Livingston touts budget cuts, loses Porsche keys

(PNI) Not helping his case … Rep. David Livingston, R-Peoria, joined the budget battle this past week by proposing his version. He's suggesting 5 percent across-the-board cuts from House Speaker Andy Tobin's proposed budget.

"Your family has cut. So should we be different?" Livingston asked via Twitter.

He also wants to separate the Medicaid expansion vote from the budget debate. Livingston is a staunch opponent of expansion.

But he didn't help his argument when shortly after announcing his proposal, he began asking for help finding his lost Porsche keys.

The state Democratic Partytook to mocking him via Twitter.

With sense of humor still intact, Livingston sent a tweet Friday morning to Democrats thanking them for their concern for his lost keys and announcing they'd been found. Now if only he could find votes for his budget …

Into the wild blue yonder…It's the kind of drama that crops up when time gets short and vote counts get tight: Fire up the state plane and rush a lawmaker back to the Capitol.

The Governor's Office was reportedly ready to do that last week, when it looked as if Rep. Sally Gonzales, D-Tucson, couldn't get to Phoenix fast enough for a Medicaid vote. She has been at home, as her brother is gravely ill. But like a good Dem, she wants to vote for Medicaid expansion, and Gov.Jan Brewer was willing to provide quick transport, if needed. If not the state plane, perhaps the state helicopter could be deployed to fetch Gonzales.

We'll see if the rapid transport will be needed this week, when a vote is (again) expected, if Gonzales' family situation continues to keep her at home.

The feds made me do it! …Congressman Trent Franks, R-Ariz., hates the federal Affordable Care Act, aka "Obamacare." So much so that he's signed onto a bill to repeal the part of the act that allows Medicaid expansion.

But in the vein of "hate the sin, love the sinner," he is casting no aspersions on Brewer for pushing the state to expand its health-care program for the poor.

"I refuse to offer any criticism whatsoever toward Governor Brewer or other Arizona elected officials for advocating a different position on the expansion component after being forced into an impossible conundrum by a totally irresponsible Federal Government," Franks said in a statement.

Given some of the harsh words directed the governor's way in the Medicaid debate, is it too much to think some legislative conservatives might follow Franks' lead?

Quote/tweet of the week

"It's go time."

--Rep. Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert, on the coming week, which should feature critical Medicaid and budget votes.

Compiled by Republic reporters Mary Jo Pitzl and Alia Beard Rau. Get the latest at politics.azcentral.com.

Copyright 2013 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Five-Term Democrat Holden Loses in Pennsylvania Primary

Ten-term Representative Tim Holden of Pennsylvania was defeated in a Democratic primary on Tuesday, according to The Associated Press, losing to Matt Cartwright, a lawyer, who made Mr. Holden’s vote against President Obama’s health care law a major issue in the newly redrawn 17th District.

Mr. Holden, who is part of the Blue Dog Coalition of conservative Democrats, would become the second incumbent to lose to a newcomer in a House primary this season. This year, Representative Jean Schmidt, Republican of Ohio, was also defeated by a member of her own party. In both cases, the anti-incumbent “super PAC” Campaign for Primary Accountability has worked against the defeated House member.

In Mr. Holden’s case, the liberal League of Conservation Voters and MoveOn.org also piled on, taking advantage of a new district drawn by Republican legislators that is considerably more Democratic than Mr. Holden’s old seat. Center Forward, a group that is pro-Blue Dog Democrat, tried to bail out Mr. Holden with an advertisement last week attacking Mr. Cartwright. Mr. Holden himself had tried to portray his opponent as a corrupt lawyer wrapped up in a pay-to-play judicial scandal.

But ultimately, Mr. Cartwright’s own money may have made the biggest difference in a district where most Democratic voters had never been represented by Mr. Holden. Mr. Cartwright also hit Mr. Holden for voting with Republicans on some energy policies.

The incumbent was one of only 25 remaining Blue Dogs, whose ranks were decimated in the Republican surge of 2010 that wiped out most Democrats in Republican-leaning districts.

This post has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: April 25, 2012

An earlier version of this post, its summary and its headline misstated the number of terms Representative Tim Holden has served in the House. He is now in his 10th term, not his fifth.

View the original article here

Coalition of moderate Dems loses more members (AP)

WASHINGTON – The Blue Dogs may be losing their bark. Despite polls showing a desire for more compromise in Washington, the political climate for moderate to conservative Democrats in the House has continued to deteriorate.

The 2010 election dropped the number of so-called Blue Dogs from 54 to 25. And the shrinking continues.

Rep. Mike Ross of Arkansas will not seek re-election next year. Rep. Dan Boren of Oklahoma also plans to retire. Rep. Joe Donnelly of Indiana has opted to run for the Senate. Rep. Heath Shuler of North Carolina is reportedly being considered for the athletic director job at the University of Tennessee.

Other House members, such as Rep. Jim Matheson of Utah, face the prospect of running in less friendly congressional districts after their states complete redistricting. Rep. Jane Harman of California resigned earlier this year to run a think tank.

The early departures and the potential for more are feeding Republican hopes that they will win more of the country's swing districts in next year's elections and maintain their majority in the House. That also raises questions about whether the Blue Dogs as a group are in an extended decline as moderates from both parties disappear from Capitol Hill.

"The parties are becoming more polarized and that's unfortunate," Boren said. "The success of our political system weighs in the balance depending upon how many moderates, how many problem-solving pragmatists are going to be elected."

The Blue Dogs got their name by playing on an old Southern expression about the loyalties of Southern Democrats. The saying went that a Southerner would vote for a yellow dog if it were on the Democratic ballot, earning them the name Yellow Dog Democrats. A Blue Dog, the moderates reasoned, was a Yellow Dog "choked blue" by their more liberal Democratic colleagues.

Blue Dog lawmakers say that talk of their group's demise is overstated. When the balance of power shifts in Congress, they point out, it's generally those in the center who take the hardest hits.

"Basically, when the Republicans take over, they beat the conservative Democrats. When the Democrats take over, they pretty much defeat moderate Republicans," Ross said. "That's because when you're in a swing district, you're going to be a conservative Democrat or a moderate Republican, or you don't survive."

Lawmakers have several theories about why the ranks of moderates are on the decline. Congressional districts are being drawn in a way that favors increasingly partisan representation from both parties. Also, much of the money flowing to campaigns these days comes from interest groups with a decidedly partisan edge, such as the Club for Growth on the right or labor unions on the left.

GOP leaders have their own interpretation as well for the Blue Dogs' decline. They say that party affiliation has drowned out the Blue Dogs' ability to demonstrate their independence.

"There's a group of Democrats that were recruited several years ago that came to Washington thinking that they could be welcome and fulfill a role within the Democratic Party," said Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas, the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee. "I think that over time these members have found out that they're in a pack of purebred liberals."

Ryan McConaghy, a director at Third Way, a centrist think tank, warned against drawing strong conclusions based on the 2010 elections and a few retirements. He said there will always be a role for the Blue Dogs coalition because a large segment of the Democratic base identifies itself as moderate.

"I think their numbers will ebb and flow," he said. "I don't see them growing extinct anytime soon."

The Blue Dog caucus was formed in 1995 after the GOP took control of the House for the first time in four decades. They focus on fiscal issues and describe themselves as centrists who believe it's necessary for both parties to compromise to tackle the nation's problems. In March, the group put forward a goal of trimming $4 trillion in national debt over the coming decade, with two-thirds coming from spending cuts and one-third from tax increases.

President Barack Obama subsequently pushed for a $4 trillion deal as well, but in the end, conservative Republicans wouldn't go along with any plan that resulted in higher taxes.

In the 2010 elections, the GOP tied the Blue Dogs to then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi as well as to the struggling economy. While members of the caucus voted against the party on individual pieces of legislation, it was rare for members to vote against all of the party's top priorities. For example, 34 Democrats voted against the health care overhaul, most of them Blue Dogs, but only six Democrats voted against the economic stimulus bill.

Even those who voted "no" on both measures, such as Reps. Gene Taylor of Mississippi and Walt Minnick of Idaho, found no escape from attack ads linking them to the Democratic priorities because they had voted for Pelosi as House speaker. "Put the brakes on Pelosi. Replace Walt Minnick," said one television ad.

In the end, many of the Blue Dogs were simply unable to distance themselves from the Democratic Party's leadership, despite voting against them on some key issues, said Burdett Loomis, a professor at the University of Kansas who has written extensively about the Blue Dogs.

"When push came to shove, they were Blue Dog Democrats, but they were Democrats," Loomis said.

View the original article here