Conservatives Already Seeing Through Kristi Noem Facade

All conservatives got with Kristi Noem was looks. Observers outside South Dakota are already seeing that, far from a true Tea Party crusader, Noem is just another pork-seeking farm-state politico. Take her comments on subsidies for ethanol:

Speaking on the Scott Hennen Show Noem says “Ethanol has been very good to South Dakota.” She said that this is not the time to repeal the subsidy “when you look at taking away that subsidy it is the wrong decision.”

She says that supporting the ethanol industry with subsidy promotes investment and continued hiring “In the long run it will get the economy back on track faster” [Kurtis Workman, "New South Dakota Congresswoman Say Ethanol Subsidy Good For Recovery," PlainsDaily.com, 2010.12.09]

Wait a minute: isn't Noem the same lady who spent a lot of time this year blasting federal stimulus efforts?

Let's tour the blogosphere. Rob Port at Say Anything:

How are ethanol subsidies any different than Obama’s economic stimulus spending? The fiscal conservative argument against the stimulus spending spree was that government cannot create jobs because government cannot spend anything without taking away from someone else.

Given that, if Obama’s stimulus spending hasn’t resulted in job growth (and we know it hasn’t) then how is spending on ethanol subsidies any different? [Rob Port, "South Dakota Rep. Kristi Noem: Ethanol Subsidies Are Economic Stimulus," SayAnythingBlog.com, 2010.12.09]

Rand Simberg:

This is depressing. Kristi Noem hasn’t even taken office yet, and she’s already defending home-grown pork as “stimulus"... [Rand Simberg, "And So It Begins," Transterrestrial Musings, 2010.12.11].

The Lonely Conservative from New York:

Kristi Noem is conservative only when it suits her.... I'm glad I didn't waste my time blogging about this woman ["Just When I Was about to Praise Kristi Noem," The Lonely Conservative, 2010.12.12].

Ah, but we shouldn't be too hard on our Mrs. Noem. She's just following the lead of John Boehner and the other big Washington Republicans who are engaged in the same hypocrisy on the pending $855 billion tax-rate and stimulus deal. Stimulus packages and deficit spending are bad, bad, bad when Democrats will get the credit and we need to rile up the voters. But when stimulus packages and deficit spending send money to our favored special interests, be they the ethanol industry or the richest 1% of Americans who pay for our campaign ads, then spending money we don't have becomes our patriotic duty.

Nebraska Farmers Union Opposes Keystone XL

Governor Heineman Washes Hands of Dirty Oil,
Disses Constituents with Double Standard

Nebraska is a welcome hotbed of activity on the Keystone XL pipeline. The Nebraska Farmers Union packed the house last Friday with a debate on the proposed tar sands pipeline. TransCanada spokesman Jeff Rauh squared off with Plains Justice advocate Paul Blackburn. Robert Pore's account in the Grand Island Independent is worth reading. Plains Justice apparently won the day: afterward, the Nebraska Farmers Union passed a resolution formally opposing the Keystone XL pipeline.

Also speaking on Keystone XL (among other topics) at the Nebraska Farmers Union annual meeting was Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman. During a Q&A, a member of Keystone XL opponent Bold Nebraska asked Governor Heineman to join Senator Mike Johanns in calling for a better study of the pipeline's potential impact on the Nebraska Sand Hills and Ogallala Aquifer.

Governor Heineman's response:

But Heineman accused Bold Nebraska of playing politics with the pipeline issue. Heienman then referred to the Democratic administration in answering the question.

"This is a federal regulatory issue," Heineman said. "There are two people who can stop it -- President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton -- and that is where our focus ought to be."

Heineman said he appreciates Johanns' efforts and is supportive of it and has sent correspondence to Clinton expressing concerns Nebraskans have about the pipeline project and its proposed route through the Sandhills and across the Ogallala Aquifer.

"Maybe that route needs to change or maybe they don't even go forward with it," he said. "But that is where the decision is -- it is a federal regulatory issue and there's nothing we can do at the state level, at this time, to prevent that. Maybe in the future, but not on this particular one" [Robert Pore, "Merits of Proposed Oil Pipeline Debated at Farmers Union Convention," Grand Island Independent, 2010.12.03].

Fascinating: a Republican governor who doesn't think state-level activists should "play politics" with federal issues. This from a member of the Republican Party that is playing politics with unemployment benefits, the START treaty, and everything else on Congress's agenda in order to get huge tax breaks for rich people who don't need them and won't stimulate the economy. This from a governor who himself is playing politics with federal health care legislation and with the clearly federal issue of immigration.

Governor Heineman has acknowledged environmental concerns about TransCanada's Keystone XL. He now needs to get consistent and apply some of that Republican states-rights backbone to this issue and fight for a better route for the pipeline... or no pipeline at all.

Obama-GOP Tax Deal Hands $360K to Richest 0.1%

Harvard's Dr. Mankiw mostly likes the tax deal between President Obama and the still-minority Republicans. He also points to some useful number-crunching from the Tax Policy Center that breaks down who gets what from extending the Bush tax cuts for the next two years. Compared with current law—i.e., the taxes everyone would pay if we let all of the deficit-busting Bush tax cuts expire at the end of this year, as originally intended—the top 0.1% of income earners each get $360,469 more in their pockets each year.

$360,469. That's enough to cover the salaries of Kristi Noem and John Thune. Normal annual pay for members of Congress: $174,000.

The way I calculate it, the 259 richest Americans could take their gains from this tax deal and buy every member of Congress.

But they seem to have already done that.

Or let's slice that locally. About 400,000 South Dakotans file federal income tax returns. 0.1% of them would be 400 taxpayers. (South Dakota's own Fortune 400—that is a list I'd love to see.) 400 × $360,000 = $144,000,000.

$144 million more dollars staying in the richest South Dakotans' pockets... at the same time that Governor Rounds wants to cut $23 million from K-12 education. Hey Dennis! I think we just found our replacement for the stimulus dollars to fix the state budget deficit!

Four More Years: No One Beating Obama

My neighbors at Dakota War College love to soothe their nerves with gentle cooing that Barack Obama will be a one-term president. While the conservative bloggarazzi revel in the President's low poll numbers, they ignore one key fact: his potential GOP challengers' numbers are even lower:

Americans are pretty evenly divided on whether they'd rather have four more years of Barack Obama or replace him with a Republican in 2012, with 48% going for Obama and 47% with a generic Republican. But with the exception of Mitt Romney none of the actual top tier Republican candidates poll as well against the President as the hypothetical one.

Obama leads Romney 47-46, matching his generic ballot lead. Obama's lead expands to 48-45 over Mike Huckabee, 49-43 over Newt Gingrich, 51-42 over Sarah Palin, and 48-37 over Marco Rubio who PPP followers voted in as this month's 'wild card' candidate [Tom Jensen, "Obama Leads All Republicans," Public Policy Polling, 2010.11.29].

PPP also finds that Palin, the Celebritarian playing the press better than any regular Republican, is viewed as electable by only 28% of Americans. She can't even get a majority of Republicans to say they think she could beat the President in 2012.

One-term President? Go ahead, conservatives. Keep telling yourselves that, if it makes you happy. But you have yet to come up with someone who can make that happen.

GOP Immigration Posturing Proves SD Legislature Getting Dumber

Arrgghh: the Republican supermajority in our South Dakota Legislature is already proving its inability to use its powers for good. With a giant budget deficit and persistent school funding problems, the Republicans are determined to ignore our real problems and fight the illegal immigrant boogeyman.

Proof of idiocy:

1. State Rep. Manny Steele (R-12/Sioux Falls) wants to make it a crime to give an illegal immigrant a home or a ride in South Dakota. But he wants to exempt from punishment the real causes of the problem: the employers who demand cheap illegal immigrant labor. Steele says it would be unfair to punish employers, because "Most employers don't have the training—what's a legal or an illegal immigration document." But landlords and good Samaritan motorists do? Seriously?
2. State Senator-Elect Angie Buhl (D-15/Sioux Falls) points out that Rep. Steele's legislation would make a criminal out of a citizen who gives an illegal immigrant woman beaten by her husband a ride to a domestic abuse shelter. Steele would bust someone like that, but not a mega-dairy that hires dozens of illegal workers to cut costs.
   
3. Attorney General Marty Jackley doesn't want to give illegal immigrants a home. He's helping the Republican yahoos write their distracting legislation, but he says he doesn't want to spend tax dollars to put illegal immigrants in South Dakota jails.
   
4. State Rep. Lora Hubbel (R-11/Sioux Falls) must live in an alternative reality. She claims illegal immigration came up regularly during her door-knocking. She tells that Sioux Falls paper, "The voters don't care about the same things (the local media) care about.... They don't care about school budgets. They're concerned about the federal government taking their rights away." We don't care about school budgets... no, Lora, I think you're mistaking the Republican caucus for the general public.

Wow. If you thought Don Kopp and Kristi Noem made South Dakota look dumb with their astrology legislation, just wait for the 2011 Republican Legislature. It's going to be a doozy.

Save Education (and GOP Consistency): Dump No Child Left Behind

President George W. Bush signs the No Child Left Untested Behind Act into law. Senator Ted Kennedy and Representative John Boehner flank the President at the signing ceremony in Boehner's district, Hamilton, Ohio, January 8, 2002. White House photo by Paul Morse.

One line in an NPR story this morning reminds me why I left the Republican Party... and how Kristi Noem could just maybe draw me back.

Morning Edition considers Speaker-in-waiting John Boehner: "Rebel or Compromiser?" Reporter Andrea Seabrook mentions that the leader of the newly elected small-government/anti-government majority in the House of Representatives helped pass an enormous expansion of federal authority over education, the No Child Left Behind Act. President Bush flew to Boehner's hometown of Hamilton, Ohio, to sign NCLB into law. Boehner has called this exercise in bureaucracy and testing "one of the proudest accomplishments of my tenure in Congress."

John Boehner thundered from the floor of the House last March against what he misperceived as a government takeover of health care. Yet he proudly oversaw a much clearer federal takeover of public education in the No Child Left Behind Act.

I have yet to hear from any South Dakota teacher or administrator a good explanation of how the No Child Left Behind Act has made it easier for them to educate our kids. One reasonable English teacher has told me that NCLB has produced more standardized testing data that she and colleagues can analyze and use as a basis for modifying their classroom strategies. However, all that data has come at significant expense, as schools pay consultants to process all the testing data into usable summaries, and as school districts rearrange curricula and schedules to make room for more standardized tests and training thereto. All that effort gets us numbers that look like solid, scientific, objective data but which really don't tell anything that conscientious teachers can't tell you simply by talking with the kids, quizzing them, reviewing their homework, and giving their honest professional assessment of the learning they've seen happen in their classrooms.

Opposition to No Child Left Behind and national standards ought to be a no-brainer for Republicans like John Boehner. Opposition to standardization is certainly a no-brainer for Sir Ken Robinson, a well-known advocate for serious educational reform. Robinson sees testing and national standards as a logical extension of the factory production-line thinking that has turned American education into an increasingly mind-numbing and ineffective exterprise.

A speech by Sir Ken Robinson gets this illustrated treatment by RSA Animate:



Representative-Elect Kristi Noem, establish your true classical conservative cred and mention this video to Speaker Boehner (once you get around to admitting you are going to vote for him). Cite this video to launch your crusade to get big government out of education and repeal No Child Left Behind.

And here on the homefront, fellow citizens, I would love to hear some local candidates run for school board and talk about Robinson's prescription for reforming our education system out of its kids-as-factory-outputs model and turning it into a system that fosters all those kindergarten geniuses.

South Dakota Legislature: No Good News for Dems

2011–2012 South Dakota Legislature, party composition (unofficial results, 2010.11.02) Click image to enlarge

Some vote notes on what happened in the South Dakota Legislature:

1. With Democrats Sandy Jerstad, Nancy Turbak Berry, and Gerald Lange booted by the voters from the Legislature, what's Dakota War College have left to blog about?
   
2. I guess there's still Frank Kloucek, still representing District 19. Kolaches will ride again... and maybe a little scrutiny of Monsanto-controlled SDSU?
3. But at least Turbak Berry got beat by Ried Holien, an old debate guy! Let's hear some good speeches, Ried!
   
4. Other incumbents who lost: Sen. Dan Ahlers from Dell Rapids, Rep. Oran Sorenson from Garretson, Rep. Quentin Burg from Wessington Springs, Rep. Matha Vanderlinde from Sioux Falls, Sen. Pam Merchant from Brookings, and Rep. Gerald Lange from Madison... all Democrats. Not one Republican incumbent in the Legislature lost.
5. If I'm counting right, the State Senate now has 29 Republicans and 6 Democrats. Dems lose 4. The Democratic caucus could carpool... in one car.
   
6. My count shows the State House with 51 Republicans and 19 Democrats. Dems lose 5.
   
7. Blogger and Pastor Steve Hickey wins District 9 House. Steve, I'll expect vociferous opposition to any new Blog Control Acts.
8. Blogger Steve Sibson does not win District 20 House. I was going to suggest that Sibby needs to put down World Net Daily and talk about things actually happening in South Dakota... but last night's results up and down the board make clear South Dakotans are not voting on policy.
9. Even without Sibby, the yahoo caucus made great gains. Expect Rep. Rev. Hickey to carpool with Reps. Jenna Haggar and Brian Liss from Sioux Falls. Get ready for Don Kopp to make climate change denial law as he originally wanted.
   

GOP Invades Mailboxes with Manufactured Scandal

I hear from our party chair that the Republicans violated federal law to bring me my weekend dose of Republican lies. According to a press release from the state Dems issued Sunday at breakfast, Republican operatives placed campaign literature for Kristi Noem, Rich Sattgast, and other candidates directly into mailboxes across Madison. Anyone other than the mailman or the owner sticking anything into a mailbox is violating federal law.

But violating the law and the truth hasn't bothered Republicans much this year. They were probably just in a hurry, right?

Among the pieces of mail Republicans have placed in my box this weekend is the newst big lie and distraction from real policy issues from the state GOP: the accusation that Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin's $1300 expenditures of taxpayer dollars at "exclusive baby boutique" Baby Elements in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, represent some scandalous "silver spoon" "spending spree."

Hmmm... how does the GOP lie to us? Let me count the ways:

1. "Exclusive": I'm reviewing the store's description and not seeing how they "exclude" anyone. The "exclusive" part of this store is that it features handmade pieces available exclusively in Sioux Falls.
   
2. The GOP implies these were irresponsible expenditures. As Dr. Newquist points out, the expenditures were authorized, audited, and approved by a standard Congressional budget ovesight procedure... the kind of fiscal responsibility our South Dakota Republican crony capitalists don't follow as they issue no-bid contracts and bloat the state motor pool to benefit their wealthy friends.
3. Dr. Newquist informs us that these expenses were far from outlandish expenditures; they are pretty much the cost of doing business as a Congressperson:

   And what were the funds spent for? For the mounting and framing of historic documents, photographs, and cultural materials, such as star quilts, for the member offices to inform visitors of the traditions under which Congress operates and to promote the features of South Dakota. Anyone can view these items on display at the offices [David Newquist, "The Annals of Libel: A Campaign Strategy," Northern Valley Beacon, 2010.10.30].

4. In spending taxpayer dollars for standard office decoration, the Congresswoman bought goods and services from a local South Dakota craftsperson.
   
5. The Congresswoman did exactly what her Republican challenger Kristi Noem did on a much larger scale with the stimulus dollars: bringing federal dollars that would have been spent elsewhere here to South Dakota. $1300 in framing for the office is peanuts dust compared to the hundreds of millions of dollars Noem and Governor Mike Rounds have spent from the federal stimulus package to avoid making hard state budget choices.
6. Remember, Herseth Sandlin has a tendency to put money back into the South Dakota economy, while Noem prefers to export our money to John Thune's adman in Texas.
   
7. Republicans tell you Speaker Nancy Pelosi is evil... but they wouldn't even have the information they are twisting into lies if Pelosi had not ordered the online publication of the House Disbursements in 2009.
8. Thanks to Speaker Pelosi's drive for transparency, we can also learn that Minnesota GOP Congresswoman and conservative firebrand Michele Bachmann spent almost $44K in taxpayer money on franked mail. Bachmann spent more than twice as much in total and per household on mass mailings to constituents than did Herseth Sandlin over the period reported.

From this manufactured non-issue to the "failed" stimulus, Republicans from Kristi Noem on down are cheating and lying to us six ways from Sunday to win this election. Fellow Dems, if for no other reason, get up out of your chairs and vote Tuesday to reject this politics of deceit.
------------------------------
Update 2010.11.02 10:05 CDT: Jeff Long, postal inspector and spokesman for the Postal Inspection Service out of Minneapolis, tells Austin Kaus at the Mitchell Daily Republic that the illegally placed campaign materials included literature for District 8 State Senator Russell Olson. Alas, says, Long, prosecution for this misdemeanor offense is unlikely. As usual, we aren't supposed to pay attention to Russell Olson's violations of the law.

Republicans Backing Heidepriem and Herseth Sandlin...

...any Dems going red?

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Scott Heidepriem has won the backing of some high-profile Republicans, including Republican State Senator Stan Adelstein, Don Frankenfeld, and Russ Janklow. GOP State Senator Gene Abdallah has expressed his approval of Heidepriem's leadership on the issue of competing with the Larchwood, Iowa, casino.

Democratic Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin has traditionally pulled lots of Republican votes, and even in this tight year, she's able to tout a growing list of GOP endorsers, including former state legislator Casey Murschel and former Mickelson and Miller chief of staff Frank Brost. (And Brost endorses SHS and hopes for a Republican majority in Congress—go figure!)

Just curious: can anyone show me comparable Democrats crossing over to vote for the Republicans? As viewed from behind my partisan lenses, I can see plenty that our two top Democrats have to offer Republicans that they won't find in their own candidate: in Heidepriem's case, specific plans, real fiscal conservatism, and leadership; in Herseth Sandlin's case, specific plans, less partisanship, and the ability to articulate positions beyond the party talking points.

But what can Democrats find in either Dennis Daugaard or Kristi Noem that (a) they can't find in Heidepriem or SHS and (b) would actually appeal to Democrats?

SDGOP Fibs on SHS and Health Care

The South Dakota Republican Party's shadow-cowboy mailer contains a gross distortion of Stephanie Herseth Sandlin's voting record on health care reform. The SDGOP makes it sound as if Herseth Sandlin voted for health care reform (if only she would have!). The SDGOP accuses thus:

Stephanie supported the near-trillion-dollar Baucus health care bill that would have put the government in charge of your health care.

They even include two sources to back this claim up. Dang, if they've got footnotes, how can this claim possibly twist the truth?

1. SDGOP first cites Jason Allen from The Hill. There is no Jason Allen from The Hill.
2. Jared Allen did write in The Hill that SHS "gave her blessing to the Baucus bill."
3. However, that "blessing" was not a vote: it was SHS saying in September 2009 that Baucus's draft had the best chance of becoming law.
4. SHS actually said this: "The draft released by Chairman Baucus addresses two central goals of the Blue Dog Coalition and the administration: It is deficit-neutral, and it takes real steps to bring down the cost of healthcare over the long term" [emphasis mine], goals the GOP should admire.
   
5. SHS said the above in part because the Congressional Budget Office found the Baucus bill would have cost $829 billion over ten years, well below the President's $900-billion budget target... and a bit of a stretch to call "nearly-trillion-dollar." That's like scoring at 82% and telling your parents, "I got nearly a hundred!"
6. The above dollar figures come from the Politico.com article the SDGOP cites on this claim... and that article that only mentions SHS as being skeptical about the long-term budget sustainability of health care reform. It supports nothing stated in the GOP flyer.
   
7. SHS never voted on the Baucus bill, S 1796. She voted against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, HR 3590, the legislation that finally passed.
8. Nothing in the Baucus bill or the legislation that actually passed "put government in charge of your health care." Nothing in either cited source says that. The bill I wanted, HR 676, might arguably have done that by implementing a universal single-payer system... but SHS, Pelosi, and President Obama never let that idea come to the table.

The shadow cowboy grouses about the voting record but cites no actual votes on health care. South Dakotans are "strong and independent," but they're also straight shooters... unlike the South Dakota GOP.

--------------
Bonus Noem Trick: On her previous flyer (you know, the one that almost lies about the NRA and breaks VoteSmart.org's acceptable use policy) Noem misrepresents Herseth Sandlin's score from the Gun Owners of America. VoteSmart.org lists that rating as a D. The Gun Owners of America themselves currently list SHS's rating as B-. So which rating does Noem choose: the rating posted at the original source, or the lower rating at a secondary source that needs updating? Of course, Noem chooses her pitch over reality.

All this makes me wonder what kind of stories Noem makes up when the Highway Patrol pulls her over.

SDGOP Twists SHS Voting Record in Cowboy Mailer

Front of SDGOP Shadow Cowboy Mailer

"South Dakotans are Strong and Independent..."reads the front of a new mailer from the South Dakota Republican Party. The glossy flyer features a manly cowboy in obligatory hat silhouetted against a prairie sunset. It also demonstrates that the local GOP is not strong enough to win a campaign on the merits of their own candidates and policy solutions and has to depend on distorting the voting record of Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin.

The main thesis of this piece of GOP propaganda is the tried and tired strategy of making the election about the image of Nancy Pelosi. "Stephanie Herseth Sandlin Votes with Pelosi 91.5% of the Time," they warn. The SDGOP pulls that number from the Washington Post Votes Database, which does indeed say that SHS votes with the majority of her party 91.5% of the time.

Inside of SDGOP shadow cowboy mailer

The GOP mails this claim just as FactCheck.org issues a pretty clear explanation of how both Republicans and Democrats exaggerate the significance of the numbers from WaPo's database. FactCheck.org notes the obvious, that voting with the majority is not the same as voting with Pelosi. FactCheck.org then does the analysis I recommended in July and August and finds that a count of actual head-to-head votes on OpenCongress.org puts SHS's Pelosi-match rate at 81%. That's still reasonably high... until you realize that SHS votes the same way as John Boehner 52% of the time. FactCheck.org concludes that those 81% of votes with Pelosi include a lot of votes that are irrelevant to serious policy.

Irrelevant to serious policy... hmm... sounds an awful lot like the GOP and their shadowy cowboy.

Stay tuned: critique of the SDGOP Twilight Cowboy's health care smokescreen coming up!

Change and Food: Disconnect Between Daugaard/GOP Words and Actions

Here are a couple images to give my Republican firends heartburn. First, my Dem friends forward me a fun juxtaposition from the big Black Hills Pow Wow last weekend:
The big banner over the Pennington GOP's table says it's "Time for a Change." Right next to that rallying cry, a picture of Dennis Daugaard, the current Republican Lieutenant Governor and candidate for governor who would continue the policies of the last eight years and the general Republican domination of Pierre over the last century. Hmm... seems to me that voting for change in South Dakota means voting for a lot more Democrats than Republicans.

But hey, at least the Republicans are just being illogical and not doing something really awful, like giving voters lunch, right?

Oops. This image comes from the SDGOP, via Dakota Voice.
...and this screen cap comes from Daugaard's own website, reminding us of the free soup suppers he hosted during the primary.

Subtext to the bogus process issue Republicans are trying to manufacture: feeding Indians who vote for Democrats should be against the law. But feeding nice civilized South Dakotans who vote the right way is perfectly acceptable.

SHS, Dems Support Health Benefits for 9/11 First Responders

O.K., fellow Dems, time to close the enthusiasm gap. Yesterday our Democratic Congresswoman, Stepahnie Herseth Sandlin, cast another vote alongside Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The bill: H.R. 847, the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010. What does the Zadroga Act do? Same thing James Zadroga did: tries to save lives and clean up the destruction wrought by the terrorists who destroyed the World Trade Center.

The bill is named for James Zadroga, a New York City police detective who worked several weeks at Ground Zero, and is the first 9/11 responder to have his death in 2006 attributed to illness contracted at the site.

The bill would establish an $7 billion fund over 10 years, with roughly a third of that going to cover the healthcare costs of the victims, and the other two-thirds to compensate them for their losses. Over 20,000 people, according to government figures, have suffered since the event, either from exposure to the toxic dust of pulverized buildings and combusted chemicals, or injuries, or post-traumatic stress, or two or all three [Joseph Picard, "House Passes Ground Zero Healthcare Bill," International Business Times, 2010.09.29].

All but four House Democrats voted for this bill. 88% of House Republicans voted against it. Republicans Kristi Noem likes—the man she won't admit she'll pick for speaker, John Boehner; the woman she imitates, Michele Bachmann; the man whose plan to privatize Social Security and Medicare she supports, Paul Ryan—voted against providing health care to the first heroes of the current War on Terrorism. Why? Because Republicans think paying medical bills for firefighters is "to put on the backs of the American taxpayer a new, $7 billion entitlement program."

Entitlement program? As Rep. Anthony Weiner says, if anyone is entitled to health benefits, it's the people who ran toward the smoke and flames and toxic dust on September 11, 2001.



The vote on the Zadroga Bill shows the gutless, heartless, hypocritical politics you'll get if you vote for Kristi Noem, or if you sit back and let her win by withholding your vote from Stephanie Herseth Sandlin. Republicans will cloak themselves in the patriotism and heroism of 9/11, but they won't put their money where their mouths are. Democrats are willing to pay what we owe to our fellow Americans.

Noem "Bought and Paid for" by Republican Leadership

I keep telling Pat not to start a fight he can't win. But does he listen? Of course not.

Dakota War College's latest meme to soothe the crumbling hopes of Noem supporters: beat the Pelosi drum again. He claims that Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin is "bought and paid for" by $35K in campaign contributions from Speaker Pelosi.

Hmm... Democratic Speaker supports Democratic candidate. Dog bites man.

But o.k., let's see who has "bought and paid for" Republican challenger Kristi Noem:

• Small potatoes, but notable: Common Sense Issues PAC sends Noem $250. CSI PAC's donations this year are strictly Tea Party, with equal donations to teabagger delights J.D. Hayworth in Arizona and Marc Rubio in Florida.
• Bigger potatotes: National Republican Congressional Committee chair and Texas Rep. Pete Sessions has bought a $5000 share in Noem through his PETE PAC.
• GOP Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan has bought another $5000 chunk of Noem through his CAMPAC.
  
• So has GOP House leader Eric Cantor, through ERIC PAC.
• So has Senator Thune, through his Heartland Values PAC. The "Friends of John Thune" have kicked in another $2000.
  

Expect more to come as the campaign hits full swing. Watch those "paid for" tags on the ads that will fill the airwaves for the next eight weeks. Kristi Noem is an empty suit, to be filled with the cash and corporate talking points of her big GOP minders.

Charlotte Landon Shaw 2.0: Worst Campaign Video Yet

District 13 must be sparse country for Republicans. The GOP has two state house candidates in this south central Sioux Falls neighborhood: Brian C. Liss and Charlotte Landon Shaw. I've given Liss a hard time for misplaced cries of "Socialism!" But Landon Shaw takes the prize for thinnest gruel of a campaign video yet. It's so weak, so ill-prepared, so tellingly bad, I couldn't resist adding some YouTube graffiti:



Uff da. Even Sibby's video is bound to be better than that. He'll at least have a script from Joseph Farah to read.
---------------------------
For those of you who prefer text to video, here's a transcript of Landon Shaw's SDPB statement:

I am not a politician, and I don't want to be a politician when this is all over. I want to remain people, people like you who are afraid of what is going on with our economic situation, in our schools, all over the country but specifically here in South Dakota. I would like to be given the chance to take your voice, the voice of the majority, and the voice of the people, to Pierre, to tell the people in Pierre that we're not afraid of what's been going on any longer and we're not going to stand for it. I believe it's not the dog in the fight but the fight in the dog, and I got a lot of fight in me and I'll take that for you to Pierre, and I will represent the thoughts and the desires you have, desires like better budgeting and [pause] better education for our chidren that comes from a new place, a fresh idea, a new opportunity out there for us.

As I've knocked door to door, I've had a lot of people contact me and tell me that they're afraid, that they're uncertain of what could happen and what's going to happen in the future. Well, I'm not afraid and I'm not hopeless. I know that with the people's voice being heard things will change and they'll all be better for the most, for the best of us. So send me to Pierre and let me have the opportunity to take your voice and fight for what's right for South Dakota. Thanks, I appreciate it.

—Charlotte Landon Shaw, "Meet the Candidates" video, SDPB, August 2010.

-------------------------
Update 2010.08.26 14:40 CDT: As of right now, Landon Shaw's original SDPB video has 61 views. My annotated version: 155.

Jenna Haggar: Why the Secrecy? Admit You're Republican

Funny that DWC is trying to manufacture a kerfuffle over a candidate's "secrecy" about past jobs and political affiliation. An eager reader expresses analogous concerns about truth in advertising on Jenna Haggar's website. Haggar is the "Independent" running for District 15 State House and a darling of the big Republican blog. But on a number of points, Haggar seems to be operating independently from the complete truth about her political affiliation.

Haggar says she served in the Legislature in 2007 "as an advocate for the rights of unborn babies and end of life issues." Now "served in the Legislature" is usually reserved to describe folks who've been elected to that august institution. I suppose we might generously extend the term to pages, which Haggar appears to have done in 2004. But in 2007, Haggar was not a public servant. She was a registered private lobbyist for Right to Life SD. Not that there's anything wrong with being a lobbyist... but "served in the Legislature" seems an overly flattering description. The plain fact is that Haggar lobbied for a private and mostly Republican organization.

And that chiropractic clinic you work for... well, the connection is just too tempting not to ask: it wouldn't happen to be Dr. Allen Unruh's operation, would it? There is a really pretty brunette pictured on Dr. Unruh's site... oops! not quite Jenna.

Haggar says she also worked on a 2008 Senate campaign. Really? For which Independent Senate candidate was she working, Bernie Sanders? Ha. Haggar stumped for Republican Joel Dykstra, a candidate Haggar perhaps realizes she shouldn't mention among a Sioux Falls electorate somewhat less right-wing than herself.

And if Haggar is a true independent, why was she drumming up support at the Republican convention in Huron and not the Democratic convention in her current home city of Sioux Falls?

Let's be honest. I will make clear to everyone in my district that Clark Schmidtke is listed on the ballot as an Independent but is truly a Democrat. I will harp on Scott Heidepriem and Stephanie Herseth Sandlin for emphasizing their use of Independent at the expense of not emphasizing Democrat and not leading the charge in making the case for our party's alignment with South Dakota values. I would ask Jenna Haggar to do the same: stand by your party affiliation. Tell the good people of District 15 you really are a Republican.

Rounds Replaces State Ed Money with Stimulus; Where's Noem?

Would someone please untie the knot of Republican contradictions for me?

Governor M. Michael Rounds has accepted $26.3 million in federal stimulus dollars to fund South Dakota's K-12 schools. The insult and injury of Republican politics on this issue is a double whammy: not only is Governor Rounds happily bellying us up to the bar of the very federal spending that Republicans tell us is a reason to vote against our incumbent Democratic Congresswoman, but the governor is technically increasing our narcotic-like addiction to federal money by using the money to replace, not supplement, state education dollars.

Just curious, Governor Rounds: are you deliberately trying to sabotage the stimulus? The idea of this federal aid is to create more jobs and put more money in workers' pockets to spend. You could take this $26 million and give each of our 10,000 K-12 teachers a $2600 bonus and sustaining the committed funding levels for everything else. Even if you can't sustain that pay level next year, I don't think anyone, from the teachers on down to the merchants on Main Street, will mind teachers having $26 million to pump right back into our local economy.

I would love to learn (as would the Herseth Sandlin campaign) where GOP House candidate Kristi Noem stands on this issue. Republicans keep wanting to forget that Kristi Noem voted for depending on Uncle Sam's stimulus dollars to save South Dakota from fiscal disaster (i.e., from having to raise taxes on rich corporations to pay our own way).

Kristi Noem wants you to forget that Congress and Stephanie Herseth Sandlin have saved South Dakota's fiscal butt time and time again. Any Republican who thinks a vote for Noem is a vote for more principled fiscal conservatism is blowing smoke. Noem would go to Congress and vote for just as many earmarks for Ellsworth and highways and other popular prairie pork as our current delegation. Noem offers nothing different, just a slightly louder No never to be realized in actual policy. South Dakota depends on federal money. Federal money does good for our state. Noem's talking points on the stimulus and other federal money doesn't match our economic reality.

Bjorklund in with Republicans, and Other Signs

On your way into Madison, don't be buffaloed:

Madison's Car Parkit Market, right across from Prostrollo's, is making clear which party it favors for the November election. Six big signs in a row, all Republican... wait a minute! Check out that sign crowding out Jackley:

That's a sheet of plywood for Jason Bjorklund, Madison's Independent-Glenn Beck candidate for District 8 House! How'd that get in there? Is Bjorklund really a Republican just as Clark Schmidtke, declared Indy for District 8 Senate, is really a Democrat?

Whatever the case, it's good to see the Bjorklund campaign is already on top of signs. He's got his up before the only actual Republican in the District 8 House race, Patricia Stricherz. Start splashing some paint, Patricia! The big-money Russ Olson machine is also slow out of the gates. Of course, given his standing with the Republican, he probably gets to put his signs right on Prostrollo's property, not just across from it. Maybe they'll just put a big Olson t-shirt on the white buffalo this time.

And for Pete's sake: aren't there any Democrats selling cars in Lake County?

Also worth noting: U.S. House candidate Kristi Noem makes clear her signs were made in South Dakota, unlike the TV spot she shot in Texas.
-----------------------------
Bonus cheap GOP humor: Oh look! Just down the road, you can pick up a retired lunch wagon used at John McCain's rallies:

Call Madison Resykle, 256-2482, for all of your scrap metal needs.

GOP Less Loved than Dems

I have mentioned more than once this week that Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin ought to avail herself more frequently of the genius of Senator Al Franken and run hard with her party and against the GOP. A new NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey suggests I'm not so far off base. Some pertinent results:

1. The Democratic Party is viewed positively by 33% of respondents and negatively by 44%.
2. The Republican Party is viewed positively by 24%, negatively by 46%. That's the lowest positive the GOP has ever scored in this poll.
3. The "Tea Party" (whatever respondents think that amorphous blob of voter crankiness may be) is viewed positively by 30%, negatively by 34%. But it also gets much bigger "Don't Know/Not Sure" ratings than the main two actual parties.
4. Those preferring a Democrat-controlled Congress slightly outnumber those preferring a GOP-controlled Congress 43%–42%. Right before the last election when control of Congress changed hands, from GOP to Dem in 2006, the Dem-control preference was 52%–37%. Come on, people: we're not letting the GOP win the House on a slim margin like this! Fire up and vote!
5. Here's a fun split: Those who want a Dem-run Congress are split just about equally between either primarily supporting President Obama and other Dems or opposing those nasty Republicans, 48%–47%.
   
6. Those who want a GOP-run Congress have a hard time reflect the Republican "Party of No" status: 59% of them want to take Congress primarily because they oppose President Obama and the Dems; 35% are more fired up about their own GOP candidates.

Then again, Chuck Todd and the crew at MSNBC offer SHS this geographical caution about running too far left in old white South Dakota:

The GOP has a HUGE generic-ballot edge in the South (52%-31%), but it doesn’t lead anywhere else. In the Northeast, Dems have a 55%-30% edge; in the Midwest, they lead 49%-38%; and in the West, it’s 44%-43%. Yet do keep this caveat in mind: Many of the congressional districts Republicans are targeting outside of the South resemble some of those Southern districts they’re hoping to win back in November -- where you have whiter and older voters. Think Stephanie Herseth's seat in South Dakota; Tim Walz' seat in Minnesota; Leonard Boswell's seat in Iowa; and Ike Skelton's in Missouri [Chuck Todd et al., "Jet Blue Nation," NBC News: First Reads, 2010.08.12].

South Dakota: Just like Dixie!—I'm not sure I feel complimented.

Now the above numbers could be skewed by fortuitous sample: 20% of NBC/WSJ's respondents identified themselves as strong Dem, while only 13% identified as strong GOP. But conservatives outnumbered liberals 35% to 23%.

Serious about Cutting Debt? End GOP Voodoo Economics

A new report from the Congressional Budget Office expresses concern (as ought we all) over continuing growth of our national debt-to-GDP ratio. The CBO appears to agree with something I said to Mr. Gibilisco the other day: sometimes you have to borrow money (e.g., wartime production, anti-recession stimulus), but the more you borrow, the less wiggle room you have for future spending. Bringing down the debt requires austerity programs that raise taxes and cut spending. CBO says such policy changes usually though not always "exacerbate... economic downturns." So odds are you have to pick what you want grumble about. If you don't like the recession, you might have to live with a growing debt for a few more months. If you don't like the debt and want austerity now, then brace for another downturn.

Austerity, alas, is a dirty word in American politics, which assumes a perpetual-motion machine of magic abundance. Conservatives are harping on the debt, but they don't want to take direct action to pay it down. The President comes up with a health care law that will save $8 billion on Medicare this year and $575 billion over the next ten, and conservatives fan fears among seniors that these cuts will mean Democrats want old folks to die. Conservatives instead want to leave most of the big spending (war, entitlement programs for senior voters) in place and cut taxes, thinking the debt will magically reduce itself.

Cutting taxes does a lot of things, but it doesn't reduce the debt, certainly not as a percentage of GDP. Check out the bumps around the time of the great Reagan and Bush tax cuts. Those bumps don't go downward:

Figure 1: U.S. Debt-to-GDP Ratio, historic.
Source: CBO report, p. 2. Click figure to enlarge.

David Stockman, who worked for President Reagan, agrees that the fiscal policy Republicans offer is a useless mess. Stockman finds it "unseemly" that Republicans respond to our mounting public debt with cries to extend the Bush tax cuts and spare the wealthiest Americans a three-percent tax increase. (CBO notes it would take a 1% increase in federal revenues to stop the growth of the debt-to-GDP ratio; a 3% increase would reverse that growth.) Stockman finds this shirking of fiscal responsibility particularly odious given that the wealthiest 1% amassed two-thirds of the economic gains from the 2002–2006 economic bubble.

Our debt situation is dire due not to drunken-spending Democrats but Republicans living in la-la-land, says Stockman:

This debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party’s embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don’t matter if they result from tax cuts.

In 1981, traditional Republicans supported tax cuts, matched by spending cuts, to offset the way inflation was pushing many taxpayers into higher brackets and to spur investment. The Reagan administration’s hastily prepared fiscal blueprint, however, was no match for the primordial forces — the welfare state and the warfare state — that drive the federal spending machine.

Soon, the neocons were pushing the military budget skyward. And the Republicans on Capitol Hill who were supposed to cut spending exempted from the knife most of the domestic budget — entitlements, farm subsidies, education, water projects. But in the end it was a new cadre of ideological tax-cutters who killed the Republicans’ fiscal religion.

Through the 1984 election, the old guard earnestly tried to control the deficit, rolling back about 40 percent of the original Reagan tax cuts. But when, in the following years, the Federal Reserve chairman, Paul Volcker, finally crushed inflation, enabling a solid economic rebound, the new tax-cutters not only claimed victory for their supply-side strategy but hooked Republicans for good on the delusion that the economy will outgrow the deficit if plied with enough tax cuts [David Stockman, "Four Deformations of the Apocalypse," New York Times, 2010.07.31].

Stockman notes that under President GW Bush's last budget, federal revenue was just 15% of GDP, the lowest percentage since the 1940s. Once again, we see that cries of "Taxed Enough Already!" show ignorance of historical fact... and a thin-skinnedness that Grandma and grandpa would find shameful. And don't forget: those low taxes not only make the debt worse but also may be hurting the economy.

Let's trade the myths about the Bush tax cuts for reality. Right now, those tax cuts for the rich are responsible for about 25% of our annual deficit. Extend the Bush tax cuts, and they'll be responsible for around 50% of our deficit in 2019.

Make Grandma and Grandpa proud: end voodoo economics. End the Bush giveaways. Pay the bills.
---------------
Update 10:41 CDT: Robert Reich helps out with some useful facts.