A possible scandal- the high road taken (ooooh, that wasn't too smart, "Longshot"). http://theessentialsteinforcon... A truck for auction on ebay....http://theessentialsteinforcongress2010.com/Auction_News.html....19 bids, and going nowhere- because car enthusiasts are broke- like the rest of us.
Next, a very unusual contest in which voters can enter to win a rugged, mans table lamp...
http://theessentialsteinforcon... And a letter to the editor....
Catching up on this site, Blue Jersey. Read a few diaries and the morning roundup. Good luck with all your endeavors. Fight the good fight; I'll continue with my crusade. One last diary about me, before I literally hit the road campaigning.
Unfortunately you folks- and what's looking more and more like a majority here in S. Jersey- might waste a golden opportunity to unseat a real political hack, just because (as been pointed out) I don't score A's and B's in certain specified categories thought needed to run and get elected.
The Democrat running against incumbent U.S. Rep. Frank LoBiondo, R-2nd, criticized LoBiondo's decision to vote against emergency federal funding to boost jobs for teachers...
In a written statement, Stein said, "LoBiondo has got to be feeling very uncomfortable now that he has voted to abandon his unionized supporters, because there are more teachers than Tea Party activists in the 2nd District."
Preach on, Stein! Oh wait...
Gary Stein, of Mullica Township, says he would have voted the same way.
You can't imagine how depressing this is. I blame party bosses for not recruiting even a symbolic candidate.
Hello Blue Jersey Democrats, I'm a life long Republican- a working class stiff by the way- who recently hitched my wagon to the Democratic Party in order to do something unusual. How often does a Congressman's supporter in 6 previous elections, change parties, successfully make it through the primary and become his chief opponent in the fall?
Anyone serious enough about their politics, to be "on-line" on a political blog on the 4th of July weekend, is dedicated enough for me to solicit an opinion on my progress to date. My opponent is Frank LoBiondo....
It looks like Frank LoBiondo isn't taking his challengers in either the primary or general very seriously:
House Minority Leader John Boehner (Ohio) and other GOP leaders have pressed their Members to pay dues and to give whatever else they can to the NRCC to help the party's effort to make big gains in November. The NRCC still significantly trailed the DCCC in cash on hand as May began, $27.3 million to $11.5 million.
Most of the NRCC's April receipts from Members were dues payments.
Rep. Frank LoBiondo (N.J.) transferred $130,000 to the NRCC last month, more than any other House Republican.
This is why it's important to field strong candidates everywhere, even when it's an uphill climb for the race. Now LoBiondo's money, instead of being spent at home will go to help try to put some GOP candidate over the top in a very close race, maybe even NJ-3.
One of the late bipartisan achievements of the Bush Administration was the America COMPETES act which aimed to increase research and development funding in certain engineering and science areas, and support science education. The 10-year process of doubling this R&D funding (7% per year) requires a new authorization this year. (The same kind of increase was done successfully with National Institute of Health funding over the previous decade.)
The 2007 bill so was so bipartisan that every New Jersey Representative voted for it. Frank LoBiondo supported it. Yes, even Scott Garrett supported it. This is "mom and apple pie" stuff because we know that such government funding is paid back in economic growth. The nations we are competing with are investing heavily even as our private sector abandons basic research.
House Democrats had to scrap their only substantive bill of the week Thursday after Republicans won a procedural vote that substantively altered the legislation with an anti-porn clause....
But the Republican motion to recommit the bill -- a parliamentary tactic that gives the minority one final chance to amend legislation -- contained language prohibiting federal funds from going "to salaries to those officially disciplined for violations regarding the viewing, downloading, or exchanging of pornography, including child pornography, on a federal computer or while performing official government duties."
That provision scared dozens of Democrats into voting with Republicans to approve the motion to recommit. After it became clear the GOP motion was going to pass, dozens of additional Democrats changed their votes from "no" to "yes." In the end, 121 Democrats voted with Republicans -- only four fewer than the number of Democrats who voted with their party.
Of course the porn thing is just an attempt to sink the very bill these Republicans supported. (Why Democrats worry about this nonsense is beyond me, though to be fair many say Rahm popularized the tactic when Democrats were in the minority.) The Roll Call vote is here. The Republicans don't have an ounce of integrity and are trying to paralyze the government in a time of crisis by even destroying things they support.
ps. If you saw "scared Democrat" and thought John Adler you're right. That's what I predicted we'll see again and again. No other New Jersey Democrat voted for the Republican sham. Remember that this tactic would not work without cowardly Democrats. (Runyan, of course, would be even worse.)
Representative Frank LoBiondo (NJ2) has some unwelcome notoriety as a video entitled LoBiondo doesn't know the Constitution has gone viral over the last week. Yesterday, the video had some 70,000 views and this evening it's over 80,000. Here it is:
As for what I think, I posted the video and an e-mail promoting it last week, and said that my sympathies were with LoBiondo. Pop quizzes are designed to make people look foolish. But evidently the right-wing just eats this stuff up, because it's being posted at conservitve and Tea Party blogs all around the country. Of course, the same people were running around calling George W. Bush their "Command-In-Chief" just a few years ago, but now they love Congress and the right to protest.
Representative Frank LoBiondo doesn't like what's he's hearing on the F-35 fighter. Costs continue to escalate massively, yet the military is counting on replacing our existing fighter jets.
I probably don't agree with every particular of his complaints (I for one am glad we pulled the plug on the F-22) but it's good to see he's angry over these outrageous costs spiraling out of control. It's not just the military: we all know the Coast Guard (Deepwater) and NASA (Ares) have had similar problems. Congress needs to be part of the solution.
Although they're upset with his "aye" vote on cap and trade, U.S. Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-Bridgeton) says he welcomes primary opposition, and is encouraged by the organizing efforts of the Tea Party movement.
"I think it's great," says the 16-year veteran of the U.S. House. "A lot of people are energized, and when people are energized, we're all better off."
"If the cap and trade vote came up again, I wouldn't support it," adds LoBiondo, who would like to see the country develop a coherent energy policy - without the tax penalties included in the bill he originally supported.
He couldn't have put it any more plainly unless he was wearing a "white flag" on his lapel. I am disappointed but again not surprised.
I believe this nation is on a disastrous march. And now Democrats are losing votes because of the policies of extremists in your party.
According to LoBiondo's previously expressed views, our energy policy was on a disastrous course but now he has flipped his vote because of extremists in the Republican party. Sad to blame someone else for it. After all, cap and trade is a Republican idea:
I'm just old enough to remember when policies like cap-and-trade were quintessentially conservative. As an econ undergrad in the 1980s, cap-and-trade was the leading light in a suite of then radical, new, market-based regulatory ideas propounded by right-of-center economists. These new market-based approaches, they argued, would achieve superior amelioration of environmental problems without the heavy-handed inefficiencies of the "command-and-control" limits embraced by liberals in the 1970s. During my undergrad years, and the the years after, there was a decent debate about the policy and economic merits of the competing approaches to regulation. I imagine someone with Lexis Nexis could even find historical documents (Galaxy Quest!) of elected Republicans advocating cap-and-trade approaches as a conservative alternative to old-fashioned, unfair "liberalism."
Fast forward to 2009, and I confess I still find myself amazed that the conservative policy won the argument... Ironically, while their proposals were winning in the marketplace of ideas, the Republican party has abandoned the field of competition and retreated into an extremism that would probably shock even the 1964 edition of Barry Goldwater. Where you might have seen someone like Jack Kemp endorsing cap-and-trade as a sexy new idea 25 years ago, now the very same policy approach is crazy communism to today's Republicans. The policy hasn't changed, but the Republican party sure has. What was once a center-right party looking for innovative new ideas (like cap-and-trade), it is now a right-of-everyone-but-the-lunatics rump, mistrustful of any and all public policy and clinging only to the irrational scraps that feed their hysterical, anti-scientific state of denial. Kind of sad, really.
As LoBiondo has been in Congress since 1994, he really needs to look in the mirror and ask how he let this happen.
Frank LoBiondo is doing his best to avoid a primary challenge from the teabaggers and probably spit out his coffee when he read in the Atlantic City Press that he had taken sides in who the Cape May Republican committee should support for Freeholder. Before the fire got to hot, LoBiondo sent out a letter to members of the Republican Party denying reports of the endorsement:
The Press of Atlantic City reported that Freeholder Director Beyel said I endorsed John McCann ("Beyel said U.S. Rep Frank LoBiondo, R-2nd, also endorses the slate"). THIS IS NOT ACCURATE.
I was not part of the decision making process by the Cape May County Republican organization. I was not asked for my opinion nor consulted with in any discussions concerning the party's decision not to endorse Jerry at any time.
Once I found out about it as the rest of you did, I made it clear I would not be involved in the committee preference vote process.
But now it is being reported that I am. I AM NOT.
You have to love the strategic use of capitalization for emphasis. The Democrats don't have a challenger yet, so as long as he can avoid a primary, its a pretty clear path to two more years. He's already got incoming fire from his own side of the aisle and is trying to keep his profile as low as possible.
I do not think Leonard Lance can be beaten in a Republican Primary. Even if David Larsen won, he would be cut out in redistricting in 2012."
Doherty's statement is sure to anger some of the same people that put him in office, but his decision seems to be more about is own political standing and thinking Lance is the safe bet so it's better to keep his powder dry in this one. Larsen will need to raise some seed money to show people he's serious and not just looking to loan his campaign money for the effort. I'm told that Lance won't be the only Republican to get a challenge from the tea party crowd as someone may run against Frank Lobiondo.
Then in the seats held by Democrats, there are a few primary races to run against the Incumbent. There are numerous candidate running in the 3rd district and Justin Murphy could also get support from the tea partiers as he runs again this year. There is also the primary to run against Rush Holt as Mike Halfacre and Scott Sipprelle will face off in a right v. further right battle and there may be more candidates to jump in the race. Assemblywoman Mary Pat Angelini and others have expressed interest in challenging to run against Frank Pallone as well. The tea partiers are even saying they may put someone up against Scott Garrett from the right, if that's possible in comments to stories that are being written. The amount of candidate running in GOP primaries can be seen as an indication of the enthusiasm and also anger out there with the public right now, who only want to see 8% of incumbent re-elected right now.
By contrast, the Democrats in New Jersey don't seem to like primaries as much. The only primary challenge I've seen so far is one against John Adler, but his warchest will make that an uphill climb. I know inside political circles they tend to shy away from primaries, because it makes you spend resources you want to conserve for the general election battle and take stands you often don't want to defend. But sometimes primaries can better prepare candidates for the trial by fire that is a general election campaign. Even if the GOP candidates don't win their primary challenges, the incumbents will already be in campaign mode given the voter angst right now. The competitive primaries to challenge Democratic incumbents will season them for the rigors of a race. With the climate and public opinion where it is, it's important that candidates don't wait to start their campaigns and these primaries insure that the GOP won't.
How does Frank LoBiondo win in landslides every two years? He's just an average legislator as far as I can tell. He says working behind the scenes is good for the 2nd district. In all the years I've been watching the news I've never once seen him on cable tv even standing in one of those small groups of his peers backing up another legislator. Frank might call it grandstanding; I think he has in so many words. I'm not sure if he means taking a stand or publicly supporting somebody who has?
But guess what? Anonymity is very effective at getting elected in this district- as long as you bring a few earmarks. I'm a Republican for a few more days and then it's over to city hall to change my registration to Democrat. I voted for Frank at least 6 times. Being fiscally conservative isn't enough for me anymore and Frank stinks on the social issues which are equally important to me. Truth be told, I thought at one time Frank was fiscally conservative; actually, he manages to bungle conservative economic theory if you look closely at his votes and his statements afterwards. Times are changing, we are in deep doo doo and wishy washy doesn't cut it anymore with me. I'm going to get the signatures required and run in the Democratic primary. I'm actually socially very liberal so I see nothing phony about re-registering. And if Jeff Van Drew isn't aware of Franks inconsistencies and sees the vulnerability, then I as a former Republican will try and point them out. Will anybody listen? We'll see, I don't have any money to run a campaign, just lots of passion. That's never been enough....until maybe 2010. It wasn't enough in 2008 when I ran as an Independent and couldn't even use a computer properly. As I said this is 2010 and I'm hoping there's an intersection now of true voter disgust, and some seasoning, technical and otherwise on my end, and maybe Frank will have to defend for once a truly mediocre career. Right after the filing deadline I'll show anybody who is willing to listen, true head spinning inconsistencies in Franks voting record. If I win the primary, and I'm correct about what I'd go so far and call his voting perfidy, he might not glide so easily to his 9th victory, although he will win; I'm not stupid, just disgusted.. And one more victory by Frank will make it 6 more years total then he originally promised he'd serve when he first ran for Congress in 1994 and sold us on term limits as a way to keep up legislatures from stagnating...how's that for irony??!! See that easy salvo? Pray for me folks I'm going to need it.
If a Democrat beats Congressman Frank LoBiondo in this November's election, it won't be State Senator Jeff Van Drew doing it. Van Drew has confirmed to Coastal Broadcasting that he will not be running against LoBiondo in this November's election. The State Senator will be up for reelection 2011, along with Assemblyman Nelson Albano and Matt Milam. Cape May Councilman David Kurkowski ran against LoBiondo in 2008, in the Republican's most recent victory.
After he didn't pull the trigger in 2008 with all the wind at the back of Democrats, I wasn't expecting him to jump in this year given the current climate. He didn't close the door on a future run however:
"I'm not going to be running in this cycle," said Van Drew, D-Cape May, Cumberland, Atlantic.
While Van Drew will not run, Egg Harbor Township resident George Sakura says he plans to run. He hasn't spoken to the Atlantic County Chair about his run yet and says he plans on running not against LoBiondo, but against the idea of lobbyists running the country. We will have to see if anyone else steps forward to challenge for the Democrats and if he gets anyone running against him from the right in the primary as well.
One thing I enjoy reading and writing about is how government and candidates for office are using technology. A story in the NY Times says that Republicans in the House are kicking some serious Democrat donkey butt:
It may have been sort of a counterintuitive thought at one time, but it's become pretty well-established that Republicans on Capitol Hill have embraced Twitter more than Democrats.
But just how much congressional Republicans are out-Tweeting the Democrats may be a bit of a surprise. According to a new study from the public relations firm Fleishman-Hillard, House Republicans have pecked away on Twitter more than five times more frequently than their Democratic counterparts - sending out 29,162 tweets all told through Jan. 3, compared to 5,503 for Democrats.
In New Jersey, @Rep_Albio_Sires and @FrankPallone are our lone members on twitter in the House. @SenatorMenendez uses twitter from our Senate delegation, but the GOP clearly has more members utilizing the medium to communicate:
The study also found that about two-thirds of Congress' 132 active Tweeters are Republicans.
But what type of communicating they are doing offers the caveat to these numbers:
Many congressional Twitter users don't follow others or reTweet items, Mr. Senak said in an interview. "It can be more like one-way communication, which is not really what Twitter was designed for," he said. Mr. Senak, who writes a blog about the F.D.A., said curiosity about how lawmakers were discussing health care was a major reason he started the Twitter study.
If they're not utilizing the medium to create a dialogue, they're not getting the complete potential. See Cory Booker for an example of how you can harness the power of social media. But on top of that, it's troubling that our leaders aren't embracing new opportunities to interact with their consituents. I know it's hard to convey public policy in 140 characters, but if you use more words no one listens, are you better off passing up the opportunity at a captive audience? If you are on twitter, even though your member of Congress may not be, you can find and follow us @BlueJersey
This is a press release but I thought it was pretty interesting.
WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg, chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics and Environmental Health, today issued the following statement at an afternoon hearing on the nation's chemical safety laws. Lautenberg is preparing legislation to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act.
"Let me thank everyone for being here as we focus on better protecting the health of our families by updating our chemical safety laws.
This is a joint hearing of my Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics and Environmental Health, and the full Environment and Public Works Committee.
I'd like to thank Chairman Boxer for agreeing to hold this hearing and for her tireless leadership of the Committee.
Right now, there are hundreds of industrial chemicals in our bodies. That goes for nearly everyone in America.
In fact, just this morning, the Environmental Working Group released the results of a two-year study that found nearly 250 different industrial chemicals in the blood of 10 babies who were exposed to the substances while still in the womb.
While some of these chemicals may not be harmful, others clearly are.
That means these children face the possibility of chronic, life-long health problems from the day they are born.
I ask unanimous consent to enter the Environmental Working Group Study into the record.
According to a 2002 study, five percent of cancers, 10 percent of neurobehavioral disorders and 30 percent of asthma cases in children are associated with toxic chemicals.
It is time to sound the alarm-America's system for regulating these toxic chemicals is broken.
Industrial chemicals are everywhere: from flame retardants in furniture and carpets, to other chemicals in cleaning products, personal care products, food containers and even children's products.
The current law-the Toxic Substances Control Act-puts a high burden on EPA to prove chemicals are "unreasonably dangerous" before the agency can take steps to restrict their use.
The burden is so high, in fact, that EPA has been able to ban only five of the more than 80,000 substances on EPA's inventory of chemicals on the market, and it has only tested about 200.
This means the majority of chemicals used in products that make their way into our homes and our children's hands are untested.
We must strengthen our chemical laws and give Americans confidence that products are safe before they are sold and used throughout the United States.
Most of the thousands of chemicals we use everyday are safe, but we need a law that will separate those safe chemicals from the ones that are not.
And I believe we are in an excellent position to accomplish that goal, with a broad group of agencies and organizations coming to the table to work for reform.
President Obama's Administration is here today, represented by EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, our good friend from New Jersey.
Here's an interesting November 19, 2009 press release from Frank LoBiondo saying "LoBiondo Supports Protecting Local Doctors from Cuts to Medicare Payments":
"For the past seven years, I've supported efforts to protect our doctors and their staffs from scheduled Medicare reimbursement cuts, which in the end would affect the care they are able to give their patients. Today, I voted for a plan that would prevent the scheduled doctors' reimbursement cuts, would not add to the deficit, and would ensure future South Jersey seniors are not shouldering the costs. Regrettably, it was not the bill that was approved by the full House today," said LoBiondo.
What's interesting about this? It's not just that LoBiondo voted against getting rid of the cuts, after all, the press release is clear enough. It's not that he claims to have voted for a Republican alternative, when there was no such vote that day. No, those are all in the days work.
The impressive bit of hypocrisy is that the cuts are due to the "Balanced Budget Act of 1997" (H.R. 2015) which, of course, Frank LoBiondo and his Republican colleagues made law. These cuts are entirely his creation! When the Republican party actually cared about deficits -- at least the name of the 1997 law says they did -- they created a "Sustainable Growth Rate" formula which would have reduced the deficit by paying doctors less. Whether it's a good idea or not, I don't know, but it is the law thanks to Frank LoBiondo's 1997 votes, whatever press release he sends out in 2009.
Sadly, we can expect that no reporter will ever notice the contradiction.
DNC is keeping up the pressure on Leonard Lance and Frank LoBiondo, two of the 32 GOP congressmen in America whose District voted for Obama - and his health care reform platform - but who betrayed the interests of their constituents by voting against reform 9 days ago in the House. Full list here.
The DNC announced the other day that they will target Congressmen Lance and Lobiondo as part of their effort to focus on the group of 32 House Republicans who opposed the healthcare bill that are in Congressional Districts won by President Obama in 2008:
Through this campaign, the DNC will send a message to Republicans who have reflexively said no to health insurance reform by urging them to do the right thing and support reform when it comes to the House again for a final vote. The campaign will include press releases, Op-Eds and letters to the editor, local events and will leverage the energy and enthusiasm of the DNC's grassroots supporters and its email list in holding these members accountable for their vote. The effort may also include paid advertising. DNC National Press Secretary Hari Sevugan released the following statement on the effort:
"You would think a Member of Congress should think twice about voting against health insurance reform that their families and small businesses so desperately need and want. But you have to think to vote against health insurance reform in a Congressional District won by President Obama just a year ago could be a political death knell at a time when Americans are clamoring for solutions to vexing issues like health care," said Sevugan. "These members not only represent districts that voted for President Obama, but also where health insurance reform, as in the rest of the country, is badly needed and where passing it will be politically popular. Some on the very far right wing would have people believe that voting for health insurance reform is a mistake politically - when the truth is that any Republican who votes against reform, especially those from districts won by the President, will undoubtedly place themselves in real political peril."
We've focused here at Blue Jersey a good deal of a attention and effort on getting the people in our own party on board with healthcare reform, but the DNC is taking a look at the other side of the aisle and lining up their targets for the next election based on what they see. In separate releases, the DNC noted that President Obama received 54% of the vote in Congressman LoBiondo's district and didn't give a percentage in Lance's district, but pointed to the President's victory. In fact, they and Organizing for America started putting out those releases hitting Lance and LoBiondo immediately following the vote on Saturday night. Congressman LoBiondo's spokesman had a simple, short response to the targeting:
Asked about the DNC's targeting of LoBiondo, Galanes asked, "Are they targeting John Adler? ... Just curious."
Are we in Congress or pre-school? A bad vote by Johnny doesn't excuse Franky from doing the right thing by his people.
After Senators Kyl and Hatch held up an extension of unemployment benefits, today the Senate finally voted on the bill. It passed 98-0. I think everyone knows that it's extremely difficult to find a job right now so this is some of the most moral and most effective government aid there is. In any case, here is Senator Frank Lautenberg's release:
Following weeks of Republican obstruction, U.S. Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) today voted to approve legislation that would extend unemployment benefits for an additional 14 weeks in every state and an additional 20 weeks in New Jersey and other states where unemployment exceeds 8.5 percent. The legislation will also extend and expand the first-time homebuyers tax credit.
"It is shameful that weeks of senseless Republican obstruction has stood in the way of families receiving unemployment benefits," stated Lautenberg. "Extending unemployment benefits will boost the economy, benefit thousands of out-of-work New Jersey residents and millions of families across the country. This legislation also takes important steps to further promote home ownership and boost the housing economy. I applaud passage of this legislation and urge my colleagues in the House to approve it as quickly as possible."
Today's withdrawal by Dede Scozzafava in the NY23 special election to Congress is an important milestone. In her statement, she says "It is increasingly clear that pressure is mounting on many of my supporters to shift their support." It's a polite way of noting that the far-right conservatives -- mostly outside the district -- have successfully purged her for perceived disloyalty to conservatism.
This must be a very unwelcome development for Frank LoBiondo. To be sure, he's "pro-life" and part of the Gingrich's Revolutionary Class of 1994, so he has right-wing credentials she doesn't. But his occasional moderate votes are increasingly unwelcome to conservatives both inside and outside of Congress. His vote in favor of the energy bill earned him attacks nationwide by outraged conservatives. There's many who would love to get rid of him.
Now, LoBiondo, unlike Scozzafava, has lots of money and the advantage of incumbency. It's now possible to imagine a successful challenge to him, but it's extremely unlikely. But today we see one more step down a road along which moderate Republicanism is extinguished.
