Slow Start

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

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

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

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?

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

Carney, Kanjo Co-Sponsor DC Gun Legislation

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

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

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

Oil!

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

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.