DSCC

Georgia Can't Afford Saxby Economics

Matthew Miller, DSCC

DSCC begins advertising in Georgia; View here

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee began running its first television ad in Georgia today, pointing out Saxby Chambliss’ vocal support of legislation that would create a 23% national sales tax. In recent weeks, Jim Martin has closed the Georgia Senate race to a tie as he focuses on Chambliss’ support of Bush’s failed economic policies.

“Saxby Chambliss’ proposal to increase taxes on Georgia families who are already struggling to make ends meet shows just how out of touch he is with the struggles people are facing today,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “Georgia families can’t afford to pay more at the pump or the grocery store, and they can’t afford Saxby Economics.”

DSCC “Cha-Ching”
Date: 10/13/08

Copy/Visual	Documentation
Narrator: With all there is to work on, what’s Saxby Chambliss been up to? Visual: The Economy Education Health Care
Narrator: A plan to raise taxes.	In 2007, Chambliss Sponsored Fair Tax Bill That Would Create 23 Percent National Sales Tax. Chambliss sponsored the Fair Tax Act of 2007. In April 2007, he and House Sponsor Rep. John Linder held a Fair Tax rally in Atlanta to promote the bill. “I have heard from many Georgians about the FairTax and I am proud to be the primary sponsor of this legislation in the U.S. Senate,” said Chambliss. “As we have seen and heard today, there is strong grassroots support for the FairTax which would bring fairness and simplicity to our cumbersome and bureaucratic tax code - and that's what taxpayers deserve.” In addition to the 2007 bill, Chambliss sponsored the legislation in 2003 and 2005. [Chambliss Press Release, 4/3/07; S. 1025, introduced 3/29/07; Chambliss Press Conference, 4/15/05; S. 25, introduced 1/24/05; S. 1493, introduced 7/30/03] Would Impose A 23% Sales Tax In Addition To State And Local Taxes, Pushing Total Taxes Even Higher. State and local sales taxes would come on top of the federal sales tax, pushing the total rate even higher. [Fair Tax.org, What’s in it for the states?; National Review Online, 8/9/04] Chambliss Continues to Back Fair Tax. In an August 2008 campaign video, Chambliss reaffirmed his support for the Fair Tax. [Chambliss Campaign Video, 8/14/08] GA Editorial: “Ignore the Sales Pitch” on National Sales Tax. In a 2004 editorial on the national sales tax proposal, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution wrote, “the downside is substantial…There are numerous problems with a national sales tax. Most importantly, sales taxes are regressive. Those least able to afford it use the greatest proportion of income to pay sales taxes…The end of federal income taxes would render worthless the deduction for mortgage interest, a major incentive for home ownership.” [Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 8/18/04] National Sales tax would increase taxes on 80% of Georgians. According to a study of the House version of the Fair Tax completed by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, the average tax increase for the lower four income quintiles in Georgia would be $3,724, $3,523, and $3,269, and $1,690, from the lowest income quintile to the second highest. On average, all of those in the highest income quintile would receive tax cuts. This legislation would raise taxes then on the lowest 80% of income earners in Georgia. [Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, 9/04]
Narrator: Yep, Chambliss sponsored a bill for a 23% national sales tax on nearly everything you buy. Visual: Sponsored 23% National Sales Tax S. 1025, introduced 3/29/07	Fair Tax Features No Exemptions. In a St. Petersburg Times column, Fair Tax Supporter C.T. Bowen wrote, “For the FairTax to work as envisioned, there must be no exemptions. Services must be taxed. State legislators must roll back their own sales tax rates and eliminate the exemptions.” [St. Petersburg Times, Bowen Column, 8/24/08]
Narrator: Movies? An extra two bucks. Visual: + $2 Narrator: Groceries? $11 a bag. Visual: + $11 Narrator: And an extra $20 for a tank of gas. Visual: + $20 Visual: Based on current averages	Movie Tickets Adult Movie Ticket Price Would Increase $2.30. In Atlanta, the price of an adult movie ticket for a weekday evening showing would increase from $10.00 to $12.30. [Regal Atlantic Station 16, Atlanta] Note: Prices do not include service charges or additional fees. **$10.00 .23= $2.30* Groceries American Farm Bureau: Average Grocery “Basket” Price $48.68. According to the American Farm Bureau Federation, the quarterly informal Marketbasket Survey “shows the total cost of 16 basic grocery items in the third quarter of 2008 was $48.68, up about 4 percent or $2.01 from the second quarter of 2008.” The survey measures the average cost of 16 staple grocery products, including flour, bread, milk, eggs, apples, cheese, ground beef, chicken and potatoes. Compared to one year ago, the overall cost for the Marketbasket items showed an increase of about 10.5 percent. [American Farm Bureau Federation: Retail Food Prices Rise in Third Quarter, 10/2/08] Cost of Groceries Would Increase by $11.20. Adding a twenty-three percent sales tax to the average “basket of groceries” would add $11.20 to the cost of groceries. Currently, groceries are exempt from Georgia state sales taxes. $48.68 .23 = $11.20* Gas Top Selling Vehicle in US is Ford F-150.According to Business Week, “The Ford F-150 pickup is the nation's biggest seller, car or truck.” [Business Week Online, May 2008] Ford F-150 Features At-Minimum a 26 Gallon Tank. At minimum the Ford F-150 features a 26 gallon fuel tank. On some models, the tank has increased capacity of 36 gallons. [Ford Vehicle Specs] Average Cost of Fuel in Georgia is $3.33. Currently, the average price of a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline in Georgia is $3.325. [AAA, Daily Fuel Gauge Report, Accessed, 10/13/08] Tank of Gas for F-150 Costs $86.58. $3.33 26 = $86.58* Cost of Tank of Gas Would Increase $20. Adding twenty three percent to the cost of a tank of gas in Atlanta would increase the price by $19.91. $86.58 .23 = $19.91***
Narrator: A 23% national sales tax on almost everything you buy. Visual: 23% national sales tax
Narrator: Saxby Economics. Visual: Saxby Economics.
Narrator: Something we can’t afford. Visual: We can’t afford Saxby Chambliss.
Narrator: The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Is Responsible for the content of this ad. Title: Paid for by The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. www.dscc.org. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising.

Slattery running hard in Kansas as underdog in Senate race

Kansas City Star

Jim Slattery knows he’s the underdog.

He sees it every day.

The 60-year-old former congressman from Topeka has little money to respond to attack ads. His staff appears minuscule compared with the volunteers and paid employees assembled on behalf of his opponent, Sen. Pat Roberts.

“The differences between being a challenger and an incumbent are just amazing,” he said as he left a campaign stop where about 10 people listened to his stump speech.

But Slattery came into this Senate race with his eyes wide open. He knew exactly how difficult it would be to knock off a Republican incumbent in a red state like Kansas.

“David versus Goliath — everybody understands that,” Slattery said. “He’s going to outspend us 2-to-1.”

Yet even as Roberts enjoys a double-digit lead in the polls, some are unwillingly to rule Slattery out just yet. And that’s likely because Slattery, a Democrat, knows a thing or two about winning in Republican territory.

In 1984 Slattery pulled in at least 60 percent of the vote in Kansas’ 2nd Congressional District. It wouldn’t have raised many eyebrows had President Ronald Reagan not pulled in 60 percent in the same territory for his re-election bid.

Although Slattery is known throughout the sprawling 2nd District, his name is still unfamiliar to many Kansans. It’s part of the reason Slattery began airing attention-grabbing advertisements, including “Hosed,” which features an executive who appears to be “relieving” himself on tiny Kansans.

Roberts has expressed disgust over the ads. But national media outlets and blogs have picked up on the items.

Whether they will translate into more votes for Slattery is a different question.

“I think there were great hopes that he would be closing things in the polls and surveys, and the Democratic senatorial committee would come in with some real money, but you don’t see that happening,” said Burdett Loomis, political science professor at the University of Kansas.

Business and politics

Slattery grew up on a farm in the community known as Good Intent in Atchison County, Kan.

“My father taught me how to work,” he said, rattling off the chores he was expected to finish. “If I didn’t get them done, I dealt with him very directly.”

Slattery said there were still many Kansans who left his forums surprised at his background.

“I’ve spent two-thirds of my adult life in the business world,” he said.

He owns a farm and real estate, and has an interest in a Topeka bank. Slattery served in the Kansas Army National Guard, and by 1972 he was elected to the Kansas House while attending Washburn University law school. He left the House six years later to open a real estate business with a partner.

In 1982 he was back in the public spotlight, winning a job in the U.S. House from the 2nd District. Supporters urged the lawmaker to run for governor in 1990. He didn’t, opting to wait until 1994, when he faced Republican Bill Graves.

“I picked the worst year in 100 years to run for governor,” Slattery said.

It was Bill Clinton’s second year as president, and Slattery was among a long list of Democrats who suffered stinging defeats.

Afterwards, Slattery returned to Washington, where he worked for a law firm that lobbies on behalf of several clients.

His work at the firm has been a source of contention during the campaign.

Slattery has released a list of his clients, which includes Kansas City Southern, MGP Ingredients and others. His work, he said, was mainly in international trade.

Roberts has made Slattery’s lobbying work part of the campaign. He points out that even Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama rejected a $50 contribution because Obama didn’t accept money from lobbyists.

Economic concerns

For his part, Slattery admits that he was living a comfortable life. But the father and soon-to-be grandfather said he was drawn back to campaigning for public office because he couldn’t sit back any longer and watch his adult sons and unborn grandchild be saddled with any more debt.

“In 2001, our nation had a budget surplus of $127 billion, and we were talking about paying off our national debt. This year, the annual budget deficit is projected to be a near-record $389 billion, and our country owes over $9 trillion in debt,” Slattery said.

And Slattery said it was time for Roberts to go.

“Frankly, I don’t know what’s happened to Pat,” he says. “I used to think he was a fiscal conservative.”

Mary Landrieu is a centrist with experience

Times-Picayune

After two terms in the U.S. Senate, Democrat Mary Landrieu says she has learned that two things are important when serving in the Capitol: seniority and effectiveness.

Landrieu says she has been effective for her first 12 years and wants six more to build more seniority, which will result in greater effectiveness. "I use my seniority to deliver for the state, " Landrieu said.

View Mary Landrieu's bio.

To do that, she will have to get past Democrat-turned-Republican John Kennedy, the state treasurer for almost nine years, and three lesser-known candidates in the Nov. 4 election.

Landrieu and Kennedy, and their two political parties, have so far gone toe-to-toe in a hard-hitting media campaign.

The Democrats have aired a series of ads labeling Kennedy as a flip-flopper and "one confused politician" for running as a conservative and embracing the Republicans after running and losing a Senate race in 2004 as a liberal Democrat and backer of Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry's presidential bid.

In return, Kennedy and the GOP have campaigned on a theme of changing the spending environment in Washington by "changing the senator." They have labeled Landrieu one of the biggest liberals in the Senate and a backer of abortion rights who is "just too liberal for Louisiana."

Landrieu is used to being hit with the "L word" in campaigns. "It is old and tired and not true," she said.

Striving for common ground

She said while she is in favor of women having the right to choose to have an abortion, she has been active in adoption matters and has voted to restrict late-term abortions and the transporting of minors across state lines to have an abortion.

"I do not have Emily's List support in this election nor in the last election" in 2002, Landrieu said, referring to the organization that helps raise money for Democratic women who support abortion rights.

She also shoots back at Kennedy, reminding voters that he was "at one time pro-choice and counseled (then-Gov. Buddy) Roemer to veto" a strong anti-abortion bill two decades ago, which Roemer did. Lawmakers overrode that veto, making Roemer the first governor in modern times to suffer that political fate.

Landrieu also burnishes her moderate-centrist credentials, pointing out she has voted with President Bush on issues key to the White House 64 percent of the time during the past eight years and against her own party leadership on key issues 22.2 percent of the time, the second-highest of a senator voting against her party.

She also points to a study by The National Journal, a weekly magazine that reports on politics and emerging policy trends, that says she is "at the center of the Senate" as one of its moderates, with 48 senators more liberal than her and 48 more conservative. The others were not ranked because of missed votes on key issues.

"She has shown her conservative credentials, " said Kurt Corbello, an associate professor of political science at Southeastern Louisiana University in Hammond. "And she knows the inside of Washington."

Landrieu said as a third-term senator, she can be more effective, possibly winning a key committee chairmanship, especially if Democrats increase their Senate majority.

By playing up her clout and seniority, said Pearson Cross, chairman of the Department of Political Science at the University of Louisiana-Lafayette, Landrieu presents "a good counter" to Kennedy's campaign theme that "Washington is broken and we need to fix it. . . . Washington is where we look for help in extraordinary times, " like getting money and programs for hurricane recovery.

'The go-to person'

Landrieu brags about spearheading the effort to get billions of dollars in aid to help recovering hurricane victims, including $3 billion to keep the Road Home program alive when it appeared to be running out of money. She also said her growing seniority has helped pass legislation opening up about 8.3 million acres of land along the Outer Continental Shelf for energy exploration and has secured a 37.5 percent cut of future oil and gas revenue for coastal restoration and flood protection, which could mean $10 million a year for the state through 2017 and hundreds of millions a year after that.

The incumbent says she wants to speed the federal government's allocation so the state gets the bigger money sooner. She said she also wants to return to the Senate to continue getting money to help the state not only recover from the 2005 disasters of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, but snag money for the damage from Hurricanes Gustav and Ike -- and possibly help overhaul the way FEMA operates.

"She was our linchpin, " said former Gov. Kathleen Blanco, whose political career came to an abrupt end as 2005 hurricane recovery efforts lagged. "She is the go-to person. . . . We'd be sitting here empty-handed because we have a very youthful, inexperienced delegation. Her loss would be devastating."

Landrieu also has the backing of two key business groups: the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Businesses, whose causes Landrieu has supported more than 70 percent of the time.

Crossover appeal

To the consternation of state GOP officials, several elected Republicans have come out in favor of Landrieu over Kennedy, none more so than St. Tammany Parish Sheriff Jack Strain, a conservative in arguably the most conservative parish in the state, and Kennedy's home parish.

Strain, who is featured in a television commercial extolling Landrieu's effectiveness and integrity, said the disdain by the state GOP is unwarranted. "It is not (party) politics with me, " Strain said. "The very first federal representative we had on the ground (in St. Tammany Parish) after Katrina was Mary Landrieu . . . when water was still in our houses and neighborhoods. . . . She spoke to my deputies and offered assistance to them."

Strain said that at "6:15 the morning Gustav hit, the first call I had was from Mary Landrieu and she wanted to know if we needed anything. What else could we ask for? John Kennedy has never been in my office."

Former Sen. John Breaux, a Democrat who mentored Landrieu, said her biggest strength now is her ability to build coalitions and govern from the political center.

"Most people in Louisiana feel they are in the middle, " he said. "It is important not to be far left or far right." Because of her ability to work with Democrats and Republicans, Breaux said, Landrieu "is a person with two parties; both sides need her. . . . The longer she is there, the better she becomes. She is just hitting her stride" now.

Landrieu points to her work with Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine to forge a centrist "Common Ground Coalition" to try to avert as much partisan wrangling as possible in the Senate. Landrieu also said she and others created the "Gang of 10, " which initially focused on judicial nominations and is now involved in other issues, including energy.

Former U.S. Rep. Billy Tauzin, a Democrat-turned-Republican, said Landrieu has learned "when to be loyal to her party and when to value Louisiana first. . . . She has done a fairly good of that."

Analysis: Why is Elizabeth Dole vulnerable?

CNN All Politics

By Stuart Rothenberg and Nathan L. Gonzales
The Rothenberg Political Report

Two years ago, as the 2007-2008 election cycle was beginning, one female Republican senator up for re-election looked to be in serious danger: Maine's Susan Collins.

But with just three weeks left until Election Day, the moderate Collins now appears to be one of the few embattled Republican senators who could survive the forthcoming Democratic wave.

On the other hand, North Carolina's Elizabeth Dole, once regarded as a lock for re-election, looks as if she is about to fall at the hands of Democratic challenger Kay Hagan.

How did Dole become more endangered than Collins?

First, Collins' campaign understood from the beginning that her opponent, 1st District Democratic Congressman Tom Allen, would be a formidable foe. Allen, a former mayor of Portland, already represents half of the state, and he has the kind of earnest, low-key style that appeals to many Maine voters.

Second, Collins understood that she'd get no help from the top of the ticket this year, so she had to raise money and get her message out early. Most neutral observers have expected the eventual Democratic nominee for president to carry Maine this year, since Al Gore carried the state by 5 percentage points in 2000 and John Kerry won it by 9 percentage points four years ago.

Third, for whatever reason, Collins has, over the 12 years that she has represented the state in the Senate, developed considerable affection and respect from Maine voters, who see her as independent, hard-working and down to earth. It has been that bond with state voters that has allowed her to weather the current storm that is overwhelming other Republican incumbents.

Dole, on the other hand, seemed not to appreciate the threat she faced. Hagan, after all, was not the initially-preferred candidate of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and the Democratic state senator from Greensboro had first ruled out a bid against Dole before eventually changing her mind.

Dole also apparently had trouble accepting that she was vulnerable. Her early poll numbers were strong, after all. But the DSCC spent heavily to attack Dole early, and they succeeded in softening her up. They also hit her on two good issues: her effectiveness (or lack of it) in Washington and the little time that she has spent in the state over the past few years.

Bill Clinton stumps for Noriega, Obama at Dallas rally

Dallas Morning News

In a rally that included most every major Democrat in North Texas, Bill Clinton on Tuesday urged voters to elect Rick Noriega to the Senate to help Barack Obama push a change agenda.

“Nobody is smart enough to do this alone,” Mr. Clinton said of electing a Democratic president. “The supporting cast matters.”

The former president said that his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, sent him to Texas to give Mr. Noriega a boost.

The state representative from Houston is challenging incumbent Republican John Cornyn, who is leading in the polls and beginning to spend a huge campaign fund.

Mr. Clinton said that his wife, who recently stumped for Mr. Noriega in South Texas, was miffed that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee was not active in the Lone Star Senate tilt.

But he said the underfunded, underdog campaign could prevail.

“This is not about money,” Mr. Clinton said to a large, loud crowd. “This is about the survival of the United States.”

Mr. Cornyn, who was in Dallas on Tuesday to tout an after-school program, said he was “flattered” that Mr. Clinton would campaign against him in Texas. Through a reporter, he even welcomed him to Dallas.

“In the end, people should not be confused,” said Mr. Cornyn, who will debate Mr. Noriega Thursday in Dallas. “If you want higher taxes and bigger government on top of a soft economy, the Democrats offer that choice.”

Mr. Noriega, however, said he offered an opportunity to reverse the tough eight years under President Bush.

“He’s supported every major failed policy that we see,” Mr. Noriega said of his rival. “The primary challenge is that we must replace John Cornyn in the Senate.”

Mr. Clinton seemed at home in Dallas. He acknowledged Dallas City Council member Pauline Medrano, state Sen. Royce West and others. He said he wished he could have cool hair like Dallas County Commissioner John Wiley Price.

But the bulk of his praise went to Mr. Noriega, who stood beside Mr. Clinton as he spoke at the Thomas Jefferson High School auditorium in North Dallas.

Mr. Clinton said Mr. Noriega would help Mr. Obama and Democrats restore jobs, achieve energy independence for the country and reform the nation’s health care system.

But he said the key reason to vote for Mr. Noriega involves the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

Mr. Noriega helped Houston’s response, which was hailed by critics.

Mr. Clinton said Mr. Noriega would use the armed forces in a prudent manner.

“He knows military should be a last resort, not a first option,” Mr. Clinton said.

Mr. Noriega echoed Mr. Clinton’s remarks, adding that he would proudly stand by “Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama” to sign a health care reform package.

“What is wrong with peace, prosperity and a balanced budget?” he said. “We have got to change the course that we’ve been on. We’ve been in a ditch.”

Who's Really In Smith's Corner?

Matthew Miller, DSCC

Smith runs ads like a Democrat, votes like Bush; View here

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee began running a new television ad today highlighting Gordon Smith’s attempts to run from his own party in this election year, despite being a consistent advocate for George Bush’s failed policies. Smith’s ads try to tie him to Ted Kennedy, Ron Wyden and Barack Obama – but Obama has endorsed Jeff Merkley, Wyden recorded an ad for Merkley and called on Smith to remove the ad about him, and Basic Rights Oregon declared, “Gordon Smith is no Ted Kennedy.”

“Gordon Smith wants Oregonians to think he’s on their side, but on issue after issue Smith only fights for George Bush’s policies and the failed status quo,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “There’s pretending to be a Democrat in campaign ads and then there’s actually fighting every day for the middle class, and Oregon voters are smart enough to know the difference.”

DSCC OR TV: “Corner”
Date: 10/12/08

Copy/Visual

Documentation

Narrator: Whose corner is Gordon Smith really in?

Narrator: He says Democrats Ted Kennedy and Ron Wyden, even Barack Obama… are in his corner. No way!

Visual: No Way!

Smith Has Repeatedly Used Sen. Obama in Ads, But Obama Has Endorsed Merkley. In June 2008, Smith ran the first of multiple campaign ads promoting his ties to Sen. Barack Obama. “The Obama campaign was quick to note that it isn’t backing Smith’s bid for a third term. ‘Barack Obama has a long record of bipartisan accomplishment and we appreciate that it is respected by his Democratic and Republican colleagues in the Senate,’ spokesman Bill Burton said in a statement, ‘But in this race, Oregonians should know that Barack Obama supports Jeff Merkley for Senate. Merkley will help Obama bring about the fundamental change we need in Washington.’” [Wall Street Journal, Washington Wire, 6/24/08; Oregonian, 7/31/08]

When Smith Used Sen. Wyden in an Ad, Wyden, Who Has Endorsed Merkley, Asked Smith to Take it Off the Air. In October 2008, Smith launched a TV ad featuring Sen. Ron Wyden. The Oregonian reported, “Wyden, however, doesn't find much humor in the ad. He's particularly upset that the ad includes his signature at the end, superimposed on a photo of the two senators, and he's asking the Smith campaign to pull the ad. ‘I guess we should be flattered by all the attention,’ said Josh Kardon, Wyden's chief of staff in Oregon. ‘But the unauthorized use of Ron's signature is no laughing matter. Its use will confuse voters about who Ron supports in this race, and the ad should come down.’” Smith’s ad “comes on the heels of one by Merkley in which Wyden talks directly into the camera about how he and the Oregon House speaker could work together in the Senate to ‘put the economy back on track, end the billions in subsidies for oil companies.’” [Oregonian, 10/10/08]

Smith’s Use of Sen. Kennedy in an Ad Prompted Gay Rights Group Leader to State, “Smith is No Ted Kennedy.” After Gordon Smith aired an ad touting his work with Ted Kennedy on gay rights issues, Basic Rights Oregon Executive Director Jeana Frazzini said, “Senator Ted Kennedy has spent his career working to ensure equality under the law for all Americans… But Gordon Smith flip-flops on the issues, trotting out his support only when his campaign is in trouble and he thinks it will score him a few extra votes in Portland and Eugene. Gordon Smith is no Ted Kennedy.” [Basic Rights Oregon Press Release, 10/3/08]

Narrator: It’s Gordon Smith who supported Bush’s tax breaks for the wealthy…

Visual: Gordon Smith Supported Bush Tax Breaks for the Wealthy
Vote 196, 5/23/03; Vote 170, 5/26/01

Smith Cast Crucial Vote for Bush’s Final 2003 Tax Cut Package. In May 2003, Smith cast a crucial vote to approve the final version of President Bush’s $330 billion tax cut plan, which passed 50-50 with Vice President Cheney breaking the tie. The bill benefited taxpayers with income from investments, lowering taxes on capital gains and stock dividends to 15% Previously, investors paid as much as 38.6% tax on dividends and 20% on capital gains. The bill also accelerated the 2001 income tax cuts. [Vote 196, 5/23/03; CQ Floor Votes, 5/23/03; AP, 5/23/03]

Smith Supported 2001 Bush Tax Cut. Smith voted for the final 2001 Bush tax cuts, which reduced taxes by $1.35 trillion through 2010 with income tax rate cuts, relief of the marriage penalty, a phase-out of the federal estate tax, doubling the child tax credit, and providing incentives for retirement savings. The top income tax rate of 39.6% would drop to 35% under the bill. [Vote 170, 5/26/01; CQ Floor Votes, 5/26/01; Chicago Tribune, 5/27/01]

Sen. McCain Said 2001 Tax Cuts Benefited Wealthy “At the Expense of Middle-Class Americans.” Sen. John McCain, who voted against the 2001 Bush tax cuts, “said the measure cut tax rates for the wealthy ‘at the expense of middle-class Americans.’” [AP, 5/26/01]

Wealthiest 1% of Oregonians Will Receive 29% of the Bush Tax Cuts. In October 2006, Citizens for Tax Justice reported that from 2001-2010, the wealthiest one percent of Oregonians, who had an average income of $967,100 in 2006, will receive 29% of the Bush tax cuts. The total 10-year average tax cut for this wealthiest group is $338,067, an average of $33,807 per year. At the same time, the poorest 60 percent will get only 19.5 percent of the tax cuts, with an average annual tax cut over the 10 years of only $382. [CTJ, 10/06]

Narrator: …$4 billion in tax breaks for big oil…

Visual: Gordon Smith Supported $4 Billion in Tax Breaks For Big Oil.
Vote 261, 8/5/99

1999: Smith Cast Decisive Vote For 1999 Tax Package With Over $4 Billion For Big Oil. Smith voted for the conference report for the 1999 GOP tax package which passed 50-49. According to the International Herald Tribune, “One provision would reduce taxes on foreign oil and gas income, costing the U.S. Treasury an estimated $4.7 billion from 2005 to 2009.” The Washington Post also wrote that “a break for foreign oil and gas income that would cost the Treasury more than $4 billion.” [Vote 261, 8/5/99; International Herald Tribune, 9/23/99; Washington Post, 8/5/99]

McCain Criticized 1999 Bill For Giving Oil Companies Billions In Tax Cuts For Their Efforts to Pass The Bill. According to the Durham Herald-Sun, Sen. McCain, “cited the influence of special interests on the passage of this summer's $792 billion tax bill. Had the president signed it, banks and securities firms, which spent $34.6 million in soft money contributions, would have received $30 billion in tax cuts, a good investment according to McCain. Similarly, restaurants and hotels spent $9.9 million and received $8.4 billion; oil and gas companies spent $14.3 million and got $5 billion; steel companies contributed $990,000 and got $187 million, McCain said.” [Durham Herald-Sun, 10/13/99]

Star Tribune: 1999 Bill “Hands Billions Of Dollars In Breaks” to Big Oil. According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, “the bill hands billions of dollars in breaks to U.S. gas and oil companies.” [Minneapolis Star Tribune, 8/8/99]

Tennessean: 1999 Bill Included “A $4 Billion Break” for Oil and Gas. Urging a veto of the 1999 GOP tax bill, the Tennessean editorial board wrote that it included “a $4 billion break for foreign oil and gas income.” [Tennessean, 8/6/99]

Narrator: …and Smith voted against lower prescription drug prices.

Visual: Gordon Smith Against Lower Prescription Drug Prices
Vote 60, 3/17/05; Vote 302, 11/3/05

Smith Voted Against Allowing the Government to Negotiate Lower Drug Prices for Medicare. In 2005, Smith voted against an amendment that would insert language that would allow the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate with drug manufacturers for lower drug prices under Medicare. [Vote 60, 3/17/05]

Smith Voted To Kill Amendment to Allow Government to Negotiate Drug Prices Through Medicare. In November 2005, Smith voted to kill an amendment that would have allowed the federal government to negotiate drug prices. The amendment which was introduced by Maine Republican Olympia Snowe, would have authorized the Secretary of HHS to negotiate prescription drug prices through Medicare, but would specifically not allow him to set prices. [Vote 302, 11/3/05]

Narrator: So don’t be fooled. We know whose corner Gordon Smith’s really in… And it’s not ours.

Visual: Gordon Smith
Not For Us.

Narrator: The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is responsible for the content of this ad.

Visual: Paid for by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. www.dscc.org. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising.

Two new polls tip in Udall's favor

Denver Post

Democratic Senate candidate Mark Udall has opened his biggest lead of the campaign over his Republican opponent, apparently helped along by a financial crisis that is scrambling races across the country.

Udall is up 14 percentage points over Republican Bob Schaffer in a new Wall Street Journal/Quinnipiac University poll and up 11 in a poll by Suffolk University, both released Tuesday.

Schaffer campaign manager Dick Wadhams called the result from the Quinnipiac poll "absurd" and said the race "was still within the margin of error."

"It's leading me to question the professionalism of Quinnipiac University," Wadhams said of the swing state poll, which showed Udall up by 8 percentage points a month ago.

Analysts say the problem for Schaffer is less the size of the lead than that both surveys suggest the struggling economy has altered the basic contours of a race at a critical moment in the campaign.

Among the more than half-dozen Senate seats in danger of shifting from Republican to Democrat, Colorado's now ranks among the most vulnerable, the surveys suggest.

Schaffer "needs the Hail Mary pass," said Jennifer Duffy, who tracks Senate races nationally for The Cook Political Report and who described the Republican's chances now as "extremely uphill."

Duffy said the country's financial turmoil has hurt GOP candidates far more than Democrats, and that's especially true in several key Senate races.

Georgia Republican Saxby Cham bliss has seen a 20-point lead nearly evaporate in just three weeks, Duffy said. In Minnesota, Republican incumbent Norm Coleman, who until now had a solid lead, is trailing by 2 points in the latest polls.

"I think (Schaffer's) got a shot, but boy, it's a bank shot," said Sean Duffy, a Republican consultant in Denver and former aide to Republican Gov. Bill Owens. Duffy is not related to the Cook Report analyst.

Among the challenges for Schaffer is that the roiling political landscape is also forcing Republican backers to triage resources, scurrying to protect vulnerable incumbents at the cost of open seats like Colorado's.

After together spending nearly $2 million in Colorado Senate ads in the last two weeks of September, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Freedom's Watch — two of Schaffer's biggest backers — suddenly pulled out.

Those two groups are now spending millions in Senate races in Oregon and North Carolina, where Republican incumbents are at risk.

"The first rule for both parties is to protect your incumbents. When push comes to shove, the incumbents are going to get the money. . . . And yeah, that absolutely hurts Schaffer," said Sean Tonner, who ran Republican Pete Coors' Senate campaign in 2004.

"Inversely for Udall, when people see a winner, money will start flowing in so people can start saying they helped push him over the finish line," Tonner said.

Udall stumps for votes, talks about Wall Street

Valencia County News-Bulletin

Valencia County voters got a first-hand look at Democratic Senatorial candidate Tom Udall Wednesday as he stopped at the Valencia County Sheriff's Posse Café and spoke to residents about issues ranging from alternative energy to the economy.

Campaign signs decorated a room filled with Udall supporters as they cheered for their candidate at an event meant to help garner votes before this year's election.

"Congressman Udall wanted to come out and see what issues are important to the people of Valencia County," said Marissa Padilla, a Udall spokeswoman.

Udall, who represents New Mexico's 3rd Congressional District, is running against Steve Pearce, R-N.M., for the open seat in the U.S. Senate vacated by Pete Domenici, who is retiring.

"I've applied one simple rule (while serving in New Mexico)," Udall said. "Do what's right for New Mexico and do what's right for our country."

Udall listed alternative energy as an avenue to increase jobs and stabilize current businesses.

"We need to reinvest in solar and wind energy in New Mexico," Udall told the crowd. "If we concentrate on that, we can grow jobs right here."

The former attorney general also said he is working in conjunction with New Mexico State University to help produce a biofuel made out of algae.

"That kind of technology means our resources would go a lot further," Udall said.

The Congressman, who opposed the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act — a law authorizing the U.S. Secretary of Treasury to spend up to $700 billion to purchase distressed assets from the nation's banks — also reached out to middle-class families.

"The bailout took care of Wall Street," Udall said. "But it didn't take care of Main Street."

Another issue Udall was stern about was the idea of drafting a timeline for troops to leave Iraq. He called President Bush's foreign policy "ridiculous" and emphasized that American troops should be deployed from Iraq within one year.

"We need to do it responsibly, not in a hurried fashion," he said. "That's the kind of thing I stand for."

Energy costs a factor in Michigan US Senate race

Associated Press

A gallon of gas costs more than twice what it did six years ago, the last time incumbent Democratic U.S. Sen. Carl Levin was up for re-election.

The average statewide cost for regular unleaded gasoline was $3.27 per gallon as of Friday, according to AAA Michigan. The price topped $4 at times this summer, very different from the $1.55 per gallon Michigan motorists were paying in October 2002.

Energy prices are among the top concerns for Michigan voters headed to the polls Nov. 4. The price and availability of energy, along with the nation's emerging energy policy, could be crucial components of the state's future economic fortunes.

Levin and his Republican opponent, Jack Hoogendyk, both say the U.S. must reduce its dependence on imported oil. But they disagree on whether drilling should be allowed in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and what should be done to prompt alternative energy development.

Levin supports a windfall profits tax on oil companies that have unduly profited from what he has characterized as "outrageous price increases" at the pump.

Commercials add to Senate debate

Oklahoman

Oklahoma’s U.S. Senate race enters the home stretch with a new focus on the economy, both in personal campaigning and in ads.

Democratic challenger Andrew Rice is hoping to tie incumbent U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe to the economic downturn. Inhofe is asking voters to trust his consistency and experience.

Rice, a state senator from Oklahoma City, launched an ad last week accusing Inhofe, R-Tulsa, of doing nothing as the U.S. slipped into an economic crisis. It suggests Inhofe was influenced by the $1.3 million in campaign contributions over his 22-year Washington career from real estate, banking and financial services donors. "Are you better off?” Rice’s ad asks.

Schaffer role in Iraq oil deal revived with group's impending endorsement

Grand Junction Daily Sentinel

A conservative political group scheduled to endorse Republican U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer on Wednesday has ties to a public relations firm that worked in 2005 to attract international oil companies and other firms to do business in northern Iraq against U.S. policy at the time.

Sal Russo, chief strategist for the political arm of Move America Forward, said he and his California-based public relations firm, Russo, Marsh & Rogers, were involved in helping promote international business deals in Kurdistan, the semi-autonomous northern region of Iraq.

“We were trying to make people aware that there was a part of Iraq that is secular, safe, booming economically … and to encourage people to invest, because it is a booming economy,” Russo said Monday.

Move America Forward, a nonprofit, has advocated in favor of U.S. intervention in Iraq and veterans issues.

Schaffer, who is running against Democratic Congressman Mark Udall, was one of several executives from Denver-based Aspect Energy who laid the groundwork in November 2006 for an oil deal between the company and the regional government.

The U.S. State Department has cited the Aspect Energy deal and two dozen other similar deals as problematic for the fledgling democracy.

On the campaign trail this year, Schaffer said he never heard firsthand the U.S. government opposed international oil deals with the Kurds.

State Department correspondence, however, shows Aspect Energy finalized its oil production agreement with the Kurdistan Regional Government in November 2007, long after the State Department had broadcast its stance on foreign oil deals, including in a May 1 letter to the man Schaffer hopes to succeed, U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo.

Chambliss-Martin Senate race getting tighter

Atlanta Journal-Constitution

The cakewalk has suddenly become a contest.

Just a month ago, no one — especially Democrats — gave Democrat Jim Martin much of a chance against Republican incumbent U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss. But an economic crisis can quickly alter the political landscape. Depending on which poll you believe, Martin is now only 6 points behind Chambliss, or perhaps dead-even, with just three weeks until election day.

Chambliss, whose campaign once enjoyed a double-digit lead and has run only positive television ads so far, will go on the offensive in the final weeks of the race as the two former University of Georgia fraternity brothers slug it out against a national backdrop of increasing Democratic clout in the face of economic uncertainty.

“We won’t be attacking Martin,” Chambliss campaign spokeswoman Michelle Grasso said Thursday. “We will be defining Martin based on his past votes. He has a long record in Georgia that a lot of people are not familiar with and need to be.”

Democrats think the recent roiling of the financial markets and Chambliss’ backing of a $700 billion financial rescue plan has given them a chance to peel off once-certain Republican votes. They believe the race has shifted, just as most voters begin to focus on the Nov. 4 election.

“These polls confirm what we’ve been hearing from middle class Georgians all across the state who are fed up with Saxby Economics: they’re being hit hard by the failed economic policies of the Bush Administration that Saxby Chambliss has supported every step of the way,” said Martin spokeswoman Kate Hansen.

Chambliss still has a huge fund-raising advantage — 4 to 1 over Martin by most estimates — and until recently the Republican’s seat was considered safe in a state where the governor’s office, both chambers of the state Legislature, the majority of its Congressional delegation and both U.S. Senate seats are controlled by Republicans.

However, the non-partisan political Web site Pollster.com now calls the Chambliss-Martin race a tossup, as does The Cook Political Report. Congressional Quarterly recently changed its rating of the race to “Leans Republican” from “Republican Favored.”

Last week, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer described Georgia and Kentucky as “even-steven races.” The committee hasn’t, however, officially added Georgia to its list of battleground states, and has been slow to pour money into the race. A spokesman said the committee did partially fund Martin’s latest television ad, which blames Chambliss for the economic turmoil.

“We think it’s a neck-and-neck race,” said DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller. “That’s why we sent money to the state party.”

Martin has unleashed a series of ads tying Chambliss to the nation’s economic woes. Chambliss will probably focus on Martin’s extensive record in state government as the campaign nears the finish line.

Martin came under a blistering attack from his Democratic opponents during the primary for his troubled tenure as chief of the state Department of Human Resources.

Some voters, however, appear to be most interested in the economy.

Palmetto resident J.W. Wood, 54, considers himself an independent voter, but said he will vote for Martin this year.

“I’m going to have to vote my pocketbook,” said Wood who works for the City of Atlanta Water Department. “The people who care more about my pocketbook recently are Democrats.”

DSCC Files Complaint Over Donor Harassment By Republican Group

Matthew Miller, DSCC

DSCC calls for investigation of Americans for Limited Government Foundation

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee today filed an FEC complaint against the group Americans for Limited Government Foundation for illegally using FEC reports to harass Democratic donors. The foundation has sent threatening letters to DSCC donors implying that they contributed to 527 organizations, writing that their names have “been put in our database” and warning the donors of the foundation’s “intent to publicize your involvement in your local community.” Because the recipients of these threatening letters have only contributed to the DSCC, it is clear the group could have only obtained the names and personal addresses of the donors from the DSCC’s FEC filing, which is against the law.

“We continue to witness shadowy special interest groups intervening in the election, and this case of harassment, intimidation and invasion of privacy proves the extent these organizations are willing to go,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “Special interests have shown they will stop at nothing to protect the Republican Senators who do their bidding in Washington, but stealing personal information and using it to harass and threaten Americans who are just trying to be involved in the political process is beyond the pale.”

To view the DSCC’s FEC complaint, click here. (PDF link)

To view the threatening letter and legal memo from Americans for Limited Government Foundation, click here. (PDF link)

Sununu In His Own Words Backing Social Security Privatization

Matthew Miller, DSCC

DSCC TV ad uses footage from New Hampshire debate; View ad here

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee began airing a new television advertisement today featuring footage from the US Senate debate on October 6 in which John Sununu said that despite the instability of the stock market, the idea of Social Security privatization “shouldn’t be” dead. Just last week, the Director of the Congressional Budget Office estimated that retirement savings have lost $2 trillion in the last 15 months.

“If John Sununu still supports Social Security privatization even in the face of this economic crisis and the volatile stock market, his judgment should seriously be questioned,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “Granite Staters don’t want to trust their retirement savings to the stock market, and they won’t trust decisions about their Social Security to John Sununu.”

DSCC “Enthusiasm”
Date: 10/10/08

Copy/Visual

Documentation

Laura Knoy: “We’re all aware of the troubles on Wall Street and the ups and downs of the stock market.”

Narrator: The stock market loses $2 trillion in retirement savings.

Visual: Stock market loses $2 trillion in retirement savings.

New Hampshire Business and Industry Association Debate. [October 6, 2008]

Headline: Retirement Savings Lose $2 Trillion in 15 Months. In October 2008, the Washington Post reported that “the stock market's prolonged tumble has wiped out about $2 trillion in Americans' retirement savings in the past 15 months.” [Washington Post, 10/8/08]

Laura Knoy: “What do those troubles, Senator Sununu, do for the enthusiasm of an initiative that you’ve long championed, and that’s the partial voluntary privatization of Social Security? “

Narrator: The Bush/Sununu plan puts Social Security in the market.

Visual: The Bush/Sununu Plan Puts Social Security in the Market

New Hampshire Business and Industry Association Debate. [October 6, 2008]

2000: Bush Planned to Use $1 Trillion to Privatize Social Security. During the 2000 campaign, Bush made it clear that he planned to devote large sums of money towards the privatization of Social Security. In December 2000, the New York Times reported, “Mr. Bush suggested that he would use a chunk of the Social Security surplus, probably around $1 trillion, to help pay for his plan to add private investment accounts to the Social Security system.” [New York Times, 12/31/00]

2005: Sununu Joined Bush to Promote Social Security Plan in NH. In February 2005, President Bush travelled to New Hampshire and held a campaign-style event to promote his plan to privatize Social Security. John Sununu and Judd Gregg stood with Bush at the event held at the Pease International Tradeport in Portsmouth. The Union Leader reported, “President George W. Bush is scheduled to return to the Granite State next week to lobby for his Social Security partial-privatization plan.” [Union Leader, 2/12/05, 2/15/05; Union Leader, Editorial, 2/18/05]

Sununu Returned to Washington on Air Force One. During the visit, “The president thanked US Senators Judd Gregg and John E. Sununu, both New Hampshire Republicans, for their support and ribbed them about their eagerness to ride Air Force One back to Washington.” [Boston Globe, 2/17/05]

Laura Knoy: “Is this issue now dead given how scary the stock market has been?”

Sununu: “It shouldn’t be.”

New Hampshire Business and Industry Association Debate. [October 6, 2008]

Narrator: Truly Scary.

Visual: Truly Scary.

Narrator: The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Is Responsible for the content of this advertising

Title: Paid for by The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. www.dscc.org. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising.

In Tapes, Ted Stevens Says He "Might Have To Serve A Little Time In Jail."

Matthew Miller, DSCC

DSCC TV ad uses audio from public interview, FBI tape; View here

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee began running a new television ad with audio from FBI tapes played at Ted Stevens’ corruption trial in which Stevens says, “What the hell? The worst that can be done, the worst that can happen to us is we round up a bunch of legal fees and might lose and we might have to pay a fine, might have to serve a little time in jail.” Stevens had previously told an Alaska TV station, “I have nothing to be ashamed of.”

“Ted Stevens told Alaskans one thing about his VECO connections, but in private he was whistling a different tune,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “As his corruption trial continues, Alaskans are realizing that for Ted Stevens, it’s just not about Alaska anymore.”

DSCC AK TV “Reel to Reel”
Date: 10/9/08

Copy	Documentation
Stevens: “I have nothing to be ashamed of. I know what I’ve done and I know I’m not guilty of the charges that they’ve made.” Visual: Ted Stevens Narrator: That’s what Ted Stevens said in an interview…	Following the Indictment, Stevens Proclaimed Innocence and Asserted That He Has “Nothing to be Ashamed Of.” In August 2008, Stevens was featured in a televised interview by KTVA where he said, “I have nothing to be ashamed of. I know what I’ve done and I know I’m not guilty of the charges that they’ve made.” [KTVA, 8/14/08]
Narrator: …and this is what he said in private to Bill Allen. Visual: FBI Wiretap Recording Exhibit 650: Ted Stevens Talking to VECO CEO Bill Allen Date: 10/18/06 Stevens: “What the hell? The worst that can be done, the worst that can happen to us is we round up a bunch of legal fees and might lose and we might have to pay a fine, might have to serve a little time in jail.” Visual: “…serve a little time in jail.”	In a Conversation Recorded by the FBI, Stevens Says that “The Worst That Can Happen to us is… Might Have to Serve A Little Jail Time.” In 2006, the FBI secretly recorded a conversation between former Veco executive Bill Allen and Stevens, where the Senator speculated about a public corruption investigation. Stevens said, “What the hell? The worst that can be done, the worst that can happen to us is we round up a bunch of legal fees and might lose and we might have to pay a fine, might have to serve a little time in jail.” [Anchorage Daily News, 10/7/08] “FBI taped more than 100 Stevens calls.” In September of 2008, Ted Stevens’ attorneys said that FBI agents taped more than 100 phone calls involving Stevens as part of their federal corruption investigation. [Associated Press, 9/2/08]
Visual: Ted Stevens It’s not about Alaska anymore
Narrator: The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising. Visual: PAID FOR BY THE DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE. WWW.DSCC.ORG. NOT AUTHORIZED BY ANY CANDIDATE OR CANDIDATE’S COMMITTEE. THE DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTENT OF THIS ADVERTISING.

Gordon Smith's Party Is Over

Matthew Miller, DSCC

New DSCC ad says Smith caters to Bush and special interests; View here

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee began running a new television ad today highlighting Gordon Smith’s support for George Bush’s policies, including the privatization of social security, support for companies that ship jobs overseas, and billion dollar tax breaks for Big Oil.

“Gordon Smith has catered to special interests for years while slamming the door on average Oregonians,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “Oregonians want a Senator who will put them first, not the special interests.”

DSCC “Party”
Date: 10/7/08

Copy/Visual

Documentation

Narrator: Gordon Smith sure knows how to throw a party - just look at his guest list!

Visual: Gordon Smith’s Guest List

Narrator: The first to arrive? The guys from Wall Street

Visual: Gordon Smith ? Wall Street

Wall Street Lobbied For Privatization. According to the Washington Post in 1996, “Wall Street is putting its weight behind the movement in Washington to privatize Social Security…Lobbyists for Wall Street are trying to stay behind the scenes as they argue for privatization because they and their firms so obviously stand to profit by the changes they are promoting, according to financial industry executives.” [Washington Post, 9/20/96]

Washington Post: “No one doubts privatization of Social Security would be a bonanza for Wall Street.” According to the Washington Post, “No one doubts privatization of Social Security would be a bonanza for Wall Street. Thomas D. Gallagher, a Washington-based analyst at Lehman Brothers Inc., estimates that under one approach being considered by the Advisory Council, the money flowing into the stock market from privatization could exceed the record $ 123 billion that flowed into stock and bond funds in 1995.” [Washington Post, 9/20/96]

Oregonian: WALL STREET SEEKS PIECE OF SOCIAL SECURITY. According to an Associated Press story published in the Oregonian in 1996, “Wall Street has set its sights on the ailing Social Security system, hoping to receive at least a $60 billion annual bonanza if Congress decides to turn part of the retirement safety net over to private money managers… If approved, privatization would have a dramatic, positive impact on the mutual fund industry if done smartly, said John L. Steffens, a Merrill Lynch & Co. executive vice president. [Oregonian, 11/14/96]

Industry Trade Group Estimated Billions In Fees For Wall Street. According to the Washington Post, “The Securities Industry Association said in a report that partial privatization under scenarios being considered could generate as little as $39 billion for investment firms over the next 75 years and no more than $279 billion…The report appeared to be a direct rebuttal to a study published in September in which University of Chicago business school professor Austan Goolsbee predicted Wall Street could collect $940 billion or more over 75 years, an amount he called the largest windfall in American financial history.” [Washington Post, 12/10/04]

Headline: “A Fat Check For Wall Street?; If Plan to Privatize Social Security Passes, Financial Firms Could Reap Billions In Fees.” According to Newsday, “No one knows whether workers would prosper in private Social Security accounts, but financial firms would likely pull in big bucks. From mutual fund managers to brokerage firms to investment advisers, financial-services companies could in time earn hundreds of millions of dollars a year in fees and other revenue if workers were allowed to invest part of their payroll taxes in the stock market, as President George W. Bush is proposing.” [Newsday, 2/20/05]

Narrator: They saw dollar signs when Smith wanted to privatize Social Security.

Smith Voted for Privatization Twice in 1998. In 1998, Smith voted to express the sense of the Senate that any budget surplus should be used to reduce the Social Security payroll tax and to establish personal retirement accounts. He also voted to express the sense of the Senate that the Senate Finance Committee should report legislation that would dedicate the federal budget surplus to the establishment of Social Security “personal retirement accounts.” [Vote 77, 4/2/98; Vote 56, 4/1/98]

Vote for Roth Amendment Was “Endorsement” Of Private Accounts. Describing his amendment, which Smith supported, Sen. William Roth said, “The Senate's endorsement today of personal investment accounts is important.” [Roth Press Release, 4/1/98; Vote 56, 4/1/98]

Vote for Grams Amendment Was “Straightforward” Vote To Set Up Personal Accounts. Describing his amendment, which Smith supported, Sen. Rod Grams said, “This is a very simple and straightforward amendment. It asks Congress and the President to commit any budget surplus to reducing the Social Security payroll tax and use the tax reduction to set up personal retirement accounts for America's working men and women.” [Grams Press Release, 4/1/98; Vote 77, 4/2/98]

Smith Wished “Everyone” Had a Private Account for Social Security. “I am not ideologically opposed to personal savings accounts. I wish everyone had one,” Smith said in 2005. [Gannett News Service, 7/7/05]

Smith “Likes the Idea” of Private Accounts. In a 2005 article, the Associated Press reported that “Smith, a member of the Senate Finance Committee, has said he likes the idea of people owning their retirement accounts.” [Associated Press, 4/25/05]

Smith Likened Personal Accounts For Social Security to A Safe ‘Lockbox.’ During a hearing with then-chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan, Smith stated, “aren't personal accounts essentially another form of a lockbox? I mean, Congress can't... It creates the lock box... they're one vehicle to create a lock box and it increases national savings, does it also have the benefit of giving to the needy what the rich have and that is something that grows compounding interest? In other words, there is a third option to cutting benefits and raising taxes. You can make the money work harder, lock it up and watch people enjoy the benefit of earnings.” [U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging Hearing, 3/15/05]

Smith Praised Bush’s 2000 Private Accounts Proposal. According to the Salem Statesman Journal, “Bush's proposal would siphon a small amount of the Social Security deduction and allow workers to invest that money in conservative, low-risk stocks and bonds…Fans of Bush's proposal include U.S. Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Oregon, who joined Bush for the Portland tour. Smith said some Social Security reform is needed and that this proposal would allow people to take ownership of at least some of their retirement funds.” [Salem Statesman Journal, 5/17/00]

Smith Backed Bush Privatization Plan In 2000, Even Though Critics At The Time Likened The Risk Of A Market Collapse To Savings And Loan Crisis. According to the Salem Statesman Journal reporting on a Bush Campaign visit to Portland in 2000, “Bush announced his privatization proposal Monday in California…Bush's proposal would siphon a small amount of the Social Security deduction and allow workers to invest that money in conservative, low-risk stocks and bonds…Social Security is invested by the government and generates about 2 percent profit per year. Bush said even the safest, most anemic stock investment would generate far superior returns…Don Negri, associate professor of economics at Willamette University, said he doesn't know the specifics of Bush's proposal but that he can guess the answer to the safety net question. “There's a certain risk in investing that money,” Negri said. “Who bears the risk if things don't work out? Well, the federal government, obviously. If people invest in the market and the market fails, the feds aren't going to say, ‘See you later.’” If such a bailout were to happen, some critics say it would resemble the disastrous savings-and-loan bailouts of the 1980s…Fans of Bush's proposal include U.S. Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Oregon, who joined Bush for the Portland tour. Smith said some Social Security reform is needed and that this proposal would allow people to take ownership of at least some of their retirement funds.” [Statesman Journal, 5/17/00]

Smith Join Bush At Campaign Stop Focused On Social Security Privatization Plan That Could Have Reduced Benefits. According to the Washington Post, “Bush, joined by Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.), sat at a table with a half-dozen employees at Gunderson Inc., a railroad freight car builder here, in front of about 50 other Gunderson employees. A big sign designed to look like a Social Security Card, with the words ‘Saving Social Security’ emblazoned across it, served as a backdrop…Bush acknowledged today that his plan does not address how much of a loss in Social Security benefits those who enrolled in the private investment plan would face. He said it is “conceivable” that a worker taking advantage of the investment accounts would get a lower guaranteed benefit from Social Security.” [Washington Post, 5/17/00]

Smith Liked the Idea of an “Ownership Society.” In 2005, Smith’s spokesman said that Smith “has said he likes the idea of an ownership society,” as Bush has advocated. [AP, 8/11/05]

Narrator: Oh, and here comes George Bush of course!

Visual: Gordon Smith ? George Bush

From 2001-2007, Smith Voted With Bush 85% of the Time. From 2001-2007, Gordon Smith voted with President Bush 85% of the time. In Bush’s first term, though, Smith supported Bush an average of 94% of the time. [CQ Member Profile, accessed 10/2/08]

Smith Is “Reliably Republican” and “Usually in Line” With Bush. In an editorial, the Eugene Register-Guard wrote that Smith’s “voting record, taken in totality, is reliably Republican and usually in line with President Bush’s positions.” [Eugene Register Guard, 6/29/08]

Smith Led Bush’s Oregon Re-election Effort. In 2004, Smith served as the state Chairman of the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign and was one of Bush’s top national fundraisers. “President Bush's steady leadership is resonating with the people of Oregon,” Smith said at the opening of the Bush-Cheney ’04 Oregon headquarters. [Gannett News Service, 9/2/04; Bush-Cheney ’04 Press Release, 4/13/04; AP, 10/17/03]

Sen. McCain Said 2001 Tax Cuts Benefited Wealthy “At the Expense of Middle-Class Americans.” Sen. John McCain, who voted against the 2001 Bush tax cuts, “said the measure cut tax rates for the wealthy ‘at the expense of middle-class Americans.’” [AP, 5/26/01]

Wealthiest 1% of Oregonians Will Receive 29% of the Bush Tax Cuts. In October 2006, Citizens for Tax Justice reported that from 2001-2010, the wealthiest one percent of Oregonians, who had an average income of $967,100 in 2006, will receive 29% of the Bush tax cuts. The total 10-year average tax cut for this wealthiest group is $338,067, an average of $33,807 per year. At the same time, the poorest 60 percent will get only 19.5 percent of the tax cuts, with an average annual tax cut over the 10 years of only $382. [CTJ, 10/06]

Narrator: Next are companies that ship our jobs overseas.

Visual: Gordon Smith ? Companies that Ship Jobs Overseas

Smith Voted To Maintain The Deferral Tax Subsidy For Companies That Offshore Manufacturing. In 2004 and 2005, Smith voted twice in opposition to amendments that would repeal the deferral tax subsidy for companies that outsource production of goods for sale in the U.S. market. In 2005, Senator Smith voted against a Dorgan (D-ND) amendment that would “repeal the tax subsidy for certain domestic companies which move manufacturing operations and American jobs offshore.” In 2004, Smith voted to table, effectively killing, an amendment that would “partially repeal a tax deferral regulation for U.S. multinational companies by requiring those companies to pay federal income taxes on foreign factories when goods are reimported back into the United States,” according to CQ. [Vote 63, 3/17/05; CQ Floor Votes, 3/17/05; Vote 83, 5/5/04; CQ Floor Votes, 5/5/04]

Vote “Upheld A Subsidy In The Tax Code” For Companies That Offshore Manufacturing, Then Sell The Product Back The U.S. As described by the Kansas City Star, Smith and a majority of Senators “upheld a subsidy in the tax code that enables U.S. corporations to defer taxes on profits resulting from sales by foreign subsidiaries in the United States.” The Dorgan amendment, which Smith voted to kill, “sought to end deferral in cases where a company moves operations overseas, makes the same product, then sells the product in the United States just as it did before going offshore.” The Kansas City Star was referring to Sen. Dorgan’s 2004 amendment to the corporate tax bill. [Kansas City Star, 5/8/04]

Narrator: Followed by oil executives who’ve gotten billions in tax breaks from Gordon.

Visual: Gordon Smith ? Big Oil Executives

2003: Smith Voted for Final 2003 Energy Bill With $11.9 Billion for Oil and Gas Industries. In November 2003, Smith voted for the final version of the 2003 energy bill. The bill provided an estimated $23 billion in tax breaks over 10 years, with $14.5 billion going to the coal, oil, natural gas industries. Specifically, CQ Monitor reported, “Senate Finance Chairman Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, said the tax breaks were expanded to satisfy demands from congressional backers of the oil and gas industry. He said the final version of the bill includes $11.9 billion in tax breaks for the industry.” [Vote 456, 11/21/03; Saint Paul Pioneer Press, 11/18/03; Wichita Eagle, 11/19/03; CQ Monitor, 11/18/03]

Additional Sourcing:

Oil Daily reported, “For the oil and gas industry, the legislation provides nearly $12 billion in tax incentives.” [Oil Daily, 11/20/03]

2002: Smith Voted for 2002 Senate Energy Bill With Over $4 Billion for Oil and Gas. In April 2002, Smith voted for the Senate energy bill that included $14 billion in tax breaks, of which $4.4 billion would go to oil and gas producers. Natural Gas Week reported, “the Senate version includes $4 billion in tax credits for producer.” [Vote 94, 4/25/02; The Herald-Sun, 4/25/02; Natural Gas Week, 4/26/02]

McCain Criticized 1999 Bill For Giving Oil Companies Billions In Tax Cuts For Their Efforts to Pass The Bill. According to the Durham Herald-Sun, “Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz…cited the influence of special interests on the passage of this summer's $792 billion tax bill. Had the president signed it, banks and securities firms, which spent $34.6 million in soft money contributions, would have received $30 billion in tax cuts, a good investment according to McCain. Similarly, restaurants and hotels spent $9.9 million and received $8.4 billion; oil and gas companies spent $14.3 million and got $5 billion; steel companies contributed $990,000 and got $187 million, McCain said.” [Durham Herald-Sun, 10/13/99]

Star Tribune: 1999 Bill “Hands Billions Of Dollars In Breaks” to Big Oil. According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, “the bill hands billions of dollars in breaks to U.S. gas and oil companies.” [Minneapolis Star Tribune, 8/8/99]

Narrator: Tell Gordon Smith and his buddies - the party’s over.

Visual: Gordon Smith. The party’s over.

Narrator: The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising.

Visual: PAID FOR BY THE DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE. WWW.DSCC.ORG, AND NOT AUTHORIZED BY ANY CANDIDATE OR CANDIDATE’S COMMITTEE. THE DEMOCRATIC SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE IS REPSONSIBLE FOR THE CONTENT OF THIS ADVERTISING.

Norm Coleman Is Part Of The Problem In Washington

Matthew Miller, DSCC

Coleman votes with Bush on oil tax breaks, prescription drugs, status quo in Iraq; View here

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee began airing a new television ad on Norm Coleman being part of the problem in Washington – voting with George Bush 86% of the time, giving Big Oil billions in tax breaks, preventing Medicare from negotiating for lower prescription drug prices, and blocking change in Iraq.

“On issue after issue that’s important to Minnesota, Norm Coleman has been part of the problem in Washington,” DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller said. “If Minnesotans want real change in Washington, they need to elect Al Franken in November.”

DSCC MN TV “Marbles”
Date: 10/8/08

Copy:

Documentation:

Narrator: Norm Coleman says he’s part of the solution in Washington.

Visual: Sen. Norm Coleman

2002: Coleman Said MN Needed a Bipartisan Senator. During the 2002 Senate campaign, Coleman said “The public is in no mood for divisive politics, and if the public is looking for leadership reaching across the aisle, that's my universe.” In an October 2002 debate, Coleman said, “We can do much better by electing a senator who knows how to work in a bipartisan manner.” [Star Tribune, 10/15/01; St. Cloud Times, 10/22/02]

Coleman Campaign Touts “bipartisan approach to problem solving.” [Coleman Campaign Press Release, 6/11/08]

Narrator: But Coleman took $200,000 from big oil...

Visual: $200,000 from Big Oil

Coleman has Accepted More than $264,000 in Contributions from the Oil & Gas Industry. [Center for Responsive Politics, Accessed 10/8/08]

Narrator: …and gave them a $2.6 billion tax break.

Visual: a $2.6 Billion Tax Break

Coleman Voted For $2.6 Billion In Tax Breaks For Big Oil And Gas Companies. Coleman voted to adopt the final 2005 Energy Bill, which provided for $14.6 billion in energy-related tax incentives, according to Congressional Quarterly Weekly. The tax package “provides far less support for alternative energy and efficiency than many lawmakers had urged,” with 58% going to “traditional energy industries, including oil, natural gas, coal, electric utilities and nuclear power,” according to the Washington Post. Specifically, “the bill provides $2.6 billion in tax benefits for oil and gas production and refining.” [Vote 213, 7/29/05; Washington Post, 7/28/05; Congressional Quarterly Weekly, 8/1/05]

Additional Sourcing for $2.6 Billion:

Discussing the 2005 energy bill, The Hill reported, “In total, the energy bill included $2.6 billion in oil and gas tax breaks.” [The Hill, 5/9/06]

The AP reported, “the legislation would provide $14.5 billion in energy tax breaks, including $2.6 billion for oil and gas industries.” [AP, 7/28/05]

Coleman Voted for a $5 Billion Big Oil Tax Windfall. In May 2006, Coleman voted for the final $70 billion tax cut package that included benefits for big oil. The Boston Globe reported, “Big oil companies won their push to keep intact accounting changes that stand to net them $5.1 billion.” The oil industry loopholes were removed from the original Senate version of the bill in February 2006, but after heavy lobbying by the industry, Congressional negotiators reinserted them into the final bill. [Boston Globe, 5/12/06; Washington Post, 4/26/06; Vote 118, 5/11/06]

Narrator: He took $300,000 from drug companies…

Visual: Took $300,000 from Drug Companies

Coleman has Accepted more than $353,000 in Campaign Contributions from the Pharmaceutical Industry. [Center for Responsive Politics, Accessed 10/8/08]

Narrator: …and voted against negotiating lower prices for Medicare

Visual: Against lower prices for Medicare

Coleman Voted Against Allowing the Government to Negotiate Lower Drug Prices for Medicare. In 2005, Coleman voted against an amendment that would insert language that would allow the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate with drug manufacturers for lower drug prices under Medicare. [Vote 60, 3/17/05]

Coleman Voted To Kill Amendment to Allow Government to Negotiate Drug Prices Through Medicare. In November 2005, Coleman voted to kill an amendment that would have allowed the federal government to negotiate drug prices. The amendment which was introduced by Maine Republican Olympia Snowe, would have authorized the Secretary of HHS to negotiate prescription drug prices through Medicare, but would specifically not allow him to set prices. [Vote 302, 11/3/05]

Narrator: Coleman voted with George Bush 86% of the time

Visual: 86% of the time

From 2003-2007, Coleman Voted with George Bush 86% of the Time. [CQ Member Profile, Accessed 8/25/08]

Editorial: Coleman Is a True Bush Loyalist. When Coleman ran from President Bush on Iraq and the proposed troop surge in January 2007, the Pioneer Press editorial board questioned his motives. They wrote: “Coleman has generally been a strong Bush partisan… Coleman told us he wanted to go to Washington to help unite the feuding factions. But he became such a staunch factional fighter that he was part of a team of senators dispensing anti-Democratic rhetoric during the 2004 national convention… While we want to give our elected officials all the room they need to maneuver and make smart compromises and change their minds when they should, the timing of Coleman’s announcement, and his history as a Dem-turned-Republican and campus-radical-turned-war-hawk, makes Minnesotans wonder.” [Pioneer Press, 1/16/07]

Narrator: 12 out of 12 times on Iraq

Visual: 12 times on Iraq

Coleman Voted Against Withdrawing U.S. Troops From Iraq 12 out of 12 Times in 2007. [Vote 438, 12/18/07; Vote 437, 12/18/07; Vote 411, 11/16/07; Vote 362; 10/3/07; Vote 346, 9/21/07; Vote 345, 9/20/07; Vote 252, 7/18/07; Vote 167, 5/16/07; Vote 147, 4/26/07; Vote 126, 3/29/07, Vote 116, 3/27/07; Vote 75, 3/15/07]

Narrator: So if Coleman thinks we’ll believe he’s part of the solution, he’s lost his marbles.

Visual: Norm Coleman
Part of the Problem

Narrator: The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising.