Thu, March 20, 2008 - 4:52 PM

He may be the son of a football coach, but former senator George Allen is not one to skip out on March Madness and the fun of filling out the 64-team college basketball bracket.

On his blog Allen writes, “I’m cheering for George Mason to make another storybook run, but I’m picking the UNC Tar Heels to win the championship.”

To see Allen’s handwritten bracket picks, click here.

--Neil Simon

Rep. Tom Reynolds of New York announced today he is retiring this fall, bringing to 29 the number of incumbent House Republican to do so.

Only six House Democrats have announced they are retiring. A seventh Democrat, Al Wynn of Maryland, lost his primary but his seat is expected to be won this fall by another Democrat.

The disparity in retirements is seen by political analysts as giving Democrats a huge advantage in potential pick-ups this fall, in seats seen as more competitive because no incumbent will be running. In addition, a 30th House Republican, Wayne Gilchrest of Maryland, was defeated in his primary.

Already, Democrats this month picked up a Republican seat by taking a special election early this month for the seat vacated by House Speaker Dennis Hastert of Illinois.

The opening up of Reynolds’ Western New York seat is seen as yet another possible pick-up for Democrats who already control the chamber.
Reynolds, a former head of the National Republican Congressional Committee, has seen his oversight of that unit questioned in recent weeks in the accounting scandal in which a former treasurer is alleged to have embezzled funds.

Reynolds also had been tied to the scandal involving former Florida GOP Rep. Mark Foley’s inappropriate e-mails to underage male House pages. Reynolds had said he was made aware of and told Hastert about the e-mails, but did not press Hastert to take action against Foley.

Republicans House Conference Chairman Adam Putnam had some nice words for Reynolds, following his retirement announcement.

“Tom Reynolds is perhaps the last of a dying breed, an old-fashioned statesman who revels in the rough and tumble of politics. Certainly no one has fought harder for the people of Western New York over the last four decades than Tom has. His retirement is a loss for the state delegation and the entire Republican Conference,” said Putnam.

Here are an updated list Congressional Districts or so-called “open seats” up for grabs in the U.S. House this fall, listed by the names of their incumbents who will not be running for re-election.

Republican seats:
Terry Everett, retiring from Alabama’s 2nd CD;
Rick Renzi, retiring from Arizona’s 1st CD;
John Doolittle, retiring from California’s 4th CD;
Duncan Hunter, retiring from California 52nd CD’
Tom Tancredo, retiring from Colorado’s 6th CD;
Dave Weldon, retiring from Florida’s 15 CD;
Jerry Weller, retiring from Illinois’ 11 CD;
Ray LaHood, retiring from Illinois’ 18 CD;
Ron Lewis, retiring from Kentucky’s 2nd CD;
Jim McCrery, retiring from Louisiana’s 4th CD;
Wayne Gilchrest, lost a primary, from Maryland’s 1st CD;
Jim Ramstad, retiring from Minnesota’s 3rd CD;
Kenny Hulshof, running for governor, from Missouri’s 9th CD;
Chip Pickering, retiring from Mississippi’s 3rd CD;
Jim Saxton, retiring, from New Jersey’s 3rd CD;
Mike Ferguson, retiring from New Jersey’s 7th CD;
Heather Wilson, running for U.S. Senate, from New Mexico’s 1st CD;
Steve Pearce, running for U.S. Senate, from New Mexico’s 2nd CD;
James Walsh, retiring from New York’s 25th CD;
David Hobson, retiring from Ohio’s 7th CD;
Deborah Pryce, retiring from Ohio’s 15th CD;
Ralph Regula, retiring from Ohio’s 16th CD;
John Peterson, retiring from Pennsylvania’s 5th CD;
Tom Davis, retiring from Virginia’s 11th CD;
Barbara Cubin, retiring from Wyoming’s at-large district.
Tom Reynolds, retiring from New York’s 26th District.

Democratic seats
Mark Udall, running for U.S. Senate, from Colorado’s 2nd CD;
Tom Allen, running for U.S. Senate, from Maine’s 1st CD.
Al Wynn, lost primary, from Maryland’s 4th CD;
Tom Udall, running for U.S. Senate, from New Mexico’s 3rd CD;
Michael McNulty, retiring, from New York’s 21st CD;
Darlene Hooley, retiring, from Oregon’s 5th CD.
Bud Cramer, retiring from Alabama’s 5th CD.

Here are current House seat vacancies identified by the departing lawmakers and their Congressional District. These seats are to be filled in special elections between March and June.
Republicans
Bobby Jindal, Louisiana’s 1st CD (sworn in as governor on Jan. 14).
Richard Baker, resigned from Louisiana’s 6th CD on Feb. 2.
Roger Wicker, Mississippi’s 1st CD (appointed to U.S. Senate on Dec. 31, 2007).
Democrats
Tom Lantos, California’s 12th CD (died Feb. 11).

-- Billy House

John McCain isn't the only candidate who has March Madness. Barack Obama was working on his bracket during the flight between Fayetteville and Charlotte in North Carolina on Wednesday. According to the AP story, his campaign has a $10 per person pool for this year's NCAA tournament.

Obama better hope the Charlotte police (and the Clinton campaign) don't find out about that. According to About.com, Charlotte is one of the municipalities that have made public statements pointing out that the annual pools are illegal there, as they are in most parts of the country.

-- Mark Young

Maybe because it’s the political version of US Weekly, but I find reading about the release of Hillary Clinton’s schedule fascinating.

If you’re truly nosy, you can check it all out here. But nearly every major news organization is providing good summaries of what’s in the schedules – and what isn’t in the schedules.

The best round-up of what’s being said comes from New York magazine’s Daily Intel blog. The writer points out that there’s really not a lot of good gossip in there. We just all hoped or imagined there would be.

-- Amy Dominello

Hillary Clinton pollster and chief strategist Mark Penn e-mailed supporters and reporters today to point out Barack Obama’s slide in a recent Gallup poll that shows Clinton favored by seven points over Obama among Democrats nationwide.

“For a long time we have explained that poll numbers for a candidate who has not yet been vetted or tested are not firm numbers, and we are beginning to see that clearly,” Penn wrote.

The folks at RealClearPolitics show the average of all recent Democratic polls still gives Obama the edge in the primary contest 47 percent to Clinton’s 44 percent.

Poll averages also show presumptive Republican nominee John McCain enjoying a slim lead over either Democrat in hypothetical contests. Against Obama, McCain leads 46 percent to 45 percent, with 6 percent undecided. Against Clinton, McCain leads 45 percent to 44 percent with 6 percent undecided.

--Neil H. Simon

Wed, March 19, 2008 - 4:31 PM

Florida state Senate Democratic Leader Steven A. Geller and fellow state Democratic Sen. Jeremy Ring on Wednesday unveiled a plan they said could resolve the delegate standoff between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton over the state's delegates.

The plan offered by the lawmakers would provide for seating of all of Florida’s 187 pledged delegates.

The compromise solution calls for half of the delegates to be awarded based upon the results of the Jan. 29th Florida Presidential Primary vote. That would give Hillary Clinton a 19-delegate edge.

The remainder would be seated on either the percentage of overall pledged delegates each candidate receives or the national popular vote -- measures that, as of now, would give Barack Obama a net gain of a few delegates.

The two lawmakers said that other 50 percent of delegates could be allocated according to any of several formulas, including but not limited to:

• an 50-50 split

• a proportional share based on the total popular votes received nationally excluding Michigan and Florida

• a proportional share based on the total delegate counts nationally excluding Michigan and Florida

“This plan gives us a light at the end of a very dark tunnel,” said Geller. “As we all know, as goes Florida, so goes the nation. With the enormous problems our country faces, in this presidential election it’s critical that the Democratic voices in this state be recognized and counted. This gives every stakeholder the opportunity to do just that. Since the DNC is not willing to resolve this issue, we’re calling on the two campaigns to step in and intervene.”

-- Billy House

Barack Obama’s presidential campaign this morning made its most definite statement to date in opposition to a possible redo primary in Michigan on June. 3.

In a memo sent out to the media, Robert Bauer, general counsel to the Obama campaign, says that such an election hurriedly prepared election raises the question of whether challenges arising out of errors or other breakdowns will result.

Bauer writes: "Whether the state can achieve its goals here depends on the nature and seriousness of the legal and administrative questions presented by this initiative — questions that, raised after the election, could put at risk the running of the election, undermine acceptance of the results if the election is held, and in both cases effectively deny Michigan voters, a second consecutive time, meaningful participation in the nominating process."

The Clinton campaign has been pushing for such a redo election, and the New York senator is scheduled to be in Michigan today.

Here’s the full memo from Bauer:

TO: Interested Parties
FROM: Robert F. Bauer
RE: Michigan Primary
DA: March 19, 2008

In the short time available, I have reviewed the proposed legislation to establish the June 3, 2008 primary, considering primarily those issues that bear on the central question of whether this election can be conducted successfully without undue risk of legal challenges, including those challenges arising out of errors or other breakdown induced by the schedule the State has proposed.
No one disputes that the election will have to be hurriedly prepared; and it is further accepted that it is, in material respects, unprecedented in conception and proposed structure. Michigan will be, for example, the first to state to have re-run an election in circumstances like these, to redress violations of party rules, and it will be the first to do so with the state supplying the legislative and administrative support but with private parties underwriting the costs with "soft money". Whether the state can achieve its goals here depends on the nature and seriousness of the legal and administrative questions presented by this initiative—questions that, raised after the election, could put at risk the running of the election, undermine acceptance of the results if the election is held, and in both cases effectively deny Michigan voters, a second consecutive time, meaningful participation in the nominating process.
For the reasons discussed briefly below, there are such questions and they are serious both in nature and in their potential, if not likely, impact on the June election proposal.
Voter Disqualification
Although Michigan has always run open elections, which allow voters to vote in whatever primary they prefer, voters who participated in the Republican primary in January could not vote in the June election under the proposed law. This class of voters includes Democrats and Independents who chose not to vote in the invalid Democratic primary at the time because the majority of active candidates did not appear on the ballot and the results would not be accepted under party rules.
This provision raises a significant constitutional question and, along with it, the prospect for litigation that would undermine the perceived legitimacy of the election and bring preparations to a standstill under circumstances in which such delay is effectively fatal. The claim here could also be presented to the party, under party rules, with a similar effect of putting the election and its results in serious question.
The burden on voters here is one of complete disqualification—they cannot participate in the Democratic primary in June if they voted in the January Republican primary. Their claim of a violation of their rights would rest on the fact that that the state "changed the rules in the middle of the game." These voters' choice was entirely reasonable in the circumstances: there was no valid Democratic primary available to them at the time, and they could not know that, when their choice was made, that they were disqualifying themselves from participating in a re-run Democratic primary this year that they could know would be held.
Moreover, the state will have difficulty justifying this disenfranchisement by reference to any legitimate state interest. Michigan cannot argue that it wants to limit the June primary to those who are genuinely Democrats, because it has always run fully open primaries. Voters, in other words, have a state-conferred right to vote in the Democratic party no matter what their affiliation. The primaries in January were fully open; and the decision to close them in June will not easily stand constitutional scrutiny. In any challenge, Michigan will be criticized for proposing a re-run without, in effect, restoring to voters the original choice they had—whether to participate in a meaningful Democratic primary.
In other words, the proposal offers a re-run for the State but not for all the voters. The state will have to assert an interest sufficient to justify this infringement on the voting rights of its citizens. Its challenge will be to show how, when the state is seeking to remedy a problem of its own making—failure in the first instance to observe party rules on timing—it can somehow discriminate against groups of its own citizens.
The State is also vulnerable to challenge under the party rules. Since any Republican or independent who did not vote in January in the Republican primary is fully free to participate in the June primary, the effect of the proposal is to enfranchise a class of Republicans while disenfranchising a class of Democrats—the ones who chose to vote in the Republican primary when they correctly understood that the Democratic contest was meaningless. A challenge along these lines would consume time, when time is not available, and it is not clear that the party would or could approve this exclusionary feature even if the participating candidates were to agree to it. The DNC would subject itself to legal action if it proceeds with approval of the plan with these terms included.
These voting rights issues constitute a serious vulnerability in the proposed legislation and a threat to its successful enactment and implementation.
Voting Rights Act Pre-Clearance
The June primary proposal is clearly subject to pre-clearance under the Voting Rights Act. Because of the voter disqualification feature, together with the other extraordinary circumstances, there is no reason to believe that this review will conclude promptly or without issues raised. The Justice Department is not even required to issue its ruling until 60 days have elapsed. This timeline simply does not fit within the state timeline and may only further delay preparations.
Further, should the Department of Justice object, the state would be barred from proceeding with its plan. Even if the Department pre-clears the election, objections could be pursued further in litigation initiated under another provision (Section 2) of the Voting Rights Act.
Additional Issues: Implications for Litigation
Under the bill, and in connection with meeting the demands of an election under the schedule it establishes, there are additional sources of potential legal challenge. Each of these is addressed briefly here:
(1) Voter Affirmation
The proposed legislation would call for voters to affirm that they have not participated in any other Presidential primary election in this calendar year. Should the election be close, it foreseeable that these affirmations would become a source of challenges, as we have already seen, in Texas, similar demands for the verification of up to one million voters' eligibility. Any such challenge would delay results on a timetable that does not allow for delay.
There is also a significant danger here of potential voter confusion: a voter might affirm that he or she did not participate in any other Presidential primary, by which the voter might mean the prior Democratic primary, with the result that the voter would be subject to investigation for falsely affirming what he or she believed to be true.
The result here could be extensive litigation, embarrassment to the voters, and eventual loss of credibility for the election.
(2) UOCAVA
.It is a serious risk that, under the highly compressed timetables established under the proposed bill, Michigan will be unable to satisfy the requirements for compliance with the Uniformed And Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA),, which was designed to protect our men and women in uniform, among others. The Election Assistance Commission's report in September, 2007 on the low turn-out in overseas voting called on States and local election authorities to attend closely to the requirements for the timely and reliable delivery and receipt of ballots. The fact that, as noted below, election administrators within Michigan have already raised the potential for administrative strain, if not breakdown, in the proposed June election squarely raises the foreseeable consequences for Michigan's performance of its obligations to these voters under the law.
(3) Strain on Election Preparations
Those with the most detailed knowledge about, and the greatest responsibility for, how well the proposed election will work—the clerks who will actually be charged with administering the election—have stated that the election cannot be planned and administered within this time frame. http://blog.mlive.com/kzgazette/2008/03/saginaw_county_clerk_says_redo.html (reporting the President of the Michigan Association of County Clerks conclusion that "Our software and other equipment are not designed to run (multiple) elections at the same time. There are just so many reasons why this [June election] wouldn't work").
The professional judgments in advance of the election, warning of breakdown, will be cited in litigation over any difficulties Michigan experiences over the course of endeavoring to run this election. If breakdowns occur, and especially if the election is close, it is likely that Michigan's attempt to hold this election on this timetable, in the face of these warnings from the responsible local officials, will weigh heavily against its legal position. In any litigation, it is sure to be noted, as in the past, that "Michigan is the largest . . . state that today place[s] responsibility for conducting elections primarily at the municipal level. . . . Some 274 city clerks and 1,242 township clerks . . . are primarily responsible for the actual administration of Michigan elections." Steven F. Huefner, et al., From Registration to Recounts: The Election Ecosystems of Five Midwestern States 88 (2007). An election held without regard to the independent and professional judgment of the responsible officials will, in the event of breakdown, subject the state and the party to adverse consequences in any subsequent legal accounting.
A Note on Financing
I have further reviewed the state's plan to collect the funds needed for this election from private sources. It appears that, under Michigan law, the State may, if it "appropriates" the money by separate enactment, invite private parties, individuals or groups, to contribute on an unlimited basis to support a public function such as this conduct of this election.
To the extent that this extraordinary financing provision raises issues, these arise under the Federal Election Campaign Act of l971. Throughout press accounts, supporters of the proposal and others commenting on it have referred to the private funding as "soft money." Now in formal use following the enactment of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, this term covers any funds raised and spent outside the FECA's contribution limits, source restrictions and reporting requirements to influence a federal election. Neither the national party nor candidates may solicit such funds, nor may others "acting on their behalf" as their agents.
We could expect that this issue may be raised—and it has already been identified by a leading reform organization, Democracy 21, a leading supporters of the BCRA "soft money" reforms. http://www.democracy21.org/index.asp?Type=B_PR&SEC={91FCB139-CC82-4DDD-AE4E-3A81E6427C7F}&DE={93E58584-8019-4201-A02C-4519BC65B974
Since the state is acting on behalf of the party, with the expected assistance of the candidates, a creditable case may be made that all soft monies raised have been impermissibly solicited on behalf of at least the Democratic National Committee and, possibly, Senators Obama and Clinton (to the extent that their donors are encouraged or motivated to volunteer funds). It is therefore well within the realm of possibility that such a case will be made, subjecting the party and its candidates to potential liability.

-- Billy House

Mon, March 17, 2008 - 3:20 PM

The McCain campaign hit upon a novel way to build a database of e-mail addresses. After providing some personal information (e-mail and zip code) basketball fans can fill out their picks for the NCAA tournament. Apparently once the tournament starts the site will tell you how well you picked versus the picks by Sen. McCain. There's also mention of prizes (campaign swag) to participants whose picks are most accurate.

Of course, the real game here for the campaign is gathering e-mail addresses. In the five minutes since I filled out my bracket (Go Badgers!) I received two e-mails from the campaign. Unsubscribing is as simple as following a link at the bottom of the e-mail.

-- Mark Young

Elton John believes in Hillary Clinton.

So much so, the English rocker is giving a solo performance at Radio City Music Hall in New York City on April 9 on behalf of the New York senator’s presidential campaign.

"I'm excited to support Hillary by performing at what will be a truly memorable night," said John, in a statement released by Clinton's campaign.

Added John: “I'm not a politician but I believe in the work that Hillary Clinton does."

-- Billy House

Sat, March 15, 2008 - 12:12 PM

Saturday, March 15
Geraldine Ferraro made history but she got stuck in 1984. Read my column and share your views tomorrow on mgwashington.com. See you soon!
-- Marsha Mercer

Fri, March 14, 2008 - 6:12 PM

Thirty-five years ago, on March 15, 1973, John McCain was released by Hanoi after 5 1/2 years as a prisoner of war.

In an e-mail sent out Thursday by his campaign, his release was described as "the continuation of a remarkable story with chapters yet to be written."

"Having survived life-threatening and disabling injuries, along with the brutality of the POW experience, John had steadfastly resisted communist efforts to exploit him and his fellow POWs."

"His courageous service and his political career are well known today, and now he is the presumptive nominee for the Republican Party to be the next President of the United States," the e-mail states.

-- Billy House

The idea of re-doing Florida’ primary with a special mail-in vote is all but “dead and buried,” according to Josh Rogin, a spokesman for Democratic Rep. Robert Wexler of Boca Raton, a Barack Obama supporter.

“There’s no support for it,” said Rogin today. “Next week, all the parties will concede that is not an option.”

“The only option left is to compromise, and my boss is trying to find one that everyone can live with,” Rogin said.

Added Rogin: “Obviously, the Obama campaign thinks anything other than splitting the delegate count is unfair,” of proposals to count some of Florida’s pledged 185 delegates – but not all of them.

But Hillary Clinton’s campaign, he said, continues to argue that all the delegates should be counted. Her Florida campaign spokesman could not immediately be reached.

-- Billy House

Thu, March 13, 2008 - 1:07 PM

The three people selected to head the Democratic Convention credentials committee that could have a final say on Florida’s presidential-delegate controversy are all former Clinton administration employees.

As Democrats in Florida and elsewhere continued Thursday to debate setting a mail-in revote in the state’s presidential primary, there still remained a likelihood that the controversy might not be resolved in that way.

And if a compromise is not reached by July, the issue of what to do with Florida’s Jan. 29 primary results would then be brought before the Democratic convention’s standing committee on credentials.

But if comes down to a decision of that committee, questions of fairness are sure to be raised.

That’s because the three co-chairs of that panel chosen by DNC chairman Howard Dean are Alexis Herman, former secretary of labor under former President Bill Clinton, and James Roosevelt Jr., a former associate commissioner in the Social Security Administration under Clinton, and Eliseo Roques-Arroyo, a White House Consultant on Presidential Travel and Advance from 1998 to 2000.

Both Herman and Roosevelt also played central roles in helping to spark the Florida-delegate controversy that they may eventually be called on to resolve. They are the co-chairs of the Democratic National Committee Rules Committee, the panel that moved to strip Florida of its delegates last fall, in the first place.

Only 22 other members of that 186-member committee have so far been chosen, also selected by Dean. The remaining 161 seats on the panel will be divvied up among delegates from states, most of whom have not been selected.

But Herman’s, Roosevelt’s and Roques-Arroyo’s previous ties to former President Clinton could represent yet a hurdle to any efforts by the party to resolve the controversy through – without holding a mail-in revote – without charges that the credentials committee was not acting impartially.

The credentials committee does not have a set date for its first meeting, but is expected to gather some time in July.

-- Billy House

Tue, March 11, 2008 - 11:36 PM

Tue, March 11, 2008 – 10:35 PM CDT

It looks like we’re wrapping up here at the Obama campaign. Thanks for joining us and as you read the posts below, be sure to leave your comments.

Also e-mail us your election-related pictures. Send them to photos@wjtv.com and adominello@mediageneral.com.

-- Amy Dominello

Tue, March 11, 2008 - 10:11 PM CDT

Earlier in the day I had the opportunity to speak to some voters.

Arlevia Ray liked both Clinton and Obama and she feels the Democrats are in a “no-loose” situation.

But in the end, it was Obama’s visit to Jackson yesterday that swayed her. She went to Jackson State University to hear Obama speak and she liked what he had to say on education and healthcare.

Here's Ray with her 9-year-old son, Aaron:



Even though the candidates have turned their attention to the next primary in Pennsylvania, they did well to not ignore Mississippi.

For voters, like Ray it’s what made the difference.

-- Amy Dominello