The Fighting 29th

All about New York's 29th Congressional District

Reader Rich sent a link to the Wellsville Daily Reporter's long interview with Eric Massa. Massa dropped a number of hints about the 2008 race (most notably, his wife and daughter want him to run), but there's nothing really new about his intentions in the piece.

Massa also criticizes Randy Kuhl's position on Iraq. Kuhl will have an opportunity to clarify his position when the House votes on a non-binding resolution on the war.

Deciphering Congressional voting records isn't easy. Of the 1100 roll-call votes in the 109th Congress, most were procedural or insignificant. Finding out how your representative voted on issues you care about in this mass of data can be daunting.

To help readers understand Randy Kuhl's voting record, I'm experimenting with a new page: significant votes. This page will be regularly updated with votes that meet the following criteria:

• Disputed - the vote isn't unanimous or almost-unanimous.
• Non-procedural - the vote doesn't involve referring a bill to committee or tacking on an amendment, unless the procedural vote kills a disputed bill.
• An Issue of National or Regional Relevance - the bill isn't a resolution honoring someone or renaming a postoffice.

This is a high bar: of the 73 roll-call votes in the current Congress, seven of them are significant by my measure. Of those seven votes, Randy Kuhl voted with the Democratic majority on five.

In the past month, Kuhl has been a relatively reliable member of the 60 or so Republicans who are voting against their party on significant issues. As the 110th Congress progresses, I'll be using the significant votes page to track this trend.

Reader Rich writes to report that today's Corning Leader has a story titled "Massa Mum on Run for Congress." Given the content, I'd say "coy" is a better word than "mum":

“I may keep that decision to a small group and figure out the best way to move forward from there,” Massa said Wednesday. “A decision has been made, but I'm not ready to discuss it publicly.”

Massa says that, if he runs, he'll have the backing of the Democratic party and will need to raise twice the $1.5 million he raised in 2006. He also said that he promised the party that he'd make his decision by today.

After finishing up the 100 hours last week, the House settled down to a more leisurely pace this week. Randy Kuhl voted with the majority on almost every non-procedural bill. This included his votes for the "Bob Ney - Duke Cunningham Act", which revokes the retirement of legislators convicted of felonies, and the "Mark Foley Act", also known as the House Page Board Revision Act.

Kuhl's only significant difference with the Democratic majority was his vote against HR 78, which gives some very limited voting rights to non-voting Representatives such as those from DC and Puerto Rico.

Kuhl also announced his subcomittee assignments. He will serve on six subcommittees of the three main committees on which he serves.

Two days after a letter from Randy Kuhl and four other Congressmen, Defense Secretary Gates called for an end to the stop-loss program. According to a memo obtained by The Hill newspaper, Gates included an end to stop-loss as part of wider changes to deployment policies for reserve, guard and active-duty units.

Under the new policy, the Pentagon's goal is to mobilize reserve and guard units for 12 months, and to follow that with five years of demobilization. However, the previous 24 month limit on total active service has been lifted, and the Pentagon acknowledges that some guard and reserve deployments might stretch up to 24 months. This means, for example, that units that spent 18 months in Iraq or Afghanistan might be redeployed under the new policy.

Overall, Gates' memo is a mixed bag for guard and reserve units. Stop-loss was a program aimed at individual soldiers whose tours of duty were expiring. Under the new policy, those soldiers will end their tours at the initially agreed-upon date. The new 12 month/five year deployment cycle for guard and reserve will shorten the length of each deployment for those units, but it might also lead to unexpected second deployments.

Kuhl's response to the stop-loss announcement was positive:

“This is excellent news for guardsmen and reservists and Randy is thrilled about the new defense secretary’s quick response to the issue,” said Bob VanWicklin, Rep. Kuhl’s press secretary.

Kuhl has not gone on record responding to the entire new Pentagon policy. Another member of his party, Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine, called it "wrongheaded" and "devastating".

After shaking President Bush's hand during Bush's walk to the podium last night, Randy Kuhl commented:

Tonight, the President discussed many important topics, a lot of the same issues that I’ve heard expressed during town meetings over the past two years [...] Whether it’s health care, energy, education, or immigration, the President has made some bold proposals and has asked for both parties to set aside differences and get this work done quickly for the benefit of all Americans. I couldn’t agree more. I ran for Congress so I could help solve problems like these, so let’s get to work.

I'll leave it to readers to identify the one bold proposal Kuhl failed to mention. Hint: it involves 21,500 young men and women.

Update: Reader porker points out that Kuhl put the war on the list when talking to the media later yesterday. The quote above is from his official site.

On Tuesday, a train derailed in East Rochester, just a few hundred feet from the Northern border of the 29th. As a member of the House Transportation Committee, Randy Kuhl is all over it, calling for hearings and issuing statements.

The fallout from the loss of earmarks has begun. Today's Rochester Democrat and Chronicle has a long report on the impact of lost pork. While he laments the possible loss of funding, Kuhl says that "the system has been totally abused and needs to be corrected".

Kuhl continues to refine his position on Iraq. This puts him in a delicate position. As Rochesterturning reports, Kuhl's latest press conference was full of qualifications and revisionist history. When asked whether he's changing his position on Iraq, Kuhl said the following:

“I’ve always felt I was standing on my own and that I was mischaracterized,” Rep. Kuhl said. “The general public in my district saw through that,” he added.

That's nonsense. Here's his campaign position on Iraq:

The new government of Iraq is continuing to make progress, with the Iraqi Security Force due to take over security in all 18 Iraqi provinces by the end of the year, alleviating the burden of the United States and Multinational Forces. The Iraqi Army and police forces’ increased participation has contributed to security and stability, which has, in turn, sustained Iraq's political progress.

During the campaign, Kuhl tried to hide behind the fact that he wasn't in Congress for the vote on the war to straddle the fence when pushed. However, his public pronouncements, such as the one quoted above, were consistently (and unrealistically) rosy. In the debates, he tried to leverage his trip to Iraq to hint that the situation on the ground was better than the reports in the media. It's not a mischaracterization to say that he followed the Republican playbook on Iraq -- it's a fact that almost lost him the election.

In the same press conference, Kuhl also tried to spin the Democrats' Hundred Hours as a failure:

Congress is not moving very fast... Not one bill has gone to the President for his signature. This Congress has done nothing in the first three weeks.

Well, the House (not Congress) passed 6 no-brainers that had been languishing for years, and Kuhl voted for 4 of them. That seems like progress to me.

On Wednesday and Thursday, Randy Kuhl voted for the last two bills in the Democrats' Hundred Hours agenda. Those bills ended subsidies for big oil and cut interest rates for student loans.

Overall, Kuhl supported 4 of the 6 Hundred Hours bills. He voted for:

• Enacting the 9/11 Commission Recommendations
• Increasing the Minimum Wage
• Cutting Interest Rates on Student Loans
• Ending Subsidies for Big Oil and Investing in Renewable Energy

He voted against:

• Expanding Stem Cell Research
• Negotiating for Lower Prescription Drug Prices

Randy Kuhl and four of his Republican colleagues sent a letter yesterday to Defense Secretary Robert Gates opposing the Pentagon's stop-loss policy. Stop-loss extends soldiers' tours beyond the originally-announced length.

The letter addresses stop-loss for all branches of the service (guard, reserve and active-duty). In a press release, Kuhl calls the program a "hidden draft" and says

Our guardsmen and reservists sign a contract to serve the nation for a specific period of time. The nation should honor that contract by not calling up our troops for longer than the time they initially agree to serve ...

Others who signed the letter were Republican Congressmen Ramstad (MN-3), LaTourette (OH-14) and Shays (CT-4). Ramstad and LaTourette are on record opposing the surge. Shays is wishy-washy: his support depends on the fine print.

Kuhl appears to be dipping his toe into the waters of opposition. Since we don't have enough troops to escalate in Iraq without stop-loss, opposing that policy is tantamount to opposing the surge. Another Republican in the New York delegation, John McHugh (NY-23), is on record against an increase in funding for the war. McHugh's position is especially significant since his district includes Fort Drum, home of the 10th Mountain Division. Kuhl has not gone as far as McHugh. Like Shays, he may end up opposing fine points of Bush's policy without voting against it. Votes are what count, and it will be interesting to see how far Kuhl is willing to go

Text of the letter after the break:

We are writing with respect to the President's plan to surge 21,000 troops to Iraq over the coming months, and specifically how the Department of Defense (DOD) intends to provide the manpower necessary to reach this troop level.

While we may have differing views on the President's plan, we share his desire both for a successful outcome to the war in Iraq and his commitment to the brave men and women that so honorably served our nation. It is in this regard we express our deep concern DOD finds it necessary to utilize stop-loss to meet our manpower needs. As you work with the President and the branches of the military, we urge you in strongest terms to limit the use of this policy.

When soldiers deploy for a tour abroad, they and their families literally count the days until their return home. Due to a variety of reasons, we are extending tours and recapturing those who have sought to retire and leave the military. This policy harms morale, places an undue burden on the families of soldiers, and damages the military leadership's credibility. We believe this policy will harm recruitment efforts.

In addition, while DOD has utilized stop-loss frequently throughout Operation Iraqi Freedom, we noted last week's announcement by Joint Chiefs Chairman Peter Pace that the Pentagon has abandoned its limit on the time reserve components can be required to serve on active duty. This announcement concerns us.

While our citizen-soldiers have responded admirably to their increased role in meeting our military's manpower needs, the policy change extending the cumulative time on active duty for the Iraq or Afghan war beyond 24 months betrays their trust, separates families and threatens to devastate the likelihood that active duty soldiers will follow-up their service with time serving in the Reserves.

The bottom line is our troops and their families deserve realistic estimates about the length of their deployment. If a deployment is for twelve months, then have them serve for twelve months and no longer. If it is for fifteen months, then have them serve fifteen months and no longer. We urge the Department to take all reasonable steps to reduce the number of stop-loss extensions.