In the first two advertisements of their kind, Republicans seeking an advantage in a Mississippi special election are invoking Barack Obama in arguing that a Democratic Congressional candidate is too liberal for his district. That flies in the face of what has been conventional wisdom for months among national Democratic strategists who have not publicly taken sides in the presidential contest; many privately express more hope in Obama's potential coattails than in rival Hillary Clinton's.

But while Hillary Clinton and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have made appearances in Republican advertisements before, the GOP is now taking on Obama, reflecting both a growing consensus that the Illinois Senator is the most likely candidate to emerge from the ongoing primary fight and that Republicans believe he, like Clinton, can be transformed into a lightening rod used to tarnish downballot Democrats.

The advertisements target Travis Childers, the Prentiss County Chancery Clerk who led his Republican opponent, Southaven Mayor Greg Davis, in last week's special primary election to replace Senator Roger Wicker in a northern Mississippi House seat. Both Davis and the National Republican Congressional Committee released the spots less than a week after Childers came within about 400 votes of avoiding a runoff by scoring above the 50% mark. And beyond Mississippi, NRCC chairman Tom Cole, meeting with reporters today, suggested that ties to Obama could hurt downballot Democrats nationally.

"When Obama's pastor cursed America, blaming us for 9/11, Childers said nothing," Davis' spot begins. "When Obama ridiculed rural folks for clinging to guns and religion, Childers said nothing."

While bringing up the Rev. Jeremiah Wright may be dangerous for some Republicans, the NRCC's commercial sounds a theme that will prove a more universally-sounded concept. "Travis Childers claims he's a conservative. But Travis Childers contributed money to John Kerry, and is endorsed by Barack Obama, who has the most liberal voting record in the U.S. Senate."

That refrain, from National Journal's annual vote ranking, will be Obama's constant, and unwelcome, companion on the campaign trail. An NRCC poll showed John McCain beating Obama by about 35 points in Mississippi's First Congressional District, Cole said, and next to Pelosi, Republicans are beginning to use Obama's name as the latest image of the liberal boogeyman. And for all Obama's talk of putting more states in play, Cole doesn't believe that is necessarily the case. "Does anybody really believe Barack Obama is going to carry [Mississippi's First District]," he asked.

Saying the country remains a center-right political climate, Cole said he welcomed the debate with Obama. "The special elections are the first effort on our side to inject that intellectual dichotomy."

In both Mississippi and neighboring Louisiana, where Republican candidates in heavily red districts find themselves in tenuous positions, Cole said turning the election into a contest with national implications, much as Democrats did in 2006, can benefit his party. "Our candidates now are trying to turn those [elections] into a referendum on Pelosi, on Obama," he said. "As these elections become nationalized, I think we do better."

National Democrats criticized the ads as Hail Marys from a candidate and a party worried about losing the seat. "These are the sort of 11th hour attacks you expect from a desperate politician and National Republicans trying to distract voters from Greg Davis' horrible record of broken promises, raising property taxes 4 times and doubling spending," Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesman Doug Thornell told Politics Nation. "The mere fact that national Republicans are being forced to spend a large chunk of their [cash on hand] to protect a ruby red district George Bush carried with over sixty percent shows how out of touch the GOP is with the American people."

Bush won the First District by twenty-five points in 2004 and by nineteen points in 2000, and Wicker, first elected in 1994, never faced a difficult re-election bid. In the Louisiana seat, Bush won by equally large margins in both his elections.

The Obama campaign declined to comment for this article, while the Clinton campaign did not return emails seeking their opinion.

Regardless of the outcomes of the two special elections, it remains remarkable that either is competitive. Both parties are spending heavily on the two seats. Through Saturday, Democrats had spent $384,000 in Mississippi and $712,000 in Louisiana, where State Rep. Don Cazayoux is vying with Republican Woody Jenkins to replace retired Rep. Richard Baker. Republicans have spent $570,000 helping Davis in Mississippi and $312,000 backing Jenkins in Louisiana. Several independent groups, including the Club for Growth and Freedom's Watch, are also spending money on behalf of GOP candidates in the districts.

At the moment, it appears that both Democratic candidates are the favorites. Childers won more votes in last Tuesday's election than Davis, and combined with the few hundred votes his Democratic opponent received -- the Democrat and Republican who placed second in the primary for the full term both tried, unsuccessfully, to have their names removed from the ballot -- Democrats received more than 50% of the ballots cast. In Louisiana, recent polls have shown Cazayoux leading Jenkins by as many as seven points, while no poll made public recently has shown Jenkins ahead. The runoff elections will be held on May 3, in Louisiana, and May 13, in Mississippi.

To turn that tide, Cole told reporters today he can use Obama to effectively nationalize both special elections. "Both Democrats were leading at the point where we began to talk about national issues," he said today. After hundreds of thousands of dollars spent trying to tie the two Democrats to the candidate who will likely be their party's standard-bearer in November, the special elections could even serve as an important turning point in the Democratic presidential contest: If both Democrats go down thanks to the association with Obama, Hillary Clinton might have another powerful argument to make to super delegates nervous about Obama's electability. If one or both Democrats win, national party strategists will not only point ecstatically to more potential signs of a Democratic wave, but will privately breathe a sign of relief that, unlike several previous nominees, Obama is not poisonous to down-ballot candidates quite yet.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 02:30 PM | Email Author | Permalink

Even before Republicans lost a special election to replace retired House Speaker Dennis Hastert, the National Republican Congressional Committee was reeling from a weaker fundraising performance in the wake of an accounting scandal that rocked the committee and will cause a dramatic reevaluation of previously-filed fundraising support.

The NRCC raised $4.5 million in February while spending $5.1 million, at least part of it on Hastert's seat, and after reexamining bank accounts reported $5.1 million in the bank with a debt of $1.9 million. The report, the second filed over the signature of new Treasurer Keith Davis, shows a much weaker financial position than the NRCC was purportedly in on February 1, when the party reported $6.4 million in the bank. That report came before the full extent of former Treasurer Christopher Ward's duplicity was known.

Last month, by contrast, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee reported raising $6.2 million and spending just $3.7 million. After being outraised by a fraction by the NRCC in January, the committee once again widened its fundraising advantage going into November, carrying a bank balance of $38 million and just $762,000 in debt. Republicans likely closed that gap earlier this month, raising $8.6 million at a single dinner fundraiser, but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urged her caucus to give more from their own campaign funds to compensate.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee, while in better shape than its House counterpart, still trails Democratic coffers by a wide margin, their FEC reports show. The DSCC raised nearly $4.8 million in February and doled out close to $2.5 million, to retain $32.8 million in the bank. The NRSC raised over $3.9 million and spent a frugal $1.9 million to retain about $15.3 million in the bank. The disparity is much smaller than that between the DCCC and the NRCC, but Democrats still retain a two-to-one advantage in what has historically been a Republican strong suit.

A bright spot for Republicans continues to be the Republican National Committee, which pulled in $10.6 million in February and spent $7.4 million, retaining $25 million, while the Democratic National Committee raised $6.3 million and spent $4.5 million. When Florida Senator Bill Nelson asked for financial assistance to help his state hold a new primary, DNC chair Howard Dean had a bank account of just $4.7 million, along with $250,000 in debt, to work with.

Dean's 50-state strategy provided some big wins in unexpected places last year, but the program is costing the party significant amounts of money. Nearly half of the expenditures listed in the committee's FEC reports are for staff salaries in every state in the country, alongside an already-large Washington staff. While it costs money to maintain those staffers, Democratic chairs from around the country maintain they are happy with the program.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 11:00 AM | Email Author | Permalink

Democratic Reps. Alan Mollohan, of West Virginia, and Raul Grijalva, of Arizona, sit on the same side of the aisle, but come this weekend, they won't be speaking much. In fact, one of the two is likely to cast a disparaging eye toward fellow Democrat David Price, of North Carolina, later this weekend. That's because Mollohan's West Virginia University and Grijalva's University of Arizona face off in the first round of the NCAA tournament for the right to face Price's Duke (barring an upset by 15th-seeded Belmont, in Tennessee Rep. Jim Cooper's district).

The tournament is a great excuse not to work for a few days, and it gives members of Congress yet another reason to make bets, shipping local delicacies to their foes if they lose. Roll Call [pdf] has the bracket, broken down by Congressional district, giving everyone a healthy excuse to call their rivals (especially if they're the higher seed). We don't know what it says that 43 of the 65 teams in the field are represented by Democrats, but it gives the majority party plenty of chances to bet against their fellows.

Price, who represents a college-heavy district in a basketball-heavy state, has the best chance of coming out on top. His two entries into the tournament, North Carolina and Duke, are a one- and two-seed, respectively, and will at least survive the first weekend. However, either Rep. Elijah Cummings or Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, both of Maryland, will lose their team tonight when Coppin State, in Cummings' district, faces Bartlett's Mount St. Mary's in the play-in game. Their prize: Facing UNC.

Our sleeper member of Congress: Washington State Republican Cathy McMorris Rodgers, whose seventh-seeded Gonzaga Bulldogs face North Carolina Rep. Mel Watt's 10th-seeded Davidson, while her fourth-seeded Washington State Cougars take on South Carolina Rep. John Spratt's Winthrop.

Roll Call isn't the only one having fun with the tourney. John McCain is also putting up a bracket challenge, where for the price of your email address you, too, can compete for McCain for President paraphernalia like fleeces, hats and pins. As an added bonus, McCain's bracket will be publicly available after tipoff Thursday, and contestants get to match their point totals against the Arizona Senator. McCain got some heat for the bracket pool last year, as some suggested the contest wasn't exactly in keeping with his historic opposition to betting on college sports.

The NCAA tournament is a good reminder that games, like politics, aren't played on paper. At some point, there will be an upset, and polls and seeds give only part of the picture.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 12:30 PM | Email Author | Permalink

As the economy tanks and both parties scramble to come up with a solution, something new and strange is sweeping Washington: Both parties are actually working together. The spirit of bipartisanship, increasingly rare inside the contentious Beltway, has gone so far as to cause two votes on contempt charges for top White House aides to be postponed, Politico reports.

The impetus for such cooperation: A need both parties feel to pass a sweeping stimulus package that puts money back into consumers' (read: voters') pockets. The White House and Congressional Democrats met yesterday, and have been in frequent communication, over the basic outlines of a plan, and all sides -- including Congressional Republicans -- hope for a quick fix.

Despite the cooperation, both parties are strategizing about how to appear more cooperative than the other side. It's still politics, after all. "If something is going to be successful, it has to happen fast," one Senate Republican aide, who requested anonymity in order to speak freely about ongoing negotiations, told Politics Nation. "If either side insists on a my-way-or-the-highway approach, it won't get 60 votes in the Senate -- and will die."

Republicans think they are winning the agreement war; tax hikes aren't a part of the initial package, and getting Democrats to admit that a tax break is good for the economy is more than just a moral victory for the GOP. "This won't be the package they want, and it will lean a lot more toward tax relief than anything else," the Republican said. "They've moved our way and taken tax hikes completely off the table."

Democrats, though, maintain that they still have the upper hand. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi offered their plan quickly, and negotiations are going harmoniously. If their package passes, they will be able to tell voters that the extra money in their pockets are because of Democrats who got Washington to work. Congressional Republicans, said one Senate Democratic aide, are negotiating out of necessity. "They see us leading on [the economy] and they needed to hop on board," the aide said.

Still, some Democratic aides wonder whether Republicans, who are playing nice right now, might walk away from the table instead of handing Democrats such a win. Getting Congress to act on an issue that is likely to play a major role in the 2008 elections, after all, is a powerful message. Republicans might decide, however, that participating in the stimulus package is a bigger win -- or a smaller loss -- than being blamed for inaction, even as the Republican White House works with Congressional Democrats.

Besides, says the Senate Republican aide, the time for serious disagreements has likely passed. "There are some that argue there is no need for an economic growth package, but now that everyone from Pelosi to the White House have acknowledged the utility of a package and are working to draft one, that ship has sailed," he said. "It's now just a matter of what its destination is."

Posted by Reid Wilson at 11:30 AM | Email Author | Permalink

House and Senate Democratic committees once again outraised their GOP rivals in November, further boosting their fundraising edge in advance of the 2008 election. New filings with the FEC show Democrats expanded their already-historic lead just eleven months after the party took over Congress.

In the House, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee raised $4.1 million last month, ending the month with $30.7 million on had. That's more than ten times above the National Republican Congressional Committee's $2.3 million on hand. The NRCC maintained about $3.3 million in debt, though Republicans reported recently that transfers from candidate committees had provided the party enough cash to wipe out that debt. The DCCC retained about $1.66 million in debt through November.

Those funds do not include the hundreds of thousands of dollars each party spent on special elections earlier this month in Ohio and Virginia. Combined, Republicans dropped more than $500,000 on the two races, while Democrats spent close to $250,000, mostly in Ohio. Republicans handily won both specials to replace their incumbents, who had passed away.

On the Senate side, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee raised $4.15 million last month, leaving them with $25.4 million in the bank and just $2 million in debt. Senate Republicans pulled in just shy of $2.4 million in the month, leaving them $10.4 million to spend. The NRSC is debt-free.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 09:30 AM | Email Author | Permalink

As rank and file members of Congress scrambled to vacate Washington yesterday, leaders of both parties did their best to spin results as the first session of the 110th Congress came to a close. The two sides laid blame for the session's shortcomings on their counterparts, though leaders said they had reason to be optimistic for 2007.

For Democrats, 2007 was both heady and frustrating. Experiencing their first concurrent majorities since 1994, the party laid out a flashy agenda that included action on ethics reform, energy, the minimum wage and tax cuts. While Republicans said the plans lacked ambition, Democrats nonetheless crowed about their own accomplishments while looking for new leverage in 2008.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi

The Democratic agenda included multiple proposals sandwiched into broad themes, making it impossible to say any had been accomplished completely. Still, the party can legitimately claim some success.

Democratic Caucus chair Rahm Emanuel's office released a chart Thursday comparing the first session of the Democratic Congress with Republicans' first chance to lead in 1995; that year, the GOP passed just one of 11 measures proposed by the vaunted Contract with America. This year, Democrats managed to pass big portions of their "Six in '06" agenda - including measures to implement the recommendations of the September 11th Commission, raising the minimum wage, reducing the cost of college and a major energy bill.

"This is just the beginning of the change that the elections of 2006 brought," Emanuel said, "and 2008 is going to be an even bigger election about change."

Previewing a possibly potent argument Democrats will use next year, leaders complained the GOP is using legislative maneuvers to block popular legislation. "The filibuster rule has now been used on every single piece of legislation. They are against change. They are happy with everything that's happening. We are not," said DSCC chair Chuck Schumer. "There's much more to be done. They block it, with filibusters."

Democrats in the House have been frustrated at the slow pace necessitated by Republicans in the Senate. "In the House we've been able to accomplish a bit more than the Senate," said one member of Congress. Still, the party cannot throw a Democratic-led upper chamber under the bus when making arguments that voters should elect more Democrats. "That the Republicans have put up road blocks, there's no question," the House Democrat said. "That's not going to be enough, I think, to convince people we can't do more."

The obstruction argument has been made before, and with mixed success. Republicans claim the issue was enough to knock off then-Democratic leader Tom Daschle in 2004, though Democrats, now trying the same argument, are quickly learning it's a complex point to make. Asked what Democrats needed to do better next year, a moderate House Democrat said the party should find a better way to "explain to people that, in the things that didn't get done, it was because the Republicans, either in the House, the Senate or the President, one of those three people opposed it."

Democrats said the GOP would be hurt by inaction on key legislative efforts, thanks in some part to President Bush. "Bush vetoed one bill in six years, and now acts like the Grinch by vetoing a health care bill for children," Hoyer said, referring to Congress's failure to expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell

The chamber's low ratings is thanks in part to the war in Iraq, the biggest issue on which Democrats' base wanted action. The new majority made little progress. Despite thirty-four votes in the Senate and thirty-six in the House, Congress capitulated to the administration, authorizing an additional $70 billion for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan without conditions.

Democrats, who found success saddling Republicans with the Iraq albatross in 2006, continue to blame their rivals for a lack of progress. "We need Republicans to join with us to give the troops a strategy to succeed in Iraq," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. "We need Republicans to join with us to refocus our military efforts on al Qaeda."

McConnell said Democrats would have a difficult time using Iraq as an effective issue, given the successes of the troop surge. "Things have improved [in Iraq]," McConnell said. "It's an undeniable fact. Or should I say, an inconvenient truth." The Kentucky Republican went on to say he would have picked General David Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, as Time's Man of the Year. "Unfortunately, Vladimir Putin beat him out," he joked.

The moderate House Democrat recognizes that Iraq remains a key issue, if not with independent voters than with his own base. "Everyone's walking around here saying, 'Eh, you guys didn't really do anything.' We did exactly what we said we were going to do," he said. "The fly in the ointment is, 'But you didn't stop the war in Iraq.'"

Leaders on both sides remain optimistic for next year, saying the last-minute rush of bipartisan legislation could bode well for the future. "We've been working on a bipartisan basis the last couple of weeks," Reid said. "It hasn't been easy, but we've worked through them."

McConnell said Congress' historically low approval ratings would not last. "I will predict that those numbers are going to pick up some," he said. "We really have met in the middle."

Whether the bipartisanship continues into next year is an open question. If recent history is a guide, this election year will likely resemble most others as tensions rise with November's approach. Both parties will recharge over the winter holiday and retool their strategies, and both will be back in January with knives out.

-- Reid Wilson and Kyle Trygstad

Posted by Reid Wilson at 09:45 AM | Email Author | Permalink

Two special elections held today, both in strong Republican districts, stuck to their party registration tonight, as both Virginia 01 and Ohio 05 elected new GOP members of Congress.

With all but one precinct reporting, State Rep. Rob Wittman has won the special election for the 1st District of Virginia 61%-37% over Democrat Philip Forgit, replacing the late Rep. Jo Ann Davis who died in October.

In Northwest Ohio, the race to replace the late Rep. Paul Gillmor caused Republicans some heartache. The party spent more than $425,000 to retain the seat, though State Rep. Bob Latta retained the seat for Republicans. Latta won 57% to Democrat Robin Wierach's 43%.

Though Democrats seemed optimistic about opportunities presented by Wittman and Latta's seats, Republicans held their own. The party swatted away Democratic hopes of stealing a seat; had Democrats succeeded, they would have perpetuated the storyline that Republicans were in a disastrous environment.

-- Kyle Trygstad and Reid Wilson

Posted by John McIntyre at 10:45 PM | Email Author | Permalink

Democrats, swept to power last year with help of charges that a Republican-led Congress had done little for America, have set much of their calendar for 2008, and Republicans say it's just another example of the new majority not keeping its word. Despite their promises to keep Congress in session five days a week to actually get work done, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer has scheduled just two five-day work weeks for the entire year.

The two weeks Hoyer plans for five days of votes both come before Congressional recesses scheduled over Easter and the month of August. "It appears that the 'most open Congress in history' isn't planning on being open for business very often next year," NRCC spokesman Ken Spain said. "The Democrats' agenda of inaction and broken promises has apparently worn them out to the extent that they are desperately in need of extra days off next year."

Arguing that Congress needs to be in session more is a difficult one to make. But Republicans hope to draw attention to the lack of action, and to tie Democrats to Congress' low approval ratings. Their first point: This isn't what Democrats promised they would do. "It's not the most consequential broken promise," said Ed Patru, a spokesman for the House Republican Conference. But "it's one of myriad broken promises."

Democrats take issue with the idea that they haven't accomplished anything. Their record in 2007, they say, shows the party has accomplished more and worked more days than their GOP predecessors. The House has been in session for 105 days so far this year, more than the 87 days Republicans kept the House in session in 2006. "We have met more than Republicans this year, and will meet more than Republicans next year," House Democratic Conference spokeswoman Sarah Feinberg says.

The calendar argument, which would ordinarily be a completely inside-the-Beltway concern, helped Democrats convince voters last year that Republicans were doing nothing with their power. Now Republicans are hoping to use the same argument against Democrats. "Democrats are crowing about the number of votes they've taken, but that is not a case they can take to the public," Patru said. "What, do they want a cookie for that?"

Despite being in session longer than the GOP, Congress still has yet to finish eleven of twelve funding bills, a job Patru calls "the most rudimentary responsibility of Congress." Feinberg countered that the party in charge had made significant progress on the minimum wage, a tax relief plan for small businesses and assistance on college tuition, as well as popular measures on Head Start and lobbying and ethics reform. Feinberg blames the failure to move appropriations bills on "Republican obstruction."

The issue, though difficult to make, can feed into a larger narrative of inaction. The GOP hopes that, as in the past, it's a criticism that almost exclusively benefits the minority party running against incumbents. President Bush's vetoes of popular legislation on children's health care, though, along with minimum wage and other high-profile legislation, will give Democrats at least something to fire back with. If they're successful, the argument will be ineffective. If they fail, Democrats could be in trouble.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 03:45 PM | Email Author | Permalink

What if the big issue Democrats are counting on to bring them a bigger majority in 2008 isn't there? It's becoming a very real concern, as more members of the new majority are returning from Iraq with the opinion that something might just be working.

We reported this morning on Rep. John Murtha's comments, a sentiment that is sure to cause Speaker Nancy Pelosi some heartburn. Murtha's office released a clarification this morning, arguing that the surce "has created a window of opportunity for the Iraqi Government." But such a prominent war opponent saying positive things is going to lead a few papers tomorrow.

Murtha is not alone; several months ago, Rep. Brian Baird, a Washington State Democrat, came to the same conclusion. Baird headed home to his district, which stretches from Olympia to the Oregon border, to face angry crowds at town hall meetings, and he heard calls for his head from the liberal blogosphere.

Baird's neighbor, Rep. Norm Dicks, agrees with him, according to an interview with the Seattle Times. Dicks is also vice chair of Murtha's Defense Appropriations subcommittee.

Democrats are aware that shifting opinions could hurt their chances next year. In fact, some say the issue is fading from voters' minds, as the Politico writes today. The voting public still trusts Democrats on most issues much more than they do Republicans. But without Iraq as a top issue, and without homogeny of opinion on ending the war, Democrats are losing what might have been an issue potent enough to take back a dozen or more seats.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 12:00 PM | Email Author | Permalink

New financial disclosures show Democratic campaign committees continue to lead the money race over their Republican counterparts. Thanks to a strong fundraising performance from the Republican National Committee, though, GOP committees actually combined to outraise their Democratic counterparts.

The DSCC raised about $3.1 million in October, just ahead of their Republican counterparts' $2.9 million for the month. That's a narrow margin, but the NRSC, which has raised $26.3 million to date, is still well behind Democrats' $45.1 million. Democrats started November with $23.4 million in the bank, well ahead of Republicans' $9.5 million on hand.

That cash advantage for Democrats is actually the better news for the GOP. On the House side, the DCCC raised $4.1 million in October for a total of $56.7 million so far this year. The NRCC pulled in $3.6 million, for a total of $40.7 million. But, again thanks to the huge debts the committee racked up in 2006, Republicans find themselves at a huge cash disadvantage, with $2.6 million cash on hand and $3.6 million in debt. Democrats have $29.2 million in the bank.

On the national level, though, the RNC continues to outraise the DNC. Despite losing chairman Mel Martinez, the committee raised $8.5 million in October to the DNC's $5.6 million. Much of that money came from a successful fundraising dinner held last month at the National Building Museum, where the party promised donors they would hear from several top Republican candidates. Instead, diners heard only from Mitt Romney and Ron Paul, as Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson excused themselves early and John McCain was stuck in the Senate for votes.

In spite of the disappointment, Mike Duncan's RNC has $17.6 million in the bank after raising $71.5 million this year, while Howard Dean's committee has raised $46.1 million and $3.3 million on hand. Democrats maintain a $1.7 million debt, while the RNC is debt-free.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 02:00 PM | Email Author | Permalink

A survey by USA Today shows it's bad for business to be under investigation while running for re-election. At least seven members of Congress have seen their names associated with ongoing investigations, and most have suffered on the campaign trail.

Rep. William Jefferson, the only member currently under indictment for corruption charges, raised just $15,000 in the third quarter, leaving him only $30,000 cash on hand. Few believe Jefferson will be on the ballot in 2008, though he has yet to attract a challenger. California Republican John Doolittle pulled in only $50,000 last quarter, while 2006 opponent Charlie Brown raised more than $200,000 in the same period. A fellow Republican candidate raised almost $80,000 in the same period.

In Alaska, two incumbent Republicans facing re-election next year each boasted big bank accounts. Rep. Don Young has $1.48 million in the bank, while Sen. Ted Stevens has more than $1 million on hand. Stevens' home was raided by the FBI in late July, while Young is under investigation, both in connection to the lawmakers' ties to VECO Corp.

Reps. Jerry Lewis and Tom Feeney, of California and Florida, respectively, are under investigation for their ties to lobbyists. Lewis pulled in just $67,000 in the third quarter, but his nearly million-dollar bank account means he would have the money to run again. Still, retirement rumors have been buzzing for months, and Lewis may decide to step down instead of running again. Feeney, who has cooperated with the FBI in an investigation connected to Jack Abramoff, raised an impressive $329,000 in the third quarter, three times what he pulled in during the same period in 2005.

Rep. Alan Mollohan, the West Virginia Democrat who finds himself under scrutiny for securing earmarks for non-profit organizations tied to his family, raised almost $200,000 in the quarter. No opponent has announced for the seat, which went heavily for President Bush in both his races. Even after news of the investigation came out last year, Mollohan still took nearly 65% in his re-election bid.

At least a few of the seven members of Congress under investigation will decide not to seek re-election next year. But even if their minds are already made up, keeping a campaign account open has one huge benefit: Donations to campaigns can be used to defray costly legal bills that at least some of these members can expect.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 10:00 AM | Email Author | Permalink

Headline on a statement from Rep. Charlie Rangel, the New York Democrat, commenting on penalties for crack-related crimes, as reported by Roll Call: "Rangel on Crack."

Oops.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 09:40 AM | Email Author | Permalink

Mitchell Wade, the defense contractor who pleaded guilty to bribing former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, will pay the second largest fine in Federal Election Commission history for his role in a scheme to funnel $78,000 in illegal contributions to federal political candidates. The FEC today announced a $1 million settlement with Wade and his company, MZM Inc., now called True Norte, Inc.

Wade used corporate funds to reimburse MZM employees for their contributions to Reps. Virgil Goode, a Virginia Republican, and Katherine Harris, formerly a Florida Republican. Wade pleaded guilty to a number of counts including election fraud in February, and an employee, Richard Berglund, pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor for making unlawful contributions in July. Berglund will pay a $42,000 penalty.

The FEC cleared Goode's and Harris's campaigns of wrongdoing, and both committees either returned the contributions or gave the money away.

Wade was the defense contractor who bought a house from Cunningham in Del Mar, California, for about $700,000 more than it was worth. After the purchase, and after other bribes including free rent and payments to a Pentagon official, MZM received more than $150 million in Defense Department contracts, thanks largely to Cunningham's position on the House Appropriations Committee. Cunningham is currently serving a 100-month prison term for his role in the public corruption scandal.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 05:00 PM | Email Author | Permalink

Two days from Halloween and some House Republicans must be thinking they've seen a reincarnation of Dracula. The State Children's Health Insurance Program is back again, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is targeting seven more members on the new version of the bill, which passed the House last week.

Reps. Richard Baker (R-LA), Steve Chabot (R-OH), Kenny Hulshof (R-MO), Ric Keller (R-FL), Joe Knollenberg (R-MI), Peter Roskam (R-IL) and John Shadegg (R-AZ) are all under fire for their votes on the bill, which passed without a margin wide enough to override a veto. Still, with Democrats bringing the bill up over and over, these seven, and other potentially vulnerable members, are certainly searching for the mythical silver bullet or a few cloves of garlic.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 01:15 PM | Email Author | Permalink

Many people joked that, on Heath Shuler's first day in Washington as a Congressman, rather than a quarterback, he still managed to throw a few interceptions. Well, on Monday night, Shuler did throw two picks, in the annual Longest Yard Football Classic.

Shuler quarterbacked for the team made up of members of Congress as they took on a team of Capitol Police officers. As usual, the cops beat the bad guys, by a whopping 28-0 score. The event raised $30,000 for the Capitol Police Memorial Fund.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 06:00 PM | Email Author | Permalink

Minutes ago, the House voted to sustain President Bush's veto of the State Children's Health Insurance reauthorization and expansion. 273 members voted to override, while 156, including Democrats Gene Taylor, of Mississippi, and Jim Marshall, of Georgia, voted to sustain the veto.

The two parties will go back to the negotiating table and try to find a compromise that can come closer to the two-thirds majority required to overcome a presidential veto.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 01:40 PM | Email Author | Permalink

As the House gets set to vote today to override President Bush's veto of the reauthorization and expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, Democrats think they're riding high. A memo emailed to reporters today cited several polls showing the SCHIP program as widely popular, and Democrats hope they can paint Republicans as voting in lock-step with the president when, as is expected, the override vote fails.

The poll numbers are overwhelmingly in favor of SCHIP: A CBS poll showed 81% of Americans back the expansion, while an NPR poll had 70% approving of adding $35 billion to the program. The NPR poll and a CNN poll showed 64% and 60%, respectively, in favor of overriding the veto.

Republicans have some poll numbers of their own. A release yesterday highlighted a Gallup poll showing 52% support the program's expansion going to families who make under $41,000 a year, as opposed to those making $62,000 a year.

The GOP is taking a longer-term view of the veto. SCHIP is just the first of many expansions the President has promised to veto, in the name of holding the line on federal spending. And the GOP has a point: This veto is about children's health care, Democrats say, but after half a dozen, the story line breaks down into Congress and the White House facing off over faceless spending programs.

That strategy fits in with Congressional Republicans' new tactic of painting Democrats as the driving force behind the Washington status quo. After a close special election race this week in which a Republican came close to knocking off a heavily-favored Democrat, the GOP thinks making the point that Democrats now run Congress can be a political winner for them. With Congress' approval ratings in the dumps, they may be right.

But to pull off that feat, the Republicans will have to endure significant short-term grief. Every day SCHIP remains in the news, Democrats believe - and the polls suggest - they benefit at the expense of Republicans.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 11:15 AM | Email Author | Permalink

Ninety years ago, in the waning days of the Ottoman Empire and World War I, more than one million Armenians died, possibly at the hands of the Young Turk regime. This week, the House Foreign Relations Committee takes up a resolution condemning those deaths as genocide. But House Resolution 106, the Affirmation of the United States Record on the Armenian Genocide, is more than just a non-binding resolution. In the years it has been proposed, the bill has cost at least one Congressman his seat in the House, and now Turkey is threatening greater consequences.

The bill, first advanced by then-Rep. James Rogan (R-CA), came close to the floor in the late 1990's. After President Clinton urged Speaker Dennis Hastert to pull the bill, Rogan lost his seat, to Democrat Adam Schiff, who took up the cause. Now, Schiff has an ally in Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a co-sponsor of the resolution, and the measure is undergoing hearings in committee. Pelosi and Schiff are far from alone: The bill has a total of 225 congressional co-sponsors.

Turkey's response has been subtle, but strong. With representation from three top lobbying firms in Washington, one of America's strongest allies with a foothold in the Middle East has suggested it may be less willing to assist America if a resolution goes through. A recent poll, cited by the Washington Post today, shows 83% of Turks would oppose their country helping the U.S. in Iraq if the resolution goes forward. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan put in a phone call last week to President Bush warning on the dangers of passing the resolution.

The American foreign policy community realizes the problems with adopting the resolution, as well. Turkey ended some military agreements with France after the French National Assembly criminalized any denial of a genocide.

A letter with signatures from all eight former Secretaries of State who are still alive went to Pelosi earlier this week, and three ex-Defense Secretaries warned Turkey could go as far as to cut off access to an air base used for operations in Iraq. The State Department and the Bush Administration, like the Clinton Administration before it, are vehemently opposed to the measure because of the foreign policy ramifications.

There are historical questions surrounding the deaths, as well. Turkey maintains that the deaths were the result of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, not an organized genocide, and that thousands of Turks perished as well.

Still, say proponents, to pass the bill recognizing the genocide would be a renewal of American commitment to preventing genocide around the globe. How, they ask, can the U.S. take action in Darfur without recognizing other, previous genocides? Opponents say regardless of the moral dilemma, modern reality is that the resolution will hurt U.S.-Turkish relations at a time when America needs allies in Iraq.

Turkish and Armenian lobbying groups in Washington have spent millions battling over the issue. According to the Post, Turkey pays more than $315,000 a month to the three well-connected lobbying groups, while last year alone the Armenian Assembly of America spent $3.6 million to lobby Congress.

For some, the issue is relevant and hugely important as the United States tries to remake its image in the world. For others, including the Washington Post editorial board, the resolution promises more trouble for troops in Iraq. Many will criticize Congress for a do-nothing session, but at times, even a non-binding resolution can cause widespread consequences.

Posted by Reid Wilson at 11:00 AM | Email Author | Permalink