good time, and now I'm seeing a lot of people for the second and third time. I think they appreciate the fact I've been around a lot."
Rep. Steve Buyer isn't really fond of the 4th District. He spends hardly any time at all there, rarely makes himself available to his constituents, and generally seems to have a distaste for the troublesome parts of being in Congress. (Namely, the 'Representative' part of his House.)
The Times' joint effort to sponsor a debate within Clinton County between U.S. Congressman Steve Buyer (R IN-4) and his Democratic challenger, Nels Ackerson, has one of the candidates ready to participate.
"I am in favor of multiple debates and I know the people are in favor of multiple debates," said Ackerson, during a break from touring the Clinton County and 4-H Fair on Thursday. "There are too many important issues to just allow people to send out press releases and tell their own story.
"That's important, but it's also important to be submitting to questions, and going back-and-forth with persons having differing views."
Buyer, however, has yet to commit to participating in a debate within Clinton County, an area solely represented in U.S. Congress by the eight-term incumbent.
Buyer has done this the last few cycles, but with Ackerson raising eyebrows with his competitive fundraising and campaign efforts, one wonders how long ol' Steve can afford to ignore his constituents.
The Times sent a letter to Buyer's Monticello office in June, requesting his participation in a debate.
After no answer, an e-mail was sent on Wednesday, and a phone call made on Thursday to Buyer's Communication Director, Anjulen Anderson.
"As the Congressman thinks the invitation for a debate is worthy of consideration, the Congressman has always discussed debates amongst the campaigns in the fall," Anderson wrote in an e-mail response to a Times' request to speak to Buyer about a possible debate.
How worthy of consideration? So worthy that Buyer's office then made the claim that he would be unavailable to appear in the district for the entire month of September.
Rep. Steve Buyer to the 4th District: I'll get to you when I get to you.
Rep. Steve Buyer has made a name for himself over the years shilling for the pharmaceutical industry. Whether you are looking at his strong-arm tactics on behalf of the drugmakers or his outspoken opposition to pro-consumer legislation, the 4th District "representative" established long ago that those that pay the piper get to name the tune.
Democratic challenger Nels Ackerson says it's time for a change:
According to campaign finance records, Fourth District Congressman Steve Buyer received more money - almost $100,000 - from Big Pharma and the health products industry than any other group in the 2006 campaign cycle. He has received $38,000 from the industry in this cycle.
"Why do we keep sending someone to Washington who's more interested in representing the special interests than the people who elected him?" Ackerson asked. "Our Congressman should be standing up for the people of the Fourth District, not the special interests."
More than 90 percent of Ackerson's campaign contributions have come from individual donors.
A quick look at Buyer's public statements on the Big Pharma pet issues reveals little more than the corporate talking points being peddled by the deep-pockets out in DC. Ackerson pledges to bring a fresh, novel approach should he be elected: He'll actually represent his constituents.
"I bring a different approach," Ackerson said. "For the past 16 years, while my opponent has been in Congress, I've been fighting for the little guy, protecting their rights and opportunities, and taking on governments and big corporations when they abuse their power and influence to take advantage of others. Hard-working Hoosiers are looking for that kind of leadership to represent them in Washington, and that's why I'm running for Congress."
In response to 4th District Rep. Steve Buyer's blatantly false smears against Democratic candidate Nels Ackerson, the campaign has released a statement calling on Buyer to stick to the issues.
Steve Buyer doesn't want Hoosiers to know that he has repeatedly proposed increasing the fees veterans must pay to receive the health care they deserve. He wants to call it an enrollment fee, but in plain English, it's a tax on veterans.
Steve Buyer doesn't want Hoosiers to know that as Chair of the Veterans Affairs Committee, he aggressively fought to cut funding for veterans health care and education benefits.
He underestimates Hoosier veterans if he thinks he can hide his record behind a personal attack. They deserve to hear the facts about his record, and I'll be sure they do.
I'm ready to provide leadership to give veterans all that we have promised them; I consider our commitment to our troops to be a sacred contract.
For the last few cycles, 4th District Rep. Steve Buyer (R-Crazytown) hasn't made much of an effort to really engage in what is generally considered to be the "campaign season." He wouldn't talk about the election, refused to debate his Democratic opponents, and he more or less pretended like the democratic process an inconvenience he didn't want to be bothered with.
Take this video from 2006. Buyer asserts that he won't debate the Democratic nominee, Dr. David Sanders, because he is a) mean and b) poor.
Ah, democracy in action never looked so pleasant.
Fast-forward to this year. Democratic candidate Nels Ackerson has seemingly taken Buyer's advice. He has raised a lot of money during the last few fundraising periods -- more than Buyer, in fact -- and has hit the streets with a message of change.
Rep. Buyer's response to all of this? Down-and-dirty from day one, apparently.
A recently approved House Bill amendment drafted by Congressman Steve Buyer (R-4th District) is drawing criticism from Buyer's Democratic challenger in the upcoming November election.
Nels Ackerson, a Zionsville attorney running against Buyer in the November election, accuses Buyer of grandstanding in an election year and maintains that the congressman "took the lead in proposing an unprecedented tax on veterans to pay for their healthcare."
Those claims come amidst a new press release from Buyer's office crediting the Congressman's amendment for an increase in healthcare and readiness of the nation's active and inactive troops.
[...]
"Mr. Buyer's cuts in veterans' health benefits have been painful and I don't begrudge a small step but we need to look at the whole package and so far that package has been dismal," Ackerson said. "He has a record of very substantial cuts to veterans' benefits over his years in Congress and he has occasionally come back to make some smaller increases in military benefits and this seems to follow that pattern."
Wait for it. Wait for it...
"It's a false and malicious statement," Buyer said. "There is no such thing as a tax on veterans' healthcare. This is a gentleman who got out of Purdue in 1967 and while his buddies went off to serve in Vietnam he served his time as a lawyer in Washington, D.C., so he does know how to spin things."
Ah, there's the rational political discourse we've heard so much about.
For what it's worth, Nels Ackerson volunteered for the Marine Corps but was not permitted to serve because he had two herniated discs.
To make matters worse, he also wasn't in Washington during Vietnam.
But hey, Steve Buyer has never let the facts get in the way before, so I don't know why he would start now.
You can learn more about Nels and donate to his campaign at his official website.
(Bumped from the user diaries. Be sure to check out the whole post in "There's More-ville." - promoted by Thomas)
Here we are with yet another installment in my "Oil Lies" series that is such a hit on teh intertubes. If you think I'm kidding, go do a Google search for the phrase, "Why don't we use Alaskan oil?" I'm authoritative, baybee! *snort*
This entry is dedicated to my local Congressional "representative," Steve Buyer. I had noticed a few days ago over at Masson's Blog that since it's election season Steve has introduced a buzzword-laden monstrosity, the "Main Street USA Energy Security Act of 2008." Sounds fantastic, eh?
Well, not so much. Go below the fold for a detailed look at what sort of solution ANWR drilling would be . . .
Sylvia A. Smith of the Journal Gazette writes in her column this morning of the troubles facing the national Republican Party brand as we move toward this year's critical election. Entitled, "Twilight in America for the GOP," the piece paints a dreary picture for a conservative movement that has seen almost every major policy initiative fail miserably over the last half decade of unbridled federal control.
The result of all of this? Maureen Groppe explores whether a landslide year for Democrats could put congressional challengers Nels Ackerson and Michael Montagano in a competitive position come November.
Buyer's Democratic challenger, Nels Ackerson, is a lawyer who is also a past national president of the Future Farmers of America and helps manage his family farm in Hamilton County. He has represented farmers and ranchers on property rights issues.
Ackerson has slightly outraised Buyer, collecting $308,603 through April 16, compared with Buyer's $301,131. But because Buyer had leftover funds from previous races, he reported $492,374 in the bank compared with Ackerson's $149,899.
Michael Montagano, the Democrat challenging Souder, raised $326,276, compared with Souder's $458,632. Montagano had $267,771 in the bank in mid-April, and Souder had $293,000.
[Rep. Tom] Davis, who led the campaign arm of the House GOP from 1998 to 2002, named Montagano in his memo as one of the examples of the "second tier" races where Democratic challengers have substantial cash.
In addition, Davis noted, the campaign arm of House Democrats had $44 million in the bank at the end of March versus $7.2 million for Republicans. And some traditional GOP interest groups, including the pharmaceutical industry and government contractors, are "giving strategically" to Democrats, he said.
I was out of commission most of yesterday, so I would first like to offer kudos to all of the great stories written by you folks. Good stuff, to be sure.
This morning, I am finally getting caught up on the latest going-ons in the Hoosier blogosphere, and I couldn't help but laugh when I saw the back-and-forth between Doug and Scott over Rep. Steve Buyer's attempt to make himself seem like some sort of leader on the topic of energy.
According to Buyer as quoted in the article, it seeks to allow drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and to shift reliance to nuclear power plants and coal. The text is here. In addition, it apparently seeks to expedite the process for building refineries, including designating 3 closed military bases as suitable for refining. I don't have any kind of familiarity with existing energy law, so I'm not qualified to say how Buyer's law would change existing law. From reading the text of the bill, I see about $1/2 billion for nuclear development and a number of tax credits for energy producers, including nuclear, coal liquification, and, apparently, non-dammed, free-flowing hydro. There are some amendments to the tax credits for home owners using solar, wind, or geothermal.
Congressional hopeful Nels Ackerson, who has been outraising the entrenched incumbent over the last few months, released a statement that took Buyer to task for throwing out a random piece of legislation in the name of political posturing.
"The incumbent congressman's energy bill is too little, too late, too narrow in scope, and too politically motivated to have any effect on gas prices," Ackerson contended. "Let's be honest, this is a weak bill put forward at the last minute in an election year. Its current co-sponsors are all members of his political party, and it has no chance of being passed.
"Hoosiers are being hit hard with gas prices passing the $4 mark. Providing relief and reducing our dependence on foreign oil are too important for political gimmicks. They deserve serious, comprehensive energy proposals."
. . .
Ackerson, though not opposed to drilling where oil can be recovered in an environmentally sound manner, does not believe a focus on increasing oil production is the answer.
"We need complete solutions, including wind, bio-fuels, solar, safe nuclear and clean coal technologies, as well as conservation," he explained.
There's probably some good in Buyer's bill, but it likely won't provide energy "security" in any particularly convincing way. Congress has dropped the ball on this for a decade now, but most of the recent woes have been from a cozy relationship between President Bush and the oil industry and the unwillingness of the GOP-led Congress to take their fearless leader to task. Democrats control the body now, but progress has been put on hold due to the recently-discovered veto threat, and most agree that it will take a new presence in the Oval Office to bring about the much-needed reform.
But wait! That sound you are hearing is our good buddy Scott turning the ol' blog to "spin cycle," and he presented his own case for Buyer's crowning as the king of energy reform.
I find that when reading some of these posts, it's actually easier (and more enjoyable) to simply assume that everything being said is more than likely the direct opposite of what actually should be said. For example:
Buyer Ackerson, of course, can be forgiven for assuming that the Democrats Republicans were going to do something about the price of gasoline in their first 11 years in office.
The Democrats Republicans, you might have noticed, have done absolutely nothing about the price of gasoline or about the country's energy situation, except pass a meaningless and empty bill to prevent the President from topping off the Strategic Petroleum Reserve that balanced some worthwhile provisions with billions of dollars in subsidies for the poor, defenseless oil industry (a big store of oil that is kept on hand as a practical matter for emergencies, such as hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico oil fields (to be ignored by the President for days) or conflict or terrorism in the Middle East (to be incited by the President for years)).
Ackerson seems content Buyer has been content for years to force Hoosier families (and American families more broadly) to continue to wait for Washington to do something about their plight with regard to gas prices until after the election.
Why they would think that electing Ackerson Buyer would solve the problem, when Ackerson's Buyer's party has done nothing about the price of gas since gaining the majority in 1995, is beyond me.
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.
From the Star's 
