A Citizen's Guide to Indiana

Masson's Blog

IN-08: Mud flies in the bloody Eighth

by 7 Comments

The National Republican Congressional Committee has been airing ads attacking Brad Ellsworth, trying to paint him as a zombie who will serve his liberal San Francisco liberal masters if elected to Congress. As a counterattack, the Ellsworth campaign has come up with an interesting approach to turning one of Hostettler’s traditional “positives” into a “negative.”

Hostettler traditionally foregoes PAC money and raises very little money of his own with which to campaign. Normally, this is seen as a good thing. Not beholden to special interests, close to his constituents, etc. etc. Trouble is that, as a consequence of his minimal campaign funds, he owes a lot of his electoral activity to money spent by the National Republican Congressional Committee which uses money that is decidedly more tainted than the money raised by Hostettler personally. Ellsworth is raising ads that suggest Hostettler shouldn’t get a free ride simply because the money spent on behalf of his campaign is first laundered through the NRCC. Instead, the Ellsworth campaign is attempting to tag Hostettler with all of the sins of the NRCC, links to convicted Republican felon superlobbyist Jack Abramoff and the spreading scandal involving Congressmen such as convicted Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-CA), indicted Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX), and convicted Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH). (See the Grand Old Docket for a rundown of criminal activity involving prominent politicians.)

IN-02, IN-08, IN-09: Indiana is the Center of the Universe

by 12 Comments

In a story by Maureen Groppe in the Indy Star, Amy Walter of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report, tracking U.S. House races said “Indiana is literally the center of the universe right now. To have three Republican incumbents in a very Republican state either tied or behind their Democratic opponents, what is that?”

What is that? It’s the Republicans, particularly on the federal level, betraying the people and the principles that got them there. The party of Eisenhower and Goldwater, the party of fiscal responsibility, foreign pragmatism, and small government has turned into a party of budget busting big government policies and impractical, ideological, ineffective foreign policy all mixed up with an Orwellian disregard for civil liberties  and catering to the impulses of Dominionist religious groups.

The article focuses on the shifting fortunes of Chris Chocola, who started the year seeming to be safe in his seat. Now he is at least slightly behind challenger Joe Donnelly in the polls. Courtesy of Gov. Daniels, Chocola has been slammed by a double whammy of local issues, important to his constituents in north central/western Indiana on which he has been silent: Daylight Saving Time and the Toll Road sale. Combine that with increasing voter dissatisfaction with national policy generally and President Bush particularly, and suddenly Chocola has a real challenge on his hands.

Meanwhile, in Indiana’s 8th and 9th Congressional races you have challenges that were always expected to be competitive. The re-rematch between Sodrel and Hill in the 9th effectively pits two incumbents against each other. And, in the 8th, you have a successful, fairly conservative, Democratic Sheriff, Brad Ellsworth, running against the always unconventional and anemic fund raiser, John Hostettler.

The Louisville Courier Press has the story on the debate in the 9th District last night between Hill, Sodrel, and Libertarian Eric Schansberg. Mike Sodrel says we have no energy policy crisis while Baron Hill says gasoline costs are causing great pain to the public and we need to take steps to wean ourselves off of oil dependence. Little is likely to be done, Hill says, under the current administration led by oil men, Cheney and Bush. Schansberg wants to let markets run their course, creating innovatie ways to produce energy and lower costs.

I particularly liked Schansberg’s quote on the financial implications of prosecuting the war in Iraq:

“The choice has been made, so far, to finance it with debt,” Schansberg said. If the government “has the courage to spend money,” it should have the courage to pay for it now rather than leave the bill for future generations.

Baron Hill had this to say:

Hill criticized the Republican-controlled government for cutting taxes for the wealthy and for oil companies while hundreds of billions of dollars are being spent on the war.

“It doesn’t make sense to people,” Hill said.

Sodrel responded with statements about the importance of liberty to the Iraqi people and claims that the cost of the War in Iraq is small compared to the costs of World War II. And there, we have more evidence that we’ve gone from a National Republican Party of fiscally responsible, hard-headedly practical foreign policy to one that supports a fiscally irresponsible approach to funding an ideological foreign policy.

Hoosiers, by and large, are practical people who do not love opening up their wallets. They expect the same from their government.

Chicago Tribune on IN-02, IN-08, IN-09

by 1 Comment

Jeff Zeleny, writing for the Chicago Tribune, has an article on Indiana’s 3 closest Congressional races: IN-02, IN-08, and IN-09. He focuses on the fact that Indiana Democrats are more conservative than Democrats nationally and that Ellsworth, Hill, and Donnelly are trying to persuade voters who may have voted for President Bush in 2004 that they share similar policy preferences. Meanwhile, their opponents are desperate to paint them as “San Francisco liberals.”

Voters aren’t as concerned with the labels as they are with basic questions about government:

People have questions about the price of energy–why is it so high and what are we doing about it? The war in Iraq–what’s the plan? The rising cost of health care–what have we done? And they have questions about immigration–are we going to get a bill?

It looks like the national campaign committees, Republican and Democratic, will be pouring money into Indiana. Control of Congress may be determined by Hoosiers.

Proposed Federal Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment

by 6 Comments

A number of Indiana’s Representatives are co-sponsors of H.J. Res. 88 proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

Indiana co-sponsors are Chris Chocola (IN-02), Mark Souder (IN-03),  Dan Burton (IN-05), Mike Pence (IN-06), John Hostettler (IN-08), and Mike Sodrel (IN-09).

The substantive portions of the proposed amendment would add the following language to the United States Constitution:

Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.

So much for states rights. This proposed amendment would not only prevent recognition of gay marriage under federal law, it woudl prohibit the people of a state from constituting their respective governments so as not to discriminate against gays.

The broadest provisions of this proposed amendment reads as follows: “The Constitution of a State shall [not] be construed to require the legal incidents of marriage be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.”

Potentially, that could be read to mandate that if something is a legal incident of marriage, a state cannot required it to be conferred on a non-heterosexual union.

The Constitution is too important to be trifled with in this fasion.

IN-08: Hostettler throws the “he won’t debate me” card

by Leave a Comment

Usually it’s the challenger who complains that the incumbent won’t debate him or there won’t be enough debates or something along those lines. In Indiana’s 9th District, challenger Baron Hill has already started that line of attack against Mike Sodrel.

But, in the 8th District, for whatever reason, incumbent John Hostettler is complaining that his challenger, hasn’t pushed for debates early enough. Ellsworth’s campaign gave the equivalent of a shrug with his spokesperson saying, “It’s a little early, but I’m sure we’ll have debates.”

Something to watch, I suppose.

IN-08: Boehner used Vectren Corporate Jet for Hostettler Fundraiser

by 5 Comments

This just looks bad. In an election year where lobbyist corruption and energy policy are hot issues, this might be a twofer for the Ellsworth campaign. As I mentioned a few days ago, House Republican Leader John Boehner came to Evansville to do some fund raising for John Hostettler. Apparently he was provided with a round trip flight to and from Evansville by Vectren, the Indiana/Ohio electric company. According to the Courier Press report, that’s a $1,200 value. Also according to the Courier Press report, under the current ethics rules, Members of Congress are supposed to reimburse companies for these kinds of transportation services, but the rules do not require either the Member or the corporations to report the flights, so there doesn’t seem to be any way to verify how often a Member takes a corporate jet or whether he is reimbursing the company for the service.

IN-08: Hostettler advocates deporting 11 million

by 8 Comments

The Evansville Courier Journal article doesn’t quite make clear that Hostettler supports deporting the estimated11 million immigrants who have not complied with all of the U.S. naturalization laws, but I don’t think there is any other way to parse his advocacy of a so-called “hard line” on immigration.

He opposes the Bush and Senate immigration proposal which allows, depending on who you talk to, a “path to citizenship,” “a guest worker program,” or “amnesty.” Politically, I guess I’m content to watch the Republicans have a food fight over the issue. Personally, I don’t think it’s really our most pressing problem — but that might just have to do with being an upper-middle class professional in Indiana. I think we have more pressing problems like paying off our debt, getting out of Iraq, developing a sustainable energy policy, combatting global warming, developing a better approach to health care, securing the ports, rehabilitating our reputation as a good world citizen, and fixing trade agreements that benefit owners of capital while screwing workers. Regardless, I don’t think mass deportations are very realistic, nice as it might sound to some constituents.

IN-08: Ellsworth announces “Hoosier Military Bill of Rights”

by 10 Comments

Austin Arceo, writing for the Terre Haute Tribune Star, has a story on 8th District Congressional candidate Brad Ellsworth’s announcement of his proposal for a “Hoosier Military Bill of Rights” for soldiers. The platform includes:

  • An increase in armor and protection of solidiers in combat;
  • An increase in educational pay and healthcare benefits for soldiers and veterans;
  • Incentives to employers to make up the pay gap experienced by National Guard soldiers who leave their job to serve;
  • Funding and expanding veterans’ health care services.

He believes these items can be accomplished without a tax increase but rather with a shifting of how we prioritize tax dollars.

Incumbent John Hostettler responded to Ellsworth’s proposal by criticizing California Democrat Nancy Pelosi. That’s a little like responding to terrorist acts of Saudis and Egyptians based in Afghanistan by attacking Iraq. Crazy, I know.

IN-08: Boehner raises money for Hostettler

by 4 Comments

Mara Lee, writing for the Evansville Courier Press, has an article on House Majority Leader John Boehner’s visit to Evansville to play golf and speak to raise money for John Hostettler.

Boehner took his leadership position in the wake of the DeLay corruption scandal because the House Republicans realized that nothing gets rid of the stink of corruption like an Ohio Republican. Boehner famously distributed checks from tobacco political action committees to members of Congress on the floor of the House of Representatives.

According to the Courier Press article, the Hostettler campaign office had no comment about the Boehner fund raiser.

Political price to pay for social security privatization plan

by 5 Comments

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is running ads in Indiana’s 8th and 9th Congressional District chastizing Reps. Sodrel and Hostettler for supporting the social security privatization plan that kicked off President Bush’s doomed second term.

The plan would have diverted funds paid in by younger citizens, currently being used to pay for benefits to current recipients, to private accounts. No plan was in place to fill resulting hole in social security funding, so we would have had to borrowed even more money.

The ad says:

“President Bush wants to borrow $2 trillion dollars – driving up our debt even further to privatize Social Security,” the announcer says. No one knows exactly how much the transition would have cost, but Vice President Cheney said it would be trillions.

The article went on to say:

Sarah Feinberg, a spokeswoman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee that paid for the ad, said even though privatization is not up for a vote this year, “when given the political opportunity, we believe the president and the Republican majority will try to pass privatization again.”

Rep. Hostettler responded with a statement that said, “With no agenda from their leadership and a candidate with no original ideas of his own, the liberals are resorting to scaring senior citizens once again.”

I think the Ellsworth campaign captures an important point with their response:

Jay Howser, spokesman for Democrat Brad Ellsworth, Hostettler’s opponent in the November election, said both campaigns have ideas on Social Security. Ellsworth wants to protect a program that has been working for 60 years, and Hostettler wants to change it by moving money into private accounts.

“It’s a clear difference between the two,” he said.

Doing something for the sake of doing something is a bad habit among politicians. Social security has been one of the government’s more successful programs, and I think leaving well enough alone is a good strategy. Certainly, to the extent it does have problems, they are minor compared to the other problems with the federal government. First and foremost, the federal government needs to stop raiding social security to pay for general fund expenditures and it needs to pay back the money it has borrowed from Social Security.