18
Oct
10

Should Noem begin attacking Boehner?

This story appeared in the Oct. 13 edition of The Hill

Boehner a rubber stamp for Pelosi?
By Russell Berman – 10/13/10 05:52 PM ET

It’s an attack ad that writes itself: The House Republican leader, Rep. John Boehner (Ohio), votes with liberal Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) a majority of the time.

The statistic seems impossible to believe, given the ferocity with which Boehner denounces Pelosi, the progressive champion of San Francisco elitism and favorite GOP villain.

But it’s true, according to an analysis by Democrats. Boehner has voted with the Democratic leadership 52 percent of the time in 2010. So has Rep. Mike Pence (Ind.), chairman of the Republican conference and former head of the conservative Republican Study Committee.
Rep. Eric Cantor (Va.), the House Republican whip, and Rep. Pete Sessions (Tex.), head of the GOP’s House campaign committee, are even cozier with Pelosi. They’ve voted with her 57 percent of the time.

And Rep. Michele Bachmann (Minn.), the conservative firebrand who has compared the Democratic agenda to socialism? She’s with Pelosi on 58 percent of House votes.

The data come from a Democratic leadership review of the 565 roll call votes in the House from January through the end of September, when Congress left Washington for the campaign trail. Since the Speaker herself rarely votes, the comparison is made using the recommended vote of the party leadership.

The percentages do not reveal a hidden bipartisanship in the rancorous 111th Congress, but they do throw into sharp relief the statistic that campaign ad makers use more than any other to cast opponents as ideological rubberstamps.

Republican campaigns nationwide are running dozens of ads that cite the percentage of time an incumbent Democrat votes with Pelosi.

In Alabama’s 2nd district, the National Republican Congressional Committee attacks Democratic Rep. Bobby Bright in radio and television ads for voting “with Pelosi 70 percent of the time” since 2009. In Idaho’s 1st district, Republican Raul Labrador’s ad criticizes Rep. Walt Minnick (D) for voting “with Obama/Pelosi over 70 percent.” Bright and Minnick of two of the most conservative Democrats in the House who opposed their party’s major agenda items.

The percentage appears high, but when Bright and Minnick are compared with the conservative Bachmann, the difference is only a few dozen votes. And compared with more centrist Republicans like Reps. Tim Murphy (Pa. – 66 percent with Pelosi) and Charlie Dent (Pa. – 65 percent), the disparity is even smaller.

The explanation for the elevated voting percentages is simple: While hotly-disputed legislation on healthcare, climate change and government spending command the public’s attention, the vast majority of congressional votes occur on more mundane and non-controversial items, like the naming of post offices or designating weeks or months to cancer awareness and other causes.

In the database of votes that campaigns rely on for attack ads, however, a vote to designate June 30th as National ESIGN Day or to congratulate the South Carolina Gamecocks for winning the College World Series counts the same as votes to overhaul the nation’s healthcare and energy industries.

The Republican strategy is a long-running standard of congressional campaigns. Democrats used it to similar effect in 2006 and 2008, tying even the most centrist Republicans to the unpopular President George W. Bush by virtue of their voting records. And a few Democratic campaigns are linking their opponents to Bush in 2010. The campaign of Ohio Democratic Senate nominee Lee Fisher, for example, has criticized Republican Rob Portman, a former congressman, of having “voted with the Bush administration nearly 95 percent of the time.”

“The data can be manipulated by both sides, and they are,” said Sarah Binder, a senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution. Voters, she said, often don’t know what to make of the statistics that flash across a TV screen in 30-second spots. “Are these the most important bills? Are these the least important bills?” a voter might wonder, Binder said.

Democrats are fighting back with their own spin on the numbers. Bright is running a TV ad that says he voted “80 percent with the Republican leader,” and Rep. Jim Marshall (D-Ga.), in his own ad, touts his record of voting 65 percent “with Republican leaders.”

As for Boehner, the NRCC scoffed at the Democratic analysis. “It’s necessary to question any numbers coming from the same party that predicted their trillion dollar stimulus bill would keep unemployment below 8 percent,” committee spokesman Paul Lindsay said. “The fact that House Democrat staffers spent their time compiling this nonsense is further proof of why their party has failed to address the economic crisis facing American families, and why voters are determined to send them packing in November.”

Doug Thornell, a spokesman for Rep. Chris Van Hollen, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and assistant to the Speaker, shot back: “Gosh, I wonder what the Tea Party would think if they knew House Republican leaders vote with Speaker Pelosi most of the time. This analysis just shows how big of a joke the GOP argument against Democrats is.”

Advertisements

2 Responses to “Should Noem begin attacking Boehner?”


  1. 1 MarshaMM
    October 28, 2010 at 4:52 am

    Interesting points–but I,for one, am tired of Nancy Pelosi’s name being used as a perjorative phrase implying anti-American activities. If legislation is introduced and championed in the House under Rep. Pelosi to increase funding for small businesses and the GOP tells its party members to vote against that legislation simply to not vote with Pelosi, then I think that’s wrong.

    Truly wrong.

    And Noem shouldn’t suggest that Boehner voting with the Dems for an important bill is a bad thing.

    If there is legislation that CLEARLY benefits small business and offers opportunities for our nation to build small business and real economic reform, then any politician should support it and for once—put country first instead of their party.

    All politicians would do well to remember that they are there to do the people’s business and not their party’s.

    I’m not a big fan of Nancy Pelosi, but really, has everyone forgotten that when the TARP money was first proposed (under Bush) to bail out the banks, Hank Paulson gave a three page document to Congress that said that the funds would go to the banks, and Congress would not require the banks to be accountable to Congress as to how they would use the funds. They would not be subject to ANY Congressional oversight. And when Speaker Pelosi said that there was no way Congress was going to give these funds away carte blanche, Paulson’s response was “you can’t blame us for trying.”

    Well I do blame them for trying. And I do blame the GOP and Fox News for painting the TARP funds as something started by President Obama or as something Congress simply wrote a blank check for. In fact because of the guidelines imposed by Congress much of the TARP funds have been paid back and the American people have earned approximately 5% interest on that money.

    Many banks paid back the money earlier than expected BECAUSE Congress told them they couldn’t use the funds for executive bonuses.

    So the GOP wanted no oversight on these funds, they want to continue the Bush tax breaks for the top 2% of the nation’s wealthiest (and really, how many South Dakotans fall into THAT tax bracket?), and they tried to block extending unemployment benefits even though our nation’s top economists have told us over and over again that unemployment benefits feed right back into the economy because that money is spent on household necessities. Whereas the tax breaks for the top 2% simply gets invested in Wall Street and not spent on Main Street.

    This election is ALL about money. Who’s funding these campaigns–why won’t the GOP in Iowa tell us who’s ponying up all the cash for those races?

    And who are the top two share holders of FOX news corp? Oh yeah, an Australian, Rupert Murdoch and a Saudi Prince, Al-Waleed bin Talal. (Who is also inexplicably the funding source behind the mosque at Ground Zero–something FOX News has rallied against–well, it does make for good ratings.)

    If you really, really want to be an informed voter, follow the money. FactCheck.org will tell you who’s financing your politicians, but because of the Citizen’s United Ruling by the Supreme Court, we may never find out what international corporations are buying our elections.

    Good luck.

  2. 2 Don Hovden
    November 23, 2010 at 7:37 pm

    Fox News again ? Give it a rest !
    Your tax dollars are funding NPR not Fox.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


October 2010
S M T W T F S
« Sep   Nov »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

Archives

RSS Plain Talk Local News

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Plain Talk Community News

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Spotted Galleries

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

Dave’s Twitter


%d bloggers like this: