Search Results for: Reichert

Two must read posts out recently for folks closely following the race between Darcy Burner and Dave Reichert for WA-08, that certainly should inform coverage in our local media.  (I’m not saying they will inform coverage, just that they should.)

The first comes from James at Swing State Project, who analyzes the “cash-on-hand competitiveness” of challengers in the top 75 non-open House races, and finds that Burner ranks fourth, with a 132% rating.  Burner’s cash-on-hand lead has been somewhat reported in the local press, but they haven’t let on how extraordinary her advantage really is.  Incumbents rarely trail challengers, and almost never by such a wide margin.  Yet another reason why WA-08 is widely considered a toss-up in 2008.

Our local press should also carefully study the latest post over at On the Road to 2008, where Daniel does a typically thorough job of fisking the oft repeated “Reichert is a moderate” myth:

As I’ve mentioned numerous times before, there is a pattern to Reichert’s voting record that is not being reported where he opposes legislation from being considered or coming to a vote, seeks to amend and change it, tries to table or kill it, before flipping his vote and voting for it on final passage.

In the 110th Congress alone he has done this 25 times, 17 times casting a final passage vote that seemingly “broke” from party ranks.

It is hard to ignore the facts as Daniel presents them—arranged and cited in a nice neat table—but so far, that is exactly what our local media has done.  Reichert may not be the most conservative member of Congress, but he’s no “conscience driven independent,” his much touted splits with his party almost always coming after the battle is lost, and even then only just for show.

But don’t take my word for it, read the whole thing and analyze the data for yourself.

From the TNT’s Political Buzz:

It seems Sheriff Dave has changed his Web site, which for months touted a rating showing him being the second most effective House member from Washington state during his first term. But according to the Democrats, sometime earlier this month that reference was dropped from his Web site. Reichert is now listed by congress.org as the least effective Washington state member and 401st out of the 439 House members.

No doubt House Republican leaders had high hopes for the silver haired Sheriff when he first came into Congress, gifting him plum committee assignments that bumped up his rookie year ratings. But in the three years hence he’s proven the biggest local bust since Brian Bosworth, trailing fellow WA Republican Rep. Cathy McMorris-Rodgers by a wide margin, along with 32 (out of 40) other members of his class.

The TNT points out that “the party in control sets the agenda, which affects the ratings,” and that’s good perspective, but so is the fact that when you compare apples to apples, Reichert now ranks only 171st out of 200 fellow House Republicans. Of course, that’s still better than 29 other GOP House members, some of whom aren’t even retired, indicted, behind bars or dead.

Why Reichert would choose to highlight his downward spiral, I don’t know. I suppose that explains the sudden web site edit.

During a web chat Friday, Washington Post congressional reporter Jonathan Weisman was asked for his thoughts on the race for WA-08:

Seattle: A Congress question — do you think Washington’s 8th District Rep. Dave Reichert (R) is in a better or worse position to win a rematch against Darcy Burner (D)?

Jonathan Weisman: Worse, way worse. I never count out an incumbent, never. But Darcy Burner is a little more experienced this go-round and a lot lot richer. She’s been raising a ton of money and is getting a lot of help from Democratic Washington.

Darcy’s getting a lot of help from Democrats in both Washingtons… the kinda help Reichert can’t count on getting from Republicans this cycle.

The numbers are in, and they don’t look too good for Dave Reichert, with challenger Darcy Burner expanding her lead over “Congressman 401” in the much watched category of cash on hand. Reichert raised only $331,000 in the first quarter, compared to the impressive $517,000 hauled in by Burner, who now leads Reichert $922,000 to $698,000 in cash on hand.

And that’s with a fundraising visit from the First Lady. Pathetic.

In my earlier post on the backdrop for Dave Reichert’s trip to Colombia, I neglected to cite one of the best sources for information on that part of the world, The Center for International Policy’s Plan Colombia and Beyond blog. There they have a couple of recent posts that provide even more background on the free trade agreement that the Bush Administration wants to see passed, as well as the ever-present anti-drug arrangements we have with that country.

Some recent posts:

A summation of how both Obama and Clinton have found some political landmines when it comes to Colombia and free trade in general.

A story about what happened when 6 FARC representatives (including the recently assassinated Raul Reyes) travelled to Europe to discuss peace in 2000.

A closer look at Colombia’s still very poor human rights record.

And finally, this one was particularly fascinating to me. They point to a website which shows on a map of Colombia which military and police installations are qualified for U.S. assistance. If you click through to that website, you can then click on each of the Google Maps pushpins to see where your taxpayer dollars go – largely in the effort to keep cocaine from coming into the United States. An effort which is not working, and will never work.

I know it’s kinda like pissing into the wind, but I strongly urge you all to read blatherWatch’s latest expose on the shameless myth-making behind Dave Reichert’s claim to fame as the man who allegedly caught the Green River Killer:

“[Dave Reichert] desecrated the victims. The public ought to know that,” says Seattle University journalism and criminal justice Professor Tomás Guillén… “He got elected based on Green River, when in fact, he didn’t solve it and he didn’t win against Gary Ridgway,” says Guillén who covered the Green River story for the Seattle Times from its beginnings and has written two books on the subject.

Really, the public ought to know, but they don’t, because our local media has been as complicit in perpetrating the myth as Reichert has himself, and they appear totally unwilling to admit their mistake. Reichert’s whole political career is built on a lie — a lie that permeates his discussion of nearly every issue…

Why is Reichert against choice for women? When asked, he’s told an interviewer: “I have a great respect for life. I’ve seen a lot of death in my career, worked Green River, seen lots of dead bodies.”

That’s just shameless, and quite frankly, our local reporters, who should know better, are doing themselves and their readers a great disservice when they let him get away with this. If Hillary Clinton’s presidential aspirations can be pronounced dead because she lied about the dangers on a tarmac in Bosnia — a tiny footnote in her personal biography — then surely Reichert’s political credibility should be called into question for fabricating his entire public persona.

Dave Reichert did NOT catch the Green River Killer! That is a fact. And our local media has an obligation to tell voters the truth.

I suppose I’ve been unfair to Rep. Dave Reichert. In a bold political move, Reichert struck a forceful blow against the abuse of earmarks by, you know… issuing a video news release. And how did I respond? I teased him about being the 419th most powerful member of the House.

Well that’s the sort of deceptive rhetoric that simply isn’t worthy of the name “Horse’s Ass”. It was mean spirited. It was cynical. And well… it was downright wrong. For it turns out that Reichert is not the 419th most powerful member of the House — those were the old rankings. The new rankings came out a few weeks ago, and Reichert has climbed all the way up to 401st. That’s better than 34 other congressman, some of whom aren’t even dead, retired, indicted or behind bars. Congratulations Dave. Another 18 years of attrition and you might actually discover some real influence.

Of course, that still leaves Reichert distantly mired in last place relative to the rest of the Washington state delegation, but when you have a political powerhouse like Rep. Doc Hastings in your ranks, that’s to be understood.

House Power Rankings by Overall Score
Name	Rank in State	Overall Score	Rank in House
Rep. Dicks (D-WA 6th)	1	39.01	22
Rep. McDermott (D-WA 7th)	2	34.06	39
Rep. Inslee (D-WA 1st)	3	29.57	72
Rep. Baird (D-WA 3rd)	4	16.48	212
Rep. Larsen (D-WA 2nd)	5	14.92	236
Rep. Smith (D-WA 9th)	6	13.69	258
Rep. Hastings (R-WA 4th)	7	11.97	301
Rep. McMorris Rodgers (R-WA 5th)	8	9.73	356
Rep. Reichert (R-WA 8th)	9	6.45	401

So how did Reichert do it? How did he climb 18 rungs on that 435-rung DC power ladder in just one year? Well, of course, all those deaths, retirements, indictments and convictions might have made a little bit of room for him at the top (of the tenth decile), not to mention his impressive use of video news releases. But a closer analysis of the numbers reveals that Reichert’s meteoric rise to the top (of the bottom) is largely based on his growing facility with, you guessed it: earmarks!

Reichert may just be 401st amongst House members in terms of overall power, but his 36 earmarks totaling over $27 million last year ranks him 73rd in terms of “member projects.” But even more impressive, Reichert climbs from a distant 9th place in the overall power rankings within the WA delegation, to a comfortable 3rd place when it comes to their “Earmark Scores”. Again, congratulations Dave! It looks like you’ve finally figured out at least one part of the legislative process.

House Power Rankings by Earmarks Score
Name	Rank in State	Earmark Score	Rank in House
Rep. Dicks (D-WA 6th)	1	2.51	7
Rep. Larsen (D-WA 2nd)	2	1.43	39
Rep. Reichert (R-WA 8th)	3	1.01	73
Rep. Baird (D-WA 3rd)	4	0.98	82
Rep. Hastings (R-WA 4th)	5	0.96	84
Rep. Smith (D-WA 9th)	6	0.95	86
Rep. McDermott (D-WA 7th)	7	0.75	152
Rep. Inslee (D-WA 1st)	8	0.74	155
Rep. McMorris Rodgers (R-WA 5th)	9	0.70	167

Of course, Rep. Norm Dicks remains by far our state’s earmark champion, but then, Dicks has never been shy about bringing home the bacon and proudly frying it up for his constituents. I mean, if Dicks were to suddenly take a principled stand against earmarks, well, that might be interpreted by the press as the height of hypocrisy. But Reichert, he was the sheriff you know, and so his sudden conversion from needing an appropriations seat “now” to promising his video camera that he’s gonna give up earmarks (during an election year)… well… I guess we should just take him at his word.

Yesterday we learned that the NRCC illegally obtained an $8 million loan in October 2006 based on fabricated audits and other financial documents, at the same time it was dumping money into tight races like WA-08. So how much did Rep. Dave Reichert benefit from his party’s shady financial doings?

Between October 9, 2006 and election day, the NRCC reported $2,268,255.08 of independent expenditures on behalf of Reichert, the bulk of it in the form of attack ads on challenger Darcy Burner. That’s $2.3 million they might not have had available to spend, if they hadn’t falsified their books. Every document, every loan, every transfer and every expenditure was signed for by Christopher J. Ward.

All those TV ads portraying Burner as a fiscally irresponsible liberal who couldn’t be trusted with taxpayer money…? They were authorized with the signature of an embezzler who was cooking the books to fraudulently obtain loans.

I’m just sayin’.

“The House Republican brand is so bad right now that if it were a dog food, they’d take it off the shelf.”
— Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-VA), former NRCC chair

Things are going from bad to worse for House Republicans, now that Christopher J. Ward — the “gold standard” of Republican campaign finance experts, and the treasurer of 83 GOP fundraising committees — is now suspected of embezzling millions of dollars from his clients. “Several hundred thousand dollars” were apparently stolen directly from the NRCC over a period of years in a financial fraud that could have far reaching consequences.

Ward is now alleged to have falsified numerous FEC filings. The NRCC apparently had nearly a million dollars less cash on hand than reported to the FEC at the end of 2006, and $740,000 less cash on hand than reported just a few weeks ago. But Ward wasn’t the only beneficiary of his crimes:

Officials told The Post that the NRCC’s problems may be more extensive. Republican lawmakers and former committee staff members now allege that Ward fabricated audits and other financial documents for 2003 to 2006, some of which were turned over to a Wachovia Bank branch in McLean in October 2006, when the NRCC borrowed $8 million in last-minute money for congressional campaigns.

That’s right, NRCC money spent on behalf of Dave Reichert in the final weeks of the 2006 campaign was obtained fraudulently, using “fabricated audits and other financial documents.” Loans obtained based on “outside audits” that were never conducted, were used to buy TV ads that helped put Reichert over the top.

And Republicans accuse Democrats of being the party of waste, fraud and abuse…?

UPDATE:
I’ve just started searching through the FEC reports and already found this NRCC expenditure from Oct. 13, 2006:

STRATEGIC MEDIA SERVICES
1023 31ST ST. NW
4TH FLOOR
WASHINGTON, DC 20007

Purpose of Expenditure: Issue Ad Placement
Name of Federal Candidate supported or opposed by expenditure: DARCY BURNER FOR CONGRESS
Office Sought: House of Representatives
State is Washington in District 08
Date Expended = 10/13/2006
Person Completing Form: CHRISTOPHER J. WARD
Date Signed = 10/13/2006
Amount Expended = $424948.80

Notice the name on the form: “Christopher J. Ward”. So Ward falsifies audits and other documents to obtain an $8 million loan, and then turns around and spends nearly half a million dollars of it attacking Darcy Burner. And I’m guessing there’s another million or so more where that came from spent during the following weeks.

I know Dave Reichert and his buddies at the Seattle Times would like to present him as a “conscience driven independent,” but exactly how independent he is can be measured by the degree to which the Bush White House has prioritized his reelection. When President Bush made his first fundraising visit of the cycle on behalf of a Republican incumbent, he flew cross-country to raise money for his friend and ally, Dave Reichert. And now that First Lady Laura Bush is making her first appearance on behalf of an incumbent, she too has followed her husband’s path.

That’s Dave Reichert — the Bush’s favorite congressman — and while you can’t blame him for happily sitting down to a $500 per person lunch with the First Lady at an exclusive Medina residence, he can’t blame us for doing our best to make him choke on it. And the best way to make him and his campaign gag on yet another White House funder, is to match this event donor for donor.

That’s why we’ve set a target of 250 new donors to Darcy Burner in response to today’s event, and the good news is that we’re already halfway there. The bad news is, we’re only halfway there. So we need your help. I just donated yet again to Darcy’s campaign and I’m asking you to do the same. Anything you give will be appreciated; even a few bucks can make a difference.

They have bigger checkbooks, but there’s more than us than there are them. Help prove it by giving today.

Help Darcy Burn Bush: $

Breaking news from Postman: apparently, Dave Reichert is running for Congress!

In other Congressional news, Reichert will get some big-name help to start his re-election fundraising. First Lady Laura Bush will headline an event Feb. 27th for Reichert in Medina.

So, the million bucks Reichert has raised thus far, and last August’s high-donor event with the First Lady’s husband… none of that counts as fundraising? Is Reichert challenging Mike McGavick for the WA state record for most campaign kickoffs?

I think it’s worth noting to whom exactly they gave the seat on the Appropriation Committee.

Rep. Jo Bonner, Republican, from the 1st congressional district of Alabama. He represents Mobile in the SW corner of the state. His district borders Mississippi and Florida. What’s the most interesting thing about his district?

It has a Cook Partisan Voting Index (what is that?) of R+12. This means that the district is eleven points more conservative than the national average.

Dave-o’s district is a D+2.

Hmmm… So instead of giving the choice seat to the Republican in the “slightly more liberal than average” seat, they gave it to the guy who doesn’t need the help.

Talk about a “fuck you” from the party.

To put that into context, Wasington’s 5th CD (with a R+7) is actually less conservative than the Alabama 1st.

I think the GOP is hunkering down, ready to ride out life in the minority.

A hotly contested Republican seat on the House Appropriations Committee will go to Rep. Jo Bonner of Alabama, rebuffing a desperate plea from a cash-starved Rep. Dave Reichert that “I need a seat now.”

Coming off a disappointing pathetic fundraising quarter in which the two-term incumbent now trails challenger Darcy Burner $607K to $463K in cash on hand, Reichert had hoped an Appropriations seat would fill his campaign coffers with earmark goodies, while bringing home some bacon to hungry 8th CD voters, and argued that he needed the assignment to help secure his slipping hold on the district. Apparently, House Republican leaders don’t think he’s worth saving.

Also jilted in a bid for appropriations was NRCC chair, Rep. Tom Cole, the man Reichert will have to rely on for party cash. We’ll see if Cole, rumored to be miffed at Reichert’s challenge, comes through for Dave in the clutch, the way the NRCC did big-time back in the closing weeks of both the 2004 and 2006 campaigns.

Yeah, I know most of you are focused on today’s Super Duper Tuesday contest, but with both the Times and the P-I ignoring Rep. Dave Reichert’s pathetic fundraising report (Really? It wasn’t worth a single mention?) it is apparently left to me to cover what could be the biggest local story of the election season: Reichert and the Republican’s slow-motion collapse in Washington’s 8th Congressional District. And while Seattle’s two dailies haven’t seemed to notice yet, the inside-Beltway media certainly has, with first The Hill placing Reichert amongst the most vulnerable GOP incumbents, and now The Politico warning that Reichert may not be able to count on the NRCC to pull his ass out of the fire this time around.

Six House Republicans holding seats that are being eyed by the Democratic majority are confronting the new, brutal reality of their party’s fundraising slump. They are limping into highly competitive reelection races with less cash than their Democratic challengers.

The latest fundraising reports are a gut punch for this six-pack of GOP incumbents: Reps. Christopher Shays (Conn.), Dave Reichert (Wash.), John R. Kuhl (N.Y.), Tim Walberg (Mich.), Jean Schmidt (Ohio) and Bill Sali (Idaho). With the exception of Sali, all represent swing districts.

But it’s also a blow to a House Republican conference that for years has prided itself on using aggressive fundraising tactics and mandates to make sure all of its incumbents held a significant money edge for their reelection.

A senior aide to a prominent House Republican requested anonymity to explain the significance of this fundraising downturn. “You’re going to see all these members in tough shape,” the aide said. “You have all these seats out there that are so expensive because of the money we’ve put in in the past. We might not be able to save some of these guys that we brought back last time.”

In the deft political hands of the late Rep. Jennifer Dunn, WA-08 was a cash cow for the national party, a safe seat in a wealthy suburban district that reliably pumped dollars directly into the NRCC and other campaigns. But over the past two cycles, Reichert has transformed his district into a congressional money pit, a political fixer-upper in constant need of expensive repair and maintenance. That “anonymous” comment from a “senior aide” to a “prominent” House Republican…? That was meant as a warning to Reichert and the others: either get your house in order and start paying your own bills, or prepare to find yourself out on the street, sleeping under bridges with our nation’s veterans.

Really.

It seems inconceivable that the GOP would abandon a district that has never elected a Democrat, but facing a structural disadvantage that makes 2006’s Big Blue Wave look like a swim at the beach, Republicans are going to have to resort to triage.

These latest fundraising numbers, combined with a raft of Republican retirements, explain why many top Republicans are bracing for the possibility of losses in November that could stretch into double digits.

At a time when the cash-strapped National Republican Congressional Committee needs incumbents to raise as much money as possible, members who fall behind financially cannot count on receiving assistance in the crunch.

The NRCC emerged in the black this month for the first time this election cycle and had $5.5 million at the end of the year. But the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, with over $35 million on hand, still has a sixfold cash advantage.

And the GOP committee, which traditionally spends money to protect its incumbents first, also will have to spend money in many of the 28 open seats where Republican incumbents have retired or resigned.

The first group of members who may not be able to count on NRCC support are the ones who posted weak fundraising numbers for the year. In the past, the committee has funded members with notoriously weak fundraising, such as former Indiana Republican John Hostettler. But given the party’s fundraising woes, that same support is unlikely to come this cycle.

In the final weeks of the 2006 campaign the NRCC focused its dwindling resources almost exclusively on “second tier” races like WA-08, winning most of them, but in the process losing almost every single first and third tier race. Unless Reichert reverses his fortunes and manages to keep pace with Darcy Burner, WA-08 could end up being one of those first tier races the GOP abandons. That is, if Reichert doesn’t abandon the race first.

UPDATE:
Fair is fair. The Times has apparently reproduced an excerpt from the longer AP story on Reichert’s fundraising woes. It hadn’t shown up in Google News at the time I wrote this post.

Cheer up Dave; you may have had another shitty fundraising quarter, but at least you’re not alone:

Nearly two dozen House incumbents were outraised by their opponents and another dozen candidates established themselves as early frontrunners for newly open seats late last week as fourth quarter financial reports were due.

Among the members on the short end of the fundraising battle in October, November and December were Republican Reps. Don Young (R-Alaska), Sam Graves (R-Mo.) and Dave Reichert (R-Wash.)…

That sure does put Sheriff Dave in great company:

Young raised just $40,000 and spent more than $400,000 in the quarter on unexplained legal fees (he is under federal investigation for his ties to the Veco Corporation), while Democrat Ethan Berkowitz raised $120,000.

The longtime congressman still has almost $1 million in cash, but it is dissipating fast due to more than $800,000 in legal fees in 2007.

With GOP incumbents facing tough battles in places like Alaska and Idaho, it’s shaping up to be one tough year for Republicans.