Chris Bowers has obtained a list of Bart Stupak supporters who would kill health care reform unless it further limits reproductive care. Bowers:
The reason for this, unsurprisingly, remains Bart Stupak. He is, as Natasha described this morning, working to block the entire bill unless none of the insurance options in the new health care exchanges cover abortion procedures. This is even though there is already a ban on federal funding for abortion in the bill, and in pre-existing federal law. Using an alliance of Republicans, anti-choice Democrats, and Democrats who oppose the health care bill for other reasons, Stupak is claiming that he has enough votes to block the bill for reaching the floor (though the necessary "motion to recommit" vote), unless his demands are met.
Bowers says that Sutpak does not have the votes but that he suspects that there may other holdouts willing to join Stupak for reasons other than placing further limits on abortion. In anycase his list does contain Costello and Lipinski. See the link above for the full list.
I am disappointed with Foster. He's an intelligent guy. But ever since the get got he's had Blue Dog leanings and he's been willing to say so out loud. Still he's a scientist. That should count for something.
Lipinski's a straight up machine hack. Well son-of-a-hack. Still his district is solid Democratic and he has to have some affinity with his electorate.
Actually that Bean is still persuadable is a pleasant surprise. I know we write her of as totally bought by her district's heavy pharma presence, but maybe she is more independent that we give her credit for here.
What's also interesting is our poll. We give too much credit to Foster but not enough to Costello and Halvorson. Costello is a bit far away for us to properly notice. Halvorson is still pretty new to us. And we have high hopes for Foster. That's one set of explanitions.
Update: The Howard Dean count has Foster and Lipinski as yeses. We've reported Foster here as yes as well, and I regularly forget it. I assume that the OpenLeft whip count has Foster as persuadable because he has not recently stated clear support.
I posted a long diary on Daily Kos regarding the primary race in IL 03.
It's all in the extended text of this diary.
The bottom line is that district-wide Lipinski lost a mere 0.64 points from '06 to '08.
Pera gained 5.55 points over Sullivan, and the two diversions this time lost 4.88 points from Kelly's figure. (This should add up, and doesn't quite.)
The results were varied from one section of the district to another. Lipinski lost 2.24 points in the suburbs, gained 2.72 points in the city outside the 11th ward, and lost 4.98 points in the 11th ward. The reformer (comparing Pera to Sullivan) gained 6.41 points in the suburbs, 6.61 points in the 11th ward, and lost 3.08 points in the rest of the city.
The left-wing extremist groups trying to defeat Congressman Lipinski are political punks who snicker and sneer at Southwest Siders like us. They laugh at traditional values. They mock people who go to church. They dismiss senior citizens as irrelevant relics of a bygone era. They look down their educated noses at blue-collar men and women who work for a living. They bad-mouth police and other public safety employees - except when they need a cop, of course. And they give the finger (figuratively and literally) to the men and women of the American military.
DownWithTyranny is reporting that Rep. Luis Gutierrez is un-endorsing Lipinski.
But, like so many politicians from Chicago, regardless of how they are on national issues-- and Gutierrez is good-- when it comes to local issues, the Machine rules. He's almost a mini version of Dick Durbin, an excellent progressive in Washington, but a pathetic hack and tool at home. So it came as quite the shock in Chicagoland politics today when Gutierrez officially withdrew his endorsement of Lipinski. But bitter disappointment from progressives didn't figure into the unprecedented action Gutierrez took today.
CHICAGO--The Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (ICIRR) has learned that Congressman Luis Gutierrez withdrew his endorsement of Congressman Dan Lipinski based on Congressman Lipinski's poor voting record on immigration issues. One-fifth of the district's residents are immigrants, yet Cong. Lipinski has not represented this part of his constituency.
Rep. Lipinski voted for the Sensenbrenner enforcement bill and the border fence. He voted to reauthorize the USA PATRIOT Act. He even voted for an amendment that would have punished Chicago, his own city, because it refuses to inquire about immigration status when offering police protection and other vital services."
At the same time, Rep. Lipinski has refused to support measures such as the DREAM Act to help undocumented students realize their full potential. He also refused to support the STRIVE Act, the bill co-sponsored by his Illinois colleague, Rep. Luis Gutierrez, that would offer a path for hardworking immigrants in his district and throughout the country to earn legal status and eventually become full members of our society.
the most important news at this point is that early voting has begun. for those who live in illinois' 3rd congressional district, the ballot positions are:
all the democrats in this race have filed their voter guide questions. lipinski's response states "I have also been a leader in the battle to responsibly bring our troops home from Iraq." pera's response argues that "More than anything else, voters are tired of politicians in Washington D.C. who are beholden to special interests and they are fed up with the nepotism and corruption that we see from the Lipinskis and the Strogers of Cook County." bennett's response observes:
During those 27 years [as mayor], I've worked with my fellow mayors and other public officials to transform the town and our region. We've come up with innovative solutions for building infrastructure, improving law enforcement and securing a safer environment.
Note: crossposted from daily kos. Please recommend if you feel so inclined.
On November 17, 2007, just two months ago today, Rahm Emanual's "Our Common Values" PAC made a $2,500 contribution to Congressman Dan Lipinski's reelection campaign.
AFTER Lipinski challenger Mark Pera's endorsement by Daily Kos, Open Left and Swing State Project
AFTER Mark Pera's endorsement by Firedoglake, Crooks and Liars, and Down with Tyranny
AFTER Mark Pera's endorsement by DFA
AFTER Mark Pera's endorsement by NARAL Pro-Choice America
and AFTER Mark Pera's endorsement by my local DFA group, Northside DFA.
Which means when my DFA friends and I were out there freezing our toenails off knocking on doors trying to get rid of Lipinski and elect Mark Pera, when Kossacks and FDLers and the rest of the netroots were scrounging for couch change to try to get rid of Lipinski and elect Mark Pera, Rahm was writing a check to help Lipinski's re-election campaign.
Yesterday I was out going door-to-door for Mark Pera, who is running for Congress in IL-03, a seat currently held by pro-war, anti-choice, machine "Democrat" Dan Lipinski. Our Northside DFA group has been canvassing precincts for Mark in Chicago's 11th Ward for a while now, but yesterday was my first time going out in the new year. Below are a few random stories/observations.
One of the first things we did when we got there was deliver window signs. At the first address the owner of the house was standing out on the front steps with her young child chatting with a neighbor. When we handed her the sign the child asked, "Mom, who's Mark Pera?" and she replied, "He's the one that's going to get rid of that lisping fool."
it's a brand new year. the primaries are less than a month away and the campaigns in illinois' 3rd congressional district are in full gear. at least they should be. the biggest piece of news in this race is that the endorsement session for the chicago tribune is available:
the surprising thing is that dan lipinski wasn't there. perhaps one cannot be too surprised, given the ongoing scandal that surrounds the incumbent congressman. the introductory segment of the session gives a great summary of what the different campaigns think are driving this campaign. the video starts jim capparelli, then goes to jerry bennett while mark pera is the last to give his introduction.
there's been a slew of news in this race, for everybody running. rep. lipinski got the afl-cio endorsement [PDF] and the afscme endorsement. this isn't a surprise given the association of speaker madigan with lipinski, and madigan's closeness with the unions. lipinski also got the endorsement of pipefitters local 597.
mark pera got the endorsement of NARAL/Pro-Choice America as well as the endorsement of forrest claypool, who won almost 70 percent of the vote in four il-03 townships during the 2006 primary. pera was also endorsed by reformers ald. manny flores, ald. brendan reilly, ald. scott waguespack, st. sen. dan kotowski, st. rep. john fritchey, and mwrd commissioner debra shore.
Fox News Chicago has a story that's been posted on YouTube detailing how Lipinski's petitions were passed in large part by city workers connected to Lipinski's dad, Bill Lipinski, and his political machine. From the report (my transcript):
They also found that all 41 of those city workers are also identified in the so-called "clout list" made public at the corruption trial of former "patronage chief" Robert Sorich. Sorich was convicted for running a scheme that traded city jobs and promotions for political work. Among those passing petitions for Lipinski is John Warrity, who we reported on two weeks ago. Warity was fired from his job in the Water Department for ghost pay rolling, a decision reversed on appeal by a city personnel board days after Warity made a $1,000 donation to the 11th Ward Democratic Organization - the Daley family's political base.
Best line by Better Government Association President Jay Stewart:
In a normal sane world, you would assume that when Gov. George Ryan got in trouble everyone would stop. But we're not talking about a sane world. We're talking about Illinois politics and government. They don't know how to do it the right way.
Watch the whole report. It's pretty damning for Lipinski.
For me before the internet and blogs there was "In These Times" magazine. It was probably sometime in 1977 that I was coming out of a food coop and a headline in the paper caught my eye. I was instantly hooked and became an avid reader. I would await eagerly its arrival bi-weekly or maybe even weekly at its start. It was refreshing to read intelligent "radical left" analysis that knew how to speak in terms that did not diminish that analysis yet did not depend upon shopworn political jargon.
It was published here in Chicago by James Weinstein an historian with broad associations in progressive circles. In These Times essentially kept me on top of what was really going on politically throughout the 80s and 90s. It imformed me immediately that my support for Barry Commoners third party run in 1980 was sweet, but doomed and it kept me abreast on race and labor issues as well. I owe a lot of my political breadth to that magazine.
Those same traditions continue into today's In These Times. So it was with great pleasure that I read Hounding the Bush Dogs about IL-03 and Mark Pera. As always the article covers a broader swath of territory, but that's our local interest. Much of the information is well known to us bloggers. Yet it's always nice to get a fresh perspective.
Despite the concerns about Republican takeovers, primary-race challenges could improve party discipline. Incumbents would benefit from local races that force them to regularly reconnect with constituents. In the long run, ousting incumbents who are out-of-touch could save cash and time for activists who now spend limited resources lobbying conservative Democrats. More energy could be devoted to open races. Most importantly, internal challenges can give voice to voters and activists who are shunted aside when no mechanism for accountability exists.
if media was all that mattered, the race against rep. lipinski would be lopsided. lipinski has generated a lot of negative publicity in his run-up to re-election, and you'd expect someone to take advantage of it. the incumbent faces a mini-scandal, one that doesn't particularly help his image as he tries to separate himself from his father (who handed him the seat in 2004). kristen mcqueary lays out the reasons for the lipinski scandal, and rich miller, of the capitol fax blog, summarizes:
Bill Lipinski games the system to get his kid elected to Congress. The son keeps his dad's cronies on the payroll, and two of them (includng one who remains on the payroll) are getting payments from his father's childrens' charity fund, which doesn't appear to be doing a lot of charitable work except for Dan Lipinski's benefit. Dan shares an office with his daddy's lobbying firm and even pays that firm for advice, but he insists he never talked with daddy about a project that the elder Lipinski is working on.
mark pera has emerged as the early netroots favorite. he's demonstrated that he's serious about this race, lining up pat botterman as his campaign manager and julie sweet as his deputy. pera has gotten the dfa endorsement and convinced the local dfa groups (all outside the 3rd) to send in the troops. pera just announced the endorsement of citizen action, which has been a bellweather endorsement in the past.
Daily Southtown reporter Kristen McQueary has a doozy of a column today (Thrs.) delving into the tangled web of corruption between Congressman Dan Lipinski, his lobbyist father (and paid consultant) former Congressman Bill Lipinski, and the "charity" Bill runs supposedly for kids but which makes most of its payments for political expenses, including to current and former Dan Lipinski campaign staffers.
U.S. Rep. Dan Lipinski wanted to set the record straight - about consulting fees he paid his father, about the All-American Eagle Fund, about his staff's salaries.
After our conversation, however, Lipinski only showed the record can't be straightened. It's too crooked.
Click the link above and read the whole sordid story.
So: what are YOU doing to help Mark Pera unseat this pathetic excuse for a "Democratic" elected official?
Are you flaming mad about Democratic capitulation on core values like torture, human rights, civil rights, rule of law, and the job we sent them there to do in 2006 -- getting us out of Iraq? Been angrily writing emails to your friends about how the Democrats have "sold us out?" Then let me ask you this -- why should any of them ever listen to us when, after the first election, they become part of the "incumbent protection plan" and basically become "legislators for life?"
Yes, there are some Democrats who, time and time again, do the right thing because they actually have principles and actually do represent our values. But what are the consequences when they don't?
We talk all the time about the need to "take our country back" from the right wing. But part of "taking our country back" ALSO means holding our Dem elected officials accountable and there is only one real way to do that, and that is by challenging them during the primaries. Because if they are not doing their job, it is OUR job to get them out of office!
But aren't there hardly ever any competitive primaries against Dem incumbents? Unfortunately that is true -- and it is something that needs to change. But for right now, we happen to have right here in Illinois one of only five competitive primaries against a Democratic incumbent in the entire country (according to Congressional Quarterly). And that is Mark Pera's campaign to unseat anti-choice, pro-war, machine "Democrat" Dan Lipinski.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, we have got to jump on this! I know lots of people are already gearing up for the general election, but I encourage you to give even just ONE DAY of volunteer time to this primary. If we don't, then we just need to quit our bitching about "the Democrats" because obviously it doesn't matter what Democrats do in Congress because we won't do anything about it anyway.
For more on this race, and why Lipinski needs to go, keep on reading ..
(I've been sitting on this so now I'll pile on with Kos. - promoted by wegerje)
Mark Pera (website, donate) may not be progressive enough.
If you are a Green you know what I am talking about right away and if you are a Kucinich supporter you know what I am talking about right away. You might even know what I am talking about if you are a Jesse Jackson or Jan Schakowsky supporter. What I am talking about is that there could well be an important progressive issue on which Mark Pera just simply won't be there if a crunch comes. I can't tell you what it might be because he is in campaign mode. That means that everything he says will be couched to cast as wide a net as possible. If you really need to know then you will need to analyze his past. But we really do not need to know.
Because while he may not be progressive enough for us he is more than progressive enough for us to get behind his campaign a hundred and ten percent. There is a simple reason why I say that. It is because he has taken us into his campaign. He is using and welcoming our support both nationally and locally. And even more importantly he is willing to use our frames for attacking Lipinski, the frames of "Bush Dog" and machine hack who inherited his job from his father.
Accepting the Bush Dog frame means he will be running on the platform of loyalty to the Democrtic Party's core beliefs that war is never to be engaged without somber reason and that the defense of individual rights against government abuse is important. At the top of individual rights stands choice, of course, and it is only logical that someone, Lipinski, who doesn't fully respect choice would be willing to authorize FISA. And those are important progressive stances as well.
But what's more important for us, if I may speak selfishly, than supporting the core principles that distinguish Bush dogs with their lack of support, is the association with the netroots effort to brand those Democrats as Bush Dogs. That association will become useful for us in future fights.
Which leads to the next frame that is very important to us which is fighting the enabling of authoritarian regimes. The Bush Republican regime nationally is mirrored locally by Republican and Democratic machine politics. Pera's acceptance of our local and national resources into the fight to oust the nepotistic Lipinski will lend creditability to the frame that a Todd Stroger (Cook county board president) can be unseated from the progressive side of politics instead of hoping that a Repbulican psuedo-reformer need be chanced upon.
It is very important that people see an effective attack on machine politics from progressive frames. It is important that they come to trust our ability to take on those politics. They have seen corrupt Republican regimes in Illinois and they see corrupt regimes in Chicago and Cook county. They need to see that those regimes can be taken on from an approach that does not result in a swing from the frying pan to the fire, from Democratic machine to Republican regime in Illinois and Cook county.
Voters want to see that there is a real choice, that real reform of machine politics can come from real reformers. But they have to know that we can win. Mark Pera will be an example of our ability to marshall the forces necessary to remove a nepotistic machine hack like Todd Stroger.
The comparison with the Lamont/Lieberman progressive vs authoritarian frames is real. We have a candidate in Pera that mirrors well Ned Lamont. Someone with the ability and resources who is willing to team up and work with the progressive grass and net roots. We for our part need to grab this opportunity and run with it for all its worth.
On Friday morning Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL03) sponsored a senior fair at a recreation center in Berwyn. Rita Maniotis was videotaping Lipinski taking questions from constituents. When a citizen (Loretta?) asked about Lipinski voting for the FISA bill Lipinski's chief of staff, Jerry Hurckes, at Oak Lawn trustee, started sticking his hand in the face of Maniotis. I saw this and started to videotape the encounter. See Proviso Probe.
