Senate Candidate Udall: Against Afghanistan Before He Was For It

I wrote earlier about the damage done by Al Franken to his Senate campaign this year. Turns out the Democrats have another Senate candidate in a critical swing seat, who appears to be doing the same thing.

Mark Udall is the likely Democratic candidate for the open Senate seat in Colorado (Wayne Allard is retiring). He is regarded as another of the Democrats' top recruits for a swing seat (polls have shown the race quite close). The race is sure to be a barn-burner, given that Colorado appears to be one of the most competitive states in the nation -- at all levels.

The NRSC however, points out that Udall recently declared Afghanistan to be the 'real central front' in the war on terror. That's a curious opinion, unless if you're prematurely declaring Iraq won -- which would be foolish at this point.

Whatever Udall's thinking, it's odd that he regards the war in Afghanistan as so important -- considering how many times he's voted against it:

• In 2003, Udall voted against $87 billion in supplemental funding for operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, including funds for body armor, armored humvees, and health care for National Guard members and reservists.
• Udall voted against a bill intended to expedite the delivery of armor to troops on the ground in 2004.
• Udall voted against $453.5 billion in defense spending in 2005.
• In 2005, Mark Udall voted against $50 billion for operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.
• Udall voted against authorizing nearly $289 billion in Fiscal Year 2000 and 2001 defense funding -- including funds for six F-22 fighters.
• Udall voted to cut $3 billion in Fiscal Year 2001 defense spending.
• In 2007, he voted against protecting funding for homeless and disabled veterans from cuts, against increasing military housing funding by $275 million, against lowering college loan rates for graduates serving in the military or National Guard, and to prevent senior military officers from working at major defense contractors for a year after retiring.

(Click over to the NRSC site for specific vote citations.)

At least Udall will be able to benefit from the experience of others. Presumably he won't argue 'but I was for the $87 billion before I was against it.'

Will John Kerry Face a Serious Challenge in 2008?

Read it at the Standard.

Democrats Tout Poll Data on Gordon Smith; Won't Release It

From Roll Call:

A poll conducted recently for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee found Sen. Gordon Smith’s (R) electability numbers to be down from earlier this year.

But the DSCC declined to release any head-to-head numbers pitting Smith against his potential Democratic opponents, suggesting that the Republican might still be in good shape heading into his quest for a third term — at least at this point.

A poll conducted late last month for Roll Call showed Smith with a 9-point lead over Oregon Speaker Jeff Merkley, the favorite of national Democratic leaders for the Senate nomination. Merkley is battling attorney and Democratic activist Steve Novick in the primary. Neither has come remotely close to matching Smith’s fundraising numbers, which include a healthy $4 million on hand as of Sept. 30.

So Gordon Smith is ripe to be defeated, it's just that the Democrats' favored nominee trails him so badly, that Democrats refuse to release the polling result.

Sounds like Gordon Smith has solidified his re-election prospects.

Democrats Better Gain Seats in 2008

Read it at the Standard.

Ben Stein Has Some Explaining to Do

I have tremendous respect for Ben Stein -- the conservative actor/economist son of Herb Stein, and former columnist for the American Spectator. But whatever Norm Coleman may say, this is inexcusable:

Liberal Al Franken is good enough and smart enough to win some of conservative Ben Stein's money -- and doggone it, Stein likes him.

Stein, an actor, writer, economist and former Nixon speechwriter, has contributed $2,000 to Franken's U.S. Senate campaign. The two men have known each other for about 30 years...

"Friendship trumps ideology, by the way, as it should," said U.S. Sen Norm Coleman, whom Franken hopes to unseat in 2008. "Was he in 'Ferris Bueller'? I think it was a good movie. I don't get a lot of Ben Stein."

Then again, maybe Stein is playing the game a step ahead of everyone else:

Republican Senator Norm Coleman sports 45% job approval rating. He also has a +17 net favorable/unfavorable rating (52/35), while his possible opponent, comedian Al Franken, has a -7 net fav/unfav rating (27/34). Attorney Mike Ciresi, Franken's challenger in the DFL primary, scored a +5 net fav/unfav rating (20/15) with a majority (51%) saying they did not know enough about him to have an opinion.

There certainly is a strong body of opinion that Ciresi would be a superior candidate to Franken. Perhaps Stein is trying to set Coleman up with an easy opponent.

Yeah... that's the ticket.

Tom Davis Rethinking Senate Run

It was regarded as a given that Tom Davis would leave the House of Representatives to seek the Senate seat being vacated by John Warner. But he's now reconsidering, as it would be a major challenge for a moderate such as he to be nominated at a convention dominated by conservatives, then lead a divided party against Warner:

Since Sen. John Warner (R) announced his retirement last month and even before, Davis has been expected to enter the race to replace him.

But Davis said at a breakfast at the National Press Club on Tuesday that both recent developments factor into his decision and suggested that he might instead run for freshman Sen. Jim Webb’s (D-Va.) seat in 2012, or not run for Senate at all.

Davis is also a strong candidate on K Street and could be drawn to a lobbying job.

“There are other races; this isn’t the only shot,” Davis said. “You’ve got a very vulnerable guy sitting there in the other Senate seat right now who may or may not run in four years. And you know what? If you don’t go to the Senate, so what? I’ve been a committee chairman in the House. I’ve got my portrait hanging on a wall. I’ve been pretty productive legislatively.”

There have been rumblings of late that Davis is having second thoughts about running, but he insists his mind was never made up.

While Davis is more liberal than many Republicans both in the House and in Virginia, he's widely respected as a bright team player, with great political skills. Whenever Republicans regain the majority, Davis will have an influential role. He'll also win friends by seeking re-election, which would take away another prime takeover opportunity from House Democrats.

Good News from the New Mexico Senate Race

Soren Dayton points out that in the latest New Mexico poll, each of the two potential Republican Senate candidates leads each of the three potential Democratic candidates.

Expect Craig to be Around for a While...

Senate Republicans look like they're split on calling for his resignation. And if Senator John Ensign is one of just a handful calling for him to leave, there's no reason for him to go:

National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Ensign (Nev.) on Thursday called for Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) to honor his original resignation speech and his personal commitment to Republicans that he would resign if the judge did not vitiate his guilty plea.

“He gave us his word that he would resign. ... I’m calling on Sen. Craig to keep his word,” said Ensign. “If he loves his party, and he loves the Senate, the honorable thing to do is to resign...”

However, Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) applauded his home-state colleague’s decision, saying he expected the Senate Ethics Committee to delay any probe until after Craig has exhausted his opportunities to appeal the judge’s ruling today.

“Like all citizens of this country, he has the right to vigorously defend his case,” said Crapo. “I look forward to working with him in the Senate...”

But Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), an early supporter of Craig’s legal strategy, said Craig’s offense was not “moral turpitude, and it’s not a basis for leaving the Senate.”

Senate Republican leaders, however, continued to deflect questions.

“This whole matter is before the Ethics Committee. So it will be dealt with I assume by Sen. Craig and the Ethics Committee,” Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said.

So John Ensign says he should quit, Arlen Specter and Mike Crapo say he should stay, and Mitch McConnell won't take a stand yet. According to The Hill, Trent Lott says essentially the same thing. If you're Larry Craig, do you feel any more uncomfortable than you did yesterday? I don't think so. If you're Craig, and you don't see 15 or 20 colleagues saying you should quit, there's no way you resign.

And if you're not going to resign -- if you think that Senate Republicans and the people of Idaho can live with you staying in the Senate -- then why rule out running for re-election? Why not test the appetite of the American people for redemptive stories?

The filing deadline for federal races in Idaho in 2008 is in March. So if Larry Craig doesn't quit now, why wouldn't he string this along until March -- at least -- to see if it looks like he might have any chance? Sure, Craig now says that he won't seek re-election but then, he said he was going to resign until he was surprised by the degree of support he received. Want to bet he'll be surprised by the support he receives in the next few months, too?

I fear this is going to go on for a while. If Larry Craig's Republican Senate colleagues aren't comfortable with that, the better follow John Ensign's lead.

Update: Read Michelle as well.

Update II: Mickey has the quote of the day:

It looks like the only Republican who's not quitting the Senate is Larry Craig.

Great.

Larry Craig Resignation Watch Back On

(Update: Expulsion Watch!)

The Politico reports that a Minnesota judge has denied the request of Senator Larry Craig to withdraw his infamous guilty plea:

"Because the defendent's guilty plea was accurate, voluntary and intelligent, and because the conviction is supported by the evidence, the defendent's conviction for disorderly conduct occuring on June 11, 2007 in the men's public restroom at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport in Bloomington, Hennpin County, Minnesota, is valid," Judge Charles A. Porter wrote in a 27-page opinion released at 1:40 p.m.

Senator Craig intended to resign September 30, but deferred while his attempt to overturn the plea was pending. Does this mean his resignation is forthcoming?

It's my understanding that Craig is entitled to appeal the decision, but he's given no indication as to whether he would. Hopefully this can be merciful and quick.

Update: More at CNN.

Update II: Larry Craig is not resigning:

Idaho Sen. Larry Craig defiantly vowed to serve out his term in office on Thursday despite losing a court attempt to rescind his guilty plea in a men's room sex sting.

"I have seen that it is possible for me to work here effectively," Craig said in a written statement certain to disappoint fellow Republicans who have long urged him to step down.

This is sure to bring a push for explusion.

Kerrey Leaning Against a Senate Run

I can't help but wondering whether Norman Hsu -- and the campaign finance connection he apparently developed on the New School board -- had anything to do with Kerrey's reported reluctance to take the plunge:

For weeks, Democrats have been keeping their fingers crossed for Bob Kerrey to announce that he was jumping back into politics to run for an open Senate seat in Nebraska.

But that, of course, would require Mr. Kerrey to leave New York City. And that has become such a sticking point that Democratic Party officials in Nebraska and Washington are grudgingly conceding that they think it is highly unlikely he will run for the Senate.

The officials haven’t lost all hope – Mr. Kerrey is headed back to Nebraska for a quick weekend trip, perhaps the Midwestern air will influence his thinking – but they are all but certain he will not enter the race to fill the seat of retiring Senator Chuck Hagel.

Without Kerrey, this race moves from 'tossup' to 'likely Republican.'

On the Left, there's definitely a whiff of that old Barry Goldwater 'I'd rather be right than popular' philosophy:

Atrios:

Obviously if the choice is between Dem/Rep control of the Senate or a filibuster-proof/non-filibuster proof majority I'd prefer Kerrey to enter the Nebraska race. But as those thresholds are unlikely to be critical, I hope he does, indeed, stay out of the race.

MyDD:

My feelings on Kerrey are a bit more mixed than those of Atrios, who asks Kerrey to "stay out of the race." I have more than a few profound policy differences with Kerrey, not the least of which Social Security (which I tend to think we shouldn't privatize, even partially) and Iraq (I tend to think it would be better to end the war than keep it going indefinitely without purpose).

Does this sound like something that the Netroots would have said in 2006? I would argue not. In that long-forgotten era, the Left wanted to win -- first and foremost. The new interest in ideological purity could help the GOP.

FBI Recorded Stevens' Calls

The FBI taped Ted Stevens' calls. The headline sounds bad, but you won't know much until you get the answers to two other questions:

1. Were these 'fishing expeditions,' or was the FBI going after something specific; and,
   
2. What did they get?
   

The answer to the first question is clear. Their informant participated in taping the calls, so they must have been after something specific:

AP reports: "Allen, a wealthy businessman and Stevens' political patron, agreed to the taping last year after authorities confronted him with evidence he had bribed Alaska lawmakers. He pleaded guilty to bribery and is a key witness against Alaska legislators. He also has told prosecutors he paid his employees to renovate the senator's house..."

The AP added: "Beyond the calls Allen made while cooperating, prosecutors also have thousands of conversations the FBI recorded while secretly wiretapping phones belonging to Allen and fellow VECO executive Rick Smith. Agents also secretly videotaped meetings between contractors and state politicians at a hotel suite in Juneau, Alaska's capital."

The answer to the second question -- what Stevens may or may not have said on the tape -- will undoubtedly be revealed with time.

Either way, it looks like Ted Stevens' re-election bid is now officially in Dire Straits.

Idle thought: I wonder if the court decision upholding the immunity of Congress from office searches has led/will lead the FBI to be more aggressive in sting operations against elected officials, such as this one.

Netroots Pose Problem for Democrats in 08

Jeanne Shaheen is the top choice of Democratic leaders to take on John Sununu in 2008. She's seen as having a great chance to knock Sununu off next year:

If Shaheen is the nominee, it would create a rematch of the 2002 contest, which Sununu won 51-47 percent. Since then, the political landscape in New Hampshire has changed, and initial polling has showed Shaheen leading Sununu. Republicans, including the free-market Club For Growth and the centrist Republican Main Street Partnership, have already rallied behind Sununu. One GOP strategist said Sununu is highly vulnerable if the contest is only about Iraq. "If the issue becomes the issue of taxes then the advantage shifts a little bit to John Sununu," the strategist said.

It ought to concern Democrats that having landed a top challenger against a targeted Republican incumbent, the first reaction from the Netroots is disappointment and disillusionment. From Open Left:

[T]o be perfectly frank, I feel like Shaheen is one of the many, many Democrats who first helped lead the party into simultaneous minority and pro-war status back in 2002-2003, but who is now capitalizing on the favorable electoral stage that was prepared mainly by the progressive movement during four years of intense guerilla warfare against conservatism from 2003-2006. While the Jean Shaheen’s and Rahm Emanual’s of the party were supporting things like the Bush tax cuts, the pre-emptive invasion of Iraq, and legislation to support Terry Schaivo, it was the netroots who were doing the bulk of the heavy lifting in opposition to Republicans. I feel like they are capitalizing on what we rightfully earned, and both dissing us and preparing to destroy all of our work in the process. They are pretenders to the new Democratic majority.

Jane Hamsher at FireDogLake uses the occasion to slam Rahm Emanuel:

Rahm supported the war and didn’t want Democrats to talk about it during the last election. He thinks immigration — which desperately needs addressing as a matter of conscience and has the added benefit of splitting the Republican party into little splinters every time it comes up — should not be addressed until a new President’s second term. After the last election people said the thing they care about most is seeing corruption addressed, and as Kagro X noted, Nancy Pelosi said the most important thing about gaining majority status was getting subpoena power. Now Rahm has decided to render that limp and useless as well.

Rahm then has the arrogance to run around and crow about orchestrating the Democratic victory in 06 as if my dog could not have done a better job, considering all the money he dumped into loser races and the way he ignored those that probably could have inched to success had they had just a little bit more help from the DCCC.

I think we’re all a bit tired of cleaning up Rahm’s messes (watch the YouTube above and remember, this is the guy who’s in charge of Democratic messaging for the House). And yes, it is irritating to watch them all ride in and take advantage of a favorable electoral stage that was set in the wake of their open hostility to those who were doing all the heavy lifting to set it.

A big reason the Democrats won the Congress in 2006 was that the prevailing attitude on the Left was: whoever it takes to win. It led the Netroots to back Jim Webb, Heath Shuler, and a host of more moderate-to-conservative candidates. Now things seem to have changed.

If the Netroots imposes purity tests in 08 -- and there's every sign that they intend to do so -- it will be a big crimp in the plans of people like Rahm Emanuel.

Update: Don Surber also has some good commentary on Democrats' fear of MoveOn in 08.

University of Arkansas Returns Hsu's Cash. Will the New School?

The Wall Street Journal reports that the University of Arkansas's Clinton School of Public Service is returning the $75,000 it got from Norman Hsu:

While Mrs. Clinton and other politicians have pledged to return or donate to charity donations associated with Mr. Hsu, Mr. Rutherford initially said the graduate program -- aimed at students seeking a career in international aid, politics, law, or philanthropy -- would keep its donation. After questions from The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Rutherford said "it's just not worth it" to keep the money and that he would return it to Mr. Hsu. "We believed it had been given in good faith," Mr. Rutherford said.

Rutherford suggests an inappropriate test for whether or not to return the money. Given in good faith or not, it's still stolen.

No word yet on whether the New School will return his donations -- which ran into the tens of thousands. The Associated Press reports that Hsu even served as chairman of a major New School fundraiser event last October, where Bill Clinton singled him our for praise:

Hsu sat on the board of trustees of The New School, whose president is former Sen. Bob Kerrey, D-Neb. He was co-chairman of a gala New York benefit last October in honor of the late Robert F. Kennedy. Bill Clinton, there to receive an award, thanked the evening's benefactors, "especially our friend Norman Hsu."

Bob Kerrey -- head of the New School -- is considering a run for Senate in 2008. He ought to have the good sense to have returned the money already.

Why the delay?

Novak: Kerry's Vulnerability

Today Bob Novak has his typical interesting Saturday read - if perhaps a little skimpier than usual. The most noteworthy item covers the apparent weakness of John Kerry to a GOP challenge:

Homeland security consultant Jeff Beatty, new to Republican politics, arrived in Washington this week with a Zogby poll showing him in a virtual tie with Democratic Sen. John Kerry in Massachusetts.

Republicans had not listed the 2004 Democratic presidential candidate as even faintly vulnerable for re-election in 2008. The Zogby poll gives Kerry 48 percent to Beatty's 45 percent -- a tie with a 4.1 percent margin of error.

That signifies Beatty's strength rather than Kerry's weakness, with Zogby showing Kerry far ahead of other possible Republican candidates. Kerry leads Andrew Card, President Bush's former chief of staff, 61 percent to 29 percent. Beatty -- a veteran of the FBI, the CIA and the Army's Delta Force -- frequently appears on television commenting on security questions.

The poll is not brand new; it was reported some weeks ago:

Mr. Beatty is the president of TotalSecurity.US, a company that specializes in strategic security and with clients including the Super Bowl, Rose Bowl, Olympics, MBTA and the Statue of Liberty...

In a poll released on his Web site yesterday, the public’s support of his campaign is growing, according to Mr. Beatty. The Zogby organization is showing that if the election were held today, Mr. Kerry would get 48 percent of the public’s vote and Mr. Beatty 45 percent.

“The electors have shown that they are ready to welcome a well-qualified Republican,” said Mr. Beatty.

He said he believes people will vote for him because they know Mr. Kerry was wrong on the war. He also said that the current senator is wrong on taxes, and that neglect has led to jobs leaving the commonwealth.

The full poll data is available on Beatty's website here. Note that in a simple 'horse race' question, Kerry beats him 58%-23%. It's only after being read Beatty's bio that the gap narrows so dramatically.

Beatty has run for office before; he was soundly beaten when he challenged Congressman Bill Delahunt just last year (by 65%-30%) . In his favor in this race however, is that Kerry isn't especially popular in Massachusetts anymore anyway. In the most recent approve/disapprove poll I can find (from April), Massachusetts voters approve of the job he's doing by a margin of just 54%-41%.

One thing is for sure: Kerry's opponent won't have much trouble raising money nationally. There are plenty of Republicans who would love to see his smug condescension and knee-jerk liberalism off the national stage.

More Trouble for Ted Stevens

A running theme here at Influence Peddler has been to ensure that the 2008 race isn't a repeat of the 2006 race -- at least insofar as ethics charges against Republicans go. In 2006 candidates were constantly answering questions about Bob Ney, Duke Cunningham, Mark Foley, and others. In 2008, will they find themselves defending... Ted Stevens?

Former VECO Corp. CEO Bill Allen admitted Friday to using company funds to pay some of the construction costs associated with Sen. Ted Stevens’ (R-Alaska) home remodeling project as well as using a small number of company employees to do the work.

Stevens’ attorney Brendan Sullivan, could not be reached for comment at press time.

Allen, testifying in federal court as part of a state-level bribery case, also said he gave Stevens furniture for the home. Additionally, Allen admitted to paying Stevens’ son, Ben, $4,000 a month while the younger Stevens served in the state Senate.

Although Ted Stevens has acknowledged VECO’s involvement in the home remodeling in the past, he has insisted the company’s role was limited to reviewing bills from contractors. He repeatedly has stated that he personally paid outside contractors for the work done on the house...

“I gave Ted some old furniture ... I don’t think there was a lot of material. There was some labor,” Allen said, according to The Associated Press, adding that between one and four VECO employees worked on the house for up to six months during 2000. Allen also admitted to visiting the work site every month or two.

OK - 'some labor,' 'some old furniture...' sounds like some buddies helping a pal set up a new apartment, right? What's the harm? Stevens probably bought beer and pizza for some friends, and that was it. After all, the place doesn't look like a palace.

I suppose that's a possibility.

But with ethics charges hovering over Stevens, Craig, Young, Doolittle, and others, Congressional leaders cannot afford to have faith in old friends. In each case, they better make sure that there's nothing to the charges, or that primary challengers are lined up.

More at the Politico, where there's more attention to the question of whether Stevens' son was bribed:

Allen told the court that that "he recruited Stevens in 1995 for work on behalf of VECO, well before Stevens was appointed to the state Senate in 2002, and that Stevens maintained a consulting contract with the company through 2006," the AP reported. Ben Stevens is former president of the Alaska Senate.

As long as it stays in the family...

The Virginia Senate Race

With John Warner's announcement that he will not seek re-election and Mark Warner's entry into the race (today), Chris Cillizza asks whether Warner can be defeated:

The problem for Republicans is this: It does not matter WHY Warner hasn't had to withstand a sustained negative attack on his record, the fact is he has not. And that means his approval ratings are not a flash in the pan; people genuinely like him and believe they know him. Republicans will undoubtedly be able to peel off some of that goodwill from Warner but, judging from his poll numbers, he has plenty to lose before he is in any real political jeopardy...

Davis is no fundraising slouch himself, having built a national network of donors during his two terms as chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee. In 2006, Davis raised and spent roughly $2.75 million on his race despite facing only minimal Democratic competition. Gilmore faces serious questions about his fundraising ability as he was never able to raise serious sums for his quixotic presidential bid; the money he did raise came from a loyal group of core supporters, many of whom donated the federal limit to his campaign and therefore will be unable to contribute to any Senate effort. Either way, Warner will almost certainly outspend his Republican opponent with a combination of fundraising and personal donations.

The conclusion? Mark Warner sits in a unique position. He is well-known and well liked by Virginia voters and is certain to be well financed. But campaigns aren't decided on blogs, but on the ground with actual voters. At this time in the 2006 cycle, no one would have predicted Virginia Sen. George Allen would be bounced from the Senate. Strange things happened. Circumstances intrude on predictions. But, make no mistake: Mark Warner starts the race as a strong favorite.

This is all true. Mark Warner is pretty much the strongest candidate the Democrats can field in Virginia in any race. But he is also the only Democrat who would be favored over the generic Republican in any statewide race. That is, Virginia is still a Republican state -- even if that is less true than in the past. And that partisan bent remains a challenge.

Recall that of the state's 3 Democrats recently elected statewide, Warner and Kaine were elected in non-presidential years, when it was easier for them to distinguish themselves from the national Democratic candidate. Webb meanwhile was elected due to a perfect storm of partisan coverage, opponent's missteps, and worst GOP year in a generation. And still he won by a hair.

While the Virginia electorate has changed somewhat -- notably because of the dramatic growth in Northern Virginia -- these candidates won largely because they were seen as different from the national party. That distinction will be much harder to draw in a presidential year -- particularly if Democrats select a polarizing figure as their nominee. (Either Hillary or Edwards would qualify.)

There are plenty of instances in which statewide candidates of the 'wrong' party prevail in off-year elections, but lose when they run in a year when the presidential race drives the election in the state. Warner will face that challenging environment next year. Further, will the Netroots give him the leeway they gave Jim Webb in 2006, after their sour experience with moderate Democrats in the House and Senate? How will Warner reconcile Virginia's military culture with his party's dovish stands on Iraq and terror more generally?

I can't see this being as easy for Warner as people believe it to be now.

One surprise though -- while Tom Davis and Jim Gilmore are clearly flawed candidates, and some Virginia Republicans are pressing for another candidate, some state conservatives are not waiting to see whether there will be any more entrants:

In advance of today’s announcement by former Gov. Mark Warner (D) that he’ll run for the state’s open Senate seat in 2008, former state Attorney General Jerry Kilgore (R) and a slew of state Republican officials released a letter Wednesday announcing that they are supporting Rep. Tom Davis (R) in the contest to replace Sen. John Warner (R).

So far, Congressman Eric Cantor is the only name that I have heard as a potential conservative entrant into the race. If he does choose to run, he would be a tougher candidate than either Gilmore or Davis.

Update: Dave Weigel has a very creepy picture of 'Mr. Warner,' and wonders what the race says about tax cut politics.

Is Larry Brown's Senate Campaign Over Before it Started

Soren Dayton notes that while Bob Kerrey may once have been a very popular and respected governor and Senator from Nebraska, he's been more of a Larry Brown clone lately:

It strikes me that there’s an important opportunity to define Kerrey early. On one level he is an outsider. An another level he is mercurial. He didn’t like the Governor’s office. So he went to Washington. He didn’t like the Senate, so he ran for President. He didn’t like Washington, so he went to New York. Now he doesn’t like New York, so he wants to go back to Washington. Only catch is that he’s going to have to domicile back in Nebraska for it little bit.

Do the people of Nebraska really want to support this guy’s wanderlust?

Plus there's the matter of his association with Norman Hsu. How closely is Kerrey tied to him? If Bruning and the GOP re-introduce Kerrey to the people of Nebraska as the itinerant friend of the guy at the center of the most far-reaching money scandal in recent memory, Kerrey will have lost before the race begins.

Can We Stop Focusing on Larry Craig a Minute?

Larry Craig is a gift for late night comedians, and he's a gift for Democrats. While press attention is focused on every excruciating detail of the Craig saga -- even though it's clear his Senate career is over -- they ignore stories like this one:

Sen. Ted Stevens has quietly steered millions of federal dollars to a sportfishing industry group founded by Bob Penney, a longtime friend who helped the Alaska Republican profit from a lucrative land deal, according to public records and officials from the state.

Critics say those earmarked federal dollars could be the first example of how Stevens rewarded Penney for a land deal in Utah that reportedly earned the senator more than $125,000. Penney’s group, for its part, rewarded Stevens with several expensive gifts at the time it was receiving the earmarked dollars.

Stevens and his aides would not comment this week, but supporters of the earmarks strongly defend the nature of the funding and dispute accusations that the money was used to reward Penney’s group. Supporters say the funding is desperately needed to help preserve and protect the salmon population along the pristine and popular Kenai River...

Penney told the Anchorage Daily News in 2004 that he invited Stevens in on the Utah land deal in “appreciation for all he’s done for Alaska and the country.” Stevens invested $15,000 initially in 1998, but sold his share of the property for $150,000 in 2004, according to press reports and his financial disclosure records.

That occurred around the same time that Stevens, as a senior member on the powerful Appropriations Committee, helped the Kenai River Sportfishing Association through the federal treasury. The group, which was founded by Penney, who now sits on the board of directors, secured more than $4.5 million between fiscal 2004 and 2006 to conduct and oversee research efforts on salmon populations in the Kenai River and a major tributary.

One can't help but notice once again how much Senator Stevens has been hurt by his power to earmark. If Congress was prevented by rule from earmarking money -- or if there was a more elaborate system to shine light on every earmark and subject them to scrutiny and debate -- Stevens would not be answering charges of an appearance of impropriety.

But if there were no Larry Craig story, people might be paying more attention to reports like this one about Ted Stevens, and insisting that he explain his actions or step aside. As I've written before, the GOP will get beaten badly in 2008 if Members like Ted Stevens are seeking re-election while under ethical clouds.

Larry Craig's political career is over; the only question is whether he is a dead man, or a dead man walking. Can we move on to others whose questionable activities might actually affect the party's electoral prospects in 2008?

Craig's Intent: Serve Out His Term, Leave 'Quietly'

Roll Call ($) reports that Larry Craig's 'intent' to resign is conditional on his being unable to rescind his guilty plea in Minnesota:

Embattled Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) said Wednesday that his stated intent to resign later this month is conditional and that he will only proceed if he fails to have his guilty plea in a Minnesota court rescinded.

Although it is a long shot, Craig has hired a high-powered legal team to try to reverse his plea before the end of the month. Craig tried unsuccessfully on Wednesday to forestall a GOP leadership request to have the Ethics Committee investigate his arrest in a Minnesota airport and subsequent guilty plea, the first of what likely will be many moves in a pricey legal chess match involving all three branches of government.

“It’s an admittedly uphill battle,” Craig spokesman Dan Whiting said of his boss’s chances of serving out the remainder of his Senate term. “But a small door has been left ajar that this could be cleared up in the next three and a half weeks.”

But even if he is successful in vacating his guilty plea, he will not seek re-election:

In the unlikely event that Craig does finish his third term, Whiting said Craig would not run for re-election in 2008, leaving an open Senate seat in a solid Republican state that the GOP should have no trouble retaining.

Roll Call then engages in a lengthy discussion about the Senate Ethics Committee's decision to continue to investigate the matter, and a debate over whether Craig may legally use his campaign cash to pay for the litigation.

And the litigation could go on for some time. If Craig succeeds in rescinding his plea, he would presumably face prosecution for the incident in the bathroom. Democratic partisans would relish the show; other liberals might even set aside partisan gains to support Craig's effort:

Had Craig shown the good sense to get a lawyer after his arrest, he could have marshaled some lofty First Amendment defense arguments that might have helped not just him but an untold number of men whose lives have been devastated by these kinds of undercover sting operations. As in most states, the Minnesota statute on which Craig's arrest was based defines disorderly conduct as engaging in indecent or obscene conduct that someone knows or has reason to believe will cause alarm in another person. Foot tapping alone isn't likely to alarm anyone, especially not someone who's already indicated that he's open to the invitation, as the cop did in Craig's case. The last thing most gay men want, in fact, is to hit on a straight guy who's not interested. The foot tapping and other hand signals are designed specifically to avoid a scene.

Civil libertarians have been making these arguments in entrapment cases for more than 40 years, though without much success. (For a stellar legal history on this subject, check out Courting Justice: Gay Men and Lesbians v. the Supreme Court, by Joyce Murdoch and Deb Price.) Back in the 1960s, a New York Civil Liberties Union attorney asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a case involving an undercover cop who'd let a man in a gay bar rub his thigh without objection and then later arrested him for disorderly conduct. Morton P. Cohen argued that his client's conduct, and that of others like him, hardly met the legal definition of "disorderly." "The majority of homosexual solicitations are made only if the other individual appears responsive and are ordinarily accomplished by quiet conversations and the use of gestures and signals having significance only to other homosexuals," he said.

The Hill meanwhile, adds a lengthy discussion about whether Craig's treatment would have been the same if he had been soliciting a woman, with comments from Craig supporters emphasizing that Craig has always been a 'team player,' and merited better:

Craig supported Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.) during his 2002 struggle after controversial comments on segregation and backed Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) in his battle with conservative activists over the Judiciary Committee chairmanship. In 2004, Craig relinquished his seat on the committee so GOP leaders could add conservative Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.).

Lott has refrained from calling for Craig’s resignation and Specter has become the Idahoan’s most ardent backer, urging Craig to fight for his seat and speaking about the scandal during Wednesday’s policy luncheon.

Craig allies also are stung by what they see as the hypocrisy of the GOP leadership. For example, a former Craig staffer noted that Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) was met with applause when he attended the weekly GOP Senate lunch after he admitted to seeing a prostitute...

Several senators refused to comment on their missing colleague, including Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), who is grappling with a federal investigation, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who directed questions on Craig to the Republicans.

“There’s a court of law and a court of public opinion,” Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) said. “I fully understand his plans to clear his name in the court of law, but I fear for him in … the court of public opinion.”

Added Smith, who faces a tough campaign in 2008: “If this story doesn’t get smaller, it will get bigger.”

Smith speaks for a lot of his colleagues. The last thing that any DC Republican wants is for this spectacle to continue. Their preference would be for Craig to quietly disappear, and not resurface until after the next election. It will be enough of an embarrassment for him to still be in office in November 2008, while his potential GOP successor is seeking election. If he succeeds in vacating the verdict, he could go on trial. And who knows how long that would take?

While Larry Craig has been much admired by his colleagues and by conservatives during his tenure in DC, all politicians know that at some level, getting elected is like joining the Cosa Nostra. You are a loved and honored member of the family as long as you follow the rules and contribute to the family's success. But when that changes, and you become a burden -- you're out.

And it's nothing personal; it's strictly business.

Cantor for Senate

With the retirement of John Warner, Virginia Republicans are disappointed at their apparent choices for his successor: Tom Davis or Jim Gilmore. Davis is seen by many as too liberal -- particularly for a state that's still pretty conservative -- while Gilmore is seen as... a disappointment.

Patrick Ruffini offers a great suggestion -- Eric Cantor:

Tom Davis could best serve the Republican Party by staying where he is, something he can well appreciate as a former NRCC Chairman. He’s the right fit for where Fairfax County is right now. If he goes, so does his district.

As for Jim Gilmore, we need look no further than his recent 11th place publicity stunt to evaluate his skill as a candidate. Yes, he was always a longshot, but the fact that he ranked well below three sitting U.S. Congressmen who both started with near-zero name ID should tell us something. The guy had less of a chance than Ron Paul for crying out loud. He ended as Governor on a low note and was a terrible RNC chairman. Gilmore is not the conservative Virginia needs.