The Fighting 29th

All about New York's 29th Congressional District

VoteVets.org has launched a $500K ad campaign featuring retired generals critical of the war in Iraq. Randy Kuhl is one of the legislators targeted by the campaign. The first ad in the campaign, included after the break, is by Maj Gen (Ret) John Batiste. Batiste was highly critical of Kuhl in the 2006 campaign, and Eric Massa used Batiste's remarks in anti-Kuhl ads.

VoteVet's rationale for targeting Kuhl is that he is "very close to breaking with the President on Iraq". The local version of the ad will mention Kuhl's name and end with the tagline "Protect America, Not George Bush".

Rochesterturning calls this "big news". I agree.

During his Thursday press conference, Randy Kuhl claimed that he's in favor of benchmarks in Iraq. As reported here earlier, the benchmark provisions of H R 1591 seem like the least objectionable part of that bill. Those benchmarks put pressure on the Iraqi parliament, which is planning a two-month summer recess even though few of their legislative goals have been accomplished.

So does this mean that Kuhl would support a version of H R 1591 with benchmarks but without withdrawal deadlines? Probably not. The benchmark bill that Kuhl cosponsored, H R 1062, requires the President to report progress in Iraq to Congress. But the bill includes no penalty if the Iraqis don't meet the benchmarks. In contrast, H R 1591 holds back half of Iraqi reconstruction funding until benchmarks are met.

Kuhl claims that "[t]he bill allows us to, if they don't meet the benchmarks, remove [...] support". Since there's no funding language in the bill, I think that claim is a stretch at best, and intentionally misleading at worst.

About halfway through Randy Kuhl's town meeting in Pittsford, the person standing next to me muttered, "Why would someone want to be a Congressman?". I've often wondered that myself, and this afternoon's meeting did nothing to answer that longstanding query.

The setting was the basement of the Pittsford town hall, in the heart of the most affluent suburb in Monroe County (and the district). The players were a SRO crowd of about 60 constituents. Some of them were covered with sheets splattered with fake blood, wearing black bags over their heads and holding anti-war placards. Others were brandishing editorials from the Wall Street Journal. The common denominator was outrage and dissatisfaction: with the government in general, and John R Kuhl, Jr. in particular.

I'd like to give an calm analysis of the interplay of ideas that occurred, but frankly the whole thing was a bit overwhelming. An undercurrent of dissatisfied grumbling would sometimes drown out the speakers. Some participants were critical of Kuhl for not answering their questions, while others cut him off as he attempted to explain his position. Towards the end, there was yelling. It wasn't fit for kids or the elderly, though at least one of the former and many of the latter were present.

I'm not sure that any real conclusion about Kuhl, his constituents, or the 29th can be drawn from this mudfight. Nevertheless, I'll offer a few highlights.

First, the comedy. One constituent began by saying that he had come to make a tougher statement, but since Kuhl was answering questions, he would give a "nice speech". His next sentence: "You have allowed yourself to become a puppet of the Bush Administration." One wonders what he would have said if he weren't making nice.

At a couple of points, Kuhl pointed out that some of the participants had been in other town meetings. One gentleman in particular, who was wearing a red Legion cap, was clearly well-known to Kuhl. He spent at least five minutes berating Kuhl for using the term "assured funding" instead of "mandatory funding" in a letter about the Veterans' Administration. A few minutes earlier, his friend had loudly declaimed that the most important issue facing the country was "bees". Actually, that might be true, and Randy's position on the Agriculture Committee probably gives him some insight on the issue. Unfortunately, the bee man kept cutting Randy off as he tried to answer.

Perhaps the most tragic figure was a dissatisfied Republican who had voted for Republicans all his life, except for the last two elections. He asked why the Republicans didn't have a "bit of courage" to stand up to the Bush Administration. His question was followed by a round of applause from the anti-war contingent, which he waved away, saying he was "talking as a Republican". He, too, didn't get an answer because someone immediately asked another question. He walked out in disgust a few minutes later.

Kuhl's demeanor was a bit different from March's meeting in Henrietta. I missed the first few minutes of this meeting, so perhaps Kuhl had laid down rules about it being a "listening opportunity." Whether or not he's still holding on to that convenient fiction, he seemed more willing to answer questions today. He tried the "I'm here to listen" line a few times, but the crowd was on to him, and they were adamant about demanding answers. Kuhl did give a few answers, and he might have said more had he been given the chance. Some of the answers were on point, and some were full of misdirection, but on the whole he seemed more willing to engage the audience than he did in Henrietta.

The overall impression I got from the meeting was that of people talking past each other. Some hot topics were the Virginia Tech shootings (gun control), Immigration (with the main concern being cutting off illegal immigration), Gonzales, melamine in the food supply and the war in Iraq. On all of those topics, I don't think anyone was satisfied.

Though I'm tempted, I can't really blame Kuhl for not satisfying this group. They came to yell at Kuhl, and Kuhl came to get yelled at. Both sides played their roles, and then, like most well-organized performances, it ended at the appointed time.

This afternoon, Randy Kuhl voted for H R 1592, an anti-Hate Crime bill which he cosponsored. The White House has vowed to veto this bill on the grounds that the bill federalizes and duplicates existing state and local laws. There's also a subtext: some far-right groups oppose this bill on the grounds that it adds homosexuals to the list of those who might be the victims of hate crimes. Kuhl was one of only 25 Republicans to vote for the bill.

Sources tell Rochesterturning that the DCCC is going to remain neutral in the contest in the 29th. I don't agree. My take is that the DCCC is going to maintain the appearance of neutrality while putting in place measures that support Louise Slaughter's handpicked wealthy candidate, David Nachbar.

Earlier this year, Eric Massa began raising money with the claim that the DCCC will consider his race a "top tier" race if he raises $300,000 by the end of June. At the time, I thought that his claim was just part of the usual fundraising rhetoric and didn't give it much thought. In the light of Nachbar's candidacy, however, this claim appears more interesting, since Nachbar can become a "top tier" candidate by simply writing a check. Once Nachbar is "top tier", it will become easier for him to raise money, and harder for Massa.

Obviously, this is pure opinion and speculation, but it can easily be verified by anyone who keeps tabs on DCCC press releases and FEC quarterly reports.

Someone forwarded me an email from a Southern Tier Democratic Party chair. Aside from expressing regret at Nachbar's candidacy, it also reported that most of the Southern Tier Democratic Committees are so upset by Nachbar's candidacy that they won't even meet with him.

The least surprising event of the day was Randy Kuhl's predictable vote against an override of the President's veto of the Iraq Emergency Supplemental.

A bookkeeping note for those of you following the significant votes page: I only count the supplemental as one vote. If I tracked every vote for every issue, the percentage derived on that page wouldn't make much sense.

Today, commenters on this blog and on Rochesterturning have been eviscerating the Nachbar candidacy. I agree. Nachbar's candidacy, if pursued, will be a disaster for the Democrats in the 29th. I say this knowing only a little bit about Nachbar, but I would say it even if he were the second coming of Christ fused with the ghost of JFK presented in the corporeal shell of Barack Obama.

I agree with those who say that a candidate from the North can't win for structural reasons. More importantly, a wealthy candidate from Pittsford is even more surely doomed to fail in the primary as well as the general election. The reasons for this encompass both pride and pragmatism.

Unlike Monroe County, where the local newspapers barely cover any Members of Congress, the Southern newspapers are all over their representative. In addition, Kuhl is often the featured speaker at important events, like commencement exercises. Replacing a local resident who's in touch with the needs of the Southern Tier with an executive from Monroe County (someone whose knowledge of that part of the district might be limited to a couple of winery tours) would be a huge blow to the pride of people in the South. It would be tantamount to losing representation.

More pragmatically, someone who lives in the Southern Tier is well-acquainted with the needs of that part of the district, which are quite different from those of the North. Let's begin with agriculture. Though this certainly isn't Massa or Kuhl's strong point, both have spent years (or decades, in Kuhl's case) listening to farmers. Nachbar and his wife have built a horse barn on their property, but I doubt that he's going to resonate with farmers. Nor is his experience in upper-middle-class Pittsford prepared him to understand the issues of the relatively poor Southern 29th. The towns in that part of the state are hurting. Unless they're represented by someone who lives in their area, the residents of the Southern 29th will fear that their representative will focus too much time and attention on the needs of the relatively wealthy Northern suburbs.

For Southerners, the presence of an hard-working Congressman who understands their needs is absolutely critical to the well-being of their part of the state. Instead of Republicans crossing over to support Massa, as we saw in 2006, we'll see Democrats pulling the Kuhl lever in the highly unlikely event that Nachbar makes it to the general election.

Now let's look at the pernicious influence of Louise Slaughter in all of this.

Louise Slaughter clearly doesn't like Eric Massa. I have yet to see anything more than the most perfunctory endorsement of Massa from her. Louise didn't campaign last election because of a case of the shingles, but her office didn't work for Massa either. Louise pushed Nachbar in 2006, and he wisely withdrew in the face of Massa's quality candidacy. In 2008, apparently Nachbar and Slaughter have decided that announcing early is a wise strategy, and it is: their Machiavellian scheme will prevent Massa from doing any major fundraising and choke off his campaign for a solid year.

By declaring herself for Nachbar, Slaughter will freeze a lot of the national money that would have otherwise have come Massa's way. As the chair of the powerful House Rules committee, Louise is a person that potential donors won't want to cross. So, instead of sending Massa some coin, those donors will either stay out or support Nachbar. It really doesn't matter, since Nachbar has enough money to self-finance the primary. Massa hasn't cashed in millions of B&L stock options, so the effect of the Nachbar announcement on his campaign will be debilitating.

Massa's dead right when he says that $3 million is what it's going to take to win the 29th. The Nachbar candidacy, with Slaughter's support, will effectively deny him that kind of money. Whether or not Massa wins the primary (and he will win it), Nachbar's candidacy will hobble Massa's effort in the general election. Massa's fundraising goal can only be achieved with a two-year effort, and without money, Massa is a sure loser.

This seems completely bloody obvious to me, yet it seems to escape a wily politician like Slaughter. Why? The simple answer is that Louise Slaughter has no reason to understand the North/South dynamic in the 29th. She's completely out of touch with party leaders and party rank-and-file in the Southern Tier. Her focus is on Rochester and its ring suburbs. It's natural that she'd look to consolidate her power in Monroe County by hand-picking a protégé.

No politician is immune to the arrogance of power, and this move reeks of it. For those of you who watched the 2006 election closely, consider this equation: David Nachbar is to Louise Slaughter as Tammy Duckworth was to Rahm Emanuel.

Before leaving the topic of Louise, I want to deal with a comment Bud made earlier today. He noted that Louise's choice of Nachbar indicates that the "Washington establishment considers Massa a loser". I'd like to hear the reasons behind that, if Bud is interested in sharing them. I certainly agree that Slaughter risks leaving that impression. But I think the real truth here is that the establishment senses that Massa is a man who can't be controlled. When the Democrats were desperate in '06, they were willing to hold their noses and tolerate rebels like Massa (or James Webb). Now that they have the reins back, those type of mavericks aren't to the taste of the entrenched Democratic powerbrokers. They want someone who won't buck when the saddle is cinched up. Massa is not that man.

Finally, let's examine the impact of this announcement on Randy Kuhl, the man who's celebrating his second birthday, Christmas, New Year's and July 4th today. After performing cartwheels in his House office, Randy will bide his time until after the 2008 primary, which is exactly the strategy he's wanted to follow since the day after the 2006 election. Randy will love watching Massa and Nachbar argue over bullshit like which one wants troops out of Iraq faster. Every minute of primary coverage is a minute where Massa is unable to stick it to Kuhl. Kuhl will exit the primary season tanned, rested and ready to spend his enormous campaign chest on obliterating Massa over the airwaves of the 29th.

David Nachbar's candidacy represents the worst in insular party politics. I hope he comes to his senses and pulls out, but I fear that Louise's hand-picked candidate will be in it for the long haul.

The Messenger-Post Nachbar announcement is headlined with the dubious claim that Nachbar would withdraw troops from Iraq sooner than Massa. The story seems to be based on one of Massa's old position papers from his 2006 campaign website. Unless Nachbar is for an immediate withdrawal, I'll bet that his Iraq position and Massa's include a similar timeframe.

David Nachbar, a Bausch and Lomb Vice-President, intends to challenge Eric Massa for the Democratic nomination in the 29th. Nachbar, who is Louise Slaughter's (NY-28) candidate, is a millionaire from Pittsford, the most affluent suburb in Monroe County.

I'll have some further analysis on this soon, but for the time being, I'll just say this: Randy Kuhl must feel like the Democrats just gave him a second birthday. Wait -- that's not strong enough -- Randy probably feels like it is his birthday, Christmas, and the Fourth of July.