Well, we’re about a week out and things are starting to get crazy. If I were Chet Culver, I’d be feeling a little nervous. Though his website touts an eight-point lead over Nussle and claims no one else can beat him, I’m a little skeptical of this as a reason to vote for Culver.
First of all, I think we’re going to beat Nussle in the fall. Period.
Secondly, Blouin and Fallon have really made tremendous gains, which shouldn’t be taken lightly. Blouin has proved his vast experience in public service make him extremely qualified, and his colleagues sure seem to recognize it. Fallon has managed to overcome his ”cooky” image and appeal to the independent-minded and party-faithful alike, building a huge, old school grassroots network.
Thirdly, Chet Culver really just doesn’t stand out to me. I can look back at the campaign season and see how the other campaigns have grown and evolved, but Culver seems to just be the “I’m ahead in the polls” guy. We’ve all heard the jokes (often cruelly cutting and quite likely bad for everyone come June 7th) that maybe Culver isn’t the smartest crayon in the box, but to me it’s something else. Politicians should not only represent the people, they should also educate them. When has Culver raised the level of discourse?
The Register today made its endorsements for competitive primary races. For Governor, they like Blouin:
He has the richest breadth of experience among the three, in both public and private sectors. He has a depth of understanding gained from decades of working directly with Iowa’s people and problems. He has the confidence to tell Iowans some uncomfortable truths, and the wisdom to propose responses that are both practical and promising.
She’s running again because she wants to bring change to Congress. She’s the best candidate to do that, as someone who is connected to her community and recognizes the challenges typical families face.
And for the 1st Congressional District, it’s Braley:
He is a fresh face on the political scene with a law degree, children still at home and an appreciation for the congressional responsibility to uphold the U.S. Constitution.
That was what distinguished him from other candidates during a recent meeting with Register editors and writers.
Of the endorsements, it’s only Schulte’s that gave me much pause. Not that I don’t like Schulte, but her endorsement read more like a personal narrative than a political endorsement, and I sort of saw Bob Chambers as the type of candidate the Register might get behind. I guess I was wrong.
I don’t know how many newspapers are planning to endorse Democratic primary candidates (I haven’t caught any others so far, and I know it’s sort of uncommon to endorse candidates in a party primary), but today the Iowa City Press-Citizenendorsed Fallon:
Rather than being dismissed as a mere leftist, Fallon’s commitment to individual freedom weaves in and out of partisan labels. His grassroots support could bring a surprise on June 6, and we believe he engages in the type of politics that we would like to see more of.
But more than that, they go candidate-by-candidate in a way that seems to provide a list of preferences: (3) Culver, (2) Blouin, and (1) Fallon.
We have toyed with the idea of endorsing a candidate (or candidates, if we do it individually) here, but I don’t know if any of us feels like it would really help in the long run.
After reading that endorsement, though, I might try to do something on my own in the days before I have to skip out (when I start work with the party in June). If a tree falls in the forest…
That said, his focus on such relatively small races is admirable. He has $5,000 to give, and he knows how far that will go in a State Senate race here. This early in the game, $5,000 could make a world of difference for whatever campaign wins. I’m not sure you could get more political benefit for the buck than by donating to one of the Democratic challengers in the state legislative races right now, and he’s smart enough to realize it.
As we draw closer to June 6th, primary day, Culver and Blouin continue to exchange accusations. Culver is now trying to paint Blouin with the same pro-Big Business, anti-farmer brush that Blouin, in his a TV ad spot, was able to color Culver with. It goes like this: first Blouin says that Culver worked as a paid lobbyist for a giant meat-packing firm. Then Culver does the classic I’m-rubber-and-you’re-glue counter by saying that actually it is Blouin who has promoted meat-packing interests in the state.
Earlier this week Culver, in his first attack ad, criticized Blouin for being against stem cell research. Then Blouin responded by saying that he would support a change in the stem cell law, a reversal on the position he held last year.
Fallon is getting marginalized even as he maintains the ‘higher ground.’ He has called for all of the candidates to run a positive campaign, but that is easy to do when no one is attacking him because he is not seen as a credible opponent. But I think Fallon is right. This is only the primary and we seem to be getting pretty heated here. Long about June 7th it seems like the Democrats might begin regretting these nasty campaign ads when Nussle drags out his war chest and begins buying up all of TV ad time he can get his hands on. After the primary it might be difficult if Culver or Blouin has to suck it up and endorse the other one, but that is what we are going to need to beat Nussle in November. Maybe it isn’t unprecedented to have negative primaries, but it seems like they are losing track of what really matters.
Sorry again for the collective hiatus from here, but we’re working hard to keep our coverage up during this recovery week after the end of school. In particular, we hope to have some coverage of Governor Vilsack’s (generally unpopular) commencement address at Grinnell earlier this week, in which he reportedly spent most of his time on US Foreign Policy.
But before we hop back on the train, it’s worth noting that Jim Nussle has redesigned his web site and general online presence — probably with the help of some very expensive (out-of-state) consultants. I’m comfortable admitting that his site is, with a few flaws, the best-looking of the gubernatorial candidates (and he’s using his email list more than the other candidates are), but that doesn’t mean he actually knows anything about the internet himself.
In addition, the top story on his site repeats what seems to be his new talking point, about “Iowa’s Energy Stool.” It’s actually a Cedar Rapids Gazette article, but Nussle is really using the stool “metaphor.” Further reinforcing the idea that Nussle talks talks out of his ass?
And, in light of this news story, here’s a photo the Nussle campaign might wish wasn’t on the Nussle family web site.
Sorry about the shortage of posts this week— the summer just began and many of our bloggers are still in transit. We should be back up to snuff shortly.
Alright, I take it back, maybe Congress.org’s Power Rankings do mean something. More likely though, it is just that Grassley’s power means something. Either way, he is using his considerable influence in D.C. to help out nearby Newton in anticipation of the Maytag plant closing. Grassley has set up a meeting with Newton Mayor Chaz Allen and the Assistant Secretary of Labor to discuss giving some assistance to Newton.
Grassley said that Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao is “very sympathetic to the Newton community” and has offered to help with resources available to the department. He said he expects the June discussion to be on the opportunities and assistance available from the agency as well as other federal departments.
I would be more impressed at the lengths to which Grassley is going to help out Newton, if it weren’t for the fact that there is obviously some politicking going on here. Boswell, Newton and Grinnell’s representative, is expected to face a serious challenge in the upcoming election. So the fact that Grassley is working independently of his Democrat colleagues is pretty significant. Unfortunately, it also seems to be working. Boswell and Harkin are calling on the Department of Labor to help Newton, but Grassley setting up a meeting is clearly a lot more useful, and clearly intended to make Boswell look ineffectual.
Not that Newton doesn’t deserve the help, but there are other towns in other districts in Iowa that are experiencing equally devastating factory closures that are not getting the same attention or assistance. If the Republicans in D.C. can do more for Newton, the Dems in Iowa are hoping to emphasize their own commitment. State economic developers have agreed to set aside $10 million over three years for Newton to assist in job replacement. (TheIowa Economic Development Board has a yearly budget of about $35 million for this kind of direct assistance.) However, Burlington and other southeastern Iowa towns have lost about 5,000 jobs in the past months (compared to Newton’s 1,800) and have not received anywhere near that kind of assistance.
Obviously this is all really good for Newton, but I trust that Boswell’s constituents won’t be so easily swayed by blatant political bribery.
Political Forecast has a post on Mike Blouin running negative TV ads against Culver. The buzz around the ads is that they are ineffective and make Blouin look desperate. I agree—this sure doesn’t seem like a frontrunner’s tactic. Then again, does Blouin look any worse than Culver’s petty jabs during the debates? Remember the “flip-flop” comment?
So let’s not pretend this is the first shot, or that Culver doesn’t have a mud trebuchet himself.
When Blouin visited Grinnell a few weeks ago, he went out of his way to stress that he would never run negative ads, but that he would “defend himself” if necessary. Sadly, he’s gone back on his pledge and stooped low. Too bad Culver was already there.
Of course, there’s still one spotless candidate—Fallon. Unfortunately, he’s wearing that stupid, stupid, hat.
So Congress.org just released congressional Power Rankings, and lo and behold, Iowa is doing pretty well.
Congressmen (and women) were ranked according to 15 ‘characteristics of power,’ including things like positions, influence, and legislative activity. You guys should probably just check out the background page to learn about their methodology, but here are some highlights:
In addition, the project team recognized that Members of Congress can exert or possess power that can’t be measured by these standard measures. Therefore, we created the “Sizzle/Fizzle” factor. For example, Sizzle factors can include a legislator’s unique background and experience (Sen. John McCain (R-AZ)) or relationships (Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY)) or newfound popularity (Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL)) that somehow adds weight to their power that is not scored in the other categories. In contrast, Fizzle factors can be applied to legislators who have seen their power diminish during the year, despite their position, due to scandal or other factors that impair the ability of the member to be effective. This was the only subjective criteria and was not weighted heavily in the overall ratings.
…
The Power Rankings project team acknowledges that Members of Congress sometimes exercise power in ways that cannot be seen or measured. The most tangible example of this is the ability to steer federal funding to their state through the appropriations process – called “earmarking.”
After these and other such stunning insights into the congressional processes, they came up with the following results:
Top five Senators:
1. Bill Frist (R-TN) 96.75
2. Arlen Specter (R-PA) 82.31
3. John McCain (R-AZ) 80.94
4. Charles Grassley (R-IA) 78.50
5. Harry Reid (D-NV) 71.06
Top five Representatives:
1. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) 97.25
2. Tom DeLay (R-TX) 63.50
3. Jerry Lewis (R-CA) 60.57
4. Don Young (R-AK) 55.00
5. F. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) 48.00
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, you heard it here first, Chuck is the 4th most powerful Senator, making Iowa proud–well, sort of.
Other surprises? Well, Tom DeLay is the #2 rep, although, one must suspect he has a pretty high Fizzle Factor, seeing as he resigned from office.
So how does Iowa stack up? Well, our fine state as a whole ranked third most powerful, with 28.92, after Nevada with 29.76 and New Mexico with 28.96. The scores come from the average of the state’s congressional delegate’s scores. Harkin weighed in at 37.94, which puts him at 35. For reps, we got Nussle at 54th with 23.44, Leach is at 69th place with 22.00, Latham is 190 with 15.50, and King is 208 with 14.94, and Grinnell’s own Boswell had a whopping 10.12, making him the 302nd most powerful representative.
Okay, so now you’re asking, so what? You’ve soldiered through this kinda long post full of numbers whose meanings are at best ill-defined and whose significance is probably illusory and you are wondering what this all means. Well, me too. Why did Congress.org do this? I don’t know! Can power be quantified? Probably not! Does this mean Iowa is going to be the proud recipient of more pork-barrell spending? Again, probably not (plus, don’t we produce pork?). Is Nussle going to call up Boswell to boast his numerical superiority tonight? One can only imagine.
