EMILY's List Up It Its Old Tricks Again... Trying To Slip In A Corrupt Conservative Over A Progressive Because They Like The Plumbing's Better

Except when it's bad women candidates like Michele Bachmann, Colleen Hanbusa or Katherine Clark 

I got into a friendly Twitter argument the other day with a guy who works for the Victory Fund, an LGBT PAC. He was cheering slimy New Dem Sean Patrick Maloney, who is the Democratic freshman with the worst-- i.e, most conservative-- voting record this year. He's corrupt and unworthy of being reelected, despite the fact that he's gay and married with two adorable children. His lovely family does not excuse his excruciating bad votes. (Watch this video, please.) But the Victory Fund guy and I just could not see eye to eye on this. Finally I said something like, "we both support Carl Sciortino for Congress. I back him because he has a record as the most progressive and effective member of the Massachusetts state legislature. Why do you?" I don't want to put words in his mouth; here's the exact tweet exchange:

Blue America also endorsed Heather Mizeur for governor of Maryland. It's cool that she's a woman and it's cool that she's an up front lesbian, but that certainly is NOT why we think she will make as good a governor as Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are senators. No, Mizeur is dynamite on policy and big on ideas and that's what attracted us to her. Maybe Victory Fund will back her because she's a lesbian and maybe EMILY's List will back her because she's a pro-Choice woman-- I hope so-- but Blue America backs her because she's the best candidate running.

Last year the Victory Fund endorsed a conservative Republican-- albeit a mainstream one, not a teabagger-- for Congress, Richard Tisei, over John Tierney, one of the most progressive Members of Congress AND a guy with a career-long 100% voting record on LGBT issues (unlike Tisei who was a typical Republican dick to the LGBT community when he was still a closet case). Ugghh. Maybe that's the only time the Victory Club ever made that kind of mistake, I hope so. EMILY's List, however, turned away from the progressive coalition long ago and seems to take particular delight in screwing up progressive male candidates-- especially ones with impeccable pro-Choice records-- on behalf of corrupt, untrustworthy women candidates (untrustworthy even on Choice), like when they backed the horrific anti-Semite Nikki Tinker in Memphis against Rep. Steve Cohen and the way they're pushing for corrupt warmonger Colleen Hanabusa now against Senator Brian Schatz in Hawai'i.

A friend of mine in Massachusetts sent me a post from Blue Mass about EMILY's List latest nightmare candidate, Katherine Clark, who they're running against the aforementioned Carl Sciortino. Clark is trying to pass a bill that would allow the cops to wiretap virtually anyone for anything, anytime, anywhere. She's the lead sponsor of a bill she claims would "just update" the organized crime wiretap bill on the books. The ACLU doesn't agree that she's trying to update it and they're horrified by Clark's Big Brother position that advances in communications technology,” necessitates it. The ACLU has said otherwise: “It’s not an ‘update.’ It’s a broad expansion of the wiretap law," asserts the ACLU, "to allow law enforcement to listen in to private conversations for virtually any investigative purpose.’” The ACLU is working with the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, Demand Progress, Digital Fourth, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Fight for the Future to stop Clark.

While Carl was fighting in the legislator to preserve benefits for ordinary working families, EMILY's List managed to find the lead sponsor of the very Republicanesque pension "reform" bill that was premised on cutting employee benefits and drastically raising the retirement age. That's why a coalition of over 20 Massachusetts unions including the AFL-CIO, the Massachusetts Teachers Association and AFSCME, opposed Clark's unfair conservative anti-worker approach. This is all typical of a ConservaDem who fights for corporate special interests and against ordinary working families. There are enough of them in Congress already-- way too many. Clark's vote for putting punitive restrictions against poor people in the welfare bill tells you all you need to know about her: she's a Republican at heart, masquerading as a Democrat in a blue state. Did you watch that video I suggested up near the top?

Read More

Ed Markey Won The Senate Seat-- Now Let's Make Sure Carl Sciortino Wins Ed's Old House Seat

Carl and Ed, Massachusetts progressives

Only weak minded and self-deluded Republicans were surprised by Ed Markey's healthy win yesterday in the Massachusetts special election to fill John Kerry's old Senate seat. Markey has been the foremost champion of climate change amelioration of any elected official in the entire federal government. And the Republicans put up some wealthy, crooked, right wing businessman to oppose him. Gomez spent his last days of the campaign blaming his defeat on the Republican Party. "They're wrong on too many issues. I mean, you know, you gotta realize, they gotta realize we’re in the 21st century." That helped Markey run away with a 10 point lead yesterday, despite the last minute flood of money from rich rightists and hatemongers from around the country.

As Alan Grayson, Markey's colleague in the House, put it last weeked, "Who cares about climate change? Ed Markey does." Grayson explained what thay means for the country.

Ed Markey served as the one and only Chair of the U.S. House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, during its four years of existence. Let me explain to you what an utterly thankless job that is. If you are the Chair of a committee on global warming, you've got Big Oil against you. You've got the electrical utilities against you. You've got the auto manufacturers against you. You've got the pipeline and tanker and drilling companies against you. What kind of person would want all of those headaches, just for a shot at saving Planet Earth?

Ed Markey. That kind of person.

After the Democrats took over the House in 2007, Speaker Nancy Pelosi wanted action on climate change, so she chartered a new House Committee, and put Ed Markey in charge of it. The Republicans named Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) as their Ranking Member. Sensenbrenner has said that the science of climate change is a "global conspiracy." Sensenbrenner has said that labeling carbon dioxide as a pollutant is "propaganda." Mocking concerns over climate change, Sensenbrenner once suggested that we "put catalytic converters on all our noses." Ignoring the havoc that climate change and extreme weather have wrought, Sensenbrenner suggested that climate change might help "crop yields go up." When Nobel Prizewinner Paul Krugman called climate denial "treason against the planet," Sensenbrenner boasted, "I plead guilty as charged."

For almost four years, Markey and Sensenbrenner battled it out, through 80 committee hearings and briefings. Markey gamely publicized clean energy technology, and the risks caused by climate change. Markey pushed forward legislation like H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act (which passed the House, and then Republicans filibustered it to death in the Senate). Markey's Committee educated the nation about global warming facts both horrifying (according to the World Health Organization, climate change already causes 150,000 deaths each year) and ironic (by 2030, there will be no glaciers in Glacier National Park). Markey faced down Big Oil, and ignored the steady drumbeat of nonsense and distraction from the see-no-evil, hear-no-evil, speak-evil Republican tools and zealots on the Committee.

With enemies like that, Ed Markey needs friends. And deserves them.

When the Republicans took over the House of Representatives after the 2010 election, they shut down Ed Markey's Committee. But Ed Markey remains the leading environmentalist in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Who speaks for the trees? Ed Markey does.

No one thinks Markey's win yesterday means it's time to relax. In fact, the very next thing we need to do is fill Markey's own House seat. It's a deep blue district and a Democrat will certainly win there. While Obama was winning the state of Massachusetts last November with 61% of the vote, he was winning Markey's district (MA-05) with 65%-- while Markey was being reelected with a stunning 77%! There are 24 counties in the district and Markey won every one of them. His "weakest" performance was a healthy 58% win in Southborough. There are a number of Democrats running for the seat, even progressives, but only one, state Rep. Carl Sciortino, is of a leadership caliber worthy of Ed Markey and the kind of people who elected Ed Markey. Grayson is meeting Carl today to give him some advice about how to win his race. And Blue America endorsed him a couple of months ago.

"Ed Markey’s win today," Carl told us last night, "is not just a victory for the people of Massachusetts, but a victory for the progressive movement. As Americans, we are fortunate to have his voice in the Senate-- but it comes at the cost of losing a true progressive leader in the House. There are real differences in the race to replace Senator-Elect Markey and we, as a movement, need to come together and make sure his legacy as a progressive leader in the House continues." Amen! And there's no one running quite like Carl, one of the organizers of the Massachusetts legislature's progressive caucus.

He reminded me that "in 2004, I was told by my Democratic state representative that 'we’ve done enough for ‘you people,’ when I asked him why he wouldn’t support marriage equality. Then and there, I decided to run against him in the Democratic primary-- and I beat him by 93 votes. When I got to the Massachusetts House, I was told by liberal members that the state wasn’t yet ready for a Transgender Equal Rights bill, but I filed the bill, organized a coalition, and now Massachusetts has protections for its transgender citizens. When the Democratic leadership decided to slash the retirement funds public sector employees had been promised when they signed up for their jobs, I stood up to the Democratic leadership and fought and voted for middle class workers."

Yes, so maybe you can see why Blue America-- and why House progressives-- are so enthusiastic about Carl taking over Markey's seat. I just got off the phone with him and I hope I wrote this down right:

"In Washington, there’s no question we need more strong progressives-- not just working on issues of civil rights, but on issues of economic justice. Never in American history has the gap between the wealthy and the rest of us been so great. Families are working hard, but only just able to afford the bare necessities. I will sign onto the bill to raise the minimum wage and index it to the cost of inflation. I will join the fight to close corporate tax loopholes at the federal level, just as I did in Massachusetts. And as a citizen signer of the Grayson-Takano letter, I will fight to protect Social Security, as well as fight to keep protections for those living in poverty that are so often left out of the public debate. Please help me keep Ed Markey’s seat progressive by supporting my campaign."

Monday, Carl was one of the first Democrats to react to he misguided 5-4 Supreme Court decision against women's health. On the campaign stump for Markey at the time, he told supporters that “I was proud to author and pass the Buffer Zone Bill after witnessing patients and their loved ones force their way through protestors to get to a health clinic. I always respect the right to free speech-- but there is no right to harassment and brutal intimidation, which is exactly what was going on before the bill’s passage. This law is important to ensure women’s access to reproductive health, and this challenge is just another attack from the right in the war on women-- something I will continue to aggressively fight against as a member of Congress.” If that's the kind of congressmember you want to see working in DC, please consider giving him a hand here.



Carl's statement today after the Supreme Court ruling:

“When I first ran for State Representative in 2004, I couldn’t have imagined how much progress we would make on marriage equality in nine short years. We are headed to the day to all couples have the right to marry whoever they love in any state in the country. But we are not there yet. Today is a great step forward for the thousands of couples living in states with marriage equality, and I’m so proud of Massachusetts for being a leader for equal rights. We must keep working until there is true marriage equality in every state.”

Read More

Massachusetts Senate Primary-- One Week From Today

The special election to fill the Massachusetts Senate seat that was given up on February 1 by John Kerry is June 25th. However, in a state where former governor Mitt Romney only received 37% of the vote last November-- and where every vaguely plausible Republican demurred-- the Democratic primary a week from today (April 30) is probably the place where the race will be won or lost. Blue America has endorsed Ed Markey-- and if you'd like you can contribute directly to his campaign here. So far Markey has raised $4.7 million to his primary opponent, ConservaDem Stephen Lynch's $1.5 million and Republican front-runners Michael Sullivan's $174,000 and Daniel Winslow's $395,000.

Yesterday the state's biggest and most respected newspaper, the Boston Globe endorsed Markey against Lynch. Markey is leading by 10 points in the most recent polling. (The same poll shows Republican Gabriel Gomez, who was endorsed by ex-Gov. William Weld today, leading Michael Sullivan, 33 to 27%, while state Rep. Dan Winslow has 9%.)

[A]fter 37 years of legislative action-- sometimes fruitful, sometimes fruitless, always engaged-- Markey is seeking to move to the Senate. His primary-election rival, fellow US Representative Stephen Lynch, casts Markey as a creature of Washington, beholden to its ways. It’s an understandable argument for Lynch, since many voters are frustrated with the paralysis in the capital, and looking for ways to register their disapproval.

But it’s hard to see what Ed Markey has to do with the partisanship and discord that have turned people against Congress. He’s a happy warrior, eager to join with Republicans on matters of national importance. To reject Markey simply because he knows how to get things done wouldn’t be a blow against congressional dysfunction; it would further it.

Like Markey, Lynch is also a long-serving congressman, albeit for 12 years. But he is, for better or worse, an antiestablishment figure. He doesn’t seek to be part of the congressional leadership, and tends to go his own way on major votes. Like former Senator Scott Brown, Lynch sometimes seems to believe the job of legislator is to wait until others have shown their cards-- until all the hard work of drafting bills is done-- and then vote thumbs up or thumbs down. He famously turned thumbs down on Obamacare, despite passionate entreaties from most of his colleagues in the Massachusetts delegation, President Obama, and Vicki Kennedy.

Lynch’s complaints about some of the details of the act were reasonable, but his decision to oppose it wasn’t; opportunities to reform health care come along every two decades or so, and passing one up would have been disastrous. Of course, Lynch’s career shouldn’t be judged solely by the times he’s bucked the system: In some areas, such as providing congressional oversight of the Afghan war and reforming the postal service, Lynch has been a diligent House member. But he’s chosen, in this campaign, to present himself as a principled outsider taking on the ultimate company man. The alleged company man, however, has delivered more for the people of Massachusetts; the achievement gap between Markey and Lynch is vast.

Markey has been the House’s main architect of federal telecommunications policy, guiding the creation of millions of jobs-- including many in Massachusetts. He’s also a leader in energy policy, and the prime mover of the far-reaching bill to address climate change that passed the House in 2009 but got bottled up in the Senate. He helped create the legislation that enabled President Obama to negotiate a 54.5 mpg fuel-economy standard for the 2025 model year-- one of the greatest accomplishments of Obama’s first term. The list goes on and on.

Of course, some Lynch supporters hope that voters’ eyes will glaze over, and that Markey’s work will morph into images of tedious congressional hearings and floor fights. There have been plenty of those, but Markey hasn’t lost his connection to the values of Massachusetts Democrats. On some values issues, such as abortion rights and gun control, he’s been a more forceful advocate than his rival.

Still, Lynch deserves credit for making the race. He’s brought needed competition to the short special-election campaign. He’s forced Markey to be a better candidate. Most Democratic strategists and power brokers preferred to clear the field for Markey. Lynch stepped forward anyway-- and rightly so. But Markey didn’t get where he’s gotten because of strategists and power brokers. It took hard work, through years of laying groundwork for measures that improved people’s lives... He is the best choice for Bay State Democrats.

Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey will make one of the most effective, motivated and powerful teams any state has in the U.S. Senate, something like the polar opposite of Cornyn and Cruz in Texas.

Read More