Search Results for: Dave Reichert

In a recent interview with the Seattle Times, Dave Reichert made a point of emphasizing his bipartisanship:

“It’s about solving problems,” he said. “This bickering back and forth is a waste of time. It’s tiresome. I just think sometimes it gets childish.”

Childish bickering, huh? Well take a look at Reichert’s approach to bipartisanship, as he describes it before a roomful of Republicans back in 2006:

“Hardest thing in the world to do to be nice to a crook, let alone someone who took your best friend’s life. But it’s my job. And in America, how hard is it for me to put my arm around a Democrat, if I can put my arm around Gary Ridgway?”

Reichert takes a touching story about a colleague and friend, tragically shot and killed in the line of duty (just get a load of those dramatic pauses)… and uses it as a setup for a punchline about Democrats. A cop killer and a serial killer, equated with Democrats. Right back at you, Dave.

But I guess that’s bipartisanship, Dave Reichert style.

As I’ve posted previously, there’s more to Dave Reichert’s abusive franking practices than simply a flagrant waste of taxpayer money, for it is not just the medium that is at question here, but the message itself.

Yesterday I contrasted two franked mail pieces, one in which Reichert promises “bold” earmark reform, and the other in which he brags about the amount of earmarked bacon he brought home to his district. You can’t get much more hypocritical than that.

Or can you?

In a widely distributed franked mail piece from 2007 headlined “Issue Alert: Medicare Cuts,” Reichert touts his opposition to “devastating cuts” in senior benefits:

In this taxpayer funded mailer, Reichert promises to “uphold my pledge to protect Medicare,” from, you know, all those social service slashing Democrats in Congress.

And what kind of pledge exactly is Reichert talking about? Well, judging from this clip from May of 2006, back when he thought he and his fellow Republicans would still control Congress in the coming session, it wasn’t much of one:

Yup, when Reichert talks about taking a “closer look at government waste,” the first place he looks is Medicare and Medicaid, because “you get the biggest bang for the buck when you cut those programs.”

Wow. That’s some pledge.

Reichert has sent out over one million pieces of franked mail since winning reelection in November, 2006—none of them fact checked by media truth squads, none of them rebutted by the opposition, and all of them paid for with taxpayer money. He uses his franking privileges to create a demonstrably false impression about his votes in Congress and his stance on the issues.

And as far as I can tell, our local editorialists and columnists just don’t seem to care.

UPDATE:
The video clip above is ©2006 by TVW. You can view full coverage of Reichert’s speech here.

UPDATE, UPDATE:
YouTube has pulled the clip at TVW’s request, so exercising my rights under the fair use exemption, I have reposted the clip using a different service.

How can Dave Reichert afford to pay for so many glossy, full-color mailings, when his campaign is struggling to raise money? Easy… he just passes the cost off to unsuspecting taxpayers:

At first glance, these fliers may look like campaign mailers. But they are produced and mailed at taxpayer expense, using a congressional privilege called “franked mail.”

Most members of Congress use such taxpayer-financed mail to let constituents know what’s happening on Capitol Hill and within their districts. Since his election to Congress in 2004, Reichert has been among the state’s biggest users of franked mail. He spent more on postage than other members of the state’s delegation in 2005 and 2006, according to federal records.

According to the Seattle Times, Reichert ranked second in the state for 2007, racking up a bill of $90,000 to Jay Inslee’s $104,000. But Reichert’s total only includes the cost of postage, whereas Inslee’s report includes the costs of printing and design. (Reichert mailed out 475,000 pieces compared to Inslee’s 171,000.) Anybody who has ever paid to print glossy, double-sided, full-color, 11×17 tri-folds knows that they don’t come cheap, so we’re looking at a total bill to taxpayers of as much as $500,000.

That’s like a half-million dollar campaign contribution from US taxpayers… and that’s just for 2007. Reichert sent out a deluge of franked mail in recent months, ahead of the May 21 cutoff, repeating a pattern of franking abuse he established back in 2006… an “aggressive Franked Mail program” even by his own admission:

Will also oversee and update electronic, internet and other communications, including an aggressive Franked Mail program.

That’s from a March 2007 job ad Reichert ran for a Press Secretary, a job description that curiously included “campaign experience” as a necessary qualification for a staff position that is expressly prohibited by law from engaging in campaign activities. Huh.

Like all Republicans, Reichert likes to fancy himself a fiscal conservative. But when it comes to spending taxpayer dollars on himself he is consistently our state’s most profligate spendthrift.

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.

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’.

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: $

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.

From The Hill:

Rep. Marilyn Musgrave’s (R-Colo.) entrance into the contentious battle for the open Appropriations Committee seat pits the House campaign committee chairman against two of his most vulnerable members.

And who is the other “most vulnerable” member seeking to plump up his coffers via a lucrative seat on the Appropriations Committee? None other than our own “Desperate Dave” Reichert.

The NRCC spent $1.8 million to defend Musgrave and $2.3 million defending Reichert last cycle. Both members narrowly won reelection and are once again targets for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC).

Musgrave defeated Democrat Angie Paccione 46 to 43 percent. Reichert faces a rematch in 2008 against his 2006 challenger, Democrat Darcy Burner, whom he defeated 51 to 49 percent.

And that $2.3 million doesn’t even include the god-knows-how-much RNC money Karl Rove spent directing 585,164 voter contacts into the 8th Congressional District, a stunning 41,666 on election day alone!

With Musgrave now in contention for the Appropriations seat, Reichert can pretty much kiss his chances goodbye. Both lay equal claim to the need to prop up a vulnerable incumbent, but Reichert’s call for geographical diversity is trumped by Musgrave’s: currently, no Colorado member sits on the 36-seat panel, whereas Washington is well represented on the Democratic side by appropriations-savvy Rep. Norm Dicks.

Which I suppose explains why Reichert is suddenly changing his tune. On Friday he anxiously told reporters that “I need a seat now. Those open seats for people who are in safe seats will come later.” But in the face of Musgrave’s equally desperate challenge, Reichert spokesman Mike Shields is now touting loftier objectives:

“[Reichert] is the person who will help the conference the most … Dave is for more transparency and accountability.”

Yeah… um… ’cause what could be more transparent than admitting on camera that he votes the way his party leadership tells him to vote, because “I have to do that over here … I have to be able to be very flexible in where I place my votes”…? And really, who should be held more accountable for Gary Ridgeway’s 18-year killing spree than the detective who dismissed him as suspect early in the investigation despite an eyewitness account?

“Transparent” and “accountable”… yeah, that’s Dave Reichert. And nothing could be more transparent than Reichert’s desperate effort to prop up his flagging campaign by securing himself a seat on the lucrative Appropriation’s Committee.

Congressional Quarterly (subscription only) reports on the six-way contest to fill an open Republican seat on the influential House Appropriations Committee. Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, the chair of the NRCC, argues that an assignment to the committee would help him raise more money for all his caucus members. But Rep. Dave Reichert’s interest in Appropriations is much more personal:

“I need a seat now,” said Reichert, who won his 2006 race with 51.5 percent of the vote. “Those open seats for people who are in safe seats will come later.”

I dunno Dave, that just comes across as sounding a little desperate. I wonder if that’s a preview of his 4Q07 fundraising totals?

21st Century Democrats will release a new poll later today, showing Democrat Darcy Burner with a 44% to 39% lead over Republican incumbent Rep. Dave Reichert in Washington’s highly competitive 8th Congressional District. 17% of voters remain undecided.

The robo-poll of 509 registered voters was commissioned by 21st Century Democrats (who endorsed Burner in July) and was conducted on August 28, the day after President George Bush came to Bellevue, WA to raise money for Reichert. 85% of Democrats support Burner and 82% of Republicans support support Reichert, but independents break decidedly toward Burner by a 40% to 24% margin.

President Bush remains exceedingly unpopular in the district, with only 30% of respondents rating his job performance as good or excellent. 96% of Democrats and 83% of independents rate the president’s job performance as fair or poor, along with a substantial 36% of Republicans.

Yes it’s early, and yes this is an internal poll from a partisan ally. But it shows that Burner’s message of fighting to bring the occupation of Iraq to a responsible close is resonating not only with Democrats, but with unaffiliated voters as well.

UPDATE:
21st Century Democrats has issued a statement:

“Darcy’s Burner’s phenomenal success in using the web to reach voters with her message about ending rather than extending the war is clearly resonating with Democrats and Independents in the district,” said Mark Lotwis, executive director of 21st Century Democrats. “These poll results and Sen. Rodney Tom’s decision yesterday to drop out of the primary race and enthusiastically endorse Burner demonstrate that Burner’s courageous and principled leadership on progressive issues is not just the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do.”

According to an editorial in today’s Seattle Times…

Reichert is a conservative — maybe too conservative for his district.

Reichert a conservative? Who knew?

There are so many things I’m itching to write about, but a quote the other day from Rep. Dave Reichert (R-Sheriff’s Department) keeps sticking in my craw. The Seattle Times’ David Postman asked Reichert about his unwavering support for the president’s strategy in Iraq, and the congressman’s choice of words was telling.

Reichert still firmly supports President Bush. The congressman is a former sheriff. When he talks about the war he frequently relates it to police work.

Of course, Reichert always relates everything to his police work. I’m told a waiter once asked him if he needed a few more minutes to decide, and he snapped back something about “looking Gary Ridgeway straight in the eyes.” (Did I mention Reichert is a former sheriff?) But I digress…

And in this case he sees parallels between the criticism aimed at Bush and his most famous case, the hunt for the Green River Killer.

“During Green River we were just hammered on by the press and the community and I got hammered by people and criticized and I just feel some of the same pressures are being applied to the president.”

So, um, what the congressman is really telling us about the war in Iraq is that President Bush is the real victim here? … Just like Reichert was during the 18 years of the Green River Killer investigation?

How incredibly narcissistic. Dozens of young women were brutally strangled by Gary Ridgeway — some, years after Reichert personally dismissed Ridgeway as a suspect, early in the investigation — but ultimately it was Reichert who was the victim, hammered and criticized by an unfeeling press and an impatient community. How did he ever survive the pressure?

Likewise, it is not the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis or the 3,600 slain American troops and their families who are the victims of the president’s military misadventures… but Bush himself.

I have repeatedly ridiculed the Times for praising Reichert’s “conscience-driven independent streak,” when in fact he has displayed little independence at all. Now I’m not so sure he even has a conscience.