Category: David Tamasi
Public Financing System for Presidential Elections Broken
By David Tamasi
WASHINGTON – The recent decisions by former Vermont Governor Howard Dean and Massachusetts Senator John Kerry to opt out of public financing in the Democratic race for President have prompted two prominent Kerry supporters to sponsor legislation to reform the current system.
Congressmen Martin Meehan, D-Lowell, and John Tierney, D-Salem, said they intend to file campaign finance bills before the end of the year to encourage presidential candidates to stay within the public financing system. Meehan said he was still working on the details of the bill, while Tierney said he would reintroduce legislation that he has submitted every session he has been in Congress.
Under current law, presidential candidates are eligible to receive $19.1 million on Jan. 1, 2004, if they agree to spend no more than $45 million until their party officially nominates a candidate at their national conventions.
Tierney said that he hoped the decisions by Dean and Kerry would be the “stimulus to get serious about public financing.”
Dean said two weeks ago that he was declining public funds because the Democratic nominee would have no money from March, when a nominee is expected to emerge, until the Democratic National Convention in July, while President Bush would have $200 million to spend with no primary opponent. The President has also declined public financing.
“A Democratic nominee with no money is exactly what the Bush campaign is hoping for,” said Dean, who has raised more money than any other Democrat. “Ours is the only campaign with a chance to defend itself during those five months.”
Last Friday, Kerry followed suit, saying that Dean had “changed the rules of the race, and anyone with a clear shot at the nomination must play by those rules.” Kerry challenged Dean to stay within the $45 million primary spending cap, but acknowledged that he would retain the option to dip into his personal funds.
In light of Dean’s and Kerry’s decisions, political analysts said presidential public financing was finished.
“The system is dead,” political analyst Stuart Rothenberg said. “When the front-runner in the Democratic race and the Republican nominee opt out, something is wrong. It is time to start over.”
“I think that the system is in serious trouble,” said Larry Noble, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that monitors campaign money. “It is probably the end of it if you are a viable front-runner.” The consensus is that $45 million is no longer enough to wage a viable presidential campaign, he said.
Meehan said that while it was too late to reform the system for the 2004 election, he had spoken to Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican who helped spearhead campaign-finance reform last year. Their “discussions were a benchmark” to work on legislation next year that would increase the spending limit for those who stay within the system in future presidential races.
“We need a system to encourage candidates to raise small contributions,” he said. Under the present system, the federal government matches, dollar for dollar, the first $250 of each individual donation. Dean has said he needs 2 million supporters to donate $100 each to match the amount Bush is expected to raise.
Meehan and McCain, along with Congressman Chris Shays, R-Conn., and Senator Russell Feingold, D-Wisc., authored legislation in 2002 that banned the unlimited contributions known as soft-money and raised individual contribution limits $1,000 to $2,000 per election. Opponents of the measure filed a lawsuit calling the law a violation of the First Amendment right to free speech. The case is currently before the U.S. Supreme Court.
New Hampshire Republican Congressman Charles Bass suggested Congress “hold hearings to examine the public financing system for presidential campaigns.”
Congress created the presidential public financing system in 1974 in response to Watergate, and it has been effect since the 1976 election. At the time, proponents said taxpayer-financed presidential campaigns would restore public faith in national elections and reduce presidential candidates’ reliance on big donors.
As the Democratic front-runner, Dean made his decision with an eye toward the general election, hoping to avoid the position 1996 Republican nominee Bob Dole found himself in that summer. Dole emerged from the Republican primaries in April of that year out of funds and unable to respond to a barrage of advertising on behalf of President Clinton.
Kerry’s rationale for declining public funds is different from Dean’s. The odds-on favorite last winter to win the Democratic nomination, he has found himself eclipsed by Dean in New Hampshire, a state that is vital to Kerry’s electoral success. By opting out of the public financing system, Kerry no longer must adhere to state spending caps and can also spend his own money.
Federal law prohibits Kerry from tapping his wife’s $500 million fortune, but he could use their joint assets as collateral to secure a personal loan from a bank. The couple jointly owns a $10 million home in the upscale Louisburg Square section of Boston’s Beacon Hill. Kerry secured personal loans totaling $1.7 million in his 1996 Senate reelection campaign against then-Gov. William Weld.
The spending cap in New Hampshire is $700,000, but campaigns are granted a “fundraising exemption” that brings the cap to $1.4 million. Other exempt categories include salaries for campaign staff, direct mail and media.
For example, a campaign that buys advertising time on Boston television stations, which reach southern New Hampshire, need count only 15 percent of the advertising buy against the cap. By opting out of the public financing system, Kerry will be free to spend as much money as he wants in the Granite State. The most recent poll conducted by WMUR-TV and the University of New Hampshire showed Kerry trailing Dean by 22 points.
State spending limits are “an older idea that was no longer workable” and would probably be “scrapped” in any new legislation, the Center for Responsive Politics’ Noble said. But political analyst Rothenberg said he did not think Congress would address the issue in a presidential year. “It is hard to believe that they would,” he said. “I think that they will wait until after the campaign.”
Meehan suggested that public funds be made available to candidates earlier than Jan.1. “These candidates have been campaigning since April,” he said. “The actual campaign begins way in advance of when they receive the money.”
Congressman Jeb Bradley, R-Wolfeboro, without saying whether he believed the system was broken, said, “It’s up to each individual candidate to decide what’s right for their campaign.”
Congress Passes Energy Bill Despite Opposition From Local Delegation
By David Tamasi
WASHINGTON - - An energy bill that supporters said would generate almost 1 million new jobs and that opponents labeled as a giveaway to special interests skated through the House this week. But it faces a bipartisan effort in the Senate to kill it.
The bill, one of President Bush's top legislative priorities, will cost an estimated $30 billion over 10 years, including $23 billion in tax breaks for oil, natural gas and coal producers. It would require a doubling of ethanol use in gasoline and would, for the first time, establish federal rules for operators of high-voltage electric lines.
Although the House approved the bill by a comfortable margin Tuesday, the measure is opposed in the Senate by an unlikely coalition that includes New Hampshire Republicans Judd Gregg and John Sununu and Massachusetts Democrats Edward M. Kennedy and John Kerry.
Under Senate rules, 60 votes are needed to shut off debate and bring a bill up for a vote. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said he was planning to file a motion Wednesday or Thursday to bring the bill to a vote Friday or Saturday. Supporters of a filibuster said that they were close to obtaining the 41 votes necessary to block a final vote on the measure.
The House passed the 1,400-page bill after one hour of debate, with 46 Democrats joining 200 Republicans to support it. Congressmen Martin Meehan, D-Lowell, and John Tierney, D-Salem, voted against the bill and were sharply critical of its passage.
Meehan called the bill "horrible" and said it was the worst piece of legislation that Congress had passed in the last five years. He said the bill was a "kickback to Republican campaign contributors."
Under the bill, Meehan said the nation would continue to rely too heavily on traditional forms of energy, such as oil and coal. He said the measure doesn't provide a great enough incentive for companies to explore "renewable" types of energy. Roughly two-thirds of the tax incentives in the bill go to oil, coal and natural gas producers, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Tierney said the bill did not "do one good thing for my district or for the country." He chastised Republicans for negotiating the bill behind closed doors.
"From what I have heard, there were plenty of energy company people in the room and no Democrats," he said. "That should raise the eyebrows of everyone across America."
The all-Republican New Hampshire delegation opposed the bill primarily because it contained a liability waiver for producers of MTBE (methyl tertiary butyl ether), a gasoline additive that has been found to contaminate groundwater. New Hampshire has filed a lawsuit against makers of MTBE, contending that the product contains a carcinogen that has been found in 15 percent of the state's public water supply.
The MTBE waiver was demanded by Congressman Billy Tauzin, R-La., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas. Both of their districts house MTBE producers.
The massive bill had been held up for three years, but the late-summer blackout across the Northeast and parts of the Midwest spurred lawmakers to act. Republican negotiators finally produced an agreement Friday. The final disputes involved ethanol, a gasoline additive produced from corn, and the amount of tax credits for energy producers.
Senator Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican and chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, insisted the bill include an increase in the use of ethanol in gasoline, an issue critical to farmers in his state. That put him at loggerheads with his House counterpart, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas, a California Republican. Ultimately, the deal on ethanol was brokered two weeks ago by Vice President Dick Cheney, who pressured legislators by reminding them the energy bill was an important domestic priority for the President.
With the ethanol issue resolved, negotiators then turned to the tax portion of the legislation. Some Republicans, including Sununu, and Democrats said that with the deficit growing, the country could not afford to lose money by giving energy producers additional tax incentives. The bill's tax package was three times what the President had originally proposed.
Republican and Democratic critics charge that negotiators padded the legislation with unnecessary tax incentives that would appeal to lawmakers whose districts are home to the beneficiaries.
The Congressional Budget Office sent a letter Tuesday to Tauzin that said enactment of the bill "would reduce revenues by $17.4 billion over the 2004-2008 period and by $25.7 billion over the 2004-2013 period."
Tierney said support for the bill was along geographic, not partisan lines. In fact, several Democratic Senators from the Midwest - the prime source of the nation's corn supply -- support the bill, and Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota, who could face a tough reelection contest next year, had still not taken sides Wednesday.
Gregg Chief of Staff is a Known Quantity in New Hampshire Politics
By David Tamasi
WASHINGTON - Joel Maiola knows New Hampshire politics. At least President George W. Bush, former President George Bush, former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, Gov. Craig Benson and U.S. Sen. Judd Gregg think he does.
Maiola, 44, currently serves in Concord as Gregg's chief of staff. He has worked for the New Hampshire senator for 20 years. And he has played a major role in the state's last four Republican presidential primaries - ultimately managing the current president's New Hampshire campaign -- and its most recent gubernatorial contest.
"He is widely regarded as one of the most able political organizers and strategists in the state," said longtime GOP operative and attorney Tom Rath.
Even the chairwoman of the New Hampshire Democratic Party, Kathy Sullivan, agreed that Maiola was a "pretty well-respected" figure in state political circles.
Next year, Maiola's political prowess will again be put to use as Gregg faces a challenge from Democratic state Sen. Burton Cohen.
But in the last two years, Maiola has been in the news for a different reason. At issue are two separate but similar incidents involving elderly peace activists.
The Concord Monitor reported on October 7, 2001, that "Maiola refused to apologize for having argued repeatedly with a group of two dozen elderly peace activists" who were submitting a peace petition to Gregg and Rep. Charles Bass, R.-N.H., a few weeks after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The event was caught on tape by New Hampshire Public Television.
The newspaper quoted a Republican operative saying, "It's this kind of error in judgment that cost Bush the primary in New Hampshire." Bush was soundly defeated in 2000 by Sen. John McCain of Arizona.
In October 2002, while the Senate debated whether to authorize the use of force in Iraq, 35 members of the Seacoast Peace Response organization headed to Gregg's Newington office seeking answers to 15 questions the group had previously submitted to the senator.
Among the peace activists was Macy Morse, an 82-year-old Portsmouth resident and longtime opponent of war.
Maiola reportedly confronted Morse inside Gregg's Newington office and told her to leave the premises.
"He was in the Concord office when he found out there were 25 of us outside and another five in the office," Morse said in a recent telephone interview. "He urged us to leave by 5 p.m. because that was when the office closed."
Morse said she never felt physically threatened by Maiola. Maiola, through a Gregg spokeswoman, declined repeated requests to be interviewed for this article. Public service has been a tradition in the Maiola family. His father, Tony, has been New Hampshire's liquor commissioner for the past 12 years and his mother has served on the Newport planning board and as town selectman. A
resident of Bow, Maiola graduated from Keene State College in 1980 and, even before he graduated, began working in politics in Bush the elder's first presidential campaign, , with the help of his connections to former New Hampshire Gov. Hugh Gregg, who recently died. "He was a child prodigy," Rath said of Maiola.
Maiola's affiliation with the younger Gregg began in 1983, when Gregg was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, and has continued through Gregg's term as governor and now as senator.
Along the way, Maiola took time off from Gregg's staff to work on the New Hampshire presidential primary campaigns of the elder Bush in 1988 and 1992, and Dole in 1996. But it was Maiola's work with the current president in 2000 that caught the attention of Bush political adviser Karl Rove.
Despite the New Hampshire primary loss, Maiola was asked to join the Bush team for the campaign's final eight weeks. He went to campaign headquarters in Austin, Tex., where he was in charge of direct-mail operations and radio advertising. Serving as an assistant to Rove, Maiola got to know Bush; on election night, he was one of a small group allowed in the "boiler room," the first place where results come in.
After Bush took office, Rove asked Maiola to assist him in the White House political shop. He turned down the job to be with his wife, Karen, and children Ryan and Lauren in Bow, Maiola told the Bow Times last year.
Although he works in Concord for Gregg, Maiola remains in close contact with Rove, reportedly speaking with the President's chief political strategist as often as several times a week.
"He is probably one of the single most powerful men in the state," said James Pindell, managing editor of PoliticsNH.com, a political Web site, "and not just in Republican circles."
In fact, Business NH Magazine named Maiola one of the state's 10 most influential people. Maiola's boss, Gregg, did not make the list.
Two years ago, Maiola took a leave of absence from Gregg's staff to join Benson's general-election campaign immediately after his primary victory. Benson shook up the staff amid concern the campaign was haphazardly spending money. Pindell said an experienced political hand was needed to streamline and refine the campaign's message.
State Democratic Party chief Sullivan said Maiola was brought in to "make sure things were not messed up."
When Maiola joined the Benson campaign, he was reunited with one-time adversary Mike Dennehy, who had run McCain's successful 2000 New Hampshire primary campaign.
Rath dismissed talk that the two did not get along, saying disagreements between Dennehy and Maiola were "professional and not personal."
Now Maiola is gearing up for another race, this time on behalf of his longtime boss, Gregg.
"Maiola is the guy you call when you are in a pinch," Pindell said, although Gregg is favored to win the race. "He is to Judd Gregg what Karl Rove is to the President."
DOJ Patriot Act Website Raises Eyebrows
By David Tamasi
WASHINGTON - A Justice Department Web site designed to mobilize support for the Patriot Act touts favorable quotes from leading Democrats, including Senators John Kerry of Massachusetts and John Edwards of North Carolina, presidential contenders who are now critics of the law.
The Web site, www.lifeandliberty.gov, features comments made by Democrats and Republicans during and immediately after Congress debated and passed the Patriot Act in October 2001. It was barely more than one month after terrorists attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and Washington was desperate to find ways to root out terrorism.
Two years later, the terrain has changed. Some Democrats and Republicans who initially supported the act, which gave more powers to law enforcement agencies, now say it curtails too many civil liberties and needs to be amended. And now some Democratic presidential candidates, who are campaigning against the Patriot Act, find that their earlier statements are being used as part of a Bush administration campaign to defend the law.
The Kerry campaign, in particular, is unhappy about it.
"It is just another example of the misleading that this administration does in putting politics over policy," said campaign spokeswoman Kelly Benander. Benander did not deny the accuracy of Kerry's quotation.
Kerry has emerged as a vocal critic of the Patriot Act during the presidential primary campaign. But the Justice Department Web site quotes him as saying on the Senate floor on Oct. 25, 2001, "With the passage of this legislation, terrorist organizations will not be able . . . to do the kinds of things they did on Sept. 11."
Edwards, who voted for the Patriot Act, has also sharply criticized it and has called for the repeal of some of its provisions. Efforts to reach the Edwards campaign for comment were unsuccessful.
Blain Rethmeier, a Justice Department spokesman, said the prominent placement of Democrats on the Web site's "Congress Speaks" page was "coincidental. There is no intent behind it."
In an August press release promoting the new Web site, Barbara Comstock, then the director of public affairs for the Justice Department, said the site would attempt to "dispel some of the major myths perpetuated as part of the disinformation campaign" against the Patriot Act.
She added that ""while news reports sometimes describe the law as 'controversial,' I have included below just some of the statements previously made by members of Congress about the Patriot Act." Among them are statements by Kerry and Edwards.
The Patriot Act provides federal law enforcement officials with new tools to track and obstruct terrorists. But in the roughly two years since its unanimous enactment,, the act has been the subject of withering criticism from opponents for violating individual liberties. The most vocal critics have been Democrats running for President.
As the outcry over the act intensified, Attorney General John Ashcroft traveled across the country this summer giving speeches that defended the law as effective and fair.
The Web site's home page displays a summary of the bill with links to other pages on such subjects as "Dispelling the Myths," "Support of the People," "Responding to Congress" and the "Congress Speaks" page that includes the floor statements and press releases that are two years old.
Jameel Jaffers, a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, said the Web site was "meant to sell legislation and is clearly a political site."
The law is set to expire in 2005, and President Bush spoke at CIA Headquarters in September in support of expanding the Justice Department's authority. It is unclear whether Congress would be asked to reauthorize the act or enact a new law in its place.
Will Medicare Issues be Resolved?
By David Tamasi
WASHINGTON - They are almost all Republicans, meeting behind closed doors in an effort to resolve their differences. But time is running out for Congress to complete its work on what would be the most significant overhaul to Medicare in 40 years.
"I've always thought failure was not an option," said Massachusetts Senator Edward M. Kennedy. "But we are in the last moments of the final inning."
Republican congressional leaders have said they wish to recess this month, but first they'd like to pass a Medicare bill that is a domestic priority for them and for President Bush. But one moderate Republican whose support is considered crucial to ultimate passage is not so sure the issue will be resolved.
"I am pessimistic that a bill will get finished," said Sen. Lincoln Chafee, R-Rhode Island.
Last summer, both the House and Senate approved a $400 billion, 10-year package that would revamp the health care system for seniors and, for the first time, provide them a prescription drug benefit. Yet the bill has been hamstrung by differences between House and Senate versions, particularly a House provision that would allow direct competition between private-sector plans and Medicare.
Democrats say such competition would eventually leave seniors without care. Republicans, prodded by conservatives in the House, have insisted that private plans be allowed to compete.
In June, the House passed its Medicare bill 216-215 amid last-minute arm-twisting by House GOP leaders. With only a one-vote margin, the House leadership is keenly aware of the value of every Republican vote. Therefore, various coalitions that emerge on the legislation can hold disproportionate sway over negotiations. For example, 42 House conservatives have threatened to oppose any bill that does not contain the provision for private competition.
In the Senate, Republicans must placate the concerns of moderate Senate Democrats and the liberal Kennedy, who long has been a leader on Medicare and who is the senior Democrat on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. Kennedy supported the Senate version of Medicare, bringing with him Democrats who might otherwise have voted against the measure. As a result, his continued support is vital to the life of the bill.
"They need to keep the Senate Democrats happy and the House Republicans happy," said Congressman Martin Meehan, D-Lowell.
The two Republicans attempting to bridge the gaps are House Ways and Means chairman Bill Thomas of California and Senate Finance Committee chairman Charles Grassley of Iowa. They have engaged in several public disputes over the last few months, which has done little to inspire confidence that compromise can be reached.
"The disagreements between Thomas and Grassley are issues affecting who they represent and not between them personally," Chafee said.
Grassley reportedly wants to ensure that $25 billion goes to Medicare payments for rural states. Thomas is said to oppose that provision.
Democrats, meanwhile, have protested the fact that only two of their members--Senators John Breaux of Louisiana and Max Baucus of Montana--have been allowed to participate in the negotiations,. Last week, Congressman Charles Rangel, D-New York, attempted to join the Medicare discussions but was not permitted, Meehan said.
"There is a long way to go," he said. "To get the biggest issues resolved, you need to get Democrats a seat at the table."
It is likely to take congressional aides six to eight days to draft legislative language once an agreement has been reached. In addition, the Congressional Budget Office must review the bill to ensure it does not exceed its limit of $400 billion.
Many Congress members and advocates for senior citizens worry that if a Medicare bill is not completed this year, it will fall victim to presidential politics in 2004. But Congressman John Tierney, D-Salem, said he does not necessarily think that will be the case.
"It will be harder to get a bill next year in an election year," Tierney said. But, he said, "I don't know why that has to be a matter of course."
Tierney said that it was "politically imperative" for the President to get a Medicare bill but questioned whether the bill would contain enough for Senate Democrats to support it.
The Bush administration reportedly has agreed with House Republicans to seek possible cutbacks in Medicare benefits, including the prescription drug plan, if the program's costs exceed $400 billion.
House and Senate negotiators are scheduled to continue their daily negotiations until at least Veterans Day, Nov. 11.
Kennedy to Receive Public Service Award From Former President Bush
By David Tamasi
WASHINGTON - Most fall Friday evenings at Texas A&M University are consumed with speculation on the next day's football game. But this Friday, all eyes in College Station will be on two different quarterbacks, as former President George Bush presents Massachusetts Senator Edward M. Kennedy with "The 2003 George Bush Award for Excellence in Public Service."
Any event featuring the patriarchs of the country's two most prominent political families would merit attention. But against the backdrop of Kennedy's recent comments about former President's son -- President George W. Bush -- and his handling of the war in Iraq, the ceremony could be uncomfortable.
A spokesman for the former President brushed off any suggestions that the affair at the Bush Presidential Museum, which honors the older Bush, would be tense.
"Former President Bush is going to talk about the debate [in Washington]," said Bush spokesman James McGrath. "He will put it in perspective."
McGrath hinted the former President would suggest that political disagreements need not be personal.
The Bush Library Foundation Committee nominated Kennedy for the award last fall, and the former President "was enthusiastic about it the second he heard it," McGrath said.
Kennedy's record of public service stretches back more than four decades. He had a brief stint as assistant district attorney in Suffolk County before winning his first Senate race in 1962 to fill the seat once held by his brother, then-President John F. Kennedy. For a very brief time, he served alongside Sen. Prescott Bush, the current President's grandfather.
Kennedy, 72, is second in seniority in the upper chamber, and has often been the leading advocate in Congress on behalf of the poor, the elderly and the young. He has been his family's patriarch since the age of 36, when his brother Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated during a 1968 presidential run.
It is his long record of service to his country that landed Kennedy the award nomination about a year ago -- just around the time he was voting against granting the current President authority to wage war on Iraq.
Since then, Kennedy has emerged as one of the harshest and most vocal critics of the President's foreign policy in Iraq. Enraging Republicans last month, Kennedy told the Associated Press that the war was "a fraud" that was "made up in Texas." He followed that diatribe with another hostile critique of the President on the Senate floor during debate on the administration's $87 billion request for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"Before the war, week after week after week we were told lie after lie after lie," Kennedy said.
McGrath said that while some Republicans disagreed with the former President's decision to grant an award to Kennedy, the "award is not for excellence in conservatism, but public service."
Some conservative activists complained to the Bush Presidential Museum that the award should not go to Kennedy in light of his recent criticism of the younger Bush, McGrath said. But, Sen. Saxby Chambliss, a Georgia Republican who serves on two Senate committees with Kennedy, said he was "not aware" of any GOP senators who objected.
The White House had no comment on the issue.
This is not the first time Kennedy has taken on a wartime Republican President. His biographer, former New York Times reporter Adam Clymer, wrote that in June 1971, Kennedy charged that then-President Richard M. Nixon was "delaying serious" peace efforts in Vietnam to "coordinate them with his re-election campaign."
"The only possible excuse for continuing the discredited policy of Vietnamizing the war seems to be the President's intention to play his last great card for a peace at a time closer to 1972, when the chances will be greater that the action will benefit the coming presidential campaign," Kennedy said. At the time, the elder Bush was America's ambassador to the United Nations, charged with carrying out Nixon's policies.
In 1988, Kennedy took on the elder Bush - then the vice president -- more directly as he campaigned against Bush and on behalf of the Democratic presidential nominee, then-Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis. In a rousing speech at the Democratic National Convention, Kennedy sarcastically asked delegates "Where was George?" when the Reagan administration was embroiled in an arms-for-hostages scandal known as Iran-Contra.
Conversely, Kennedy was the only Democrat to appear at the Rose Garden ceremony when the first President Bush signed a civil rights bill in October 1991.
Kennedy often sets aside partisan differences to work with Republicans on legislation important to him. He did so most recently in 2001, when he worked with the current Bush administration on an education reform law called No Child Left Behind.
Kennedy spokesman David Smith said the senator was "very much" looking forward to the awards ceremony Friday night and would be traveling with "several family members" to Texas to receive the award. Notably absent will be the Kennedy family's newest entrant to elected office: incoming California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Bradley Learning the Ropes Inside the Beltway
By David Tamasi
WASHINGTON - A little more than a year ago, Jeb Bradley cast a vote in the New Hampshire House to establish an employee recognition and award program. Now, he is preparing to travel to Iraq as part of a congressional delegation.
The venture overseas--Bradley said he couldn't disclose the exact details of his trip yet--signals his conversion from state legislator to member of the U.S. Congress.
As his first year in the House comes to a close, Bradley said the biggest difference between serving in Congress and in the New Hampshire legislature is the need to understand a variety of domestic and foreign issues. He served 12 years in the state legislature.
"When I was in the legislature, I was able to almost exclusively focus on a couple of issues," he said in an interview. "Here, there are a lot of things that were not really part of my experience in the legislature."
Bradley listed foreign policy and veterans' affairs as two examples of subjects on which he had to "broaden my perspective."
Bradley defeated Democrat Martha Fuller Clark last November in a race for the House seat vacated by now-Senator John Sununu. Since he took the oath of office in January, Bradley has been thrown into the front lines of national policy debates over national security, the economy and health care.
"When I do town meetings at home, those are the big issues that people are talking about," he said.
Sitting in his Capitol Hill office, Bradley was relaxed as he hewed to the Republican Party line on a number of issues. He expressed support for President Bush, but acknowledged that many of his constituents are concerned about the conflict in Iraq.
"I get a lot of questions, certainly," he said. "But I think there is broad support for the President and an understanding that he is doing everything in his power to make Americans secure."
Bradley added that there will "always be people who argue over details."
Though the conflict in Iraq dominates the national and local headlines, Congress is also hoping to complete work on Medicare and energy legislation before recessing for the year in November. Bradley said he believed the Medicare reform bill had a better chance of passage than the energy bill but cautioned that his comments were based on "what he has heard."
And therein lies another change for Bradley. Last year in the state legislature, Bradley was an intimate player in the passage of the New Hampshire Clean Power Act. Now, as a freshman in Congress, he is generally out of the loop. Decisions in Congress are made by committee chairs and party leaders who gain positions, in part, because of their seniority. Freshmen are rarely involved in the discussions that lead to important legislation.
Currently, the Medicare bill is the focus of intense negotiations between House and Senate lawmakers. House Republicans are seeking a bill that would include a provision to allow private companies to compete with the government-sponsored health plan for seniors. Senate Democrats oppose this measure because, they say, it would leave poorer seniors with inadequate coverage. The issue has emerged as a key sticking point. Just this week Bush stepped into the fray to urge Congress to send him a bill he could sign.
"There is a lot of support for it [Medicare]," Bradley said. "I think that there will be ways of bridging the gap."
Bradley said he would not be surprised if there was a fallback position that would let private plans compete in some way to give seniors "some choice." House members, for example, would support medical savings accounts that allow people to set aside pre-tax dollars for their medical expenses, he said.
While expressing less confidence that consensus could be reached on an energy bill, Bradley said he doubted that a controversial provision to permit oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would be included in the final version of the bill. Critics say the drilling would destroy the environment; proponents have argued it would reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil.
Bradley said he also did not think Congress had an appetite for another round of tax cuts, but added that a bill to ease tax rates on corporations doing business overseas might be passed in the next several months. This would stem the loss of manufacturing jobs, he said.
Three weeks ago, Bradley flew on Air Force One with Bush, Sununu and fellow New Hampshire Republican Rep. Charlie Bass for a Manchester appearance before what he called a "friendly audience." Bradley said he expected the President to carry New Hampshire in the 2004 general election. Bush won by a narrow margin there in 2000.
Would the President's coattails help him in his own re-election effort?
"I hope so," Bradley laughed.
New Hampshire Senate Candidates Gregg, Cohen File Campaign Reports
By David Tamasi
WASHINGTON - While most New Hampshire voters are focused on the state's Democratic presidential primary Jan. 27, another statewide political race is looming next year.
Republican Senator Judd Gregg is seeking re-election to a third term, but faces a challenge from State Senator Burton J. Cohen, a Democrat from New Castle. Gregg is considered the favorite because of his high name recognition and his ability to raise money, which was strengthened when Gregg assumed the chairmanship of the powerful Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee when Republicans took control of the Senate this year.
Gregg reported raising $179,590 from July 1 through Sept. 30, while spending $69,413, according to records filed with the Federal Elections Commission. At the end of the three-month period, he had $1,218,300 cash on hand. Altogether, Gregg has raised $1,248,317 for his 2004 race, 57 percent of it -- $709,438 -- from political action committees (PACs). Most PACs represent business, labor or ideological interests, and committee chairs such as Gregg are often prime beneficiaries of their donations.
Yet despite Gregg's financial advantage, New Hampshire Democrats say they are optimistic about Cohen's chances.
"I think he [Cohen] is going to work very hard," said Pamela Walsh, spokeswoman for the New Hampshire Democratic Party. "There are weaknesses in Senator Gregg, and there is a growing unease with some of his positions."
Walsh blamed Gregg for Congress's failure to fully fund the No Child Left Behind Act, the education reform measure that became law in 2001. As a result, she said, New Hampshire taxpayers will have to pick an increased share of the tab to enforce the law's requirements for student testing and school performance.
The Cohen campaign insists the Democrat can be competitive with less money.
"We expect to be outspent," said Jesse Burchfield, Cohen's campaign manager. "But it is going well, and we are meeting our targets."
Cohen reported raising $98,271 from July 1 through Sept. 30 and spending $69,429, according to FEC reports. He ended the third quarter with $187,904 cash on hand. For the year, Cohen has raised $256,893. He has also lent his campaign $65,000 of his own money. In addition, Cohen reported receiving a $1,000 contribution from actress Susan Sarandon and donating $1,000 to the Democratic presidential campaign of Massachusetts Senator John Kerry.
In the last three months, Cohen spent $52,390, or about 75 percent of his total spending, on political consultants and staff. Of that, $21,200 went to the political fundraising firm of Cunningham, Harris and Associates, a significant expenditure that demonstrates Cohen's effort to bridge some of the fundraising gap with Gregg.
New Hampshire Republican Senator John Sununu, who does not face reelection until 2008, reported raising $6,050 in the three months that ended Sept. 30, while spending $28,951. He had $15,296 on hand.
The most recent campaign filing for Massachusetts Democratic Senator Edward M. Kennedy showed that during the same time period, he raised $21,670, spent $54,903 and had $62,948 cash available. He also has $3,469,109 left over from his landslide reelection in 2000, money he can spend in his next race. Kennedy, 71, was first elected to the Senate in 1962. Aides have said that he will seek another term in 2006.
Senate Approves Ban on Partial Birth Abortions
By David Tamasi
WASHINGTON - The Senate voted Tuesday to ban what opponents call partial-birth abortions, clearing the way for the first ban on a type of abortion since the Supreme Court legalized abortions in its seminal Roe v. Wade decision 30 years ago.
President Bush has said he will sign the bill, which the House passed three weeks ago. But opponents are prepared to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation in court as soon as the president signs it, according to an attorney with the Center for Reproductive Rights, which won a similar lawsuit three years ago.
The Senate voted 64-34 to approve the ban. New Hampshire Republican Senators Judd Gregg and John Sununu voted in support of the ban, while Massachusetts Democrats Edward M. Kennedy and John Kerry voted against it. Kerry, a candidate for president, was campaigning in New Hampshire and flew back to Washington for the vote.
Kennedy decried the Bush administration for "constantly attempting to undermine" Roe v. Wade.
"Proposals such as the partial-birth abortion bill are blatantly unconstitutional," he said in a statement. "Women have a constitutional right to choose, and Congress should respect that right."
Senators Gregg, Sununu and Kerry did not return phone calls seeking comment on their vote.
Partial-birth abortion is not a medical term, but refers to a controversial procedure that opponents say is generally performed late in a pregnancy on a partially delivered fetus. Abortion-rights advocates argue that the procedure is extremely rare, and that the legislation passed by Congress is so vaguely worded that it will outlaw other, more common procedures performed as early as 12 weeks into a pregnancy.
In 2000, there were 2,200 partial-birth abortions out of 1.3 million abortions performed nationally, according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a non-profit organization that conducts reproductive health research. Figures were not available by state for partial-birth abortions. But in Massachusetts, 30,410 women obtained abortions in 2000, equal to the national average, while 3,010 women in New Hampshire had abortions, 10% below the national average, the Guttmacher Institute reported.
Passage of the legislation has long been a goal of social conservatives, who expressed renewed hope when Republican's took control of the Senate last year. President Clinton twice vetoed similar bills, in 1996 and 1997, because they did not include exceptions to protect the health of the woman. Abortion-rights supporters argue the latest bill also does not offer a health exception.
As the battle shifts from Congress to the courts, abortion-rights advocates are rallying around a 5-4 Supreme Court decision in 2000 that struck down a Nebraska state law that also banned partial-birth abortions. The court ruled that the Nebraska law was unconstitutional because it did not clearly define what procedure was prohibited and did not provide a health exception for the woman.
Supporters of the ban say they have addressed the legal issues raised in the Nebraska case by tightening definitions and offering findings that show the procedure has not been used to protect women's health.
Priscilla Smith, director of the Domestic Legal Program at the Center for Reproductive Rights, said the issues before the Supreme Court in the Nebraska case were identical to the bill that is headed to Bush. The bill is slated to become law the day after Bush signs it.
Politicians Report Fundraising Totals
By David Tamasi
WASHINGTON - The two New Hampshire Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives submitted their most recent campaign fundraising reports to the Federal Election Commission this week and said that neither has a 2004 opponent yet.
Congressman Jeb Bradley, R-Wolfesboro, reported raising $84,119 during the three months that ended Sept. 30, leaving him with $291,503 cash on hand. Fifth-term Congressman Charles Bass, R-Petersboro, raised $57,560 during that period, and had an available cash balance of $101,820.
Congress members must file reports with the FEC four times a year, detailing how much money they have raised and spent.
The reports can serve as a barometer to incumbents' strengths or weaknesses. Based on the amount of money they have raised, they can scare off or invite potential challengers. Congress members run for re-election every two years, and any challengers would likely announce by January their intentions to run in 2004.
First term Congress members are generally viewed as the most vulnerable because they usually have not established the fundraising prowess that comes with long-term incumbency. By this calculation, freshman, Bradley would be most likely to draw an opponent. But his spokesman said no challenger has emerged.
"We have not heard anything about potential challengers," said Bradley's spokesman, T.J. Crawford.
A closer review of his filing revealed that nearly 40 percent, or $32,950, of the cash Bradley raised from July 1 to Sept. 30 came from political action committees (PACs) and Republican Party committees. Of the $350,888 Bradley raised so far this year, more than half, $196, 215, came from PACs and political committees, including $1,500 from General Electric's PAC. Bradley received $2,000 from the International Firefighters Association of Firefighters, two contributions totaling $7,000 from the Florida, Power & Light Company Employees PAC and $1,000 from Federal Express's PAC.
Bradley spent $44,993 in the third quarter, with $27,060 going to SCM Associates, a Republican direct mail marketing firm. New Hampshire Governor Craig Benson, a fellow Republican, contributed $1,000 to the Bradley campaign.
In the 2002 election, Democrat Martha Fuller Clark raised $2,526,066 more than Bradley. Bradley beat her 59 percent to 39 percent.
Half of the money Bass raised, $29,500, came from political action committees and the Republican Party. Bass received $1,000 donations from the Mohegan Tribe, which owns Mohegan Sun Casino and the Mashantucket Pequod Tribal Nation, owners of Foxwoods Casino, both of which are in Connecticut. In addition, the National Cable & Telecommunications PAC gave $5,000 and the American Maritime Associations PAC donated $2,000 to Bass. The New Hampshire Congressman made a $1,000 contribution to President Bush's re-election effort and gave $500 to the campaign of Nashua Mayor Bernard Streeter. He spent $13,604 in the third quarter of this year.
Bass won his last two races, even though his 2002 opponent Katrina Swett raised $1,429,259 compared to Bass's $906,760. In 2000 Barney Brannen raised $99,351 more than Bass.
Bass spokesman Sally Tibbetts said he did not have an opponent yet.
On the national level, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, a Democratic candidate for president, reported raising $3.9 million during the third quarter of the year. Kerry spent much more than that -- $7 million.
Kerry's fundraising has dropped steadily since the first three months of the year, when he took in $7 million. He raised $5.9 million from April through June. In total, Kerry has brought in nearly $17 million, considerably less than the $25 million reported by former Vermont Governor Howard Dean, who is leading Democratic presidential contenders in fundraising.
Records for Senators Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass.; Judd Gregg, R-N.H., and John Sununu, R-N.H., were not available at the end of the week because senators file their reports differently than House members, according to Barbara Riley, a spokesman for Sununu.
