Local Values

Reelection

2008-11-06T17:00:00.000-05:00

On Tuesday, Chris Carney won his reelection bid convincingly against Chris Hackett. This was a district that many pundits had considered to be a "toss-up" early on and one of the few seats the Republican Party hoped to steal.

Based on early reports on Election Day, Chris Hackett was expecting record rural turnout which his campaign believed would work to his benefit. Obviously, in a district were Republicans outnumber Democrats by almost 40,000 registered voters, higher turnout would theoretically work to Hackett's advantage.

Hackett's campaign was correct that more voters turned out in the district--in fact, almost 75,000 more voted in the congressional race--but the results didn't break his way. It seems the consensus going in was that Lackawanna and Luzerne would go to Carney, but the majorities he received there would need to be offset by success in the western part of the district where Hackett had fared well in the primary.

Surprisingly, Carney actually underperformed in Luzerne based on his 2006 percentage, but pounded Hackett in Lackawanna. It was his success throughout the rest of the district that sealed the deal.

For instance, in Wayne County voter turnout exceeded 71%. This was a district that Sherwood won in 2006, yet Carney was able to steal. Not only does this likely reflect the increased Democrat registration throughout the district, but also that a "Republicans For Carney" contingent existed and helped his reelection bid.

In fact, if you look at the elections numbers compared with Carney's original bid, you can see why he was so successful. Not only did he expand his majorities in counties that he won in 2006, but he also stole all but one county from the GOP. In this county (Snyder), Hackett was able to hold it, but made no gains in building on Sherwood's proportion.

----------------------------------------------------------------

OVERALL:
Carney--56.4% (159,072)
Hackett--43.6% (123,065)

2006
Carney--52.9% (110,115)
Sherwood--47.1% (97,862)

BY COUNTY:

Bradford County
Carney--51.8%
Hackett--48.2%

2006
Carney--46.7%
Sherwood--53.3%

Lackawanna County
Carney--69.3%
Hackett--30.7%

2006
Carney--62.9%
Sherwood--37.1%

Luzerne County
Carney--60.1%
Hackett--39.9%

2006
Carney--60.2%
Sherwood--39.8%

Lycoming County
Carney--50.9%
Hackett--49.1%

2006
Carney--49.1%
Sherwood--51.0%

Montour County
Carney--53.6%
Hackett--46.4%

2006
Carney--54.2%
Sherwood--45.8%

Northumberland County
Carney--56.8%
Hackett--43.2%

2006
Carney--56.1%
Sherwood--43.9%

Pike County
Carney--51.9%
Hackett--48.1%

2006
Carney--52.2%
Sherwood--47.8%

Snyder County
Carney--43.5%
Hackett--56.5%

2006
Carney--43.5%
Sherwood--56.5%

Sullivan County
Carney--55.3%
Hackett--44.7%

2006
Carney--50.2%
Sherwood--49.8%

Susquehanna County
Carney--59.3%
Hackett--40.7%

2006
Carney--49.7%
Sherwood--50.3%

Tioga County
Carney--55.0%
Hackett--45.0%

2006
Carney--30.0%
Sherwood--70.0%

Union County
Carney--50.5%
Hackett--49.5%

2006
Carney--48.8%
Sherwood--51.2%

Wayne County
Carney--51.7%
Hackett--48.3%

2006
Carney--48.5%
Sherwood--51.5%

Wyoming County
Carney--58.8%
Hackett--41.2%

2006
Carney--42.3%
Sherwood--57.7%

----------------------------------------------------------------

Carney's staff credited his town-hall meetings throughout the district as a big reason for his success noting he even held a meeting in Tioga County which only has one municipality in the 10th District (only 60 total votes on Tuesday) .

Carney stated he looks forward to an ambitious second-term:

"I am anxiously awaiting our next term in Congress, where we can tackle the costs of health care, explore alternative energy and work toward energy independence, fight for more federal funding and jobs for our region, and continue to push for more middle class tax cuts. Working together, I know we can make this happen. To the voters of the 10th district, thank you again for this opportunity to be your Member of Congress."

The Road To Victory

2008-11-03T14:10:00.002-05:00

Good look at the numbers games in 10th District:

Hackett won his Republican primary battle by sweeping in much of the southwestern portion of the district, winning Lycoming, Union and Snyder counties by more than 2,100 votes in an election decided by about 3,000 votes.
....

Assuming a 45 percent to 55 percent turnout on Election Day among registered voters district-wide — a conservative estimate, some analysts say, given the attention to presidential campaigns — about 194,000 to 237,000 people will vote in the 10th District. Combined, all counties, excluding Lackawanna and Luzerne, will see between 145,000 to 180,000 people vote. If Carney sweeps out of Luzerne and Lackawanna counties with a significant lead (he beat Sherwood by nearly 13,500 votes in those counties), Hackett will need to make significant ground in Snyder and Bradford, where Republicans double registered Democrats. That kind of lead in Luzerne and Lackawanna counties still might be too difficult for Hackett to overcome. Keeping with a 45 percent to 55 percent turnout ratio, there would be about 28,000 to 34,000 voters in Bradford and Snyder counties combined on Election Day. Even if Hackett wins 60 percent of the vote in those counties — a significant margin — he would gain 5,600 to 6,900 votes. In other words, any margin Carney pulls in Luzerne or Lackawanna counties has to be buffeted by Republican counties out west for Hackett to win.

Earmark Benefits

2008-11-03T13:59:00.004-05:00

In last week's debate, Chris Hackett charged that Chris Carney received more than $100,000 in campaign contributions from companies that he secured earmarks for.

The Citizen's Voice investigated the claim and found that Carney actually received slightly less--$80,000--from those who received earmarks.

The $100,000 figure that Hackett used was much more generous since it included contributions from faculty at colleges where Carney received earmarks for as well as employees of companies that got the funds.

Carney's campaign manager Vincent Rongione responded by saying, "That is a very serious accusation. To accuse a government official of an illegal activity without proof is unbelievable. There is very little, if any, evidence at all to even try to make such a claim."

Mark Harris argued that regardless of the legality, "Congressman Carney directly benefitted from those earmarks by getting campaign contributions."

Campaign Moves To Billtown

2008-10-31T07:50:00.003-04:00

Williamsport got a heavy dose of the Presidential campaigns yesterday as both of the Vice Presidential candidates were in town.

Senator Joe Biden appeared in the afternoon at Lamade Gymnasium at Lycoming College. During his stump speech, Biden used the Halloween holiday for his newest punch line. He said, "Look, I know Halloween is tomorrow night, but John McCain dressed as an agent of change, that's just one costume that does not fit. It does not fit."

Governor Sarah Palin campaigned up the road at Bowman Field in the evening. The crowd was energized and even chants of "drill baby drill" occassionally reigned down throughout Palin's speech. Palin used the stump as a chance to emphasize the differences between the two campaigns on taxes and energy.

Thoughts On The 10 CD Debate

2008-10-30T21:30:00.003-04:00

It was great to see these two candidates finally square off. I attempted to liveblog the debate to give those who didn't watch a better feel for how it went. It was also be aired on C-SPAN tomorrow night for those who missed it. Below are my initial impressions:

Carney won the toss and started the debate by stressing that he is a humble, bipartisan representative of a district who lives within its means. Hackett wasted no time in getting to the matter at hand by bringing up Carney's failure to hold more debates. He used the remaining time to detail his background and professional experiences.

The first question out of the gate utilized Hackett's opening remarks and asked if one debate was adequate. Carney emphasized he held numerous town hall meetings and he was readily accessibly to his constituents. He also noted that other important offices (the Vice-President) only hold one debate so this was no out of the ordinary. Hackett went right for the jugular early by saying Carney is hiding his record by continually saying one thing in the district and doing a different thing in Washington. This was a theme that Hackett hammered home throughout the debate (Washington Carney vs. District Carney).

In regards to the bailout, Hackett scolded the "must pass" bailout as doing nothing. He recommended a capital gains tax reduction to 0% for the next two years so more capital can flow into the markets and self-correct many of the liquidity problems. Hackett preempted Carney here by saying while Carney had not voted for the financial rescue, he did vote for the auto industry loan, the Fannie/Freddie bailout, and rescue for the sugar industry.

Carney noted that he had talked to bank presidents in the district and found they were properly regulated as well as financially sound. It was Wall Street which was the cancer. Because the Paulson plan was all Congress looked at and didn't have further hearings, he didn't feel comfortable voting for it.

Social Security provided the first contentious issue of the night. The candidates squabbled over who was scaring seniors more as Hackett made the program appear in dire straights while Carney exaggerated the risk implications of Hackett's market proposals. Carney suggested that Social Security was in sound financial shape as the trust fund had trillions of dollars and was earning interest. Hackett used the bailout as an example of Washington waiting until a crisis to do something and Social Security was another issue of waiting until a crisis.

The issue of earmarks also brought some fireworks. Most notably, Hackett stated that the district had lost $20 million in the transition from Sherwood to Carney and this was a problem with relying on earmarks for revenue. He followed that up by claiming Carney had received $100,000 in donations from companies that he provided earmarks for.

Carney allowed the statistical claims to go unchecked while suggesting earmarking was a beneficial process for the district. Less than 1% of federal budget is earmarks, but that single percent has an exponential impact on the projects in the district: it wouldn't be there if it wasn't for earmarks. Carney even went so far as to defend Nancy Pelosi's earmarking (money inserted in the farm bill for her district) by claiming Pelosi was "saving her people."

The finance of the campaigns was also brought up. While Carney acknowledged he spent more money thus far, he wouldn't be here if it wasn't for individual donations because he didn't have deep pockets like Hackett. Hackett suggested imposing term limits for campaigns to eliminate some of the money involved (2 terms for Senate and 10 years for House) and changing McCain-Feingold.

The most informative portion of the debate was on Hackett's tax liens. Hackett clarified that these were all legitimate challenges and not failure to pay taxes. For instance, he noted a $500 fine from the PA Department of Revenue. The taxes were paid by check and not through the electronic system (which he wasn't approved for). Hackett disputed this fine levied against his business. Carney didn't buy it and brought up the fine in Williamsport to which Hackett responded that it was a payment to the wrong party--much different than not paying as Carney implied.

The debate was rounded out by illegal immigration and military spending. On immigration, Carney stated there was a need for more personnel and tools to fight illegal immigration. Hackett agreed on no amnesty for illegals, but hammered Carney on his vote to de-fund construction of the fence. Carney rebutted the challenge by noting Hackett employed an illegal immigrant and used it as an example of the need to crack down on employers. The only big difference between the two on defense was which country was more of an immediate threat: Pakistan of Iran. Carney suggested it was Pakistan, and Hackett voted for Iran.

In their closing statements, Hackett repeated the points in his opener and noted the need to change politicians to change the culture of Washington. He also brought up the content of the Specter ad by suggesting one-party rule is dangerous. Carney closed by stating there was no bipartisanship coming from Hackett. Carney's credentials--as provided by the National Journal and his bipartisan parents--were much more fitting for the district.

My initial impression is that this debate was much better to watch than any of the presidential debates. It was much more entertaining, combative, and substantive. I think Hackett won the debate, but they both are very qualified politicians. I found Hackett's delivery to be superior and sharper. Carney stumbled over his words at points throughout the debate and didn't appear to get into a rhythm. Overall, I thought he was spotty throughout. [As a side note, I was curious who Chris Carney kept smiling and winking at to his right?]

Substantively, Hackett was ready to challenge the points against his character and prodded Carney on his vulnerabilities. However, Carney did deliver the best line of the night. During the immigration portion, Carney said that the border is not the NFL: two feet in bounds does not mean citizenship.

Another Endorsement

2008-10-30T09:52:00.002-04:00

Chris Carney earned the endorsement of the Citizen's Voice yesterday:

With two years of significant accomplishments to his credit, U.S. Rep. Chris Carney from Dimock Township has earned the right to another term in Washington representing the 10th Congressional District.

Voters should choose Carney, a Democrat, whose moderate and pragmatic approach to many difficult issues facing residents of this region and the nation has proven to be a good fit for the rural and traditionally Republican-leaning district.

...Hackett has not yet shown the flexibility and bi-partisanship that will be necessary to address and fix the nation’s social and economic woes, many of which have reached crisis proportions.

Outside Influence

2008-10-30T09:03:00.003-04:00

The Alliance For Retired Americans cut an ad for Congressman Chris Carney. The ad attempts to highlight some differences between Carney and Hackett on issues facing seniors.

It's not a great ad to begin with, but they seem to gloss over the fact that Carney has indeed supported making Social Security more personal with expanded investment opportunties. From Carney's website, "Workers should have opportunities and incentives to invest for their retirement, but not at the expense of the traditional Social Security system."

Hackett has stated: "I think workers in their twenties and thirties should be given a choice that would allow them to receive better than a 1% return on their retirement dollars. That’s why I favor creating voluntary personal accounts controlled by each individual, rather than by Washington."

Both rhetoric is very similar and focuses on preserving the traditional system while offering new opportunities to young workers entering the system. It is splitting hairs to say that Hackett supports "privatization" while Carney does not.

Carney also picked up the "Friend of the Farm Bureau" award for his support of the farm bill.

Frankly, after hearing Hackett attack Carney early on in the campaign on the federal government's agriculture subsidies, I thought he would continue to pursue the topic and distinguish himself from Carney on the idea of reforming the programs. But it's been an issue he seemed content with fading out of the campaign's focus.

While the NRA has decided not to endorse in the district, Hackett earned the endorsement of the Gun Owners For America yesterday.

More Endorsements

2008-10-28T14:31:00.005-04:00

More editorial endorsements for Chris Carney from over the weekend. The Daily Item endorsed him on Saturday:

However, since gaining office two years ago, Congressman Chris Carney has faithfully represented the traditional values embodied by 10th District voters, and for that, The Daily Item is endorsing Carney in his bid for re-election.

The Times Leader followed suite:

CHRIS CARNEY, who has a background in counter-terrorism work, displays a command of many of the most important issues facing the nation.

That knowledge, combined with Carney’s knack for voting independently rather than solely along party lines, makes him the better choice to serve the people of the 10th U.S. Congressional District, which encompasses much of Northeastern Pennsylvania including Wyoming County and Luzerne County’s Back Mountain area.

For their endorsement in the 11th District, the Times Leader went with Lou Barletta over Paul Kanjorski:

SEND LOU Barletta to Washington, D.C.

Although some people try to pigeonhole Barletta as a single-issue candidate, the Hazleton mayor who gained nationwide attention for his city’s attempted crackdown on illegal immigrants offers fresh ideas on a host of issues.

Another DCCC Spot Against Hackett

2008-10-28T10:04:00.002-04:00

The DCCC had produced yet another ad highlighting the nine tax liens against Chris Hackett's business.

New Poll

2008-10-28T10:00:00.000-04:00

A new poll out from the Lycoming College Polling Institute shows Chris Carney with a 15-point lead in his 10th District reelection bid.

The poll, which sampled 441 likely voters, was taken last week between October 19th and 23rd.

This new data slightly increases Carney and Hackett's polling percentages in the Local Values Average while decreasing the undecided category. The overall margin-of-victory for Carney is still hovering around 14%.

If I were involved in the Hackett campaign, what would be most concerning about these polling numbers is not the overall lead that Carney holds, but the fact that poll after poll has shown Chris Hackett's unfavorables to be higher than his favorables. This is the third poll in a row which has highlighted that trend.

That's not a good sign, and it signals that voters aren't responding to his campaign's message. I'd speculate that the DCCC and Carney ads have played a role in this as these spots have all explicitly questioned Hackett's character by attempting to expose him as a walking contradiction. They have essentially hit him with everything but the kitchen sink: his energy proposals and the personal investments he holds, his tough talk on illegal immigration while hiring an illegal immigrant as a personal housekeeper, and his personal tax problems and "radical" tax proposals. Add in a bitter primary with Dan Meuser and you can see the issues with Hackett that are likely resonating with voters. I know Hackett has spent a lot of his campaign's time trying to paint Carney as a liberal out of touch with the distict, but he may not have done enough to address these concerns.

Hackett does have the opportunity to change the game slightly with his debate performance Thursday night, but with only a week left in the campaign these numbers don't bode well for the campaign.

Paper Endorsement

2008-10-27T17:15:00.002-04:00

The Times-Tribune officially endorsed Chris Carney today citing his background and ability to properly represent the district:

Mr. Carney has a particularly good background to serve in Congress. A former Penn State political science professor, he also is an active lieutenant commander in the Naval Reserve. Yet his election to Congress two years ago might well have had more to do with political serendipity — a personal scandal that crippled the candidacy of Republican incumbent Don Sherwood.

Mr. Carney has not wasted his opportunity while in office. He has honored the fundamental conservative social viewpoint that predominates in the vast district while ensuring that the region remains in play for federal development funding, defense contracts and so on. And, even though he is a freshman, he has held a seat on the powerful House Homeland Security Committee, where he has been able to employ his experience in military intelligence.

...

Both candidates are capable, but Mr. Carney’s record favors his re-election.

Hackett and Specter

2008-10-27T17:08:00.002-04:00

Arlen Specter makes a special appearance in Chris Hackett's new campaign ad. The ad argues the importance of electing Hackett to avoid a one-party hegemony. In the ad Specter states, "With Chris Hackett, we'll have a check against massive Democratic control and that's vital to our country."

This is a similar argument that the McCain campaign has been making in hopes that voters will elect him so he can provide a counterbalance.

Rock Solid

2008-10-24T17:45:00.007-04:00

New Carney ad out touting his leadership in Washington and independent credentials. Looks like the campaign wanted to add a 'feel good' spot to the repertoire before Election Day.

Chris Carney: "Rock Solid"

Of course, the reference to Carney being "effective" in the ad sources a December 12, 2007 USA Today article.

In that article, the paper makes note of Carney being effective only in terms of his ability to secure pork. He was highlighted since he got the most earmarks of any freshman representative:

Rep. Christopher Carney, D-Pa., who won in a heavily Republican district, secured the most money among the freshmen members. He was sole sponsor on 21 earmarks worth $18.2 million. That ranked him 48th among the 426 House members who requested earmarks.

Double Invitation

2008-10-24T13:25:00.003-04:00

The Sun Gazette decided to invited Chris Carney twice to their candidates' forum since he has been reluctant to accept event and debate invitations:

Candidates invited to the event are: Republican Dave Huffman and Democrat Rick Mirabito, 83rd state House; Republican E. Eugene Yaw, Democrat Louis "Trey" Casimir and Independent Michael Dincher, 23rd state Senate; U.S. Rep. Chris Carney, D-Dimick, and Republican Chris Carney, 10th Congress; and Democrat Mark McCracken, Republican Glenn Thompson and Libertarian James Fryman.

Party Ads

2008-10-23T17:03:00.003-04:00

The political parties are up with new ads in the 11th District.

The two ads have one common theme: they both focus on Paul Kanjorski.

NRCC's "Kick Out Kanjorski":

DCCC's "Paul Kanjorski Measures Up For Pennsylvania Families"

In The 11th

2008-10-23T16:45:00.004-04:00

Lou Barletta one of four featured candidates in Ken Rudin's "Political Junkie" column over on NPR:

Now on to Pennsylvania. Lou Barletta, the mayor of Hazleton, is one of the few Republican challengers to Democratic incumbents who are given a shot on Nov. 4. There are several factors that give Barletta hope. The incumbent, Paul Kanjorski, has been under fire for his role in obtaining millions of dollars in federal grants for a company owned by his relatives, a role that was investigated by the FBI. This issue has been around for years, and in fact, it was one of the things Barletta used when he ran against Kanjorski six years ago.

He lost by 13 points, but it was the 71-year-old incumbent's closest race since he was first elected in 1984. Another issue is Kanjorski's role as the second-ranking Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee and his vote for the unpopular $700 billion bailout/rescue bill of Wall Street. Barletta has been hitting the issue hard.

Barletta is also a nationally known crusader against illegal immigration, a position that has made him extremely popular in Hazleton. A Republican, Barletta also had the nomination of the Democratic Party when he was re-elected in 2007. Two years ago, Hazleton became the first town in the country to ban employers from hiring illegal immigrants, though that ordinance was overturned by a federal judge. An appeals court hearing is expected at the end of the month.

Also, the Pindell Report is now ready to say the race "Leans Republican". James Pindell's decision to move the race to the GOP side of the board has been influenced by Kanjorski losing control of his image and the failure of money in the race to impact polling numbers.

End Of The Hackett Drought

2008-10-23T16:31:00.003-04:00

Chris Hackett's campaign, after not having updated their website in almost a month, is back on the scene.

Yesterday, the campaign posted its ad which responds to Chris Carney's "despicable" tactics. This is an ad which the campaign has been airing on television.

Also, the campaign website was updated to make note of the honor Hackett received from the 60 Plus Association. The Association, led by spokesman Pat Boone, presented Hackett with the Honorary Guardian of Seniors’ Rights award:

The 60 Plus Association’s Guardian Award is presented to Democrats and Republicans in Congress based on their “senior friendly” voting records. The Honorary Award is given to those running for office and is based on their views on seniors’ issues.

Boone cited Hackett’s support for repealing the 1993 tax imposed by President Clinton on Social Security benefits, as well as Hackett’s support to repeal the ‘Death Tax’ which hurts small businesses and farmers across Pennsylvania and the country. “Chris Hackett, running for the U.S. House of Representatives for Pennsylvania’s 10th District, knows a bad tax when he sees one,” said Boone, “and the Death Tax is as bad as they come!

DCCC Gets In On The Action

2008-10-21T13:29:00.002-04:00

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has decided to also hit Hackett on the Fair Tax issue.

Not only does the ad make note of this support, but it also goes after Hackett's personal tax trouble again.

Dust Up Over Flier

2008-10-20T18:10:00.000-04:00

The Carney campaign released a flier highlighting Chris Hackett's alleged support of the Fair Tax.

The flier sparked some controversy between the two campaigns because Chris Hackett claims he has never has endorsed such a tax.

The source in question is an article from the Williamsport Sun Gazette which stated that Hackett supported a sales tax replacing income taxes. The Carney campaign upped the ante by interpreting the context to mean Hackett endorsed the Fair Tax.

A similar logic is displayed on the Carney campaign website:

Chris Hackett wants a 23% sales tax on everything you buy:

Chris Hackett told the Williamsport Sun Gazette (8/21/07) that he “favors a national sales tax to replace various other taxes that are levied against Americans.”
According to the New York Sun (ScareTax, not FairTax, 12/17/07), the FairTax does away with the income tax, corporate taxes, estate taxes and just about any other federal levy. Under the FairTax, Washington would apply a single national sales tax on purchases, whether a DVD player, or a new house. FairTax advocates tout the plan with a 23% rate….which is "inclusive," meaning that for every dollar you pay, 23 cents is tax. That translates to a 30% tax on a 77-cent expenditure—or raising gas taxes by $1 a gallon

From the Citizen's Voice:

In interviews with The Citizens’ Voice in the past several months, Hackett said he is open to ideas like a national sales tax replacing other taxes, but he has stopped short of ever endorsing those plans. Instead, Hackett has called for a flat tax and reducing of the size of the federal tax code. A flat tax would have a single tax rate for everyone regardless of income. Proponents of a flat tax plan say it would simplify the tax code and help reduce tax costs overall.

Another interesting discussion we are likely to see in the debate between the two candidates. 10 days until the showdown.

NRCC TV

2008-10-20T17:39:00.002-04:00

The National Republican Congressional Committee released a new wed ad hitting Kanjorski on his flip flopping.

Interesting selection of music...

Hackett's Website

2008-10-17T16:09:00.005-04:00

As a general observation, it would seem to me that the final 30 days in an election are the most important for a competitive campaign. Why then, after being so active earlier on, has the Hackett campaign's website remained so stagnant during the past month? It seems they haven't updated their news section since the end of September.

Any ideas?

No Forum

2008-10-17T15:47:00.005-04:00

Paul Kanjorski backed out of a forum yesterday with Lou Barletta which has caused some speculation into the reason(s) behind Kanjorski bailing at the last minute.

The two primary reasons being mentioned:

Kanjorski didn't like the combative release Barletta put our earlier in the day
Kanjorski was upset that the NAACP flier did not include him

In regards to reason #2, apparently the Monroe County NAACP was one of the sponsors of the forum between Barletta and Kanjorski and put out a flier featuring Barletta's picture with no Kanjorski image. However, the NAACP claims that Kanjorski was never firmly committed to the event and added his image to a second flier after he agreed. Then on Wednesday, Kanjorski changed his mind again leaving the forum without its billed speaker.

The Kanjorski campaign acknowledged that the flier was problematic, yet the Congressman made every attempt possible to attend the event. The campaign claims that his prior committment speaking to Obama volunteers didn't allow him to attend.

The Barletta campaign issued a stinging press release after Kanjorski backed out:

"What's the difference between Paul Kanjorski and the Cowardly Lion? Answer: the Cowardly Lion didn't funnel 10 million taxpayer dollars to his family's business.

"This is just another example of Paul Kanjorski's disrespect for the people of northeastern Pennsylvania. He takes the voters for granted and worse yet he takes their money for his cars and his gas, and to fund his family's bankrupt business. The congressman's actions speak for themselves."

Whichever side you choose to believe, pulling out 10 minutes before a scheduled event is never a good thing.

Third Quarter Fundraising

2008-10-16T17:49:00.003-04:00

The third quarter (July 1-September 30) campaign finance data is now available from the FEC.

In the 10th District, Chris Carney raised $381,151 during those three months. Over that same period, Carney spent $950,049 and ended the quarter with $581,198.

Chris Hackett raised slightly less with $351,561 while spending $591,520 and ending with $330,673 cash on hand.

In the 11th District, Paul Kanjorski spent $1.375 million for the quarter, raised $505,000, and ended with $1.35 million in cash on hand.

Barletta spent close to $480,000, raised $409,000, and ended with $250,000 on hand.

In independent expenditures, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has made the two seats a priority as they've spent $711,000 on Carney's seat and $857,000 for Kanjorski's seat. Both of which are in the Top 25 seat allocations for the Committee.

Some substantial cash disadvantages for the GOP challengers in these districts coming down the stretch.

Unfounded

2008-10-15T16:20:00.001-04:00

Breaking news from the Times Leader:

The agent in charge of the Secret Service field office in Scranton said allegations that someone yelled “kill him” when presidential hopeful Barack Obama’s name was mentioned during Tuesday’s Sarah Palin rally are unfounded.
The Scranton Times-Tribune first reported the alleged incident on its Web site Tuesday and then again in its print edition Wednesday. The first story, written by reporter David Singleton, appeared with allegations that while congressional candidate Chris Hackett was addressing the crowd and mentioned Oabama’s name a man in the audience shouted “kill him."
...
Agent Bill Slavoski said he was in the audience, along with an undisclosed number of additional secret service agents and other law enforcement officers and not one heard the comment.

Clarification From Carney Interview

2008-10-15T11:20:00.000-04:00

In his interview with Congressman Chris Carney, Gort managed to work in a question regarding the patch for the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) and pay-as-you-go (paygo) budgeting rules:

Our friend Local Values has a question on the pay go rules. The AMT patch actually violated the pay go rule and even Steny Hoyer voted against it but you voted for it. Any comment.

The pay go rule? Which one, what time? It was also part of the sweetener package in the last bailout. It did comply with pay go because they did identify the pay for in the next budget. The pay for was identified in the first one but was not identified in the bailout bill which is one of the reasons I voted against it. Values guy is wrong.

He’ll be glad to hear it.

First and foremost, I'm very thankful that Gort was able to plug one my questions into the conversation. I will likely never have the opportunity to interview these candidates so I appreciate Gort considering such a question. Second, I am grateful that the Congressman legitimately attempted to answer the question. He provided a substantive response which is very admirable in his tough reelection campaign.

However, it is important to clarify that "Values guy" is not wrong.

I will give the Congressman the benefit of the doubt that he misunderstood the statement, yet I stand by the content in my original question because everything was factually accurate.

The question that is in question:

2) As a Blue Dog Democrat, you have stated your commitment to pay-as-you-go (paygo) budgeting rules and their importance in reaching a balanced budget. However, your votes have not always reflected this as a priority. For instance, last December you voted for an un-offset Alternative Minimum Tax (H.R. 3996). This decision was a violation of paygo rules and was estimated by the CBO to cost $50 billion in 2008. Others, like Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of the Blue Dogs, refused to accept an unpaid for offset and voted against the bill. We all know that an AMT patch is an important priority for middle class taxpayers, but with deficits expected to reach record levels, what assurances can you make regarding your commitment to fiscal responsibility and the weight it will receive in your decision making?

Again, in fairness to Chris Carney, I believe he was referring to the AMT patch for the upcoming year that was just passed as an add-on to the bailout bill and not to his vote from last December as the question indicates. His vote from last December was in fact a vote in favor of waiving pay-as-you-go budget rules.

For those unfamiliar, paygo rules are budget neutral and were implemented to prevent the nation's fiscal condition from getting worse. In fact, they were instrumental in the early '90s as Congress traveled the difficult path to reach budget surpluses. The rules require that any change in taxes be offset with either spending cuts or increased taxes elsewhere. Since Congress continues to enact AMT patches on an annual basis to prevent the middle-class from getting hit, the patches are subject to paygo rules and are expected to be offset.

Last year, the House successfully passed two versions of the AMT with offsets. However, in the Senate it was amended and stripped of the offsets. This was a violation (or waiving) of paygo rules.

Before the Senate amended the legislation, Congressman Carney stated in a press release:

"I came to Congress with a goal of providing middle class tax relief. I was proud to vote for this fiscally responsible legislation to provide middle income families relief from the Alternative Minimum Tax. This legislation adheres to the pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) standard of fiscal discipline, I am a firm believer that Congress must not continue to pass more debt onto our grandchildren"

However, the bill was without revenue-raising offsets after the actions in the Senate. Majority Leader Steny Hoyer highlighted this on December 18, 2007 after the events played out in the Senate:

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer released the following statement tonight after Senate Republicans blocked for a second time a fiscally responsible patch of the Alternative Minimum Tax. Senate Democrats again supported the House-passed fiscally responsible AMT bill: ...

"House and Senate Democrats have tried twice this year to enact responsible legislation that would protect 23 million Americans from the AMT while not adding to the deficit by closing unfair tax loopholes for the wealthiest Americans. Republicans in the Senate blocked each bill, while the President bolstered their fiscal irresponsibility by threatening vetoes."

When the bill came back to the House after it was amended in the Senate, Hoyer voted against the un-offset bill to prove a point. Carney, on the other hand, did not. Both are members of the Blue Dog Coalition, yet Hoyer believed it was more important to do the fiscally responsible thing while Carney placed a greater emphasis on passing an AMT patch before Congress adjourned.

From a CNN story recapping the vote:

The House on Wednesday voted in favor (352-64) of a one-year AMT "patch" that the Senate had already approved earlier this month...it's the first time House Democrats gave the nod to a "clean" bill, meaning it has no provisions to pay for the patch's estimated $53 billion price tag.

In no way was the original question meant to be a "gotcha" moment. Rather, something I believe that voters should seriously consider when casting their ballot in November. In a situation like last December, we should know how much emphasis the Congressman will put on fiscal responsibility. It is easy to support doing the right thing in the abstract, but difficult situations will arise when two conflicting priorities collide. That is the nature of Congress. In this case, it was an extension of the AMT patch (which everyone acknowledges to be a necessity) and a $50 billion unfunded liability. As I tried to point out in the original question, how much emphasis will fiscal responsibility receive when you cast your vote.

I felt it was important to make this clarification for the readers of this blog in order to defend its integrity.

Kanjorski Center Likely Leased

2008-10-14T12:52:00.003-04:00

On Monday night, the Luzerne County Community College Board voted to accept a contract which would effectively allow them to lease the Kanjorski Center in Nanticoke.

The proposed seven-year contact, which could be finalized in 10 days, would pay the Nanticoke Housing Authority close to $300,000 a year in addition to utility expenses. The Luzerne County Community College plans to use the facility to expand their health services department.

Of course, the Nanticoke Municipal Authority still must agree to finalize the deal, but they are expected to meet later this week to tackle the subject.

Precept Associates of Hanover Township--which was awarded a controversial no-bid contract that was not reviewed by the LCCC solicitor -- will head up renovations on the Kanjorski Center.

Don't Forget Paul

2008-10-13T17:19:00.003-04:00

While yesterday's event in Scranton with Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden was focused on Barack Obama's presidential bid, local races managed to weave their way into the discourse.

During his portion of the presentation, former President Clinton highlighted Paul Kanjorski's tough race with Lou Barletta.

From the Times Leader:

President Clinton found time to ask the crowd to support U.S. Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski, who is facing a challenge from Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta in the 11th Congressional District.

“Folks, Paul Kanjorski’s got a tough race,” he said. “He’s got a tough race because some people in his district believe that illegal immigration is a bigger cause of their economic problems than President Bush’s economic policies. I got news for them and I’ve got news for you – you need to help him get re-elected.”

Endorsements

2008-10-13T15:22:00.002-04:00

Running list of endorsements garnered by candidates in the 10th:

Chris Carney: National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare; International Association of Fire Fighters; National Farmers Union PAC; Pennsylvania AFL-CIO; Pennsylvania Narcotics Officers Association; Service Employees International Union Pennsylvania State Council; Sierra Club’s Pennsylvania Chapter; United Mine Workers of America; Action Committee for Rural Electrification; The Council of Prison Locals of the American Federation of Government Employees; sheriffs in Lackawanna, Northumberland, Columbia and Montour counties; and Montour County Commissioner Jack Gerst.

Chris Hackett: Club for Growth; US Chamber of Commerce; Business and Industry PAC; Eagle Forum PA; Concerned Women for America; National Right to Life Committee PAC; Gun Owners of America; Council for Citizens Against Government Waste PAC.

Notably absent from that list of endorsements is the NRA, which in the 10th District is pretty substantial. The NRA rates Carney with a "B" and Hackett with an "A". However, the NRA notes that even though Hackett receives the higher grade his only criteria for the grade comes from a survey he filled out before the election.

Although the NRA has not officially endorsed a candidate, it has contributed to Carney's reelection PAC which his campaign has interpreted to mean they are officially supporting him.

From the "Hack Fact Check" portion of his website:

The National Rifle Association supports Carney:

The National Rifle Association PAC is supporting only one candidate in the PA-10 race: Chris Carney. The NRA PAC donated $1,000 to Carney’s re-election (opensecrets.org/pacs).

DCCC Ad

2008-10-13T15:17:00.001-04:00

Most recent DCCC ad in the 10th hammers Hackett's personal investments in big oil.

Friday Notes

2008-10-10T17:20:00.000-04:00

-PolitickerMD notes a stop in the 10th District next week from House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. Hoyer, a fellow Blue Dog Democrat, aims to help Chris Carney's reelection bid.

-During an event at the National Press Club with DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen, Republican strategist and retiring Rep. Tom Davis explictly stated the 11th District as a toss-up election the GOP is banking on to break their way.

Poll Part II

2008-10-10T16:49:00.004-04:00

The DCCC released its second poll showing Paul Kanjorski ahead of Lou Barletta by 8 points. This poll had Kanjorski polling at 47% and Barletta at 39%.

Of course, this directly contradicts Lou Barletta's new poll this week.

From PolitickerPA:

But once again, the DCCC released almost no details about the poll, making any assessment of its veracity difficult.

In both cases, the DCCC polls were released after surveys showed Kanjorski trailing Barletta. In September, a Franklin & Marshall College poll had Kanjorski trailing Barletta by nine points, prompting release of a DCCC poll claiming a Kanjorski lead of the same margin.

This week, the DCCC poll came on the heels of an internal Barletta poll showing Kanjorski trailing by 8 points.

Funny polling on the part of the DCCC? All sounds like a lame attempt by Kanjorski to rebut every poll by Barletta, but you be the judge.

The Tax Twins

2008-10-09T14:40:00.003-04:00

Freedom's Watch goes after Chris Carney and Paul Kanjorski with a new web ad calling them the "taxing twins."

Transcribed:

"The economy in turmoil, jobs lost, 401(k)s down, but it would be much worse if Paul Kanjorski and Chris Carney had their way. They've been like taxing twins. Both supported big tax increases two years in a row. One would be the largest in our history. Higher taxes on married couples, people with children, retirement savings, even the death tax. Tell Kanjorski and Carney that higher taxes are not the answer, especially now."

10th District Poll

2008-10-09T12:05:00.000-04:00

The most recent poll surveying the congressional race in the 10th District shows Chris Carney ahead of Chris Hackett by 14 points.

F&M College/Times-Shamrock (Sept. 30 – Oct 5)
Sample Size = 713
Carney – 39%
Hackett – 25%
Undecided – 36%
*Margin of Error - 3.6%

Problably the most interesting feature of that survey is the undecided group. The fact that undecided voters almost polled higher than Carney did says a lot about the race.

Terry Madonna, who directed the F&M poll, noted that several factors appear to be contributing to the large undecided portion. While Carney being a freshman contributes to some uncertainty about his record, the Republican base seems to be unsure about Hackett (likely due to the divisive primary) and reluctant to decide. Said Madonna, "If these numbers showed Hackett with 80 percent support among Republicans, this thing would be over. That’s not what we’re seeing … He seems to have a problem with his base."

In fact, the poll shows that Hackett is only receiving 43% support from the Republican party with 39% undecided and 17% going to Carney.

The top three issues reflected in the poll were the economy, government & politicians, and taxes. Of those three issues, Hackett only pulled ahead of Carney on taxes with Carney dominating Hackett on the most important issue (the economy).

Mark Harris, Hackett's campaign manager, deflected the poll's results by revealing Hackett's internal polls portray a much closer race. Of course, I recall Dan Meuser touting internal polls which placed him ahead of Hackett right before election day.

However, National Journal's Tim Sahd agreed with Harris: "This is one that is just going to break late. If this is going to break for Republicans, it is going to break because of national politics … not because Carney has made a mistake or Hackett has identified a weakness in Carney. This is going to be a late bloomer."

[SIDE NOTE: I tend to enjoy polls and following them so I created a new poll tracking feature on the right sidebar. Suggestions welcome.]

Chris Taxitt

2008-10-09T10:41:00.001-04:00

In case you had no clue that Chris Hackett avoided paying his taxes, Chris Carney's new ad seeks to remind you.

New Barletta Poll

2008-10-08T12:10:00.000-04:00

Lou Barletta released another internal poll showing him ahead of Paul Kanjorski.

Oct. 2, 2008 (400 likely voters)
-Barletta -- 47%
-Kanjorski -- 39%
-Undecided -- 13%
*Margin of Error -- 4.9%

Ed Mitchell responded by saying, "While Lou Barletta viciously and personally attacks Paul Kanjorski, the congressman has been doing his job and trying to fix the economy – an economy that is the way it is because Barletta worked twice to elect George Bush and still supports his disastrous policies that have led to today’s economic meltdown. A vote for Barletta is a vote for continuing these bankrupt Bush policies: tax cuts for the wealthy, outsourcing our jobs overseas and no tax on the windfall profits of oil companies."

Questions For Carney

2008-10-07T17:45:00.000-04:00

Gort will be sitting down for an interview with Chris Carney this Thursday, and since he asked for questions, I feel obligated to give him some.

In no particular order:

1) You have accused your opponent Chris Hackett of "scaring" seniors when he discussed reforming Social Security. However, according to the most recent Trustees report, Social Security will begin to run cash deficits within the next ten years. You have openly affirmed your commitment to continuing the promised level of benefits for Social Security; I have interpreted this to mean you refuse to look at recalculating benefits (i.e. price indexing as opposed to wage indexing). If you are opposed to adjusting Social Security benefits, then what do you propose on the tax side that would produce actuarial solvency over the next 75 years?

2) As a Blue Dog Democrat, you have stated your commitment to pay-as-you-go (paygo) budgeting rules and their importance in reaching a balanced budget. However, your votes have not always reflected this as a priority. For instance, last December you voted for an un-offset Alternative Minimum Tax (H.R. 3996). This decision was a violation of paygo rules and was estimated by the CBO to cost $50 billion in 2008. Others, like Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of the Blue Dogs, refused to accept an unpaid for offset and voted against the bill. We all know that an AMT patch is an important priority for middle class taxpayers, but with deficits expected to reach record levels, what assurances can you make regarding your commitment to fiscal responsibility and the weight it will receive in your decision making?

3) In your 2006 debate, you criticized Don Sherwood on the issue of Iraq by arguing that Congress should not be the "legislative arm" of the executive and rubber stamp funding. Yet, once you got to Congress you have stated that you are proud to fund the war without preconditions. Is it possible to reconcile these two statements?

4) With 1 in 150 children developing autism in this county, you made it a priority in your freshman term to address this worthy initiative by joining the Coalition for Autism Research and Education and the Congressional Autism Caucus. While the CDC and others in the scientific community have established that there is no causation between vaccines and autism, you appear to remain open to a possible link. Can you clarify your position on the autism--specifically as it relates to vaccines?

5) When you voted for the farm bill this spring, you qualified your support by stating "family farming is not a partisan issue." Yet, 10% of the farms receiving agricultural support from the federal government account for 75% of the money. You have noted the importance of bringing federal money back to invest in the district, and with over 50,000 farms in the district, agriculture is an important issue. Do you support reforming agricultural subsidies, or at least readjusting them so that more "family farms" in the district get a better proportion?

Hackett Debates Carney Substitute

2008-10-06T17:00:00.001-04:00

While Carney may be avoiding debate opportunities with Chris Hackett, Daniel Roberts is not.

On Sunday, Hackett was taking prepared questions from a moderator at the Temple Ohev Shalom in Williamsport. Carney could not make the event because he had a scheduling conflict. However, Democratic chairman Jessie Bloom noted that recent high-school graduate Daniel Roberts--a field coordinator in Lycoming and Union county--was in attendance and representing Carney. While Roberts did not technically "stand-in" for Carney, he attempted to clarify Hackett's claims as they pertain to Carney's record.

Threat

2008-10-06T16:40:00.004-04:00

Chris Carney's new ad "Threat." After highlighting Chris Hackett's immigration problem in a recent ad, Carney's new ad aims to reinforce his credentials on the topic.

Carney's Poll

2008-10-03T15:05:00.000-04:00

Another Momentum Analysis poll out of the Carney campaign shows the incumbent with a hefty lead.

The new poll, which sampled 400 likely voters, reflects a 14% advantage for Chris Carney.

Momentum Analysis (Sept 29-Oct 1)
Carney - 50% (Favorable 51% vs. Unfavorable 24%)
Hackett - 36% (Favorable 31% vs. Unfavorable 34%)
*Margin of Error -- 4.9%

Last month's Momentum Analysis poll showed Carney with a 27% advantage. However, much of this has dissapated and Hackett has essentially cut Carney's lead in half over the course of a month.

Bringing The Wood

2008-10-03T14:59:00.001-04:00

New Chris Carney ad on Hackett's immigration problem.

Social Security Issue

2008-10-02T17:40:00.001-04:00

It appears the issue of Social Security has reared its ugly head again in the 10th District race.

Chris Carney used the recent downturn in the stock market as a way to highlight the risk involved with Chris Hackett's private accounts:

"My opponent, for example, wanted to base Social Security in the stock market. What a disastrous plan that would be," Carney said. "To privatize Social Security on top of something like this would just be ruinous. I think plans of privatization, especially based on the stock market, have been disproven now."

Hackett was forced to clarify his position and noted that he would not change benefit calculations for those close to retirement. Instead, he would phase in a private account system for young workers. Hackett further distanced himself by stating, "I think it's pretty clear that he's trying to misrepresent my position. It's a scare tactic, which is pretty typical of a guy like Chris Carney."

Connecting Hackett to drastic Social Security reform is something Carney has been trying to do from the beginning. It was one of the first policy points Carney issued against Hackett and continues to do with the Club For Growth references.

One thing that I'm not clear on about Hackett's plan involves carve-out or add-on accounts. The carve-out account approach is more what the Club For Growth lobbyies for which would replace existing benefits. Whereas an optional add-on account would be used to supplement benefits. Of course, the add-on approach would function as an additional tax which I'm sure is not a big selling point to Hackett. Carney sounds more like an add-on guy by stating he would support an opportunity for investment but not a change in the benefit system.

Questions Anyone?

2008-10-02T16:48:00.003-04:00

I have a great appreciation for the Wayne Independent. They probably realize there is not going to be another debate between Carney and Hackett, but they are going about business like the event is official.

For weeks, Steve Fountain been trying to get Chris Carney to agree to a second debate. Even though Carney has not officially responded to the invitation, the paper is now accepting questions to be asked at the debate:

Questions can be submitted to Wayne Independent Publisher Steve Fountain by fax at (570) 251-9910; by e-mail at sfountain@wayneindependent.com; or dropped off at the Wayne Independent office, 220 8th St., Honesdale. Questions may also be submitted at the event.

If Carney doesn't show, the event will simply be two 45-minute "Q&A" sessions with Chris Hackett who has agreed to attend. In the first 45-minute session, Hackett will take prepared questions from the moderator. Following a short break, Hackett will return for another session and take questions submitted from readers and audience members.

An hour and a half alone on stage might make for a long night.

Still Opposes

2008-10-02T16:39:00.004-04:00

Chris Hackett said he still opposes the financial rescue measure which will likely come before the House tomorrow.

Even though new additions were put into the Senate bill--including another annual patch for the AMT, extension of popular tax deductions, and tax breaks for victims of natural disasters--Hackett stated he would still vote against the measure.

In a written statement, Hackett declared: "The new bailout bill is in some ways worse than the first one. They added a bunch of special interest spending to entice more politicians to support it. But the bottom line is this still puts taxpayers at massive risk and doesn't fix the underlying cause of the crisis."

The Bailout Effect

2008-10-02T14:01:00.003-04:00

Politico has an article up today entitled "The Risks of Being A Yes Man," in reference to some members in competitive seats voting in the affirmative for the bailout.

One of the eight men on their list is Paul Kanjorski:

Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski (D-Pa.)

Kanjorski is in perhaps his toughest race since winning his seat in 1984, troubled by what Real Clear Politics called “ethics issues, questionable earmarks and an unremarkable record.”

And no matter what he did, he stood to lose, at least in political terms. As chairman of the House subcommittee on capital markets — and one who had taken a lead role in negotiating the proposed Wall Street bailout — Kanjorski couldn’t exactly vote no without risking widespread derision.

But by voting yes, he exposed himself to criticism from his Republican opponent, Hazleton, Pa., Mayor Lou Barletta, who indicated Monday that he would not have voted for the rescue bill.

The one saving grace for Kanjorski may be Barletta’s seemingly contradictory approach to the bailout issue. On Sept. 25, Barletta appeared to support a bailout in comments to a Scranton Times-Tribune reporter.

“At least we know where Congressman Kanjorski stands,” said Kanjorski campaign spokesman Ed Mitchell. “We never know where Mr. Barletta stands; he plays to the crowd.”

New Poll

2008-09-30T13:30:00.002-04:00

The Lycoming College Polling Institute released its first poll for the 10th Congressional District.

The poll sampled 460 likely voters and found that Chris Carney (45.7%) holds a ten-point lead over Chris Hackett (36.1%). The margin of error for the poll being 4.6%. The Institute's Director Jonathan Williamson added that Carney's efforts to build support among Republicans and Independents appears to be paying dividends.

Just looking through some of the polls that Lycoming put out in the 2006 race:

September '06 (804 likely voters):
Carney -- 46.7%
Sherwood -- 38.2%
Undecided -- 14.7%
*Margin of Error -- 3.5%

October '06 (643 likely voters):
Carney -- 47%
Sherwood -- 38.4%
Undecided -- 14.6%
*Margin of Error -- 3.9%

Of course, the '06 race turned out to break 53% to 47% in Carney's direction. Therefore, the two polls that Lycoming put out before the race were statistically correct in their victory margin for Carney (assuming the margin of error).

It has to frustrating for the Hackett campaign to square this poll with the Survey USA poll which showed a statistical dead heat in the race. Essentially a month after that poll, with further expectiations building for a Republican upset, the new Lycoming poll shows Hackett to be in the same statistical position that Sherwood was in two-years ago.

However, two points to keep in mind. First, Don Sherwood was not able to make up any ground on Carney largely due to self-inflicted wounds (i.e. his affair and abuse allegations) whereas Hackett is relatively new to the political scene and has wild card ability to change the race dynamics in the next month.

Second point of consideration, the number of undecided voters is larger in this poll than it was in 2006. Mark Harris is correct in noting that Hackett still has five weeks until election day to get his message out, and it could be that those five weeks that make or break the Hackett campaign. Assuming the polling percentages are firm, Hackett would need to woo 8 out of every 10 undecided voters in the district. May seem like a tall order, but in a district that is relatively heavy in the Republican department, you have to appreciate--if not like--your campaign odds.

Vote Reaction

2008-09-30T09:05:00.000-04:00

I'm sure you have heard enough, but some reaction to yesterday's bailout vote:

Carney: "I could not vote for a measure that bails out years of unmitigated Wall Street failings at the expense of our hardworking taxpayers. This bailout bill does not provide any source of revenue to pay for its enormous costs, which is not fair to our middle class families that have played by the rules, but are struggling to keep up with the rising costs of their daily expenses. Where is their bailout? It allows the payment of regular inflated salaries to executives of bailed-out firms. Any executive that feels his bonus is too low can ask his firm for a multi-million dollar increase in base salary that is simply unacceptable to the taxpayers who are shouldering the burden of paying for Wall Street’s greed. This type of tough legislation requires genuine oversight in the process. As it stands now, the oversight board can make suggestions for improvements, but has no means to enforce them. We need tough regulations with real teeth. We need to assess the current situation and thoughtfully consider long-term solutions to stabilize our economy, not pass hurried legislation. It might calm the markets today, but the underlying problems remain. We cannot allow Wall Street to borrow its way out of the current fiscal mess. I could not support this legislation, nor could I support measures to allow Congress to adjourn when it is clear that more work needs to be done to ensure the stability of our nation’s economy."

Peterson: "Having served in the United State Congress for six terms - 12 years - this was one of the toughest votes in my legislative career. My decision to cast a vote in favor of this economic rescue package was a decision that I wrestled with for days, and today reluctantly supported... The option to support or oppose this legislation in my eyes is the difference between possible success and driving further into a recession. While this legislation did not guarantee stabilization of the financial markets, it was the only solution on the table to address a looming crisis....Let me be clear, the legislation that was voted on today (Monday) was not the Bush Administration proposal, rather, it was a bipartisan compromise that protected the taxpayer by eliminating excessive executive pay and so called golden parachutes and was designed so that Wall Street, not Main Street, would be responsible for any potential losses."

Kanjorski: "Today the House of Representatives voted down the economic recovery plan that the President, Treasury Secretary Paulson, and bipartisan leaders in both the House and Senate told us was necessary to avoid the collapse of the American economy. People must understand that we are not bailing out Wall Street; we are rescuing the middle class on Main Street. Congress must get this job done no matter how long it takes. It is my hope that over the next several days we can all work together to agree upon a plan which puts the interests of average Americans first, as their retirement savings, pensions, and investments continue to dwindle by the minute. Already I have spoken with local businesspeople who are having difficulty obtaining credit to cover their payrolls or borrow money to expand their operations. Unless we unfreeze our credit markets very quickly, these problems will only increase. I will work for as long as it takes until we are able to reach a majority to enact legislation which both protects American taxpayers and stabilizes the American economy."

The challengers:

Barletta: "I like that the bailout bill included some punishment for failed CEOs. But the bailout bill doesn’t include a clear call for an independent investigation into why this happened, which is what I called for from the beginning."

Hackett: "[While glad Carney voted against it] But let’s not be fooled; Chris Carney has voted for numerous corporate welfare handouts, including $25 billion for the auto industry just last week. I wish Carney would side with taxpayers when the public spotlight isn’t on him and an election is right around the corner."

[As a side note, The Hill had an interesting article yesterday--which specifically referred to the 10th District--on how challengers in competitive races (as well as open-seat candidates) were quick and early to offer up hard "no's" on the financial rescue measures while vulnerable incumbents were forced to ponder their vote, but eventually succumbed to the political pressure. ]

Bailout Vote

2008-09-29T15:00:00.000-04:00

The financial rescue measure failed in the House this afternoon by a vote of 205-228.

Along the Pennsylvania delegation line, the vote was pretty split with the majority--ten members--voting against it. The only Republican who voted for it was John Peterson:

Brady (D-1st): Yes
Fattah (D-2nd): Yes
English (R-3rd): No
Altmire (D-4th): No
Peterson (R-5th): Yes
Gerlach (R-6th): No
Sestak (D-7th): Yes
Murphy (D-8th): Yes
Shuster (R-9th): No
Carney (D-10th): No
Kanjorski (D-11th): Yes
Murtha (D-12th): Yes
Schwartz (D-13th): Yes
Doyle (D-14th): Yes
Dent (R-15th): No
Pitts (R-16th): No
Holden (D-17th): No
Murphy (R-18th): No
Platts (R-19th): No

Club For Growth Ad

2008-09-25T15:58:00.011-04:00

Today, The Club For Growth put out an ad attacking Chris Carney.

Of course, these are the attacks that Carney has fought to correct. Last week, the Daily Item had a story entitled "What is your opponent saying about you that is untrue?".

The Hackett campaign responded by hammering home the earmark issue:

“By stopping the corrupt earmark system, we will save the taxpayers of our district from having to pay for a Mule Museum in California, a Lobster Institute in Maine and thousands of other wasteful projects all across the country that Chris Carney has supported because of his allegiance to the pork spending system.”

However, Carney responded by trying to correct the tax issue:

“Taxes: The truth is, Carney has fought for middle-class tax cuts, and across-the-board tax cuts for small businesses and veterans. He introduced Made in America tax cuts for manufacturers and businesses aimed at keeping and creating jobs right here in America. Hackett called the bill a campaign gimmick instead of acknowledging the bill’s bipartisan support and the need for Congress to do everything in its power to stimulate and strengthen our economy. Carney also introduced the Caregiver Tax Credit — which allows families to better take care of aging relatives; tax cuts for veterans and military families, and has voted for tax cuts for small businesses and the middle class including a fix for the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). The only taxes Chris Hackett wants to cut are those for millionaires — like the ones he pays.”

Update On Carney Autism Briefing

2008-09-25T12:50:00.007-04:00

It appears Chris Carney (or staffer) did not attend the Rep. Maloney's vaccine-autism briefing.

The sign-in sheet does show that staffers from other PA delegation offices were in attendance:

Robert Brady (D-1st)
Charlie Dent (R-15th)
John Murtha (D-12th)
Todd Russell Platts (R-19th)
Bill Shuster (R-9th)

On The Bailout

2008-09-25T12:32:00.004-04:00

Daily Item article regarding Carney and Hackett on the financial rescue.

Carney argues that the bailout must include more regulation, federal oversight, insurance against executive compensation, and protection for homeowners. Said Carney, “Most of us are not inclined to give a blank check to (Treasury Secretary Henry) Paulson on his word of ‘Trust me’.”

Hackett was also skeptical that the bailout could end the financial crisis on its own, but made reference to the budgetary implications by stating that “some types of actions would make our long-term economic outlook much worse, and should be rejected."

The 5 Hackett Principles for any bailout package

Guarantees that if these bailouts are successful, any taxpayer cost would be offset by returns that return to taxpayers rather than company executives and shareholders;

Reform of government policies that contributed to the financial meltdown, including terminating Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s status as Government Sponsored Enterprises, to prevent the kinds of high-risk mortgages that led to the current crisis.

Structure multiple entities (a minimum of five) to compete for the purchase of troubled assets, limited to residential home mortgages. Rather than Treasury Department control, have an independent board of directors who report quarterly to Congress on progress and results.

Do not allow the current crisis to be used as an excuse to push additional special-interest corporate bailouts that have no comparable systemic economic implications, such as the $25 billion being requested by the auto industry.

Reduce tax burdens on investments and real estate to attract new private capital to U.S. markets, thereby relieving the pressure to call upon taxpayers to provide public capital.

Lot of Trust Involved

2008-09-24T17:50:00.003-04:00

From Peter Orszag's--Congressional Budget Office Director--testimony today before the House Budget Committee regarding the budgetary implications of the proposed bailout:

"At this time, given the lack of specificity regarding how the program would be implemented and even what asset classes would be purchased, CBO cannot provide a meaningful estimate of the ultimate net cost of the Administration’s proposal. The Secretary would have the authority to purchase virtually any asset, at any price, and sell it at any future date; the lack of specificity regarding how that authority would be implemented makes it impossible at this point to provide a quantitative analysis of the net cost to the federal government."

Furthermore:

"CBO expects that the Treasury would probably fully use its $700 billion authority in fiscal year 2009 to purchase various troubled assets. To finance those purchases, the Treasury would have to sell debt to the public. Federal debt held by the public would therefore initially rise by about $700 billion. Nevertheless, CBO expects that, over time, the net cash disbursements under the program would be substantially less than $700 billion, because, ultimately, the government would sell the acquired assets and thus generate income that would offset at least much of the initial cost."

Added cost:

"In addition to any net gain or loss on the purchase of $700 billion or more in assets, the government would also incur significant administrative costs for the proposed program. Those costs would depend on what kinds of assets were purchased. On the basis of the costs incurred by private investment firms that acquire, manage, and sell similar assets, CBO expects that the administrative costs of operating the program could amount to a few billion dollars per year, as long as the government held all or most of the purchased assets."

Some food for thought...

Where Is Carney On Autism?

2008-09-19T22:20:00.002-04:00

The Age of Autism is reporting that Chris Carney will be attending Rep. Carolyn Maloney's (D-NY) briefing on vaccines and autism this coming Wednesday.

Rep. Maloney has long been focused on autism, and her intention to address autism is certainly admirable--one that most members of Congress have not highlighted. Yet, Maloney has been fighting the wrong team on this issue by continuing to attack vaccines and encouraging parents to question their effects. Maloney has said, "I remain committed to passing vaccine safety legislation and to fighting to ensure that the voices of all the parents and children who participated in today’s rally [Green Our Vaccines Rally] are heard within the halls of Congress."

In the scientific community, study after study (also good information here) has demonstrated that there is no causal relationship between vaccines and autism.

From the CDC's own website:

"Many studies have looked at whether there is a relationship between vaccines and autism. The weight of the evidence indicates that vaccines are not associated with autism."

The questioning of vaccines by prominent leaders and groups in the autism circle appears to have already produced unintended, negative consequences. For instance, take the recent outbreak of measles across the country, infecting 131 children to date, over half of whom were not vaccinated by their parents. Even though the MMR vaccine is proven to have no connection to autism in children, resident experts largely cited parents concerns about autism with their failure to get children vaccinated.

This is not productive to the overall autism debate. While this debate has been settled in the scientific arena, it is still causing damage to our children's health.

I would be extremely interested in hearing more about Chris Carney's views on this issue because it is important and largely underdiscussed.

Carney's website makes note of the fact that he is committed "to increase research funding and raise awareness of autism." I would argue that if Carney is earnestly trying to help on this issue, he must break from the Maloney crowd and take this issue in a different direction rather than rehashing debates of the past.

Second Scandal Is The Charm

2008-09-18T10:40:00.001-04:00

Republicans are going back after local lawmakers for their connections to Charlie Rangel.

Back in July, the NRCC targeted Democrats who had received money from Charlie Rangel after the story broke regarding his four rent stabilized apartments. Chris Hackett attempted to highlight the scandel further by issuing a press release using Chris Carney's hypocracy against him (i.e. Carney's 2006 call for Sherwood to return money he received from Tom Delay).

Now, a new Charlie Rangel scandal is brewing due to his tax trouble and failure to disclose rental income coming from a Dominican Republic villa he owns.

The NRCC is back hammering the Rangel connections to Carney and Kanjorski.

Carney has received more $21,000 from Rangel's political PACs since 2006 while Kanjorski has received $14,000 this election cycle.

Ken Spain (Press Secretary for the NRCC) said, "When it comes to standing by corrupt politicians, it appears that Paul Kanjorski and Chris Carney have a lot in common. Even the liberal New York Times has called for Charlie Rangel to step down, but neither Kanjorski nor Carney is willing to give up the tens of thousands of dollars in cash that they have pocketed."

However, the Carney campaign responded by saying it will wait until it has more information. Vince Rongione (Carney campaign spokesman) stated, "We will not take any action, except to say that elected officials should be held to a higher standard and it is up to the voters in his district to decide."

The Kanjorski camp took a more offensive approach by citing Barletta's own dirty money from Ted Stevens, which it has previously drawn attention to.

The Palin Effect In PA

2008-09-16T17:27:00.001-04:00

PolitickerPA reports some rejuvenated expectations coming from state GOP chair Bob Gleason:

Republicans nationally and in Pennsylvania tout the energy vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin has injected in the GOP base.

On Tuesday, it caused state party Chairman Bob Gleason to make a bold prediction: Republicans will win back "four or five" congressional seats in the Keystone State.

It seems Gleason explicitly referred to the 10th (Hackett over Carney), the 11th (Barletta over Kanjorski) and the 7th (Williams over Sestak).

I'm sure if Gleason is including Craig Williams over Sestak, he is also banking on Tom Manion over Patrick Murphy in the 8th.

Those four seats would deliver Gleason his prediction assuming they all come through.

However, Gleason doesn't expand on why--or at least the article doesn't mention his reasoning--the Palin pick has the potential to be such a game changer in Pennsylvania aside from the recent injection of energy into the base. It is hard to imagine renewed energy alone delivering those two seats in the Philly corner of the state.

Wayne Independent Encounrages More Debates

2008-09-15T16:30:00.004-04:00

The publisher of the Wayne Independent, Steve Fountain, issued an open letter to both Chris Carney and Chris Hackett last Friday.

In his letter, Mr. Fountain stated that his efforts to obtain more debates for the voters of the 10th District have been stonewalled by one side--obviously, the party in question is Chris Carney even though Fountain never explicitly states this fact.

However, Fountain presents a fairly compelling argument for why the Wayne Independent provides the ideal backdrop for an additional debate:

"Democracy needs more than what voters have received thus far from both sides: advertising blitzes, sound bites and single-candidate controlled “listening sessions” or “town hall meetings” or whatever may be the latest warm-and-fuzzy campaign jargon for such one-sided events.

Democracy needs open, vigorous debates - plural, not singular -- highlighted by face-to-face meetings.

The Wayne Independent was founded 130 years ago to provide an independent voice amid the partisan rancor of two rival publications.

I humbly draw upon this tradition and history in offering to host a debate."

Of course, this debate issue is still a sensitive topic to Carney. In fact, Carney released a new ad aimed at controlling the damage of Hackett's recent charge against Carney by claiming it is really Hackett who is manipulating the truth.

Hackett was the first one to respond to Fountain's open letter with an authoritative "yes." No word from the Carney campaign.

The Carney campaign may be too busy celebrating the good news it received on Monday when Hillary Clinton announced she would be supporting Carney. Clinton will be sending out E-mails highlighting important races for Democrats across the country. In her first E-mail to supporters, Clinton will include Carney as one of the four candidates detailed. The E-mail will also coincide with the release of her HillPac candidates (coming soon).

More Regarding Debates In The 10th

2008-09-10T14:05:00.005-04:00

Chris Hackett released his third general election ad against Chris Carney.

The ad, appropriately called "Debate," focuses on Carney's refusal to accept additional debates against Hackett.

The Carney campaign thought the ad distorted the Congressman's record and Carney campaign manager Vincent Rongione stated, "Unfortunately, this is exactly what we have come to expect from our challenger, a campaign of lies and distortions. This is a desperate attack from a typical negative politician who will say anything to try and get elected, including statements which he knows to be false."

Hackett campaign manager Mark Harris responded by saying, "If Carney dislikes the ad, all he has to do is agree to debates, and we will gladly take the ad off the air."

Seems like a political win-win situation for the Hackett campaign. Either Carney agrees to more debates and Hackett gets his way or Hackett continues to use the issue to hammer home his message that "Washington" Carney is out of touch with the district.

Competitive Races

2008-09-08T11:26:00.003-04:00

RealClearPolitics rates the congressional races in the 10th and 11th Districts among the top 25 most competitive races in the country:

Kanjorski vs. Barletta:

11. Pennsylvania 11 -- Kanjorski (D) -- Ethics issues, questionable earmarks and an unremarkable record, coupled with a near-celebrity opponent, put Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D) atop national Republicans' target list. Kanjorski hasn't faced a real race in decades, and John McCain is likely to win the Scranton-based district, aiding Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta (R). It's one race in which the "change" mantra may benefit Republicans.

Carney vs. Hackett:

16. Pennsylvania 10 -- Carney (D): Rep. Christopher Carney represents a Northeast Pennsylvania district that gave President Bush 60% of the vote in 2004, and where Barack Obama did notably poorly in the state's April primary. That's not a recipe for success for a Democrat, especially one who won by challenging an incumbent with serious personal problems. Republicans are enthusiastic about businessman Chris Hackett (R), who won a competitive primary.

The Candidates and Education

2008-09-08T11:23:00.003-04:00

Times Leader has an in-depth look at the candidates and the issue of education:

Paul Kanjorski
Democrat

11th Congressional District

• Supports an increased focus on math and science

• Favors improving early childhood education, expanding literacy programs through school library systems, and helping provide funding to modernize schools

• Supports (and co-sponsored) legislation to fund school modernization projects and improve student literacy

• Supports legislation (which he introduced) to address the credit crunch to help make sure that student loans are available

Lou Barletta

Republican

11th Congressional District

• Says the No Child Left Behind legislation had good intentions but said the bill is not working

• Favors a bipartisan solution to the education system

• Cites an innovative program used in the Hazleton Area School District called Partners in Education, which brings together school administrators, teachers and employers and teaches topics such as math and history as well as skills considered essential by local employers

Chris Carney

Democrat

10th Congressional District

• Says “teaching to the test is wrong”

• Supports (and authored) legislation that ensures students are evaluated for consecutive years rather than annually measuring entire grades

• Supports early childhood education such as Head Start, Reading is Fundamental and the Striving Readers Act

• Vows to fight to protect programs such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which provides funds to states for the education of children with disabilities

Chris Hackett

Republican

10th Congressional District

• Will work to make college affordable for working families

• Favors local control over federal control and will oppose increased federal regulation and mandates on local schools

• Supports giving maximum opportunities to parents to choose the school that is best for their children, rather than having government dictate to parents which schools their children must attend

"Fight With Me"

2008-09-05T09:00:00.004-04:00

John McCain's acceptance speech from last night

Also, former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge's speech:

It seemed McCain made a strong attempt to invoke his 2000 "Maverick" image as the candidate willing to tackle the big issues with little regard for political party. Perhaps most impressive, he told the party some things it needed to hear.

The last two minutes of the speech where he begins reciting "Fight With Me" provides a great soundbite with him speaking over the crowd's applause.

New Carney Ads

2008-09-03T22:20:00.001-04:00

Two new Chris Carney advertisements: "Coupons" and "Kids".

"Coupons" discusses Carney's personal experience with a tight budget and suggests more tax cuts targeting the middle class. In order to connect with these voters, Carney also talks about how he and his wife used to clip Sunday coupons to stay ahead.

In "Kids", Carney highlights his legislative fight to help protect America's children by sponsoring a bill that received bipartisan support. Carney put out a press release to accompany the ad:

Clarks Summit, PA—Congressman Chris Carney is up on the air with a new advertisement, Kids, which addresses the work in Congress to protect children from lead in toys and internet predators.
“As a father of five, I have made fighting for our families a top priority in Congress,” said Chris Carney. “That is why I am proud that the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed my legislation, Enhancing the Effective Prosecution of Child Pornography Act of 2007. I will keep fighting for our children, both to keep them safe from harm on the internet and to keep lead out of our toys.”
Responding to a report that 35% of toys on shelves contain lead, Congressman Christopher P. Carney introduced The Lead Free Toys Act in December 2007. The legislation bans lead from toys, toy jewelry, and other products used by children under age six.
According to the results released the Michigan-based Ecology Center, along with the National Center for Health, Environment and Justice, tests on more than 1,200 children’s products found that 35 percent contain lead. According to the report, many of these toys contained lead levels far above the federal recall standard used for lead paint.
Congressman Christopher P. Carney’s legislation, Enhancing the Effective Prosecution of Child Pornography Act of 2007, passed in the House of Representatives by a vote of 416 to 0 in November 2007. This legislation allows the Justice Department to more effectively prosecute people who produce child pornography or knowingly access child pornography repeatedly with the intent to view it. It is awaiting action in the U.S. Senate.
Child pornography has become a $3 billion annual industry. According to the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, more than 20,000 images of child pornography are posted online every week. U.S. Customs Services estimate that 100,000 websites offer illegal child pornography, and according to the National Center for Mission & Exploited Children, approximately 20% of all Internet pornography involves children.
The legislation changes the U.S. Federal Code to improve the efficiency in the prosecution of child pornography cases by including money laundering as a prosecution tool. Additionally, the bill expands the U.C.S. (the code) to make it easier to prosecute those who knowingly and repeatedly view child pornography.

News In The 10th

2008-09-03T09:25:00.001-04:00

Chris Carney met with Vice-Presidential candidate Joe Biden early this week at Scranton's La Festa Italiana.

It seems to the two only spoke briefly, but Carney was pleased to have Biden back on his "home turf."

After the encounter, Carney said, "We look forward to future conversations when he returns to the area. Sen Biden brings an enormous wealth of experience and insight to the office of the vice president. This is a man truly ready to assume the presidency if that were necessary."

It is very likely that Biden will return to the area of Scranton and return frequently. The city was mentioned several times in Biden's keynote address --three by my count not including the video and Beau Biden's intro--at the Democratic National Convention and has already been the subject of an Obama campaign ad.

With the Obama campaign now believing that they can compete in this region thanks in large part due to the selection of Biden, Scranton and Northeast Pennsylvania will figure prominently in the campaign's strategy. If Chris Carney is any indicator, the selection of Biden is working in Pennsylvania because Biden finally brought a skiddish Carney into the Obama fold.

Carney's opponent, Chris Hackett, returned from his brief stint in St. Paul at the Republican National Convention. Gustav cancelled Hackett's remarks during the Convention's kick-off on Monday. While there was a slim chance he would have time later in the week, Hackett decided to leave the convention and catch a flight back to Pennslyvania.

Hackett did release the full text of his scheduled remarks. To read them, visit Gort.

In Other News

2008-09-02T13:45:00.004-04:00

As the country turns its attention to a 17-year-old pregnant girl and Hurricane Gustav hammering the Gulf Coast, one piece of news that seems to be lacking its fair share of coverage is the recent transfer of security responsibilities in Anbar province.

In a ceremony yesterday, the United States military officially handed over the responsibilities to Iraqi forces and is part of the continued military effort to transfer all provinces to Iraqi control.

A few years ago, many thought the security situation in Anbar was not salvageable and demonstrated why the United States could never succeed in Iraq.

Now, the security improvements in Anbar leading to the transfer of power stand as a testament to our brave men and women in uniform.

From the famous Washington Post September 2006 story which leaked a memo from Pete Devlin, the Marine's chief intelligence officer:

"Devlin reports that there are no functioning Iraqi government institutions in Anbar, leaving a vacuum that has been filled by the insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq, which has become the province's most significant political force, said the Army officer, who has read the report. Another person familiar with the report said it describes Anbar as beyond repair; a third said it concludes that the United States has lost in Anbar."

Things even reportedly got worse later that year:

"The Marines recently filed an updated version of that assessment that stood by its conclusions and stated that, as of mid-November, the problems in troubled Anbar province have not improved, a senior U.S. intelligence official said yesterday. 'The fundamental questions of lack of control, growth of the insurgency and criminality' remain the same, the official said."

Putting yesterday's event in proper context demonstrates just how much the situation in Iraq has improved.

Today's Wall Street Journal editorial does a better job at aligning that history with yesterday's ceremony:

For U.S. politics, it is worth recalling that that 2006 Washington Post story became part of a Beltway consensus that defeat in Iraq was inevitable. Democrats made withdrawal the center of their campaign to retake Congress, Republicans like Senator John Warner became media darlings for saying the war couldn't be won, and the James Baker-Lee Hamilton Iraq Study Group laid out a bipartisan road to retreat. According to memos disclosed Sunday in the New York Times, even senior officials at the State Department and Pentagon opposed the surge. President Bush, heeding Generals David Petraeus and Ray Odierno as well as John McCain, overruled the defeatists and ordered a renewed U.S. commitment to Iraq.

The Anbar handover is above all a tribute to the hundreds of Americans who have fought and died in places like Fallujah, Ramadi and Hit over these last five years. Over the horizon of history, we tend to recall only the successes in previous wars at such places as Guadalcanal, Peleliu and the Chosin Reservoir. We forget that those wars and battles were also marked by terrible blunders and setbacks, both political and military. What mattered is that our troops, and our country, had the determination to fight to an ultimate victory. So it is with the heroes of Anbar.

Carney's 2-to-1 lead

2008-08-29T15:19:00.002-04:00

Chris Carney put out a press release yesterday trumpeting the results of a recent Momentum Analysis poll.

The Momentum Analysis poll showed Carney with a dominant 2-to-1 lead over Hackett (54% to 27%)

Said campaign manger Vince Rongione, "These polls confirm what we already know. Congressman Carney has very strong support across party lines and across the district. We will continue to fight for every vote and focus on the issues that really matter, but it is very encouraging to see that our positive message is connecting with voters in every corner of Northeast and Central Pennsylvania."

The Momentum Analysis poll, however, stands in stark contrast with the Survey USA Poll that announced a statistical dead heat between the Carney and Hackett.

Several things to note about this Momentum Analysis poll:

The polling data that Chris Carney is using to demonstrate his 2-to-1 lead over Chris Hackett comes from Momentum Analysis which is a self-identified liberal-leaning
organization. According to its own mission statement, Momentum Analysis helps "forward Democratic and progressive causes."
Margie Omero, who serves at the President of Momentum, worked for Chris Carney in 2006 campaign to unseat Don Sherwood.
The Momentum Analysis survey is less statistically sound than the Survey USA poll. The sample size in the Momentum Analysis poll is only two-thirds of what the Survey USA poll was and a much larger margin of error.
While this poll may not be credible on its own, the latest poll from Momentum Analysis could serve as a comparison to a poll they took of the district in January. These two snapshots demonstrate that Carney's disapproval rating has increased, his approval rating has decreased, and the race has tightened.

In January, Carney had a 58% approval rating (12% disapproval rating) with a 55% to 21% lead over Chris Hackett.
Now in August, Carney received a 53% approval rating (18% disapproval rating) with a 54% to 27% lead over Chris Hackett.

On the whole, it's very difficult to compare these two polls. Obviously, reasons #1, #2, and #3 above tend to render the Momentum Analysis less accurate. As Hackett campaign manger Mark Harris stated, "Carney can make up any numbers he wants. The independent polling is far more credible."

In addition, Survey USA has a strong reputation for it's accuracy:

"SurveyUSA, which pioneered these polls, has an impressive record for accuracy. The company ranks second among more than 30 pollsters rated by Mr. Silver. Its own report card shows it ranking at or near the top in predictive power for recent national election cycles."

If I were a betting man, I would wager the situation in the 10th District currently looks more like the Survey USA poll (Carney 49%- Hackett 45% ) than the Momentum Analysis poll posits.

Hackett's Day

2008-08-28T07:15:00.002-04:00

Yesterday, Chris Hackett received some statistical support and some closure from his rough primary fight with Dan Meuser.

The first poll out of the 10th District shows a statistical dead heat between Chris Carney and Hackett.

The poll from Survey USA conducted for Roll Call magazine sampled 623 likely voters and found that Carney (49%) lead Hackett (45%) by only 4%--within the margin of error (4%).

Breaking down the results further:

CARNEY
Favorable -- 40%
Unfavorable -- 23%
Neutral --30%
No Opinion -- 7%

HACKETT
Favorable -- 36%
Unfavorable -- 23%
Neutral -- 31%
No Opinion -- 10%

Also from the survey, the most important issue to voters in the district was the economy (40%) with gasoline coming in a distant second (14%).

The survey did analyze the gasoline issue further. Most believe the oil companies are to blame (40%) followed by Congress (13%) and foreign governments (11%). Furthermore, the sampled voters stated alternative sources of energy (54%) provide the best answer to solve the problem with offshore drilling receiving 36% .

Obviously, this is a big liability for Chris Hackett. Carney has been trying very hard to tie Hackett to the big oil companies. Either through Hackett's personal investments in the sector or his energy policies which are perceived to benefit the bottom line of oil companies, the Carney camp has been pushing the issue into the laps of voters.

On the other hand, the fact that voters blame Congress more than the President could be a sign that voters are impressionable to the idea that some blame can be laid at the feet of Carney.

Overall, the Hackett camp interpreted the poll to mean that they were neutralizing Carney's incumbency advantage and closing in.

Said campaign manger Mark Harris, "We’re very pleased. After more than a month of TV ads trying to promote his paper-thin record in Congress, Chris Carney is still being rejected by voters. We fully expect Carney and his liberal Washington allies to ramp up their negative message now."

One other noticeable problem for Hackett is the fact that he only received a 52% favorable rating from Republicans in the district. Most of this, I would hypothesize, still stems from the Meuser-Hackett primary feud.

However, Dan Meuser did voice his support for Hackett yesterday by offering a formal endorsement. Meuser said, "I will always support good Republicans for office. In a choice between Chris Carney and a conservative Republican, I will always choose the conservative Republican."

It will be interesting to see whether Meuser actively campaigns for Hackett in the coming months. Encouraging his supporters to get involved for Hackett would be a good first step in demonstrating the unity between the two and driving up Hackett's favorability among Republicans.

Tour De 10th District

2008-08-26T14:50:00.000-04:00

You have to hand it to Chris Hackett for being creative with his new campaign tour of the 10th District. Either that or the cost of gasoline is beginning to affect the Hackett campaign's bottom line.

Apparently, Hackett is an avid cyclist and decided to work it into his quest for Congress. He and his wife Ramah--at points on separate bikes and at others on a tandem Trek bike--will be looking to speak with voters in all thirteen counties.

Hackett is planning to hit 20 stops on the tour and kicked it off yesterday by visiting Tick Tocks in Honesdale where he had lunch with local officials.

It seems point along the journey are evening sparking further discussion in the debate between he and Chris Carney. From the Times Leader:

Riding west on Route 6 between Honesdale and Carbondale, Hackett passes within a mile of the Waymart Wind Farm, a rare symbol of agreement between the GOP challenger and his Democrat opponent.

Be sure to catch Chris Hackett's Cervelo tour when it comes to an area near you:

Today: Forest City, Montrose and Tunkhannock

Wednesday: Wyalusing, Towanda and Sayre

Thursday: Dushore, Forksville, Kreamer, Selinsgrove and Williamsport

Friday: Danville, Shamokin and Sunbury

Debate Analysis

2008-08-22T17:00:00.000-04:00

This whole blowup between the Hackett and Carney camps over the debate schedule is relatively fascinating.

It seemed pretty obvious from the beginning that Carney wasn't into debating Hackett. Even early last month after Hackett proposed his format for eight debates, the October 30th debate was already scheduled and the Carney campaign seemed lukewarm at best towards the notion of entertaining more debates. Carney spokeswoman Rebbecca Gale even addressed Hackett like a little child saying, "If he’d behave himself, perhaps we’d discuss more debates."

Then, the Hackett campaign essentially tried to smoke Carney out from hiding. They seemed to believe calling him a liberal debate dodger enough times would force Carney above ground. While that did keep the debate issue simmering, I'm sure at the end of the day there wasn't enough of an incentive for Carney to accommodate the added political risk.

There should be more debates between these two candidates, but I think at the end of the day the reason we are not seeing more between the two candidates is because the debate schedule became a campaign issue rather than a scheduling formality.

After the initial challenge to eight debates, Hackett began beating this issue like a drum (see here, here, and here). It seemed to be one area where the Hackett campaign thought they got some traction. There was even a big campaign point made about Carney possibly agreeing to a second debate and a sense of vindication emerged which drove the issue further into political territory.

It could be a matter of micro-analyzing the situation, but allowing Hackett to have more debates could have been viewed in the Carney camp as handing him an early political victory (not to mention the needed publicity it could have given Hackett). Yesterday's reaction by Mark Harris essentially proved how important the issue was to the campaign.

One thing that is for certain, we haven't heard the last from the Hackett campaign regarding Chris Carney's failure to defend his record in public debates.

One Debate

2008-08-21T15:53:00.004-04:00

It looks like the debate schedule for the 10th District has finally been ironed out with an unfortunate outcome for the Chris Hackett campaign.

You'll remember that Hackett challenged Chris Carney to eight debates, but the Times Leader announced this afternoon that Carney and Hackett will face off in only one debate.

The one-hour debate will occur one week before the general election and be simulcast on WVIA-TV and Pennsylvania Cable News Network.

Hackett campaign manger Mark Harris responded by saying, "Chris Carney obviously thinks he’s a Washington big shot now. First he abandoned his promise to represent Pennsylvania values by voting with Nancy Pelosi and the liberals 90 percent of the time. Now he refuses to even show enough respect for voters to defend his record in open and honest debates. Carney is a sorry excuse for a congressman, trying to win an election behind negative attacks instead of debates."

Chris Hackett might spend more time speaking at the Republican National Convention than he will in his debate with Chris Carney.

Video Overload

2008-08-19T14:00:00.002-04:00

Chris Carney will be receiving some TV competition as Chris Hackett introduced his first two ads of the general election cycle. Both Carney and Hackett unveiled two new spots which will be up and running soon.

While Carney has an $880,000 cash advantage, the NRCC helped Hackett purchase time for the spot which marked their first congressional ad involvement in Pennsylvania.

All the ads essentially cover the same territory: oil prices, energy solutions, ending corporate handouts, etc. Hackett's "Plan" ad is slightly different and seeks to emphasize his Declaration of Principles that he published earlier in the year.

For your viewing pleasure (in alphabetical order):

Chris Carney -- "Made In America"

Chris Carney -- "Oil Shock"

Chris Hackett -- "New Direction"

Chris Hackett -- "Plan"

In addition to Hackett's ads, the campaign also put out a press release calling into question the accuracy of Carney's ads by claiming two Carneys exist: a "Campaign Carney" and a "Washington Carney".

The Carney campaign tried to throw the hypocrite label at Hackett as campaign spokesman Vince Rongione said, "Our opponent always says one thing and does another. Displaying an almost pathological inability to tell the truth. He runs against Washington insiders and then has them fund his TV advertising."

A Master Triangulator

2008-08-18T17:30:00.001-04:00

The Wall Street Journal had an article in today's paper discussing the abandonment Chris Carney is experiencing from his own party as the liberal Democrats seek to turn their back on him.

As the piece points out, liberal Democrats were able to stomach Carney in 2006 for a couple reasons. First, the most important priority for the Democrats was regaining the majority in Congress. Therefore, the liberals saw Carney as an advancement towards that end. Second, several argue that Carney disguised his commitment to progressive ideas when he ran for office. In order to win the election, Carney would appear as a moderate in order to provide an acceptable alternative to Sherwood. However, after getting into Congress, Carney has moved away from those liberal groups whose support he relied upon in 2006.

2008 is a much different year for Democrats because they are likely to increase their majority which enables them to eliminate--or at least threaten to eliminate--some of those moderate Democrats now viewed as turncoats.

While not endorsing Hackett, Glenn Greenwald told the WSJ, "Our goal is to attach a real price to the type of things Chris Carney is doing. If that means he ends up losing, then so be it. I would rather see a smaller majority but fewer Blue Dogs than a big majority with the Blue Dogs in charge."

These liberal groups have been voicing their disdain for Carney over the past year and have targeted him with TV and print ads. However, it is likely they will intensify this campaign.
Blue America alone is expected to spend $100,000 on Carney during the months in September and October. In addition, a recent "Moneybomb" aimed at Carney from the Accountability Now PAC was able to raise $150,000 in 24-hours. Not necessarily the $1 million the group had in mind, but still admirable given the scope of the target.

Ironically, Carney has not had the fortune of being too conservative for the likes of his opponent, Chris Hackett. Hackett has continually invoked the word liberal when referring to Carney and grouped him in with the Pelosi Democrats. The last three press releases alone from the Hackett camp have included the word "Liberal" and "Carney" in the release's title. This has obviously been a significant part of the Hackett campaign's message.

Two completely different strategies for attacking Carney.

Eroding Base

2008-08-18T12:55:00.002-04:00

Good article from the Associated Press this morning regarding the Republicans and their fight to hold rural voters in November.

It seems rather obvious to many observers that Republicans will carry these voters in the upcoming election, but tough economic times over the last four years combined with a declining standard of living in some of these rural parts have caused pundits to question how strong that support will be this election season.

The article makes note of the fact that Bush won 60% of rural voters in the last election cycle. While early polling this election still highlights a McCain lead in rural voters, the margin has tightened. Obviously in such a close election, Republicans can't bleed votes in this bedrock category.

Certainly, the economy will be a powerful issue this fall, but it won't exist in a vacuum for most voters. Other social issues could help to stabilize this demographic. Yet, even if Obama is able to make inroads with this group (as he's already started a "Barns for Obama" campaign in Ohio), it may not necessarily motivate people to vote for him. Rather, it could just cause rural voters to stay home which would equally erode McCain's projected base.

Nationally, the importance of connecting with rural voters is significant because in battleground states across the country they represent anywhere from 10% to 20% of the electorate. Reaching out to these voters needs to become an important component of McCain's strategy if he's going to have success.

That's a point Terry Madonna also concedes: "McCain will have problems getting a high turnout among those voters unless he finds some way to identify with them, some way to make them think that, A, he’s not connected to Bush, and B, his economic plan is superior to Obama’s."

Obama Uses Carney Tactic

2008-08-13T14:33:00.005-04:00

Barack Obama took a page out of Chris Carney's political play book by announcing his own "Republicans for Obama."

The group emerged yesterday and sought to emphasize Obama's "bipartisan appeal." Most of these supporters have already endorsed Obama publicly, but by rounding up all the Obamaicans into one group with some marketable apparel, the campaign hopes to attract disenchanted Republicans.

Former Congressman Jim Leach and former Senator Lincoln Chaffee along with a former GOP fundraiser who endorsed John Kerry in '04, Rita Hauser, led the way on the announcement of the new group.

The biggest news concerning the group was that Chuck Hagel has not joined the group and was not part of the opening ceremony. There is no word yet on who Hagel plans to endorse let alone whether he plans to join the Republicans for Obama.

The move by Obama seeks to neutralize McCain's campaign for the center and recent ad which sought to contrast the previous words of praise from Democratic bigwigs (Kerry, Biden, Obama) with their current reversals.

Barletta's First Television Ad

2008-08-13T09:15:00.003-04:00

Lou Barletta paid for his first television time of the campaign season and will begin airing his new campaign ad today.

The ad is essentially the same piece that was put out in his first internet ad almost two months ago. However, the TV version is chopped down to 30 seconds with the tag line "I'm Lou Barletta and I approved this message" added to the end.

Barletta spent close to $50,000 to have the commercial aired 174 times on the four local networks: WNEP, WYOU, WBRE, & WOLF. Rep. Paul Kanjorski has already been up on television with a variety of spots.

Also up on Barletta's YouTube site was another just released Internet ad in which Barletta responds to Kanjorski's negative attacks and repeats his call for a change of leadership.

The brand-new Pindell Report from Politicker.com called the race a "Toss-Up" and ranked it at the seventh most competitive race in the country. Ed Mitchell from the Kanjorski camp denied the report was of an significance and claimed, "We’ve got Barletta on the run and that will be more evident in the next few days."

Other well regarded Pennsylvania pundits like Terry Madonna have resisted the urge to call the Barletta-Kanjorski campaign a "Toss-Up" due to Kanjorski's long record in the district.

Slow Start

2008-08-12T10:00:00.001-04:00

While scanning through some of the media this morning, I noticed an editorial in yesterday's Daily Item regarding the slow start to the congressional race in the 10th District.

They argue that the 10th District race has yet to "heat up" largely due to Chris Hackett's low profile:

Carney's Republican challenger, Chris Hackett, has kept a low profile since upsetting Dan Meuser to win the GOP nomination. Hackett may be working behind the scenes to mend fences with party leaders who had worked against him in the primary, but his public appearances have been few and far between. Hackett campaigned aggressively to win the party nomination, and he may feel that a prolonged stretch of campaigning is unneeded in the Republican-majority 10th District.

I'm not so sure they hit the nail on the head with this assessment. First and foremost, it is hard to argue that the race has not--in real terms--heated up. Certainly, it has not reached its pinnacle, but by any measure, the race between Carney and Hackett has intensified since the primary. Any time an incumbent is forced to air ads before Labor Day, it is clear that campaign season has started early.

Regarding Hackett's "low profile," I would venture to theorize that it's not only Chris Hackett's lack of public appearances that is painting the perception of a low-profile, but also his campaign's inability to drive media coverage of his campaign's message.

Chris Hackett has been relatively visible since the primary trying to jump start his candidacy. The problem seems to be that a majority of his campaign's coverage has existed in the blogs. Few in the media have gravitated to his camp for substance, and his campaign has been forced to react to stories rather than create and drive the news. For instance, every week, the Hackett campaign produces a handful of press releases citing Carney's failures as a Congressman. However, no one in the media appears to be sinking into these issues. Certainly, there has been some success with this, but I'm sure not as much as his campaign would like. It is almost as if the Hackett campaign is throwing paint at the wall and hoping something will stick--not only to Carney, but resonate with the media at large. For better or worse, one of Hackett's most effective talking points has been to debate Carney on the fall debate schedule. I don't know if this is an issue voters will take with them into the ballot box.

All of this effectively means that Hackett has not been able to push the ball into Carney's court. The election this fall with likely be a referendum on Carney. The less leverage Hackett is able to generate in the media, the more likely it is that Carney will have success. It could still be true that Hackett is mending fences in private after the split between he and Meuser. Publicly however, campaign manager Mark Harris has argued that everything is fine and it will be a non-issue this fall.

Of course, all of this could simply be because the election has not intensified to full tilt and the campaign is waiting to hit its stride.

Carney Spends Time With The Clingers

2008-08-11T17:28:00.005-04:00

Chris Carney was able to get some good media attention out of his recent campaign stop at the Factoryville Sportsmen's Club. Carney swung by the club for three rounds of skeet on his way to a speech celebrating Chris Mathewson.

The Times Leader and Daily Review both managed to make news out of the stop. [Defer to the TL article for a description of skeet, birds, and a nice, uplifting from Republican supporter Tom O'Neil regarding Chris Hackett--“I would just like to have a ceremony where he’s crucified"]

Of course, as the Daily Review points out, it's unlikely that gun control will be a major issue for either campaign this fall. Both Carney and Hackett have relatively similar positions on the issue which will likely render it a moot political point.

However, that won't prevent Carney from including some of his freshly snapped "Sportsman for Carney" photos on campaign mailers this fall.

Unfortunately for the sportsmen on hand, John Kerry was not in attendance.

Carney Targeted By Strange Bed Fellows

2008-08-07T22:06:00.008-04:00

Has hell frozen over? Well, likely not, but it sure seemed that way when a group of libertarians converged with liberal bloggers for a new ad campaign.

"Strangebedfellows" is the appropriately named group that united in order to publicize perceived civil liberty threats --mainly those posed by increased government surveillance powers.

The group has organized the Accountability Now PAC which seeks to become a permanent fixture in the Washington political landscape.

The PAC is hoping to achieve a successful "money bomb" tomorrow. You may ask why August 8th? Well the group has a fitting answer for that as well. From their website:

"That is the day in 1974 when Richard Nixon was forced to resign from office for his lawbreaking and surveillance abuses. That day illustrates how far we have fallen in this country in less than 35 years, as we now not only permit rampant presidential lawbreaking and a limitless surveillance state, but have a bipartisan political class that endorses it and even retroactively protects the lawbreakers."

"Money bombs" was the term that Ron Paul brought to fame when supporters would seek to raise vast sums of money during a single, targeted day. Trevor Lyman, who organized the effort for Paul, is using his firm--Basic Media--for tomorrow's effort as well. Although several smaller ventures have failed for candidates down ticket from Paul, the new group is hoping that the anger on the left is fresh for the picking.

With the projected $1 million fundraising effort, the group seeks to to target three Democrats: Chris Carney, John Barrow, and Steny Hoyer. The group is hoping to raise enough money to mount a full fledged campaign against the three candidates consisting of newspaper ads, robocalls and other organized efforts.

One of the group's organizer's is Glenn Greenwald. Greenwald has been very outspoken on Chris Carney's perceived betrayal on FISA (see here and here).

Weighing In

2008-08-07T09:44:00.004-04:00

From an interview with Bob Asher in The Bulletin regarding whether the Republicans in 2008 will perform better than 2006

"No. In 2006, we became fat, dumb and happy. We became arrogant and overconfident - and had no message. The Republican congress didn't act like a conservative congress when we were in charge. We were spending money like Democrats, and our base didn't appreciate that. So we have to win them back - with the right message and with good candidates. But also, there's no question that the war at that time was unpopular. I think President Bush is a wonderful human being but not a great communicator. I don't think he got the message out there the way it had to be done. But he's been proven right - the surge in Iraq is working.

Why don't I think it will be as bad this year? First, we'll maintain the state senate, maybe even pick up a seat. Second, I think the Republicans have an excellent chance of winning the state house back. I think we have a real good shot at picking up (freshman Democratic Congressman Chris) Carney's seat, with (challenger Chris) Hackett winning that one. And we're going to carry the state for John McCain."

Surprised to see no expectation of picking up the 11th District.

Change Agent?

2008-08-06T10:06:00.002-04:00

A real agent of "change" would simply work with the aliens, not question their political party affiliation.

Carney, Kanjo Co-Sponsor DC Gun Legislation

2008-08-05T16:30:00.002-04:00

Washington, D.C.'s reaction to the Supreme Court's decision in Heller has caused some lawmakers to ponder if the city really understood the Court's opinion.

The District of Columbia responded to Court with new regulations that were--for all intensive purposes--just as restrictive as the previous laws. For instance, the city required all guns be registered with the police department, most magazine-fed guns were not permitted, and firearms were to be unloaded or protected with a trigger lock unless a "reasonably perceived threat of immediate harm" exists in the home. This is in addition to the fact that as a D.C. resident, it is effectively impossible to purchase a firearm because there are no federally licensed dealers.

D.C.'s response to the Supreme Court has been so bad that House Democrats are now looking to implement less rigid legislation and override the city. Democrats put together a bill to repeal most of the restrictions listed above and the House leadership has even agreed to have a vote on the bill sometime next month.

The Second Amendment Enforcement Act (H.R. 6691) already has almost sixty co-sponsors. Included among those are several Pennsylvania Democrats including: Chris Carney, Paul Kanjorski, Jason Altmire, Tim Holden, Patrick Murphy, and John Murtha.

The legislative maneuvering for this bill has some pretty obvious political undertones for Democrats. Primarily, this bill could be a way for Democrats to avoid the stereotyping [i.e. Americans are "bitter" so they "cling" to their guns] that Barack Obama has used. The measure could still likely get stalled and killed in the Senate before it's all said and done, but in the meantime, the legislation allows Democrats to bat around a political volleyball. Gun rights promise to be a big issue in the fall especially with the $40 million campaign the NRA is planning to pursue. Therefore, this legislation establishes some tangible "proof" that Congressional Democrats are not the gun grabbing elitists that the up-ballot candidate [Obama] suggested they were.

Funny Polling

2008-08-05T10:00:00.001-04:00

Lou Barletta is alleging that there is some funny phone "polling" going around his district that is too conveniently biased against him.

The calls, which Barletta explicitly referred to as "push polls," are designed to shape public opinion by disseminating negative information regarding one candidate while at the same time seeking to clarify or mask potential negatives about the opposing candidate.

These particular push polls sought to promulgate negative information by specifically discussing Barletta selling his business to a "convicted drug felon" and cutting back the police force while "blood rolled down the gutters of Hazleton."

Kanjorski campaign spokesman Ed Mitchell denied any involvement in the push polls and criticized the Barletta campaign for making an issue out of it. Mitchell even went further stating, "But Lou Barletta could at least act like a man and stop crying, whining and complaining every time someone calls him on his record."

It seems that the DCCC could likely be behind the polls. The polls originated out of Miami, Florida with a company called Sun Survey. The DCCC declined to say whether they were conducting their own survey survey. DCCC spokeswoman Carrie James said, "We’re not running a push poll. … It’s not ours … I don’t know anything about a cameraman." However, it could be as simple as the DCCC not viewing what they are doing as push polling and refusing to acknowledge it as such.

Barletta also got some more negative press thrown his way in a New York Times story today. The story cites an authority who regards Barletta's "inflammatory" anti-immigration rhetoric as a possible factor in the death of a illegal Mexican immigrant. Barletta responded in the story by saying: "It’s a tragedy what happened to that man. But I don’t believe our ordinance had anything to do with it. Every person is responsible for their own actions."

For Your Viewing Pleasure

2008-08-04T08:22:00.002-04:00

Always making the citizens of Northeastern Pennsylvania look classy, Paul Kanjorski's segment on CBS Evening News.

Oil!

2008-08-03T22:30:00.001-04:00

The Carney camp took advantage of Exxon's recent record setting quarterly earnings to bring to light Chris Hackett's personal holdings in oil companies and campaign receipts from various oil companies' political action committees.

It appears that the Carney campaign is looking for this to be a reoccurring campaign issue.

Each time an energy development comes to print, Carney seeks to publicize Hackett's connections to big oil--either through his personal investments or campaign workings. The Carney campaign is using every opportunity it can to paint Hackett as a lackey of "Big Oil."

This time around, the campaign highlighted a $5,000 PAC donation in May from Exxon Mobil as well as other personal donations from oil executives. This all is supposed to make Hackett less credible on the energy issue.

Carney hasn't offered many energy solutions. He enjoys going after the oil companies and using the "Use It or Lose It" slogan as a major component of his campaign's platform. For those unfamiliar, the "Use It or Lose It" argument suggests that oil companies have existing onshore leases and opportunities to drill for oil, but have failed to do so because by not drilling, they are able to drive up the price which in turn allows their bottom lines to increase. It all feeds into the oil company conspiracy theory that liberals love, but unfortunately, it is--at the very least--an overly exaggerated claim.

Said campaign manager Vincent Rongione, “Clearly, Chris Hackett is deep in the pocket of Big Oil. Whose side is Hackett on? … Chris Hackett doesn’t understand the toll record high gas prices are taking on middle class families — once again, he says one thing and does another. He should let us know, whose side is he on?”

However, if Carney is accusing Hackett of being bought and sold on energy, one needs to look no further than FISA to see a synonymous situation with Carney. Many organizations accused Carney of surrendering to retroactive immunity for telecom companies because of their big contributions to his reelection campaign. In fact, one of the top contributors to Carney is Comcast with roughly $21,000 in donations. Comcast even refused to air Blue America's ad against Carney unless it was censored, and that's just one of the major telecom companies which has donated to Carney.

Kanjo's CBS Story

2008-08-01T23:28:00.006-04:00

Below is a transcript from this evening's CBS Evening News Special on Paul Kanjorski.

The Parking Garage To Nowhere?
Congressman Rakes In Millions In Earmarks To Build Vacant Offices - And Parking For Them

(CBS) Congress started a five-week vacation Friday. But before leaving, the House passed a bill that contains more than 500 earmarks. CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson has been investigating these expensive pet projects that lawyers slip into spending bills. And now, she's followed the money to a deserted office complex.

This tale begins in the small town of Nanticoke, Penn., population 9,500, where hometown Rep. Paul Kanjorski got more than $3 million federal tax dollars to build the "Kanjorski Center," an office building to attract business and help the local economy.
"I'm used to getting a great deal of money for my district," Kanjorski said.
But things haven't quite gone according to plan. The Kanjorski Center's main tenant moved out in 2005, and the building's been empty ever since.
"How much is the city paying for the building while it's empty?" Attkisson asked Pennsylvania state Rep. John Yudichak.
"The city's been paying about $15,000 a month while the building has been empty," he said.
Yudichak says the Kanjorski Center was ill-thought-out, and has become an albatross.
Now Kanjorski has a new plan. It involves millions more tax dollars to build a parking garage for the Kanjorski Center, in hopes of convincing a local community college to move in.
It'll cost taxpayers $5.6 million - money Kanjorski earmarked for the parking garage project. An earmark is a grant of money without the normal public review.
But there's one big problem: federal aid can only be used for parking garages that serve mass transit ... it's not intended for office parking in a congressman's hometown. When Kanjorski was notififed his project is contrary to federal rules, he said it didn't matter.
"I don't think the rule should be there," Kanjorski said. "I don't think the rule should have any attention paid to it. Becaus in Congress we have our own rules."
It turns out local officials like Yudihak also object to Congressman Kanjorski's parking garage.
"We saw it as a huge liability," Yudihak said.
Congressman Kanjorski calls that sour grapes from a political rival, a fellow Democrat, and says local residents should be happy to get the grants of money he brings home.
"You call these federal and state grants 'free money.' The quote is, 'I don't know anyone who would turn down a free building. It would be funded with, quote, free money,'" Attkisson said. "'From federal and state grants.'"
"For the community, it is free money," Kanjorski said.
"But it's not really free. Taxpayers are paying for it," Attkisson pointed out.
"It is the taxpayers of the United States' money," Kanjorski said. "But it doesn't cause any difficulty to the community to take the money."
"It is not free money!" Yudichak said. "It's taxpayers' money. In my view, the congressman looks at federal earmarks, the $5.6 million, as play money."
Regardless of whether the town wants to play, Kanjorski now says he'll do whatever it takes to build his parking garage with some of that "free money," better known outside of Washington as your tax dollars.

Prime Time For Kanjo

2008-07-31T22:16:00.005-04:00

Saw a promo for CBS Evening News tomorrow night. Paul Kanjorski will be sitting down with Katie Couric to discuss his earmarking scandals. Looked interesting enough for me to tune in.

UPDATE: A Friday morning story from the Times Leader

Funded Abortions

2008-07-31T08:18:00.003-04:00

It seems that the Hackett camp is trying to push the topic of taxpayer funded abortions to the front of the issue radar.

At a recent town hall meeting in Williamsport, "Carney was asked if he supports tax-funded abortions either in the U.S. or overseas. 'No,' he said simply."

However, Hackett was quick to dispute that the one-word answer did not properly summarize Carney's voting history. A Hackett news release cites two specific votes:

"On June 21, 2007 Chris Carney voted for a repeal of the Mexico City policy. The
Mexico City policy prevented taxpayer dollars from going to organizations that provide abortions overseas. (Roll Call 534, 6/21/2007) Then Chris Carney voted against a bi-partisan amendment that banned public funding of Planned Parenthood, America’s largest provider of abortions. (Roll Call 684, 7/19/2007) Carney received a 100% rating from the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) in 2007."

Ironically, it appears that Chris Hackett is taking a page out of the Dan Meuser playbook. If you recall the end of the primary, Meuser made the claim that Hackett was trying to distort his record on abortion.

Carney denied that his response to the question was inconsistent with his position on abortion. Campaign manager Vincent Rongione declared, "Chris Hackett’s dishonest twisting of congressman Carney’s record shows how desperate he is to gain any traction in this race."

However, the Carney campaign did not clarify what is incorrect about Hackett's charge. On previous questionnaires, Carney had indicated that he did not personally favor abortions and that organizations who provide abortions should not receive public funding.

Has Kanjo Flipped On Tolling?

2008-07-30T08:23:00.005-04:00

Lou Barletta challenged Paul Kanjorski's position on tolling I-80 yesterday. He put out a press release accusing Kanjorski of desperately trying to mislead voters on where he actually stands. The release contained previous statements from Kanjorski which demonstrated his support for tolling or lack of effort to ensure the interstate wasn't tolled.

From the release:

Aug. 3, 2007: “I believe that the federal government should respect the decisions made by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.” Statement from Paul Kanjorski after the tolls were announced, www.kanjorski.house.gov
Nov. 8, 2007: The Peterson-English Amendment to the Transportation Appropriations Bill would have stopped the tolling of Interstate 80. The bill was defeated. Paul Kanjorski had his chance to show his independence. What did he do? Did he demand a meeting with Leadership on this amendment? Did he ask Pennsylvania’s U.S. senators to support the amendment in conference committee? He did nothing. He did not fight for his constituents.
Nov. 29, 2007: “Let’s do all the interstates. I think we’ll have to end up tolling 80, 81, 78 and 95.” Bloomsburg Press Enterprise story printed in the Pocono Record.

On Tuesday, Kanjorski submitted a letter of opposition for tolling I-80 to the Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. The letter argued that tolls would burden Pennsylvania businesses and cited an '05 Pennsylvania Department of Transportation study that recommended not tolling the highway.

Raising the tolling issues seems to be a beneficial to Barletta because it shifts the focus away from recent attacks on his Social Security record. However, in order to further pander to Senior Citizens, Kanjorski put out another ad towards the end of last week.

Pull That Ad

2008-07-29T08:19:00.003-04:00

Lou Barletta is petitioning local television stations to stop airing the DCCC's ad against him.

Barletta claims the ad unfairly mischaracterizes his stance on Social Security by claiming he supports private accounts. In making his case, Barletta stated in his letter that, "Your station has transmitted this false statement over public airwaves."

It is unlikely that an station will pull the ads. For instance, WNEP has promised to continue airing the ad until they receive comment from the DCCC. However, the DCCC has remained firm in its support of the spot and won't fold in the face of a local dust-up.

From the very beginning of the campaign, Barletta has sought to clarify his position on Social Security. The topic was one of his very first press conferences where he came out with very strong and clear statements against private accounts.

This ad spat comes in the face of both Democratic candidates (Carney and Kanjorski) preempting their Republican opposition by launching their own campaign commercials.

"Pennsylvania Values"

2008-07-28T08:07:00.006-04:00

Chris Carney unveiled his first advertisement for the general election.

The ad highlights the same themes he used in his successful '06 bid. It seems Carney is banking on a growing negative campaign so the ad looks to reinforce the positive aspects of his candidacy.

The campaign bought $130,000 worth of time on four location stations: WNEP-TV, WOLF-TV, WBRE-TV and WYOU-TV.

The Hackett campaign responded with a press release seeking to clarify the ad by presenting Carney's overall voting record, his ties to Charlie Rangel, and instances of voting against Pennsylvania values.

Time Away

2008-07-19T12:15:00.001-04:00

This next week you won't see a lot of new content on Local Values due to vacation time. There may be a couple new posts, but likely days without. Everything should return back to normal on the 28th.

New Update

2008-07-18T14:26:00.006-04:00

In a growing acknowledgment that Paul Kanjorski is indeed vulnerable this fall, CQ Politics updated the race from "Safe Democrat" to a weaker incumbency advantage at "Lean Democrat."

It appears CQ was initially reluctant to make the race upgrade:

"CQ Politics initially was hesitant to include Pennsylvania 11 among the ranks of competitive races, though, in part because the NRCC also heavily promoted Barletta’s candidacy against Kanjorski in 2002, when he lost by the substantial margin of 56 percent to 42 percent."

However, it seems the DCCC's ad campaign in the district ("political parties don’t spend money in districts where they expect easy wins") and Barletta's ability to draw district-wide recognition ("it appears he’ll have the resources to wage a credible campaign") have been the two largest factors behind CQ's decision.

I would also add Kanjorski's willingness to begin airing his own television ads before Independence Day and his reluctance to debate Barletta enhance the perception that Kanjorski is nervous about his reelection chances.

Fundraising

2008-07-18T11:03:00.003-04:00

Today's WSJ has an article about Democratic success in out-fundraising Republicans in Senatorial campaigns. Even in some red states, Democrats have been competitive against Republican incumbents.

However, success in the House races hasn't been so uniform. One notable exception is the Pennsylvania's 10th District.

From the article:

"The picture in the House was much more mixed. Some Republican challengers raised more than the Democratic incumbents they are trying to unseat. Peter Olson, a former Capitol Hill staffer, bested Texas Rep. Nick Lampson. Businessman Chris Hackett narrowly raised more than Pennsylvania Rep. Chris Carney -- not including a $250,000 loan to his campaign. Both challengers, however, have far less cash on hand."

Returning The Money Back?

2008-07-17T22:43:00.004-04:00

It appears the NRCC talking points have permeated at least one campaign. Chris Hackett was the first candidate to respond to the NRCC campaign by launching his own attack.

Hackett issued a press release today reiterating most of yesterday's substance, but uniquely invoked Carney's own words against him.

The release states:

In 2006, Carney said, “It is unfortunate that money and trappings of extreme partisan politics have blinded Don Sherwood to the real concerns and needs of the 10th District and of America.” (Carney Press Release, 9/28/06) Chris Carney called on Don Sherwood to return the $14,800 he received from Tom DeLay’s PAC.
Yet, Carney has received far more money from Rangel both directly and indirectly.

From a Carney for Congress post over at his Daily KO's Dairy (just one of several):

"Tom DeLay's dirty money is still filling the pockets of politicians all over the country. Now that we have the Sept. 30th FEC numbers, we know that the money is still festering.
With an arrest warrant on the table, isn't it time to make every single politician give the money back!
If the money isn't given back or donated to a good cause, everyone who keeps the money is just asking for it come election time.
Don Sherwood (R-PA) has not given the almost $15,000 he has received from DeLay back. Tell him to give it back!"

It seems Carney was making quite a bit of hay with the issue in his previous election so we'll see how he responds when faced with a similar situation.

Local Politician Takes Lead On Energy

2008-07-17T13:01:00.011-04:00

Rep. John Peterson seems to be taking a big step towards addressing the nation's energy problem.

Peterson has long favored increasing domestic supply by lifting the offshore drilling ban, so he was particularly pleased with Bush's recent decision to lift the moratorium.

On Tuesday, he wasted no time reacting to the news. He joined with Neil Abercromie (D-HI) to form the House's Energy Working Group. The group aims to establish a bipartisan compromise which would increase supply for the current crisis by drilling offshore while at the same time encouraging alternative energy sources as a background for future transitioning.

The group is shooting to have comprehensive legislation produced before the August recess, but preferably in the next week.

The Republicans will not include ANWAR in the proposal as it is seen as too much of a "lightening rod" likely to break apart any potential compromise.

Abercrombie said the group is "evolving" and couldn't announce the member list yet because it might cause some members a political headache, but hopefully it will include other members of the Pennsylvania delegation.

It's great to see Peterson take the lead on this issue. Furthermore, the approach he is using to address this problem is commendable and impressive. In an election year, it could be tempting to play politics with the topic and use it as a bludgeoning object against the opposition. Instead of subjecting this time-sensitive issue to unneeded political scrutiny, he's recognized the importance of working across the aisle to successfully get any offshore drilling program implemented.

NRCC Targets Kanjo, Carney

2008-07-16T19:08:00.004-04:00

The NRCC has selected a handful of Democratic candidates to target. As ammunition, the NRCC is using Charlie Rangel's most recent scandal involving the use of his congressional stature to obtain four rent-stabilized apartments.

The NRCC sent out two sets of E-mails (one to incumbents and one to challengers) encouraging them to return the donations they had received from Charlie Rangel.

Although the NRCC is publicly linking the politicians to Charlie "My constituents are proud I drive a Cadillac" Rangel, it doesn't appear the NRCC is prepared to open the issue up in an full-fledged ad.

From PolitckerPA, "The eight congressional candidates include sitting U.S. Reps. Jason Altmire, Chris Carney, Paul Kanjorski, Patrick Murphy, Allyson Schwartz, Joe Sestak and challengers Dahlkemper and Bob Roggio."

Day Of Reckoning

2008-07-16T13:54:00.004-04:00

From RealClearPolitics on the FEC Second Quarter Filings:

Pennsylvania 10: In 2006, Chris Carney ran against a scandal-tainted incumbent Republican in a heavily Republican district, winning by a six-point margin. This year, Carney faces an opponent who doesn't carry the same baggage, and who can largely self-fund his own contest. Carney recognizes the threat, and raised a solid $354,000 in a district that has cheap television rates; he's got $1.15 million left over. His opponent, businessman Chris Hackett, made it through a bruising primary and raised $367,000 this entire quarter, to keep $267,000 in the bank. Hackett has already loaned his campaign $740,000, and more could be coming.

Pennsylvania 11: Democratic incumbent Paul Kanjorski could be in serious trouble this year. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is running their first television advertisements of the year on Kanjorski's behalf, and the twelve-term incumbent has raised $488,000 in the Second Quarter, nearly two-thirds of the money he spent during all of the 2006 cycle. With $2.17 million in the bank, Kanjorski will have plenty of money to take on Republican Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta, who raised $333,000 in the last three months and still has $322,000 left. Barletta is being outraised, but his prominence on immigration issues could make up for being outspent.

Some campaign reaction on the campaign filings:

Barletta camp: "Mr. Kanjorski’s support is indicative of the kind of congressman he’s been. I’d rather get money from the people, not from powerful Washington lobbyists and big corporations."
Kanjorski camp: "We’re letting the numbers speak for themselves. The amount of money one raises is indicative of the support level they have. After you get by all Barletta’s pathetic spin to put a good face on his poor level of support, it’s obvious people are rallying to keep Kanjorski in Congress."
Hackett camp: "We’re happy with the quarter. We out-raised the incumbent, and anytime that happens things are going well. We’re confident that come November we’ll have the resources we need to win."
Carney camp: "We’re right where we want to be. Between Republicans for Carney and another strong fundraising quarter, we’ve been overwhelmed and humbled by the strong support we are receiving. We’re very excited about the direction our campaign is heading."

Total cash on hand for the candidates through June 30, 2008:

Kanjorski: $2,174,387
Carney: $1,149,938
Barletta: $321,895
Hackett: $266,816

DCCC Targets Barletta

2008-07-15T08:12:00.013-04:00

With its first spot of the general election cycle, the DCCC has purchased time for a Scranton-area ad targeting Lou Barletta.

It sounds as though the ad will hit Barletta as being a candidate voters can't trust because of his previous positions and close ties with President Bush.

Said DCCC spokesman Doug Thornell, "Lou Barletta is trying to mislead voters and we will not allow him to undergo an extreme makeover about his strong support of President Bush’s failed economic policies, tax cuts for the rich, and privatizing Social Security."

Although Kanjorski wasn't on the original list of 31 candidates getting a boost from the DCCC, it appears the DCCC has made a commitment to Kanjorski with the ad that will begin airing today.

You may recall that Kanjorski already launched his own ad back in June and was the first House Democrat to do so.

Once we get the ad or a transcript, it will be posted.

UPDATE: The Politico has a more detailed story and describes the tone of the ad better.

“Barletta supported George Bush’s failed economic policies,” the ad says. “Barletta even helped lead Bush’s campaign in Pennsylvania. And both have supported privatizing Social Security, putting our retirement at risk.”
The narrator closes: “Lou Barletta – he may be George Bush’s friend, but he’s no friend of the middle class.”

UPDATE II: An AP story on the ad puts the total cost at $150,000 over the three week period.

Karen Hanretty, a spokeswoman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said, "It's pathetic that Kanjorski is such a corrupt and inept politician that the DCCC has to go on the air before Labor Day with a two-week ad buy to try and save his bacon."

Hanretty's statement takes offense to the early timing of the ad likely due to the fact that the the NRCC doesn't have enough funds to start its own ad war this early on. At the end of May, the DCCC had $47 million on hand while the NRCC had only $6.7 million.

Barletta will have a hard time funding his own ads against Kanjorski. Both candidates have produced ads, but the biggest difference was that Kanjorski had enough money to get his on TV while Barletta was left producing an Internet only ad.

The 11th District marks one of the few seats that Republicans can take back this election cycle so their mobilization of resources to the region will likely play a pivotal role in constituents deciding to dump a 20+ year incumbent.

UPDATE III: Transcript from Roll Call:

"George Bush has a friend in Pennsylvania — Lou Barletta. Barletta supported Bush’s failed economic policies, Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent. Barletta [even] helped lead Bush’s campaign in Pennsylvania. And both have supported privatizing Social Security, putting our retirement at risk. Lou Barletta. He may be George Bush’s friend. But he’s no friend of the middle class."

Carney Wants NEPA Nuclear Option

2008-07-14T22:31:00.003-04:00

The Daily Item has a story and video on Chris Carney's recent town hall meeting at the Middlecreek Community Center.

Obviously, energy was one of the primary topics of conversation at the meeting so Carney was forced to discuss his plan for decreasing energy prices.

In the video, Carney emphasizes that there are certain things that Northeastern Pennsylvania has to start doing on the energy front (transcribed below):

"We have within the Northeast and center part of Pennsylvania a lot things that we need to do. We have coal that we can start leveraging the good clean coal technologies. We have to do that. We can do nuclear here."

The inclusion of nuclear energy is not something I've seen from either Hackett or Carney in their energy platforms. Most of the time, their discussion of alternative technologies refer to solar or wind power.

Therefore, Carney's proposal to bring a nuclear plant into the district (let alone his support of nuclear energy) was something of a surprise. It'll be interesting how much he expands/clarifies that proposal down the road.

Family Ties

2008-07-14T08:19:00.005-04:00

Hats off to the Times Leader for yesterday's story on Paul Kanjorski's PAC, "Citizens For Action."

It turns out that Peter Kanjorski, the nephew who headed Cornerstone Technologies, has been getting paid $2,000 a month consulting fee from the Congressman's PAC.

From the story:

"For the quarter, Peter Kanjorski was paid $6,000. That’s in addition to the $20,000 he received between July 2007 and March. Since he was hired as a consultant, he has been paid $56,461 in fees and expenses."

Furthermore:

"Making $5,000 contributions last quarter were the Credit Union Legislative Action Council, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp., the Investment Company Institute PAC, the Realtors PAC, Sallie Mae Inc., PAC, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association Fund A and the UBS Americas Fund for Better Government. PP&L People for Good Government also contributed $5,000. The only individual donors were the owners of Pocono Raceway, Joseph and Rose Mattioli of Long Pond, who each contributed $5,000."

Notice all the investments from the parties involved with the housing industry. Those come due thanks to Kanjorski's influential position on the House Financial Services Committee which handles housing bailout measures.

Campaign Cash

2008-07-13T11:24:00.004-04:00

The Citizen's Voice provided a peak at the FEC filings due this upcoming Tuesday. Some highlights:

Carney's campaign committee will report raising more than $360,000, campaign manager Vincent Rongione said, with about $1.15 million in cash on hand. Carney's last FEC report, showing contributions from the first of the year to April 2, listed more than $960,000 in cash on hand and $280,000 raised in that period.

Hackett's spokesman Mark Harris said the campaign will report having about $267,000 in cash on hand. The committee raised $618,000 in the quarter, Harris said, but that includes $250,000 Hackett loaned his campaign after April 2 during his heated GOP primary battle with Dan Meuser. Without the loans Hackett raised about $368,000 during this period, which includes $18,700 in contributions his committee received right before the April 22 primary, according to FEC reports.

Barletta's campaign committee will report raising more than $330,000, according to a news release, bringing his total cash on hand to $320,000.

Targeted Races

2008-07-11T13:00:00.004-04:00

TPM is reporting the list of 31 Congressional races that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) is targeting this fall with $34 million worth of ads.

The 11 Democratic incumbents the DCCC is supporting are (seat competitiveness provided by Cook Political Report):

Mitchell (AZ-05)--Lean Democratic
Mahoney (FL-16)--Lean Democratic
Hill (IN-09)--Lean Democratic
Yarmuth (KY-03)--Lean Democratic
Cazayoux (LA-06)--Toss Up
Boyda (KA-2)--Toss Up
Shea-Porter (NH-1)--Lean Democratic
Altmire (PA-4)--Lean Democratic
Lampson (TX-22)--Toss Up
Rodriguez (TX-23)--Likely Democratic
Kagen (WI-8)--Lean Democratic

All of the incumbents are freshman members of Congress so I'm particularly curious why Chris Carney is not on the list.

Carney is a freshman member of the DCCC's "Frontline '08" Delegation (like 10 of the 11 names above), but that didn't seem to translate into him getting support.

These are all "competitive" seats, but it is clear that some are much more competitive than others. For instance, Carney's seat is rated a "Toss Up" signaling it is particularly competitive. Therefore, it seems rather odd to leave Carney out for Rep. Ciro Rodriguez of Texas who is in a "Likely Democratic" reelection bid and already served in Congress (lost after 2003 redistricting, but won again in 2006).

I'm not quite sure those are the wisest priorities. As the NRCC targets Carney in Pennsylvania and ROMP makes a commitment to Hackett, it's interesting to see the dynamics of Carney's own party and their failure to support him.

Obama Moves In With Carney

2008-07-11T12:03:00.002-04:00

A couple of Democratic organizations will be sharing office space at Carney's campaign headquarters.

The Pike County Democrat Committee and the Pike County 4 Obama campaign will unite, after a divisive primary season, by coming together to open a joint office.

The new office will be located in on Harford Street in Milford and serve as campaign headquarters Carney.

I'm sure the central location will assist in producing a unified message between the two campaigns--Obama and Carney. The Democrats are relying on both of them to win, and thus far, Carney hasn't been overly supportive of Obama.