The Fighting 29th

All about New York's 29th Congressional District

Elmira's WETM-18 has a story about the cost of Kuhl's trip to Brazil.

Via Rochesterturning, here's a Politico story that puts Randy Kuhl in a group of a half-dozen incumbents out-raised by their opponents.

Evan Dawson of WHAM-13 has a long and thoughtful response to criticisms in the comments to a previous post.

The WHAM-13 blog has a new post with more details on Randy Kuhl's trip to Brazil.  Kuhl's office has released a partial accounting of the cost of his trip, which totals around $4K.  As WHAM's Evan Dawson points out, that number is misleading because it doesn't include the cost of military air transport, which is something like $10,000 per hour.

In addition to the cost of military airtime, there's some more missing information:  how many military and/or embassy personnel were detailed to the trip?  How much time did that expensive airplane and crew have to sit around waiting to shuttle the delegation between cities?  All the disclosure appears to show is Kuhl's per diem and hotel costs, which is a small fraction of the cost to taxpayers.

This partial information release is accompanied by one of the snottiest press releases I've read in a long time.  Here's an excerpt:

The total for my portion of the trip was $4,028.93, which divided up among the 600,000+ residents the 29th District, equals approximately $0.00671 per constituent.

I understand the significance $0.00671 means to my district, but achieving energy independence is priceless to some. There are those who said that this trip was a vacation and we should have spent our time in Iowa. When Iowa finds the solution to energy independence, I will be the first to schedule a CODEL there.

It is unfortunate that some media outlets and individuals would skew this trip to only be about dollars and cents. But the truth is that this trip was desperately needed by lawmakers of Congress to find a solution to the energy crisis and I encourage more of my colleagues in Congress to visit Brazil.

Kuhl seems to be attacking the messenger, WHAM, which is an organization that's just doing its job.  When you don't disclose information when you promise to do so, it makes good reporters curious, so they follow up.  WHAM spent an inordinate amount of time and effort to find out something that could have been disclosed on time and without any static.  Their reward for going through weeks of run-around is a partial disclosure and a bunch of attitude.  They're the ones who should be snarky, but of course they've stayed professional.

If there's really nothing here, then Kuhl should put a little foot on ass with the committee bureaucracy and provide a full disclosure.  That's good representation and smart politics.

(Thanks to Exile at Rochesterturning for a heads-up on this.)

The raw footage of Randy Kuhl's interview with Rochester's WHAM-13 has been posted (and embedded below).

Highlights:

• "Taking every step to become a candidate in the next election" (0:45).
• He's never had any pressure from his party to vote for a bill (5:00).
• The Iguazu Falls trip was to study drug interdiction (7:15) and it built a relationship with Brazilian legislators (8:00).
• S-CHIP extension that he supported (and was the subject of the mailer) is "actually an expansion" (10:40)
• Mailings aren't confusing, they tell people that he "supported S-CHIP for poor children first" (12:10)
• Why didn't Kuhl speak out against earmarks in 2005 when he said that "earmarks are an important tool" (12:50).  Answer:  He has, "internally in the system".  Also, we should be taking federal money however it comes (14:45).
• Iraq. (17:00)  The point of the surge was a political solution.  Is it working?  Answer:  Surge has stabilized the country, need security for a government.  Governmental reconciliation is not going as fast as Kuhl would like, but "firmly convinced we are on the right course". 
• How long can Iraq fail without us getting out? (19:15). "All I know is what I'm fed." If we hadn't seen success in the last surge, we wouldn't be in a position to continue our support.  Our next timeline is March.  "General Petreus, you're the leader, tell us what's going on."  
• What about McCain's 100 years comment (21:00)?  "In many cases countries don't want us to leave...that may very well be what happens and what Sen. McCain was talking about."

In the accompanying blog entry, Reporter Evan Dawson talks about the importance of government transparency.  Amen, brother.

Rochester's WHAM (Channel 13) has a story about Kuhl's Brazil trip that highlights the run-around they've been getting from the different committees and offices that are supposed to be releasing information about the trip.  The story illustrates all the tricks of non-disclosure disclosure.  These include unclear responsibility, releasing documents in Washington DC on paper instead of via email or over the Internet, and refusal of the main actors to acknowledge a problem.

WHAM should feel good about the hard work they're doing to track down this story.  Even better, they let bloggers embed their stories, which I've done after the break:
DayPortPlayer.newPlayer({articleID:"190145",bannerAdObjectID:"5",videoAdObjectID:"4",videoAdConDefID:"2",playerInstanceID:"27574A89-06D1-CD92-4444-22719C5099EC",domain:"video.wokr13.com"});

Ontario GOP has posted his interview with Randy Kuhl.  It's a good run-down of Kuhl's spin on some important election-day issues.

To his credit, GOP asks a couple of questions about issues that will be important election issues.  On S-CHIP, Kuhl's justification for voting against hasn't changed much since last Fall:

Their plan also enables illegal aliens to fraudulently enroll in Medicaid and SCHIP by weakening the proof of citizenship. Also, their bill is the most regressive tax increase in American history and taxes the poor to benefit the rich. SCHIP was also designed for children, but the Democratic extension increases the number of adults on SCHIP, which allows even more resources to be taken away from low-income kids. And finally and most importantly, SCHIP was designed for low-income, poor children. The majority forgot that when they designed their extension, because there are still poor children not covered. We must ensure that we cover the low-income children first before considering expanding the program.

I've debunked some of these claims earlier (see this post on the immigrant issue).  The "tax the poor" spin is an argument that poor people will bear the brunt of the tax increase on tobacco that partially funds S-CHIP expansion.  The adult issue is a legitimate question, but the states that received waivers for adults were already covering all the kids allowed to be covered by S-CHIP, so the spin that adult funding is shorting kids is wrong.  Also, part of the reason that poor children are not covered is that states are allowed to set coverage levels, and some fund S-CHIP at lower levels.

On the trip to Brazil, I think Kuhl over-reaches when he says this:

This trip was enlightening and desperately needed. And for those people that want to belittle it for political gain, do not understand that as a country you can not hide your head in the sand and think that everything will be fine. This is a global economy and we must learn from one another to benefit from the successes and failures that we have experienced.

The obvious rejoinder to this is that there's no desperate need for anyone to stay at five-star hotels and fly on first-class military charters to learn about Brazil.

Iraq is not mentioned in the interview, which I think reflects the spin that the working surge means Iraq no longer matters.  I don't think that wish will hold up to the reality of the election.

Unless you've been hiding in a cave, you know that the New York State Presidential primary is tomorrow.  I've contributed a guest post to Rochesterturning in support of Barack Obama, and you can view Obama's latest ad after the jump. 

The New York Democratic Party has a special webpage full of information for Democrats.  There doesn't seem to be a similar page for Republicans. 

For those interested in an overview of polls, there's an excellent post at pollster.com which summarizes the recent history of every poll in every Super Tuesday state in one easy-to-read chart.

With favorite son Rudy Guliani out of the running, Randy Kuhl has officially endorsed John McCain.  Eric Massa is tacitly supporting Senator Hillary Clinton. 

Randy Kuhl was asked about retirement rumors at a taping of Coleman and Company, WETM's Sunday political talk show.  He repeated his stock answer that he will be deciding whether to run in the next couple of months.

I've read a lot of rumors in the past couple days, but I haven't seen any sourced from Kuhl's staff.  Randy's recent, uninspiring fundraising numbers will probably fuel still more speculation, but I don't think he's going to retire.

Kuhl's seniority, or lack of it, is the first reason that I think he's staying put. Twenty-eight of his Republican colleagues just retired, almost all of whom are more senior than him.  Kuhl's recent appointment as deputy whip indicates that he's interested in leadership, so those retirements give Kuhl a better opportunity to move up.  Randy's a healthy 64. He can reasonably expect at least a decade or more behind the plow.  His prospects for attaining a significant leadership or committee post in that timeframe improve whenever another Republican throws in the towel.

The psychology of seniority for a back-bencher like Kuhl is quite different from a 20-year vet like James Walsh (NY-25).  Walsh and the other retirees know that they're looking at a couple of grim sessions for Republicans.  Democrats will almost certainly strengthen their hold on the House in 2008,  It's likely that they'll increase their majority in the Senate, and they might also occupy the White House.  If you've already tasted the sweet nectar of a senior committee or leadership spot, the prospect of waiting a couple more sessions until you do it again may not be worth the agita of defending your seat.  If you're like a back-bencher like Kuhl, you knew coming in that you were going to have to put in your time, and it really doesn't matter if your party is in the majority or minority while you're reeling in the years.

Finally, there's redistricting.  In 2012, Western New York is going to lose a seat in Congress, and it's likely that the new district lines will carve out only one "safe Republican" seat.  There's no doubt that, if such a seat exists, it will include the Southern Tier.  If Kuhl can hold off Massa's challenge and survive until then, he might end up with a safer seat than he has today.

Kuhl's retirement is great fodder for speculation, but a reality check shows that he's got plenty of reasons to go down fighting.

Two stories in the last couple of days show that the economy of the 29th district is steadily moving from one based on well-paid, skilled manufacturing jobs to a lower-paid, less-skilled, service economy.

In Rochester, the Democrat and Chronicle reports that Kodak, once the engine of the Rochester economy and number one employer, has falled to number three.  Wegmans, the local grocery chain, moved from third to second on the D&C's ranking.  The University of Rochester, which runs Strong Hospital, is number one. 

Elmira's WETM reports on Governor Spitzer's appearance in Erwin, where he cut the ribbon at a remodeled Corning plant.  The new occupant, Sitel, plans to hire 400 $8/hour callers for its call center there.

This kind of economic news is another reminder that news of recession is nothing new to the residents of the 29th.  The economy here has been shrinking for decades.

Randy Kuhl has endorsed John McCain for president, even though he disagrees with McCain's moderate immigration policy, and his involvement with campaign finance reform.

The New York Times has a roundup of the large number (28) of Republican retirements in the House:

“The open-seat situation is so lopsided as to deny Republicans any chance of taking back the House in 2008,” said David Wasserman, who analyzes House races for The Cook Political Report, a nonpartisan publication.

Compounding their problems, Republicans face a worrisome financial gap in comparison to House Democrats. New fund-raising figures to be made public on Thursday will show that the national campaign committee of the House Democrats ended 2007 with $35 million in the bank and $1.3 million in debt. The Republicans’ committee had $5 million in the bank and $2 million in debt.

Today's Massa press conference covered the State of the Union, the primaries, earmarks, S-CHIP and defense spending. Massa began by saying that the real story of the primaries is the increase in voter turnout by Independent and Democratic voters.  He characterized the Republican vote as "suppressed", and looks forward to seeing energized voters on Super Tuesday.

Turning to the State of the Union, Massa noted that one of major commitments by the President was to veto any legislation that does not cut taxpayer-funded earmarks in half.  Massa pointed out the difference between that position, which was echoed by Randy Kuhl in a press release on Monday, with the announcement the next day of a grant for the town of Erwin, as well as Kuhl's historic position on earmarks: "In the last Congressional campaign, Congressman Kuhl's primary reason and justification for re-election was his ability to bring home earmarks."

Massa said that the "irresponsible borrowing and spending by the government has driven this country to the brink of an economic disaster we face today."  Referring to past examples of political courage, such as JFK's, Massa noted that "to be part of the problem and then say it should be eradicated [...] is not political courage."  Massa's position is that every Congressional district should have a fair share of federal money brought back, but it should be done through the budget process.

I asked Massa whether he had any concerns about the stimulus package, and lack of pay-as-you-go financing. 

Borrowing $150 billion from the Chinese to buy $150 billion of Chinese-manufactured goods stimulates the Chinese economy.  In addition to getting cash to the economy, we need to engage in a FDR-style infrastructure building package nationwide.  We need to tie stimulus to living wage jobs that produce something for the public good.

Massa said that pay-go financing for the stimulus package should come from "tax subsidies for the ultra wealthy."  Massa noted that the middle class has seen taxes go up, so he prefers to call the Bush tax cuts "tax subsidies".  "I don't know anyone who hasn't seen their taxes go up."

On S-CHIP, Massa defended his desire to debate Kuhl: 

There's nothing wrong with a public official debating this key issue.  It is not a trick or a ploy, I'm not trying to be cute.  He's going to be here on recess doing the business of the district, and there are thousands of children in the district -- why won't he debate this issue?

Referring to Kuhl's suggestion that Massa read the bill, Massa said he's read it many times.

I asked Massa another question about the military budget.  Since our defense spending is more than the rest of the world combined, I wonder where he thought it should be cut, and, specifically, if we should reduce our commitments in wealthy countries like South Korea and Germany.

It is true that we are spending more on our military than every other country combined.  We are not spending it smartly.  We have committed $2.5 trillion to the occupation in Iraq and received no increase in our national security and no increase in our economic security. 

Massa agreed that garrisons in South Korea and Germany need to be scaled down or eliminated.  He also pointed to overseas bases, such as those in Japan, Kuwait and the United Kingdom, saying "this network of overseas bases needs to be evaluated."  Massa added that there was some more important information about the military:

This administration has consumed our military.  President Clinton turned over 30 fully-operational and deployable Army brigades.  [...]  Today we have in that category, zero.  Not a single deployable Army brigade exists outside of Iraq.  Those in Iraq do not meet pre-Iraq standards.

Massa pointed to the recent grounding of half of the F-15s in service, and to the fact that the Navy is a fraction of the size it was when the Bush Administration came to office as other indicators of problems with the military.  "Across the board, our military is being mishandled and misused.  We need people in Congress and in the White House who understand that."

I was the only person on the call who asked questions -- I think there was at least one other who was not identified.