The Tipping Point?

The tipping point may have been reached for President Obama.  Two House special elections took place last night -- one in Nevada, one in New York.  While the election in Nevada was never really in doubt (Dems hoped to make it competitive because it was a swing district, but had conceded well in advance), the election in New York had serious significance.  The seat belonged to Anthony Weiner, and used to belong to Chuck Schumer and Geraldine Ferraro.  And now... it belongs to the GOP...

Republicans have scored an upset victory in a New York City House race that became a referendum on President Barack Obama's economic policies.

Retired media executive and political novice Bob Turner defeated Democratic state Assemblyman David Weprin (WEHP'-rihn) in a special election Tuesday to succeed Rep. Anthony Weiner (WEE'-nur), a seven-term Democrat who resigned in June after a sexting scandal.

The heavily Democratic district spanning parts of Queens and Brooklyn had never sent a Republican to the House. But frustration with the continued weak national economy gave Republicans the edge.

...Democrats, panicked at the prospect of an embarrassing loss, poured cash into the race and sent in their stars to try to save Weprin, a state lawmaker who was forced to defend Obama's economic policies even as he tried to stress his own independence and close ties to the community.

Republicans worked to frame the race as a referendum on Obama, even though turnout is usually low in a special congressional election.

...Hoping to shift the momentum in the final days, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee invested more than $500,000 in ads in New York's pricey television market. An independent Democratic group, the House Majority PAC, ran ads, too. And Obama for America, part of the Democratic National Committee that support the president's re-election, urged volunteers to rally behind Weprin.

The party also enlisted two of its biggest guns, former President Bill Clinton and Gov. Andrew Cuomo, to record phone calls for Weprin. And Democrats relied on organized labor and other affiliated groups to bring voters to the polls.

Take note of who didn't record a robo-call: the President.  One presumes that he would have done so, if the DNC or the DCCC or the Weprin campaign thought it would have been a positive. 

DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is desperately trying to claim that the district was a tough one for Democrats, but considering that the last time a Republican represented some of this district was during the time of Warren Harding, that's a tough sell. 

It should be noted that this is a one of the more conservative (that's a relative term here) districts in NYC, in part because of an Orthodox Jewish population that may well have found Weprin's views on gay marriage (he voted for it as a state legislator) offensive.  And the same populace may well be upset with the Obama Administration's treatment of Isreal.  And Weprin will now be thrown under the bus (violation of the new tone of civility acknowledged), Martha Coakley-style, as a crappy candidate.  And he was, since he didn't even live in the District and apparently underestimated the national debt by about $10 trillion during a media interview last month (one might think this explains a lot about the Democratic Party in general).  and to be fair, the GOP weathered a series of special election losses in 2009 and 2010 prior to grabbing 63 House seats last fall (although a good number of those losses occurred in a heavy Dem district or featured the presence of third party candidates).

And yet... there's something in this result that may trigger some panic in the Democratic Party.  Or, should I say, more panic.  Mickey Kaus and Dave Wiegel both have good takes, with a conclusion that poses a serious problem for Democrats: the old saw of screaming that the GOP will kill Medicare and Social Security didn't save them, precisely because the Democrats themselves have now admitted (as vaguely as possible) the need for changes to entitlements.

Many people thought the GOP walked into a trap with the Ryan plan.  The Dems would be able to attack the GOP mercilessly on entitlements, a tried-and-true strategy, right?

Except that the Dems have a serious problem because they know, as does the populace, that entitlements need to be addressed as part of any solution to the monstrous debt run up by the country and insanely accelerated by President Obama.  The failure of Obama to embrace the report of his own debt commission last winter is looking more and more like a losing strategy, precisely because there is no real backup strategy, and voters recognize that.  Obama's failed to address economic problems -- why should anyone believe he's willing to take the steps neccessary to address entitlements?   The Ryan plan may not be ideal, and Rick Perry's rhetoric on Social Security (even if it is truthful) may go beyond what people find comfort with... but they take less comfort in a party that acknowledges there is a problem, but proposes no real solution to it.  The trap is now one for the Democrats.

Maybe they'll still find a way around it.  But the signs aren't reassuring.

The Health Care Follies Continue

Interesting nugget from a Time article that talks about Chuckles Schumer and Dick Durbin fighting over Harry Reid's position as Senate Majority Leader, even before Reid possibly loses his election this fall...

The first time leadership aides noticed something was amiss was during the health care debate last November, when Schumer made some notable overtures to the progressive wing of the party. He'd previously taken flack from progressives for his championing of Kirsten Gillibrand, a moderate Dem from upstate New York who was appointed to Hillary Clinton's seat. Just after Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus passed a bipartisan health reform bill out of his committee, Schumer demanded that the public option — a liberal provision that provided government competition to private insurers — be put back in. Reid initially bowed to Schumer's pressure but weeks later had to drop the provision in order to secure all 60 Democratic votes to overcome a Republican filibuster threat. That delay would come back to haunt the Democrats after the New Year, when Scott Brown's surprise victory in the Massachusetts Senate race cost them their critical 60th vote.

I'm thinking that if health care reform fails, the Tea Party movement should send thank you notes to Schumer for being an ambitious jerk. On more substantive matters, The Hill has another Whip count, with the expected number of no votes on health care from Dems to be 25 as of now; if my math is correct, Pelosi can't afford to lose more than 12-15 more Dems or the game is over. In other words, Bart Stupak's coalition will probably decide it. Unless, of course, more Democrats follow the lead of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, which is now threatening to torpedo the bill unless their concerns over illegal immigrants get addressed as part of the package...

Since last fall, Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) members have kept quiet, at least publicly, about their objections to the immigration provisions in the Senate bill.


The Senate language would prohibit illegal immigrants’ buying healthcare coverage from the proposed health exchanges. The House-passed bill isn’t as restrictive, but it does — like the Senate bill — bar illegal immigrants from receiving federal subsidies to buy health insurance.


Hispanic Democrats say they haven’t moved from their stance that they will not vote for a healthcare bill containing the Senate’s prohibitions.


...On Wednesday, members of the CHC privately acknowledged they’ve told their leaders that anyone who is assuming they’ve backed away from their position is in for a rude awakening.


“The [Hispanic] Caucus didn’t want to raise it as an issue too early,” one Hispanic Democrat said Wednesday. “But it’s real. It’s a problem.”


Those alarm bells have apparently been heard. CHC Chairwoman Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.) said she and others have, on behalf of two dozen Hispanic Democrats, been in discussions with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and other leaders about how to resolve the matter.


“And we will continue having discussions,” Velazquez said.


However, it is unlikely that the Senate will be able to change the immigration provisions under reconciliation rules. And even if it is deemed possible, there may not be enough support in either chamber of Congress to do it.


Not every member of the CHC would stand in the way of healthcare over the immigration issue. As a House leader, it would be unlikely for Becerra to vote against the president’s signature domestic policy priority. And centrist Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) said the Senate language is “not a deal-killer” for him.

Somewhere, Congressman Joe Wilson is laughing.  That last statement by Cuellar probably gives away the game -- as noted by Ed Morrissey, the Caucus members probably just want an assurance from President Obama that he will indeed take up immigration reform this year, as he promised last year. But if the bill starts to look unlikely to pass, the votes against it could snowball based on people suddenly discovering "principled" reasons for opposition.

Meanwhile, perhaps we're getting closer to the final bill, or to a real end to it, as Speaker Pelosi and House Majority Leader Hoyer have now canceled all Committee hearings and gone behind closed doors with the party leadership, providing us with more of the transparent, open government promised by the President. Jake Tapper says a compromise bill is close to being complete.

Maybe they have the votes and are doing a little champagne toast in Ted Kennedy's honor or something, but I tend to think that if they had the votes, a vote would be scheduled before another Democratic congressman melts down in an ethics scandal (or worse, disclosed more details about what goes on in the House gym showers).

So do they have the votes?  My thought is that if they did, we wouldn't see ideas like this get floated...

House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter is prepping to help usher the healthcare overhaul through the House and potentially avoid a direct vote on the Senate overhaul bill, the chairwoman said Tuesday. Slaughter is weighing preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes to the Senate version.


Slaughter has not taken the plan to Speaker Pelosi as Democrats await CBO scores on the corrections bill. "Once the CBO gives us the score we'll spring right on it, " she said.

And I thought reconciliation was a bad idea politically. By contrast, this is toxic. The Heritage Foundation refers to this nicely as "procedural fraud." Forget the optics of the issue -- this is one sure way to guarantee that we'll be debating the legitimacy of the bill as law forever. In their fervor to pass the bill, Democrats are undermining Congress and the legitimacy of the legislative process. What's really bad is that I don't think I'm exaggerating, if they pursue this latest procedural flimflam. Deeming the bill passed -- I'm sure the Democrats will be chagrined when this gets used against them some day in the future.

As to whether they have the votes, Pelosi has already indicated the White House's March 18th deadline may not be workable.  Michael Barone says the votes don't look like they are there yet. We'll see if that changes, or if the Dems merely change the rules again -- maybe the Democrats will find a way to claim that a minority is a majority.

You Stay Classy, Chuck Schumer

A sitting United States Senator just called a potential future colleague a "Teabagger", in an effort to raise money for Martha Coakley. When politicians start calling other politicians be derogatory names, it gives off a whiff of desperation.

And while I know that liberal pundits and some politicians have trotted out the term during the last year or so, they're really testing the limits of whether they can get away with saying just about anything, even if it's vaguely offensive to another group, just because they're Democrats. In other words, I guess Harry Reid really is a leader.

Chuck Schumer's Middle Name? Dick

Senator Schumer should know better than to tick off a flight attendant, let alone do it in front of a GOP aide...

Sen. Chuck Schumer loves the sound of his own voice, but it carried a bit farther than he might have liked on the US Airways shuttle from New York to Washington on Sunday.

According to a House Republican aide who happened to be seated nearby, the notoriously chatty New York Democrat referred to a flight attendant as a “bitch” after she ordered him to turn off his phone before takeoff.

Schumer and his seatmate, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), were chatting on their phones before takeoff when an announcement indicated that it was time to turn off the phones.

Both senators kept talking.

According to the GOP aide, a flight attendant then approached Schumer and told him the entire plane was waiting on him to shut down his phone.

Schumer asked if he could finish his conversation. When the flight attendant said “no,” Schumer ended his call but continued to argue his case.

He said he was entitled to keep his phone on until the cabin door was closed. The flight attendant said he was obliged to turn it off whenever a flight attendant asked.

“He argued with her about the rule,” the source said. “She said she doesn’t make the rules, she just follows them.”

When the flight attendant walked away, the witness says Schumer turned to Gillibrand and uttered the B-word.

“The senator made an off-the-cuff comment under his breath that he shouldn’t have made, and he regrets it,” Schumer spokesman Brian Fallon told Shenanigans.

Ironically, Schumer has been a friend of US Airways flight attendants of late, lobbying company CEO Doug Park on their behalf after several of them asked the senator to help keep them based at LaGuardia.

Through her office, Gillibrand said Schumer was “polite” with the flight attendant Sunday and “turned off his phone when asked to.”

But moments after the flight attendant had told Schumer to shut it off, the phone rang again.

“It’s Harry Reid calling,” the source quoted Schumer as saying. “I guess health care will have to wait until we land.”

Any chance we can keep that plane in the air for another 400 days or so?