The Fighting 29th

All about New York's 29th Congressional District

Randy Kuhl has a weekly telephone press conference. Most reporters in the 29th seem to use it for background, but the Hornell Evening Tribune covers it faithfully. This week's story shows Kuhl is concerned about two things: undue haste in the passage of the 100 hours legislation, and his vote against stem cell research.

Kuhl points out that the ethics reform package includes a mistake in the wording of the section intended to prohibit travel in corporate jets. In the current legislation, the wording could be interpreted as a complete ban on travel on non-governmental airplanes. Kuhl uses this as evidence that the Democrats' should not have circumvented the normal committee process when passing the first legislation of the 110th Congress.

Kuhl's position is consistent with his party. Every major vote in the 110th has been preceded by a party-line vote seeking to refer the legislation to committee. Once that vote fails, a few Republicans join with the Democrats to pass the bill in question. Though I agree with Kuhl on the general principle that legislation should be reviewed by committee, the first 100 hours bills are a bunch of no-brainers that have generally been well-reviewed and heavily debated in previous Congresses. If the Democrats continue with the policy of prohibiting referral to committee, then Republicans have a legitimate gripe, just as the Democrats did when the Republicans employed similar measures to advance their agenda when they were in the majority.

On the stem cell issue, Kuhl's latest position is that he is for embryonic stem cell research that doesn't involve the destruction of embryos. When science is able to extract stem cells from embryos without destroying them, he'll support the legislation.

Nobody seems to have asked Kuhl the obvious question: If destruction of embryos is so bad, why is in-vitro fertilization (IVF) allowed? Hundreds of thousands of embryos die each year as a result of IVF, yet most right-to-life advocates accept this collateral damage as the price of helping infertile couples to have a baby.

Kuhl and others believe that the right to conceive is important enough to kill embryos. The right to research a promising cure for a number of deadly and debilitating diseases is not. This position makes no sense.

Thursday and Friday saw the passage of bills in support of embryonic stem cell research and negotiation of Medicare prescription drugs. Both bills passed without the support of Randy Kuhl.

Kuhl's vote against embryonic stem cell research was predictable. He's been a strong right-to-life candidate and had previously voted against a similar measure in the 109th Congress, which provoked President Bush's first and only veto. This year's attempt passed without a veto-proof majority, but stem cell research advocates vow to continue to bring similar legislation to the floor. If the 29th has a tight race in '08, expect to see this issue front-and-center.

The Medicare bill directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate drug prices for Medicare Part D. Currently, those negotiations occur between insurance companies providing Part D coverage and drug companies. Backers of the bill point to the experience of the Veterans Administration, which has negotiated prices for a group of popular drugs that's significantly less that the Medicare average. Opponents say that these negotiations will only work if drug choice is limited.

As with any Medicare or Social Security issue, the political impact of this vote will depend on who can put more fear into seniors. Backers of the bill will charge that the opposition will bankrupt Medicare by enriching the drug companies. Opponents will argue that negotiation will lead to limited formularies, which means that some seniors won't be able to afford off-formulary drugs. Expect ads showing lawmakers stuffing money into the pockets of drug company fat cats, or men in suits ripping pill bottles out of the hands of defenseless old ladies.

The final votes in the Democrat's 100 hours will occur sometime next week, when Dems introduce bills to limit interest on student loans and to finance renewable energy research from oil royalties.

Randy Kuhl's first reaction to Bush's new Iraq plan is that it is better than doing nothing. Kuhl also thinks that Bush should engage Iran and Syria diplomatically, and pledges continued support: "Kuhl said he will continue to support the president's plan with the expectation that troops will gradually be moved out of the region within the next year and a half." I don't see how Kuhl's expectation is consistent with the plan announced Wednesday, though he's certainly not the only Congressman who wants us to start leaving Iraq before the next election.

In other Iraq-related news, Kuhl was present yesterday with the family of Corporal Jason Dunham, a Marine killed in Iraq, for the posthumous presentation of the Congressional Medal of Honor by President Bush. Corporal Dunham lost his life after he used his body to shield two of his men from the explosion of grenade. He grew up in Scio, a small town in Allegany County. Kuhl also sponsored legislation to rename the Scio Post Office to honor Cpl Dunham.

Rochesterturning notes that the announcement of Randy Kuhl's appointment as minority whip seems at odds with a couple of recent votes. On Tuesday, Kuhl voted with the Democrats to implement the findings of the 9/11 commission. Yesterday, unlike the majority of his Republican peers, he voted to increase the minimum wage.

Both of those votes were smart ones for a Representative who was one of fifteen Republicans who won by tight margins in 2006. Kuhl's long-stated position has been to support the minimum wage, though his 2006 opponent argued that his position didn't always match his voting record. Yesterday's vote takes minimum wage off the table for 2008. The 9/11 vote was another no-brainer. Republicans opposed it because they believed that inspection of cargo ships would be too expensive. They also tried to send the bill back to committee for further amendment. Kuhl voted with his party on that procedural vote, but he wisely supported the 9/11 bill when the motion to re-commit failed along party lines. Being seen as soft on terrorism is the last thing Kuhl needs as he heads into the '08 race.

If Kuhl is going to vote against his party to support popular initiatives, why did he join the leadership? There are a couple of reasons. First, Kuhl is at heart more of a party loyalist than his predecessor, Amo Houghton, who was not part of the leadership when he retired. Second, joining the leadership gives Kuhl a little more clout to bring home appropriations to the 29th. Since his view of the role of Congressman is one who serves his district, and service for Kuhl means getting money for projects like roads, he's more likely to achieve that goal as a whip than as a backbencher. Finally, it sounds good: Kuhl's a leader, not a follower.

Kuhl's role as whip will be more apparent on key party-line votes. These are the votes where the minority decides to take a stand and wants all hands on deck. I'd be very surprised if Kuhl doesn't vote in the majority when one of these measures comes to the floor.

Randy Kuhl has retained the same committee assignments that he held during his first term: Transportation and Infrastructure, Agriculture, and Education and Labor. In addition, Kuhl was named a Deputy Minority Whip.

Deputy Whip is the lowest rung of the leadership ladder. The role of the whip is to "whip up" votes and to disseminate information among other members. According to the Congressional Research Service [pdf], when the Democrats were in the minority, they had a dozen Deputy Whips, led by six Senior Deputy Whips. When the Republicans were in the majority, they had 17 deputy whips and 49 assistant whips.

Most of this week's media focus was on the spectacle of Nancy Pelosi's elevation to speaker. Nevertheless, Randy Kuhl was able to get a couple of his observations published.

The Olean Times-Herald reports that Randy's hard at work on a couple of projects, including the expansion of Route 219 and West Valley cleanup. In this story, Kuhl portrays himself as ready to compromise to serve his district.

The West Valley bill is a $1 billion authorization [...] I hope the New York senators can move it through their (chamber) and help me with the Democratic leadership in the House. I’m willing to give up sponsorship if it means passage.

Kuhl also says that he's in charge of a "shrinking pot" now that he's a minority member, but “I’m still going to have to deliver for my district.”

Finally, Syracuse Channel 10's report includes this quote from Kuhl:

The [D]emocrats have control. They can pass bills in this house. They can pass bills in the Senate. So, they have the complete responsibility, number one, and the power to adopt and set policy in this country going ahead. They have two years to show the American public that they are for change.

Nothing surprising here. Kuhl's strategy of concentrating on getting funding for his district and, for the most part, portraying himself as a spectator in the squabbles between the Republicans and Democrats got him re-elected. He's going to stick with it during his second term.

The first set of votes in the 110th Congress were mainly party-line votes for Speaker and the House Rules. The single exception was the vote for Title IV of the Rules, which dealt with earmark reform and pay-as-you-go budget financing. About a quarter of the Republicans joined the Democrats to vote for this provision. Maintaining his practice of party loyalty, Kuhl voted with the majority of the Republicans on this measure.

As Randy Kuhl begins his new role as member of the opposition, he can learn from the media coverage of his leadership and hopefully avoid a couple of mistakes:

• First, it's easy for the opposition to sound like whiners. Consider Adam Putnam, the Florida Republican who's been given the unenviable job of chief complainer. Putnam's current gripe is that the Democrats are doing to the Republicans what the Republicans did to the Democrats: limiting amendments and debate. Here's a telling exchange from last night's News Hour interview:

  MARGARET WARNER [reporter]: And you don't think there's a bit of a double-standard here in you all complaining about that now?
  REP. ADAM PUTNAM: Well, you know, obviously people at home are saying, "Oh, you guys are just complaining about the same stuff the Democrats used to complain about."

  When you acknowledge that "people at home" don't give a shit about what you're saying, perhaps it's time for a new media strategy. The Putnam lesson for Kuhl is that people don't care about process, as long as it yields results. The Republicans need only wait 100 hours to start complaining about results, and Kuhl would be wise to hold his tongue until then.

• The second lesson is that demonization is a double-edged sword. The terrible reign of Speaker Pelosi that was forecast during the 2006 campaign has so far been non-apocalyptic. She looked pretty good yesterday. Pelosi limits her media presence and has ironclad message discipline. I don't see her becoming the she-devil forecast in campaign rhetoric unless the power that she so obviously enjoys goes to her head. That will probably happen soon enough. Until then, attacking her will probably be counterproductive.

WHAM-TV has a skeptical take on the impact of the one-year moratorium on earmarks in the 110th Congress. Both Randy Kuhl and James Walsh (NY-25) are quoted in the piece bemoaning the loss of funding for projects in the region. Kuhl believes that the earmarks are important, because "you have to have economic development".

WHAM's story features a list of earmarks. These include money for the Monroe County Water Authority and the Erie Canal, which causes WHAM to ask the question: why do these projects, which are ostensibly already funded by taxpayer money, need earmarked funding?

Though WHAM is unable to get the Water Authority's answer to the question, I'll offer mine: the earmark process is part of the machine politics practiced by majorities in both parties. Though "machine" usually refers to the ability of a political organization to turn out votes, it also refers to the interlocking set of relationships between local, state and federal officeholders. By using a combination of earmarks and regular funding to finance projects for the Thruway and Water authorities, legislators at all levels are able to assert greater control and to glean far more personal credit for even the most minor capital projects.

Instead of saying that "I voted for federal support of the Thruway Authority, and the Authority financed improvements to the park at your local lock", the legislator can say "I was personally responsible for the $115K needed to put a new playground in at Lock 42, because of my personal commitment to the children in my district." The difference is huge. By allowing Members of Congress to take credit for even minor projects in their districts, earmarks play a key role in personalizing politics and entrenching incumbents. Any idiot can vote for an appropriation for the Thruway Authority. It takes a special and powerful politician to personally obtain funding for a new park.

Louise Slaughter (NY-28) calls most of the earmarks "frivolous". Perhaps some are, but Walsh and Kuhl have a point: there's going to be some pain in the transition back to traditional funding. Whether that pain is something voters will hold against the Democrats, who cut out the earmarks, or the Republicans, who were responsible for letting them get out of hand, isn't clear to me. Based on this story, I think Walsh and Kuhl are betting that voters will resent the Democrats for taking away their pork.

Precious little is happening in the 29th during the holidays.

In the euphemism watch department, Randy Kuhl was one of the signatories of a bi-partisan letter to Eliot Spitzer, urging him to support a "woody biomass" power generation plant near Ellicottville. "Woody biomass" is the shiny new name given to trees and branches: apparently "Utilizing Woody Biomass" sounds a lot more high-tech than "burning wood". According to a GAO report [pdf], it is cleaner than coal, but more labor-intensive and harder to obtain.

In the pork watch department, Kuhl announced still more Homeland Security grants to local fire departments.