Earlier this year, the group No Labels unveiled a new wrinkle to their approach to bridging partisan gaps in D.C. today by bringing in members of Congress. While citizen leaders and politicos can certainly get the ball rolling by voicing a need for change, it ultimately comes down to what Congress and the President can accomplish together in a bipartisan fashion. That is especially key in the U.S. Senate and U.S. House individually and then collectively as compromise has been viewed more negatively in the growing environment of partisan voters in a redistricted national map a couple years ago that provides a very high number of non-competitive districts.
With that all in mind, the No Labels Problem Solvers have been a growing group of members of Congress who will "pledge" to the American public and their constituents and not a lobbyist group. Two of the Problem Solvers are Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick (R-PA8) and Congresswoman Cheri Bustos (D-IL17).
The two would come together and provide the following bipartisan outlook:
Far too often, people tend to focus on our differences instead of what brings us together. Despite what we all may hear, common ground does exist among lawmakers from opposing parties.
Although one of us is a Democrat and one of us is a Republican, we both feel things can and should get done in Washington. Our constituents sent us to our nation's Capital not to position and posture, but to use common sense and compromise to move our country forward.
This is why both of us joined the bipartisan group called 'No Labels,' and have been identified as Congressional Problem Solvers. We represent a wide range of opinions and beliefs, but are united in the desire to put partisanship aside and work together to find common ground.
We surely don't agree on every issue, but there are plenty of areas we can find to achieve results for the people we represent.
One area that everyone can agree on -- both Democrats and Republicans -- is the desire to root out and eliminate government waste and protect taxpayer money.
That desire is why we both support the bipartisan Government Waste Reduction Act (HR530), a common sense bill that would reduce unnecessary duplicative government services, eliminate government waste and save hard-earned taxpayer dollars, while protecting the crucial programs upon which our neighbors rely.
The Government Waste Reduction Act would establish an independent government waste reduction board tasked with developing legislative proposals based on recommendations from the non-partisan Government Accountability Office and sending them to Congress.
To promote accountability, and to include multiple points of view, the board would consist of 15 members, six from the majority party and six from the minority party in both the House and Senate, and three from the Administration.
Cutting down on unnecessary government waste is a good step in the right direction as we strive toward getting our fiscal house in order without jeopardizing essential programs like Social Security and Medicare.
The Government Waste Reduction Act alone will not solve our fiscal problems, but it is a bipartisan starting point that holds tremendous potential for reducing our deficit.
We both come from hard-working districts where our people expect their elected officials to put politics aside and do their job.
We hope our bipartisan bill not only is received as a common sense way to help reduce the deficit, but also can show the American people that governing in practical, common sense and reasonable ways is once again possible in Washington.
Sunday, April 28, 2013
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
A red state/blue state problem
Over the last few years, the state of politics in Washington D.C. has continued to become more partisan than ever. Granted there are not fights like in the old days of Congress or bitter attacks, but there are still few chances that one can catch members of opposing parties talking or hanging out. That lack of conversation and overall willingness to work with members of the other party has led to a divided Congress when it comes to votes and discussions. Recently, the Washington Post's Fred Hiatt put a focus on the problem in Congress with blue and red states and their impact on votes.
For Hiatt:
In the week since modest gun control died in the Senate, those of us who don’t think guns make the country safer have been inclined to blame a few cowardly senators whose votes could have shifted the outcome.
Unfortunately, the problem is bigger than that. Contrary to what then-Sen. Barack Obama told us in his inspiring breakout speech to the Democratic convention of 2004, there is a blue America and a red America. And the colors have been deepening over the decade since Obama spoke.
This isn’t an original thought. Journalist Bill Bishop coined the phrase “the big sort” in 2004 to describe the increasing political homogeneity of American living patterns. It comes as no surprise that some 60 percent of households in Montana own guns, compared with 13 percent in Rhode Island; or that, with similar populations, Missouri has six abortion providers and Maryland 34.
But the red-state/blue-state fissure seems to be turning into a chasm in the months since President Obama won reelection. After the Newtown massacre, Connecticut and Maryland enacted sweeping bans on assault weapons and other gun-control measures. South Dakota enacted a bill authorizing school employees to carry guns.
North Dakota enacted a bill that, if enforced, seems likely to ban most abortions, while Maryland became one of the nine states (plus the District) that recognize same-sex marriages. Meanwhile, such marriages remain illegal elsewhere and, in 30 states, unconstitutional.
As Ronald Brownstein and Stephanie Czekalinski point out in the National Journal, the chasm doesn’t run only through social issues. Blue-state governors such as Jerry Brown in California and Martin O’Malley in Maryland have engineered tax and budget increases while red-state governors such as Sam Brownback in Kansas are cutting the income tax, the budget and the state workforce. The Kansas legislature is now so far to the right that conservative Brownback finds himself trying to moderate its enthusiasm for budget-slashing.
There are still a handful of purple states. In a few (such as Virginia), the parties have compromised and made progress; in others (Wisconsin), they have gone to political war. But as The Post’s Dan Balz pointed out recently, the number of states that are divided evenly enough for presidential candidates to fight over has been steadily dwindling. In 2012, only four (Florida, Ohio, Virginia and North Carolina) were decided by five percentage points or fewer.
The encouraging news, if there is any, is that these patterns aren’t as immutable as they were, say, with the division between slave and free states before the Civil War. Populations shift over time, attitudes change, political parties evolve. The migration of foreign-born families into the heartland, for example, may help make immigration reform more achievable than it would be if immigrants were clustered only in traditional coastal cities. And, as Third Way’s Matt Bennett pointed out to me, polls show voters often are more moderate than their politicians, even in deep blue or bright red states.
But on many issues the country is sharply divided, as it was between Obama and Mitt Romney (Obama won just 51.1 percent of votes ). And while congressional gerrymandering amplifies the effect of the division, even fair redistricting would not bridge the chasm, as Rob Richie explained in a Post op-ed last fall. (Richie’s solution: Create multi-member House districts, so that the minority party in any given region could elect at least one out of three legislators.)
One result is that purported adherence to states’ rights has become more situational than ever. Red-staters want to ignore Roe v. Wade while insisting that the most permissive state’s concealed-carry law be accepted across the country. Advocates of gay marriage find themselves simultaneously against the federal Defense of Marriage Act because it doesn’t recognize Massachusetts’s primacy in allowing same-sex marriage and against California’s ban on same-sex marriage because it violates the U.S. Constitution.
On some issues, liberal and conservative policies may get a chance to compete. Will the well-funded schools of Maryland help attract business and maintain the state’s prosperity despite higher taxes, as O’Malley maintains? Or will Brownback’s tax cuts more effectively drive growth? As red states resist Obamacare and blue states embrace it, where will people be healthier?
Unfortunately, across a range of issues state diversity won’t work very well. A ban on assault weapons in Maryland is of limited use if you can buy a gun in Virginia. A married gay couple with children could risk custody if they move from Massachusetts to Mississippi.
But with Americans living in two separate worlds, that may be the reality we face for some time to come.
For Hiatt:
In the week since modest gun control died in the Senate, those of us who don’t think guns make the country safer have been inclined to blame a few cowardly senators whose votes could have shifted the outcome.
Unfortunately, the problem is bigger than that. Contrary to what then-Sen. Barack Obama told us in his inspiring breakout speech to the Democratic convention of 2004, there is a blue America and a red America. And the colors have been deepening over the decade since Obama spoke.
This isn’t an original thought. Journalist Bill Bishop coined the phrase “the big sort” in 2004 to describe the increasing political homogeneity of American living patterns. It comes as no surprise that some 60 percent of households in Montana own guns, compared with 13 percent in Rhode Island; or that, with similar populations, Missouri has six abortion providers and Maryland 34.
But the red-state/blue-state fissure seems to be turning into a chasm in the months since President Obama won reelection. After the Newtown massacre, Connecticut and Maryland enacted sweeping bans on assault weapons and other gun-control measures. South Dakota enacted a bill authorizing school employees to carry guns.
North Dakota enacted a bill that, if enforced, seems likely to ban most abortions, while Maryland became one of the nine states (plus the District) that recognize same-sex marriages. Meanwhile, such marriages remain illegal elsewhere and, in 30 states, unconstitutional.
As Ronald Brownstein and Stephanie Czekalinski point out in the National Journal, the chasm doesn’t run only through social issues. Blue-state governors such as Jerry Brown in California and Martin O’Malley in Maryland have engineered tax and budget increases while red-state governors such as Sam Brownback in Kansas are cutting the income tax, the budget and the state workforce. The Kansas legislature is now so far to the right that conservative Brownback finds himself trying to moderate its enthusiasm for budget-slashing.
There are still a handful of purple states. In a few (such as Virginia), the parties have compromised and made progress; in others (Wisconsin), they have gone to political war. But as The Post’s Dan Balz pointed out recently, the number of states that are divided evenly enough for presidential candidates to fight over has been steadily dwindling. In 2012, only four (Florida, Ohio, Virginia and North Carolina) were decided by five percentage points or fewer.
The encouraging news, if there is any, is that these patterns aren’t as immutable as they were, say, with the division between slave and free states before the Civil War. Populations shift over time, attitudes change, political parties evolve. The migration of foreign-born families into the heartland, for example, may help make immigration reform more achievable than it would be if immigrants were clustered only in traditional coastal cities. And, as Third Way’s Matt Bennett pointed out to me, polls show voters often are more moderate than their politicians, even in deep blue or bright red states.
But on many issues the country is sharply divided, as it was between Obama and Mitt Romney (Obama won just 51.1 percent of votes ). And while congressional gerrymandering amplifies the effect of the division, even fair redistricting would not bridge the chasm, as Rob Richie explained in a Post op-ed last fall. (Richie’s solution: Create multi-member House districts, so that the minority party in any given region could elect at least one out of three legislators.)
One result is that purported adherence to states’ rights has become more situational than ever. Red-staters want to ignore Roe v. Wade while insisting that the most permissive state’s concealed-carry law be accepted across the country. Advocates of gay marriage find themselves simultaneously against the federal Defense of Marriage Act because it doesn’t recognize Massachusetts’s primacy in allowing same-sex marriage and against California’s ban on same-sex marriage because it violates the U.S. Constitution.
On some issues, liberal and conservative policies may get a chance to compete. Will the well-funded schools of Maryland help attract business and maintain the state’s prosperity despite higher taxes, as O’Malley maintains? Or will Brownback’s tax cuts more effectively drive growth? As red states resist Obamacare and blue states embrace it, where will people be healthier?
Unfortunately, across a range of issues state diversity won’t work very well. A ban on assault weapons in Maryland is of limited use if you can buy a gun in Virginia. A married gay couple with children could risk custody if they move from Massachusetts to Mississippi.
But with Americans living in two separate worlds, that may be the reality we face for some time to come.
Sunday, April 14, 2013
15 Gubernatorial Elections to Watch
While most of the attention from 2010 is directed towards the Tea Party and Republican Party's success in picking up over 50 seats as they regained control of the U.S. House, there was also a major shift in several states with gubernatorial and legislative elections. Those shifts occurred in major states like Florida, Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania; all states typically monitored during a presidential election. Add in Virginia in 2009 and you have a lot of success for Republicans at the state level. Now, it is time for elections in all those states over the next year plus. The impact in 2013/2014 might not be as large as 2009/2010 when redistricting was about to occur and new legislative and congressional lines were drawn based on population shifts. With the next major gubernatorial election cycle ahead, there are multiple races to watch. The Washington Post's the Fix has listed 15.
Here is that list to watch:
15. New Hampshire (Democratic-controlled): There’s a new Sununu on the scene. Republican Chris Sununu, the son of former governor and White House chief of staff John H. Sununu and brother of former senator John E. Sununu, is reportedly looking at challenging first-term Gov. Maggie Hassan (D) in 2014. Other GOP options include former congressman Frank Guinta, who lost his reelection bid in 2012 after one term.
14. Arizona (Republican-controlled): Former Clinton White House aide Fred DuVal (D) picked up endorsements this week from a trio of former Democratic governors. But he may not have the field to himself, with state Rep. Chad Campbell (D) showing interest, too. There hasn’t been much buzz lately about Gov. Jan Brewer (R) challenging the state Constitution to pursue another term (there had been some late last year), and if she doesn’t try to run again, look for a potentially crowded GOP field. Republicans such as Secretary of State Ken Bennett, state Treasurer Doug Ducey and Mesa Mayor Scott Smith could possibly jump in alongside former Tempe Mayor Hugh Hallman, the AP notes.
13. Wisconsin (R): Having survived a recall attempt, Gov. Scott Walker (R) is taking his story to the national stage, stoking buzz about 2016. Walker is teaming up with former George W. Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen to pen a book about his time as governor, including his high-profile clash with labor activists. As for 2014, Walker is in decent shape early on, and Democrats have yet to find a candidate. If and when they do, this race could become more interesting.
12. Connecticut (D): Former ambassador to Ireland Tom Foley (R) officially launched his rematch with Gov. Dan Malloy (D) last month, and his campaign quickly released a poll suggesting that Malloy is highly beatable. This was a very close race in 2010, with Malloy winning by about 7,000 votes. But that was a good GOP year, and running as an incumbent is often beneficial. For now, Foley’s got a shot, but Malloy’s the favorite.
11. Massachusetts (D): Former Republican senator Scott Brown’s flirtation with a New Hampshire Senate campaign would seem to be a pretty good indication that he won’t run for Massachusetts governor in 2014. Then again, he might surprise us. Next in line is 2010 nominee Charlie Baker, who ran a solid campaign but came up short in a three-way race. Baker says he will decide on a rematch by the fall.
10. Ohio (R): It’s looking as though Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald (D),who has formed an exploratory committee, is going to be the candidate Democrats end up coalescing around. Republican Gov. John Kasich’s numbers look at whole lot better than they once did, but he’s far from invulnerable. Republican state legislators recently threw out Kasich’s proposed tax plan, a development Democrats seized on to suggest he is out of step with most of the state.
9. Illinois (D): The buzz about a potential bid by state Attorney General Lisa Madigan (D) has been ramping up, drawing attention to a pol long seen in Democratic circles as a rising star. Of course, Madigan will have to beat Gov. Pat Quinn (D) in a primary — but his numbers have been downright lousy. Meanwhile, don’t lose sight of Republican Bruce Rauner (R). The venture capitalist who is exploring a bid has raised a hefty $1.3 million.
8. South Carolina (R): Vincent Sheheen’s news moves this race up the Line one spot. His announcement, paired with Elizabeth Colbert Busch’s House bid, has given South Carolina Democrats something to get jazzed about for the first time in, well, a long time. But Republicans are trying to tie both to the national Democratic Party — and if they are successful, it could be another disappointing cycle for Democrats in the Palmetto State, given how unpopular President Obama is there.
7. Michigan (R): The good news for Democrats? Gov. Rick Snyder (R) continues to have a higher disapproval than approval rating, and 2010 opponent and Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero (D) won’t seek a rematch of his 18-point loss. The bad news? It’s not clear who will make the race. The Democratic bench in Michigan remains very thin despite the state’s blue lean, and with Rep. Gary Peters (D) looking like a good bet for the open Senate seat, it’s not clear who else will step forward.
6. Virginia (R): Both former DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe and state Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (R) are starting to take their lumps, with McAuliffe being the subject of scrutiny related to his resignation from GreenTech Automotive and Cuccinelli being targeted for failing to disclose his stock holdings on time. Expect both men to stumble repeatedly in the hottest race of 2013.
5. Pennsylvania (R): Schwartz gives Democrats a top candidate in this race. She was the House Democratic campaign arm’s chief fundraiser, which means she knows how to bring in big bucks. Other Democratic candidates might jump in, but the early read is that Schwartz has the inside track. Polling shows Corbett is vulnerable, so he’s got some work to do if he’s going to win a second term.
4. Arkansas (D): There’s no question that Mike Ross’s decision to run gives Democrats a big boost here. What was beginning to look like a lost cause for the party suddenly looks like a race where they have some hope. Still, Ross will have to get by former lieutenant governor Bill Halter in the primary while former congressman Asa Hutchinson (R) appears to have a clearer path to the GOP nomination. Republicans have the edge here, but not by as much as they did before Ross jumped in.
3. Maine (R): A new poll shows that Gov. Paul LePage (R), despite his unpopularity, could very well survive in a three-way contest. If 2010 independent nominee Eliot Cutler runs as a Democrat, though, Cutler would be an eight-point favorite in a head-to-head race. Former governor John Baldacci’s (D) flirtation with running should give Democrats great pause; he exited office with terrible approval ratings.
2. Rhode Island (Independent-controlled): What will unpopular Gov. Lincoln Chafee (I) do? He could become a Democrat – something Democratic Governors Association Chairman Peter Shumlin appeared to welcome recently – but he might find himself running against two top contenders (Treasurer Gina Raimondo and Providence Mayor Angel Taveras) if they decide to make bids. What’s more, the DGA isn’t going to endorse Chafee or anyone in a contested Democratic race, a national Democrat noted. (The group will simply support the eventual nominee.) If he runs as an independent, Chafee may still lose a three-way race. There are not a lot of outs for him in this race.
1. Florida (R): The good news for former governor Charlie Crist (D) is that it doesn’t sound as if 2010 nominee Alex Sink is going to run. If Crist runs and ends up the Democratic nominee, and Gov. Rick Scott (R) isn’t felled in a primary, we could be in for an interesting Sunshine State general election. In one corner would be Scott, who has angered both the political left and the right. In the other, Crist, who abandoned the GOP for a Democratic Party in which some voters may be skeptical of him. Money talks in the state with so many expensive media markets. Crist and Scott (a huge self-funder in 2010) would each be expected to spend big. In the end, this still looks like a very tough hold for the GOP.
Here is that list to watch:
15. New Hampshire (Democratic-controlled): There’s a new Sununu on the scene. Republican Chris Sununu, the son of former governor and White House chief of staff John H. Sununu and brother of former senator John E. Sununu, is reportedly looking at challenging first-term Gov. Maggie Hassan (D) in 2014. Other GOP options include former congressman Frank Guinta, who lost his reelection bid in 2012 after one term.
14. Arizona (Republican-controlled): Former Clinton White House aide Fred DuVal (D) picked up endorsements this week from a trio of former Democratic governors. But he may not have the field to himself, with state Rep. Chad Campbell (D) showing interest, too. There hasn’t been much buzz lately about Gov. Jan Brewer (R) challenging the state Constitution to pursue another term (there had been some late last year), and if she doesn’t try to run again, look for a potentially crowded GOP field. Republicans such as Secretary of State Ken Bennett, state Treasurer Doug Ducey and Mesa Mayor Scott Smith could possibly jump in alongside former Tempe Mayor Hugh Hallman, the AP notes.
13. Wisconsin (R): Having survived a recall attempt, Gov. Scott Walker (R) is taking his story to the national stage, stoking buzz about 2016. Walker is teaming up with former George W. Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen to pen a book about his time as governor, including his high-profile clash with labor activists. As for 2014, Walker is in decent shape early on, and Democrats have yet to find a candidate. If and when they do, this race could become more interesting.
12. Connecticut (D): Former ambassador to Ireland Tom Foley (R) officially launched his rematch with Gov. Dan Malloy (D) last month, and his campaign quickly released a poll suggesting that Malloy is highly beatable. This was a very close race in 2010, with Malloy winning by about 7,000 votes. But that was a good GOP year, and running as an incumbent is often beneficial. For now, Foley’s got a shot, but Malloy’s the favorite.
11. Massachusetts (D): Former Republican senator Scott Brown’s flirtation with a New Hampshire Senate campaign would seem to be a pretty good indication that he won’t run for Massachusetts governor in 2014. Then again, he might surprise us. Next in line is 2010 nominee Charlie Baker, who ran a solid campaign but came up short in a three-way race. Baker says he will decide on a rematch by the fall.
10. Ohio (R): It’s looking as though Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald (D),who has formed an exploratory committee, is going to be the candidate Democrats end up coalescing around. Republican Gov. John Kasich’s numbers look at whole lot better than they once did, but he’s far from invulnerable. Republican state legislators recently threw out Kasich’s proposed tax plan, a development Democrats seized on to suggest he is out of step with most of the state.
9. Illinois (D): The buzz about a potential bid by state Attorney General Lisa Madigan (D) has been ramping up, drawing attention to a pol long seen in Democratic circles as a rising star. Of course, Madigan will have to beat Gov. Pat Quinn (D) in a primary — but his numbers have been downright lousy. Meanwhile, don’t lose sight of Republican Bruce Rauner (R). The venture capitalist who is exploring a bid has raised a hefty $1.3 million.
8. South Carolina (R): Vincent Sheheen’s news moves this race up the Line one spot. His announcement, paired with Elizabeth Colbert Busch’s House bid, has given South Carolina Democrats something to get jazzed about for the first time in, well, a long time. But Republicans are trying to tie both to the national Democratic Party — and if they are successful, it could be another disappointing cycle for Democrats in the Palmetto State, given how unpopular President Obama is there.
7. Michigan (R): The good news for Democrats? Gov. Rick Snyder (R) continues to have a higher disapproval than approval rating, and 2010 opponent and Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero (D) won’t seek a rematch of his 18-point loss. The bad news? It’s not clear who will make the race. The Democratic bench in Michigan remains very thin despite the state’s blue lean, and with Rep. Gary Peters (D) looking like a good bet for the open Senate seat, it’s not clear who else will step forward.
6. Virginia (R): Both former DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe and state Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (R) are starting to take their lumps, with McAuliffe being the subject of scrutiny related to his resignation from GreenTech Automotive and Cuccinelli being targeted for failing to disclose his stock holdings on time. Expect both men to stumble repeatedly in the hottest race of 2013.
5. Pennsylvania (R): Schwartz gives Democrats a top candidate in this race. She was the House Democratic campaign arm’s chief fundraiser, which means she knows how to bring in big bucks. Other Democratic candidates might jump in, but the early read is that Schwartz has the inside track. Polling shows Corbett is vulnerable, so he’s got some work to do if he’s going to win a second term.
4. Arkansas (D): There’s no question that Mike Ross’s decision to run gives Democrats a big boost here. What was beginning to look like a lost cause for the party suddenly looks like a race where they have some hope. Still, Ross will have to get by former lieutenant governor Bill Halter in the primary while former congressman Asa Hutchinson (R) appears to have a clearer path to the GOP nomination. Republicans have the edge here, but not by as much as they did before Ross jumped in.
3. Maine (R): A new poll shows that Gov. Paul LePage (R), despite his unpopularity, could very well survive in a three-way contest. If 2010 independent nominee Eliot Cutler runs as a Democrat, though, Cutler would be an eight-point favorite in a head-to-head race. Former governor John Baldacci’s (D) flirtation with running should give Democrats great pause; he exited office with terrible approval ratings.
2. Rhode Island (Independent-controlled): What will unpopular Gov. Lincoln Chafee (I) do? He could become a Democrat – something Democratic Governors Association Chairman Peter Shumlin appeared to welcome recently – but he might find himself running against two top contenders (Treasurer Gina Raimondo and Providence Mayor Angel Taveras) if they decide to make bids. What’s more, the DGA isn’t going to endorse Chafee or anyone in a contested Democratic race, a national Democrat noted. (The group will simply support the eventual nominee.) If he runs as an independent, Chafee may still lose a three-way race. There are not a lot of outs for him in this race.
1. Florida (R): The good news for former governor Charlie Crist (D) is that it doesn’t sound as if 2010 nominee Alex Sink is going to run. If Crist runs and ends up the Democratic nominee, and Gov. Rick Scott (R) isn’t felled in a primary, we could be in for an interesting Sunshine State general election. In one corner would be Scott, who has angered both the political left and the right. In the other, Crist, who abandoned the GOP for a Democratic Party in which some voters may be skeptical of him. Money talks in the state with so many expensive media markets. Crist and Scott (a huge self-funder in 2010) would each be expected to spend big. In the end, this still looks like a very tough hold for the GOP.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
