Showing posts with label 9th congressional district. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 9th congressional district. Show all posts

Saturday, August 04, 2018

Hollingsworth? Nah. Local Democrats may be useless, but calling them out doesn't mean I'm a Republican.

Home sweet home.

With Tennessee Trey in town earlier today to raise funds (could he even find his way?) what can I add except this: let's always remember the famous Scottsburg town meeting, and the congressman's links to the Koch Brothers, and his desire to build walls ... but of course he's rich, and in our advancing oligarchy, the money's all that matters.

Hope you enjoyed the first Gilded Age.

Where is Trey Hollingsworth? Carpetbagging Congressman cancels first-ever town hall, angering constituents and emboldening opponents, by Christopher Rex (Medium)

They descended on Scottsburg under the cover of early-morning darkness, from all over Indiana’s Ninth Congressional District. They came from places like Mitchell and Bedford, Bloomington, Memphis, Floyds Knobbs, and more. They were teachers and construction workers, mental health counselors and high school students; retired postal workers and stay-at-home moms. One was a bundled-up third grader in a pink Colts stocking cap. They were there to speak face-to-face, finally, with their elusive representative, Congressman Trey Hollingsworth.

It was a small group, not more than 25 in number, and they were carrying signs with slogans like Protect Working Families; Stop Re-Writing the Tax Code in SECRET; and, most simply, #SHOWINGUP. They were exceedingly polite and civil in their actions, huddled together along South Lake Road North, trying desperately to keep warm as cars and trucks whizzed past in the dark, but they were angry, too, oh yes, and they had some questions they wanted the man representing them in Congress to answer.

Chuck Sebastian, a local barber, wanted to know who Hollingsworth was really working for, the people of the Ninth District, or the large donors that the tax bill would benefit the most; Barbara Burton, a cancer survivor, wondered if Hollingsworth and the GOP would be coming for her Medicare next; High school senior Dylan Baker had the $1.5 trillion deficit in mind when he asked why he and his generation were being asked to pay, tomorrow, for rich people’s tax cuts today; Roger Pedigo, a construction worker, wanted to know why we weren’t investing in infrastructure — the roads and bridges he helps build — while his wife, Jennifer, wondered how her two daughters were expected to thrive, financially, with crippling student loan debt.

There was one singular question, however, that they all demanded an answer to:

Where was Trey Hollingsworth?

Friday, May 04, 2018

Caufield makes the case for Canon for Congress.


Kate Caufield's name has appeared in the Tom May Compendium so often this year that she's almost as ubiquitous as, well, Tom May himself.

I had a letter to the editor in support of Dan Canon and Canon For Indiana printed in the News and Tribune today. If you live in IN-9, please consider casting your vote (if you haven’t already) for Dan. He is as real as real gets.

As of 9:00 p.m. Friday night, the "letters to the editor" section of the on-line Tom May Anthology hadn't been updated since April 24, so here's the letter in its entirety, as copied from her post on Facebook.

--

I’ve lived in the 9th district of Indiana since we moved here in 1988- when I was 12.

I’ve experienced middle school, high school, college, and now my career and child raising years here in this incredibly dynamic district of this beautiful state. I’ve seen candidates and politicians come and go: Some were elected, some were not; some made changes for the better; some did not.

I’m not a believer in negative campaigns. However, I AM a believer in true representation by an elected official. To that end, I’d like to raise a concern about Canon’s opponent, Liz Watson. While Liz may truly believe in what she thinks is best for this district, she hasn’t been here to experience all of the changes that IN-9 has gone through in the past 10-15 years.

Instead, she’s spent the past decade plus working and living in Washington, DC- most recently with the House Democrats, and including doing work lobbying with the National Women’s Law Center. To be clear, there’s nothing wrong with her career choices or her decision to move away from the 9th district. In doing so, however, she made her preferred choice known: DC over Indiana. When she chose to move home, it came with an ask: Send me back to DC with your money and your votes. As a constituent of IN-09, that troubles me greatly. How can you represent me, when you haven’t the faintest idea how the past decade has shaped the district?

That said, never have I been more excited to vote for a candidate than I am in this primary election. Dan Canon has chosen to live in IN-9 for most of his life, and knows the struggles of these past 30 years as the district has endured as our country has changed. He’s fought for the values that I believe wholeheartedly in: Equality for all, and human dignity. He didn’t just start fighting for them, though- he’s been doing it long before the thought of running for a political office crossed his mind.

Because of his passion and his commitment for living here, and knowing all of the unique things that make this district what it is, Dan Canon is who will have my vote ‪on May 8.‬

Wednesday, May 02, 2018

Roger encourages you to vote for Dan Canon for Congress.


It’s been a while since NA Confidential attempted any sort of comprehensive candidate endorsement slate, although on occasion individual aspirants have been singled out for praise.

This blog is a one-man show, and there isn’t an editorial board. Maybe there should be, as composed of friends and volunteers. That’s something to consider for the general election, but not for the primary, apart from letting readers know which candidates made public statements about the NAHA putsch.

Election Day draws near. Find out which candidates have issued public statements about Deaf Gahan's public housing acreage takeover.

That said, the Confidentials voted this morning at the clerk’s office, and my vote went to Dan Canon for 9th district congressman.

Ironically, last week I was walking up Main Street and ran into Liz Watson, Canon’s opponent, who was out canvassing. A third candidate, Rob Chatlos, also appears on the Democratic ballot.

Watson’s campaign manager was with her, and when she asked me if she had my vote, he interjected: “He (Roger) is a Canon guy.”

I nodded, and she asked why. I told her that as a leftist/socialist in a Northern European mold, Canon’s platform jibes more closely with my point of view. That’s the truth of the matter.

But there’s something else.

Watson appears to have the support of the local Democratic establishment, and if we’re speak here about endorsements, seeing 15 of Watson’s yard signs cluttering John Rosenbarger’s lawn emphatically isn’t one of them. The local Democratic “brain trust” is the problem, not the solution, and most of them are supporting her.

Some of my closest friends disagree, and that’s okay. In terms of conscience, my primary reason for supporting Canon is the strength of his platform, not my writhing revulsion with Adam Dickey’s usual beige suspects.

Canon’s platform is not perfect. Almost nothing is said about foreign policy, especially American war-mongering around the globe. I’ll be asking Dan for more substance on foreign policy in the run-up to the general election.

And if Watson wins?

Dude, when it comes to the pressing issues of the day, I’m no friend of Trey Hollingsworth.

I’m also sick and tired of voting “against” Republicans by voting “for” the inanity of the Democratic National Committee’s neoliberal cash envy.

Ask me again next Wednesday.

Until then, my personal endorsement goes to Dan Canon for Congress.

Saturday, April 07, 2018

Liz Watson's statement about public housing concerns in New Albany focuses on the federal.


We're passing these candidate statements along as Aaron Fairbanks of We Are New Albany harvests them; all along, our stance at NA Confidential has been that any primary election contestant who'll actually make a public statement addressing the Democratic mayor Jeff Gahan's hostile takeover of public housing, and his subsequent assaults on our city's most vulnerable populations, at least merits consideration for voting -- as opposed to the ones who have refused to comment at all.

As to the quality and content of these statements ... well, we'll get to that when there's time, but dear reader, your thoughts are welcome in the interim.

Late Friday evening, Fairbanks published the long-awaited statement of 9th district congressional candidate Liz Watson (D). At Facebook, this was followed by a brief and revealing discussion between Fairbanks and Mike Bainbridge, former Director of Finance and HUD Compliance at the New Albany Housing Authority. For background on why Bainbridge left, there's this:

Gahan's NAHA putsch continues to dazzle the DemoDisneyDixiecrats, so let's ask Irving Joshua about zero threshold, employee drug testing and the status of "interim."

Watson's statement comes first, then the follow-up conversation, followed by links to previous installments in this series.

---

Public Statement of 9th District Congressional Candidate, Liz Watson

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Working Americans are facing a housing crisis. Eleven million of us pay over half our income for rent, and by 2025 that number could be at over fifteen million. At the same time, low-income housing has fallen by more than 60 percent since 2010. Housing is too expensive, and there’s not enough of it to go around. ​Long waiting lists for public housing leave people homeless or living in substandard conditions for years. The shortage of public housing has reached crisis levels.

The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit ​(LIHTC) gives states and localities the ability to make almost $8 billion in tax credits for the acquisition, rehabilitation, and new construction of low-income rental housing. It is our most important tool in increasing the stock of affordable housing, is capped far below the level of need for millions of Americans.

We can do better. ​I support Representative Suzan DelBene’s Access to Affordable Housing Act, which would increase the LIHTC by fifty percent. That would result in as many as 400,000 more affordable housing units over the next ten years, easing the shortages that force families and communities to make impossible choices. I also support the bipartisan Affordable Housing Credit Improvement Act; that would increase the program’s ability to serve Americans who are most in need, and it would help to preserve existing affordable housing stock. And I know that we need to boost funding​ for the National Housing Trust Fund, so that we can provide desperately needed assistance to families.

It is heartening that under the spending bill passed in March of 2018, HUD received an increase of $3.9 billion for FY 2018, for a total of nearly $43 billion in funding (which was $12 billion more than the President’s budget request).

And while the reduction in the corporate tax rate had the indirect effect of diminishing the attractiveness of the housing tax credit to investors, the spending bill boosted allocations for the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit by 12.5% over the next four years, repairing that damage.

Our public housing has $26 billion in unmet renovation needs, and our fellow Americans are suffering in winter when their worn-out heating systems fail. I would work to ensure that funding levels at HUD are substantially increased to provide adequate funding for the needed rehabilitation of public housing.

New Albany, for example, is currently struggling with underfunding and poor conditions in many of its federally funded public housing units. The New Albany Housing Authority is in the midst of assessing the state of public housing to determine the physical conditions of existing units. The city is also in the midst of taking inventory of existing housing stock for which housing choice vouchers could be used. Any changes to public housing – even the best improvements – will inevitably be challenging for public residents who are directly affected.

That is why it is so important that federal law provides key safeguards for public housing residents during any demolition or renovation. To receive federal funding to support any needed improvements to public housing, local housing authorities must first submit a plan to the federal government for approval.

Moreover, federal law provides protections for public housing residents who are displaced due to renovation or demolition. The Uniform Relocation Act’s protections and assistance apply to the acquisition, rehabilitation, or demolition of real property for federal or federally funded projects. Under the Uniform Relocation Act of 1970, people who live in federally-supported housing cannot be required to move unless at least one “comparable decent, safe, and sanitary (DSS) replacement dwelling is made available to you.” As a member of Congress, I would work to ensure that the rules of the Uniform Relocation Act are followed whenever federally-funded public housing is being demolished or rehabilitated and that HUD exercises appropriate oversight over changes to existing public housing.

The public housing crisis in our nation is one we can solve. In the richest country in the world, no one should have to choose between paying for food or paying rent. ​With the right leadership in Congress, we can make housing affordable again for millions of Americans.

---

Mike Bainbridge: 
"The problem with this statement related to NAHA's situation is that the Uniform Relocation Act doesn't apply to Section 18 (of the Housing Act of 1937) demo/dispo activities and a Section 18 application is exactly what they are planning to submit to HUD. So all those tenant protections under the Uniform Relocation Act that Liz mentions will not have to be provided to NAHA's displaced tenants (if Duggins and Gahan are able to push the Section 18 application through HUD's approval process)."

Aaron Fairbanks:
"I noticed the same thing, Mike. While I'm all for getting the candidates to open up a dialogue on this subject after over a year of complicit, public silence, I'm disappointed that some of the candidates took the statements as an opportunity to repeat talking points and rally behind the local administration's narrative.

"There were certainly better ways to navigate this issue, while working to get a better understanding of it. I'm extremely thankful to the candidates that navigated this a bit more carefully. Many of the candidates took the opportunity to issue preliminary statements, while working to better understand the issue at hand. I commend them for using their platform to shine a light on this issue."

Aaron Fairbanks:
"I had a misstatement, similar to Liz's misstatement. The URA doesn't have a one-for-one replacement unit requirement, just a requirement that comparable housing be made available as Liz's statement suggested.

"I, also, went back and checked on Section 18 demolition and disposition, and there's a comparable unit requirement.

"As best as I can understand, it's unlawful for a public housing agency to make "current residents" homeless by execution of demolition under Section 104(d), RAD, Section 18 or the URA. That doesn't mean that PHAs cannot significantly disrupt current residents' lives by forcibly displacing families from New Albany, costing them access to services that they rely on where they currently live, etc.

"It, also, doesn't stop a PHA from jeopardizing the long-term housing security of current residents, those on waiting lists and future applicants of housing assistance. Candace sent me a message from one of the former NAHA residents relocated with a voucher before the demolition of some of the Broadmeade units last year. According to that former resident it has been extremely difficult finding landlords that will so much as accept the voucher, which is one of the concerns of the multitude of housing advocates that have commented on this issue. The City and the New Albany Housing Authority are determined to demolish more than half of the public housing stock in the middle of an affordable housing shortage for the entire Louisville Metro Surrounding area. While "current residents" may not be found homeless through relocation, they may certainly find themselves homeless thereafter with some 500 or 600 fewer units of affordable housing left available."

---

Previously: 

Kudos to congressional candidate Rob Chatlos for his direct and honest support of public housing residents threatened by Jeff Gahan's putsch.

Read Dan Canon's statement about the issue of public housing in New Albany.

Three more candidates have provided statements to We Are New Albany about their positions on Jeff Gahan's public housing demolition fetish.

Grooms, Murray join Clere in addressing public housing concerns during NAHA candidate forum.

We Are New Albany press release, Part Two: "We Are New Albany endorses Republican candidate Ed Clere of Indiana State House of Representatives, District 72."

Democratic State Senate candidate Anna Murray replies to our question about the New Albany Housing Authority.

Councilman Al Knable: "I haven't given a formal public statement on NAHA but I'm happy to respond here."

Sunday, April 01, 2018

Kudos to congressional candidate Rob Chatlos for his direct and honest support of public housing residents threatened by Jeff Gahan's putsch.


9th district congressional hopeful Rob Chatlos (D) has provided a strong statement about public housing to We Are New Albany, but first, let's clarify a portion of District 72 House of Representatives candidate Chris FitzGerald's testimony from yesterday evening's post.

FitzGerald wrote:

For those not aware, NAHA currently operates 1,200 housing units. With underinvestment from the Federal government going back decades, we have a price tag of nearly $140,000,000 in deferred maintenance costs. This is a situation that cannot continue as is. Continued deterioration will only harm NAHA residents.

I asked FitzGerald to refer me to the source of the $140,000,000 figure. Thus far he has not, but Mike Bainbridge, former financial director of the New Albany Housing Authority, picked up the ball on social media.

The $140,000,000 of maintenance needs is taken out of context every time Gahan & Co. use it. That was the estimated total cost to bring all 1,000 units to a like new condition. It included all costs of rehabbing units/complexes that could be salvaged, and tearing down and rebuilding all units/complexes that couldn't. That was NOT an estimate of "deferred maintenance" costs. That's just what Gahan & Co. have morphed it into. Obviously tearing down and rebuilding 500+ units goes far beyond deferred maintenance costs.

Further, Bob Lane had a viable plan that did make one-for-one placement feasible even with the $140,000,000 estimate (which was the highest-end estimate). As the former finance guy I can assure you it's not a lack of funding that makes one-for-one replacement unfeasible. It's the agenda and desires of the current administration ... masked as a lack of funding.

It may be true that Chatlos has little chance of winning the primary. However, as Aaron Fairbanks of We Are New Albany reveals, Chatlos addresses the crux of the public housing putsch directly, with passion, force and logic.

I commend him.

---

We have yet another huge public statement. This is our second statement by a congressional candidate, and we really appreciate his strong show of public support for the residents of the New Albany Housing Authority and We Are New Albany.


Public Statement of 9th District Congressional Candidate, Rob Chatlos (D)

rob@chatlosforcongress.com

We Are New Albany has asked me to weigh in regarding the public housing issue that will displace current residents in low income housing. Politics is a dirty business, and in the absence of truthful factual information I question the credibility and authenticity of any public servant unwilling to be completely transparent on issues that clearly require complete disclosure to the public.

The expectation of full disclosure has been rendered to a halt encompassing this issue and I for one side with the citizens of We Are New Albany until it is clear what the sincere intentions and motives are of those pushing for the demolition of these public housing units. The reason this is so important is that it has been established that there are not enough affordable housing options to compensate residents that will be displaced throughout the city or adjacent communities using housing voucher programs.

It really boils down to simple logic. You don’t pick something up to move it unless you already have a new place to set it down. Right now that standard of logic has been largely unheeded and I encourage the citizens of We Are New Albany to continue fighting for full disclosure until an acceptable and fair outcome has been reached. I will be happy to assist in this matter in any capacity that I can as I have not always had a roof over my head. Housing first.

---

Previously: 

Read Dan Canon's statement about the issue of public housing in New Albany.

Three more candidates have provided statements to We Are New Albany about their positions on Jeff Gahan's public housing demolition fetish.

Grooms, Murray join Clere in addressing public housing concerns during NAHA candidate forum.

We Are New Albany press release, Part Two: "We Are New Albany endorses Republican candidate Ed Clere of Indiana State House of Representatives, District 72."

Democratic State Senate candidate Anna Murray replies to our question about the New Albany Housing Authority.

Councilman Al Knable: "I haven't given a formal public statement on NAHA but I'm happy to respond here."

Read Dan Canon's statement about the issue of public housing in New Albany.


Without further ado, here is 9th district congressional candidate Dan Canon's statement about the issue of public housing in New Albany. It is a thoughtful, nuanced response, and I appreciate it very much.

---

As readers of this page may already know, my friends at NA Confidential have criticized me more than once for not commenting on New Albany's housing situation as it stands. Though I've often talked about housing broadly, even in New Albany, there are a few reasons for my relative silence on the specifics of this issue thus far.

First, I have been waiting for release of a finalized, official plan to see what it looks like. Housing advocates generally agree that decentralized public housing is, on the whole, a good thing. I'm hoping to see a plan that ensures no one loses their home, and that puts the folks who are currently in public housing into a better situation.

Second, there is an ever-present concern of appearing to use the poor, or any marginalized group, as a political pawn. My campaign has canvassed and called public housing residents in New Albany. For the folks we've talked to, this doesn’t seem to be a top issue (many were not aware of it at all), and so commenting on this felt almost artificial. I realize now that this is the wrong way to think about this issue - I’ll discuss that more below.

Third, there are some details I shouldn’t publicly comment on because I learned them wearing my lawyer hat, which complicates things a bit.

In the aggregate, this issue has created a unique challenge for me and for my campaign. There’s a lot of messaging power wrapped up in a race like this, and the people of my hometown are important to me, so I’ve been tinkering with an official statement for a while. The long and short of it is: none of the above reasons are good enough to maintain silence on the issue as it presently stands.

As detailed in a video my campaign produced late last year, Charlestown has run scores of people out of single-family homes in the Pleasant Ridge neighborhood by levying outrageously high fines for alleged code violations. The owners, unable or unwilling to pay fines that total more than the value of the house itself, are coerced into selling their houses to a developer for a pittance. Houses sit vacant, boarded up, falling in on themselves, while the remaining residents' property values plummet. It now looks like a scene out of the Walking Dead. The transparent - and practically admitted - goal of Charlestown's Mayor is to run enough people out of Pleasant Ridge so that the neighborhood may be bulldozed and replaced with a new subdivision; one filled with homes in the $400k range. The Mayor is on record suggesting that the residents of Pleasant Ridge, who "don't contribute anything," can simply move to a different town. I've called it the starkest example of class warfare I have ever seen in Indiana.

There are other contenders, of course. A few years ago in Indianapolis - a city which then had no secular homeless shelters - a tent city was dismantled. Around 70 refugees, veterans, seniors, people suffering from mental illness, and other vulnerable individuals were dispersed, then-Mayor Ballard expecting that they would simply vanish. Ultimately, he was right - those affected had little means, little political power, and no voice.

Prior examples such as these should be a cautionary tale for any halfway compassionate executive, legislative, or administrative body that seeks to do anything that dramatically affects housing: things often go very badly for those who are most vulnerable. So naturally, as I listen to the people in the know who would be directly affected by a plan to demolish public housing in New Albany, it seems the real torture is the fear of the unknown. Imagine being told "someday, in the near future, you will lose your home." "When?" you ask. No one knows. "Where will we go?" No one knows that either. For the poor, many of whom have been repeatedly cheated by the various institutions that govern their daily lives, not much will help ease the fear that comes with that news. Chalking it up to the usual complications of urban planning and administration doesn't help. Arcane legalese doesn't help. Pointing to the federal government’s lack of support doesn’t help. Saying "just trust us" doesn't help. Even a concrete plan, clearly put in writing for all to see, might not help. These minds will not be eased until a specific remedy is explained - as in "you will move to x address at y date and time" - and perhaps not until that specific remedy is fully implemented.

The damage is done in Charlestown. People have been displaced. Lawsuits rage on, but the neighborhood will never recover. The former residents of Pleasant Ridge will likely never be made whole, rich developers will go on being rich, and it’s unlikely that anyone will be made to account in any meaningful way. New Albany might yet be given the benefit of the doubt; Charlestown cannot. I should be clear that I haven’t spoken with Mayor Gahan or Dave Duggins prior to this statement, but I hope to. I am, generally speaking, an optimist, and so my expectation is that they and other city officials are earnestly working on a fix that will not leave anyone homeless. I understand that the folks who read and contribute to this page may not be so optimistic, but perhaps that’s as it should be. The time to ensure no one is left homeless is now; not after a neighborhood has been swallowed whole.

As such, I recognize the need for maintaining a robust public discourse on an issue like this. The fact that not many public housing residents seem to be engaged in this struggle is, in fact, more a reason to speak up than not to. When powerful interests anywhere feel like they are not being watched, they tend to run roughshod over folks who have the quietest voices. I learned this important lesson early on as an activist, I relearned it as a lawyer, and it would seem I'm learning it yet again as a politician. This is what organizations like We Are New Albany are for, to be sure. But politicians who are frequently in the public eye - and that's me these days, I guess - have a duty to speak up, too. To the extent that I've failed in that duty, I apologize to the readers of this page and to the affected residents. I grew up with you folks, I care about you and I am listening.

A final point on this: We Are New Albany has endorsed Representative Ed Clere, a Republican, as a candidate who will presumably protect their interests. Likewise, Senator Ron Grooms has had some strong language for New Albany’s Democratic administration. But GOP politicians have consistently voted for decades to keep wages low, sabotage organized labor, gut housing programs, and generally screw the working classes in every way imaginable. NA Confidential’s contributors have characterized the silence of my colleagues and me as leaving a leadership void. Perhaps they are right. While I respect Ed, I am inclined to look at both his stance and Grooms’ comments as part of a cynical ploy by Republicans - who, on the whole, are openly antipathetic to the poor - to fill that void. Naturally, I am concerned as to what they might fill it with.

Apart from voting records, in Indianapolis, we saw an example of a Republican administration’s effort to make the homeless disappear. In Pleasant Ridge, we've seen an example of how Republican administrations treat low-income residents of private housing. Maybe Ed is different, but he still plays for the same team. Right now, that's a lot like playing baseball in hockey gear, insisting that you're somehow going to change the game. Still, Ed at least shows up and puts on the gear, and there is something to be said for that.

And I get it; there are plenty of Democrats who would do, and have done, the same as the administrations in Charlestown and Indianapolis. Abuse of the poor and the vulnerable is not, and has never been, a purely partisan affliction. We can combat such abuses with vigilance, which is the promise of We Are New Albany. I can make that promise as well. The good people in my hometown deserve as much. We will be watching.

Sunday, February 25, 2018

If Dan Canon is railing against the Republican mayor in Charlestown over housing issues for the working poor, but not the Democratic mayor in New Albany, there's a big problem.

I thought it was clear where matters stood, and then it wasn't. Something changed for me in September, 2017.

That's when my preferred 9th district congressional aspirant Dan Canon came down fast, forcefully (and correctly) on Mayor Bob Hall of Charlestown, who happens to be a Republican. Canon's rhetoric was blazing as he considered the implications of Hall's Pleasant Ridge cleansing fiasco.


Unbelievable. This guy has no shame about driving the working class out of the city by destroying entire neighborhoods. I am trying to avoid the internet this weekend but this is so appalling I can't stand it.

Mayor Hall: consider that if the torches and pitchforks come (and let me be clear that progressives are trying to stop that from happening), they are coming first for elected officials who wipe out the working poor to accommodate the wealthy. You can only take so much from your own people. Taking their homes is going too damn far.

At the time I was inspired, because everything Canon wrote about the situation at Pleasant Ridge applied just as accurately to Mayor Jeff Gahan's forcible seizure of the New Albany Housing Authority -- and still does, even more so in the wake of David Duggins' recent termination-worthy intimidation tactics.

As I thought in September, surely candidate Canon was ready to apply the same logic to Gahan's putsch, and to lead. As we all know by now, this hasn't happened.

Yes, Canon attended the We Are New Albany candlelight vigil, so there's that. However, in the main, it appears that when Bob Hall attacks the working poor, that's bad, but when Jeff Gahan attacks the working poor ... it's largely unmentionable.

First, a look at Canon's response to the issue during his recent town hall meeting in New Albany, as reported by the newspaper. Then, a few thoughts.

Canon candidate conducts town hall, by Erin Walden(News and Tribune)

Addresses public housing, school shootings


NEW ALBANY — Congressional candidate Dan Canon met with voters Saturday at a town hall at Clean Socks Hope and two key issues arose: public housing in New Albany and school shootings in America.

... The public housing situation in New Albany drew at least two Southern Indiana residents to the town hall. Aaron Fairbanks, a volunteer who has canvassed for Canon, attended because he says he believes in Canon but needs to know where he stands on housing.

“There’s definitely an issue with [public housing] in New Albany … With government cooperation, [the government] has the ability to reduce homelessness so that’s an issue I’m incredibly interested in — fair and affordable housing. I want to get a more concrete idea of where he sits on that,” Fairbanks said.

The issue, Fairbanks said, is the plan to demolish some of the public housing units with no concrete plan to replace those units.

“Having lived in public housing before, it is a bit personal,” he said. He knows that all the blame can't be placed on the local government, but coming up with solutions, and dollars, at the federal level to put into public housing would be a good place to start.

“Basically without knowing exactly where Dan [Canon] sits, I don’t know know if he would be for a remedy that would bolster public housing stock, and that’s what I’m interested in,” Fairbanks said.

Candace Brewer, chairperson for "We Are New Albany," a group formed to oppose the plan to demolish the housing units, also attended the town hall to check out Canon’s stance on housing.

“... It’s an absolute fact people will be made homeless [from this plan]. It’s my number one issue right now,” Brewer said. According to Brewer, she doesn’t care which party a candidate belongs to as long as they fight for the working class.

Even though what’s happening at the New Albany Housing Authority is localized, Canon says solving community problems at the federal level is possible with a representative in the House who is in touch with their constituents.

“We get into talking so much about what is happening at a national level and at Washington D.C., what the national topic du jour is. Congressional candidates on both sides of the aisle run a sincere risk of losing focus on local issues. More often than not the federal government has a big role in alleviating some of the problems going on on the ground in their district,” he said.

Most of what he said he hears in the town halls, such as a comprehensive solution to the opioid crisis or a handle on healthcare, the “issues people talk about at their kitchen table every day” as Canon put it, are solvable through legislative action.

Canon says there are several ways to bring real change to the housing issue. The first would be to “simply provide more resources to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and other agencies that are dealing with the problem of homelessness and housing in general. Beyond that, education and outreach to end chronic homeless and poverty" would counteract homelessness, something he says is lacking in the current leadership.

On social media, Jeff Gillenwater dissects this.

Canon goes to Washington, advocates for more federal housing funding along with the rest of a platform that has little to no traction with Democratic leadership locally or nationally. Jeff Gahan and local Democrats maintain their positions. Canon takes credit for advocacy, Gahan takes credit for “revitalizing” public housing areas, and half the previous public housing residents still end up on the street. If criticized, Canon says there’s nothing he could’ve said or done as it’s a local issue, Gahan blames the feds, and Democratic leaders and attendant sycophants will determine if that’s good governance by whether or not they get re-elected. So it goes, here and elsewhere.

Paraphrasing another thought of Gillenwater's, we all understand that Canon speaking out about public housing in New Albany right now could help make a positive difference for those residents. Many of us are suggesting he should. If Canon is railing against the Republican mayor in Charlestown over housing issues for the working poor, but not the Democratic mayor in New Albany, there's a big problem.

In fact, it's an even larger problem than Adam Dickey's behind-the-scenes string-pulling.

If I'm to vote for a genuine progressive on the left, then shouldn't the progressivism be equally applied, across the board, come what may?

Or is it more important that local DemoDixieDisneycrats retain their sinecures, even if it means cynically abandoning whatever shards of progressive thinking that somehow seep through Dickey's cordon of self-interested censorship?

New Albany's traditional older white male small-pond power brokers, a slight majority of whom remain nominally Democratic (albeit rarely democratic), have no interest whatever in Canon's enunciation of progressive political thinking. They're laughing at him behind his back, because everyone knows that politics in Floyd County is about beak-wetting and not ideology.

Except they're perfectly willing to to piggyback on Canon's anti-Trumpista platform, because it distracts the younger Democrats who might otherwise see through the public housing putsch, thus providing the Elders with breathing space to fulfill their mythology-fueled dream of slaying the resource-sucking vampire of public housing -- arguably the single biggest straw man in this city's ignoble history of intellectual underachievement. 

Fact is, they'll turn against Canon in a Eastridge Drive Minute. They're using him, not the other way around. What actually needs slaying is the local Democratic Party; then it can be rebuilt into something that matters -- and if Canon might be elected to Congress with the local party staying exactly as it is, what good would that do us? 

I'm completely assured that if elected, Canon intends to stand in opposition to Trumpism, and will be a progressive advocate. Suits me, but I can't vote for him on these stances alone.

To avoid hypocrisy, Canon also needs to oppose local Gahanism, which has been proven by the mayor's public housing putsch and personnel choices to be indistinguishable in its degradation from the moral rot oozing from across the aisle.

I don't know if Canon will, or if he won't; ironically, just like my vote.

Saturday, January 27, 2018

Dan Canon's good ink underscores the ideological problem for Adam's local DemoDisneyDixiecrats.


The author wouldn't identify the brewery, so I have.

It's an excellent profile of Dan Canon, man and candidate -- and I promise not to mention the local DemoDisneyDixiecratic Party's right-wing assault on public housing ... not even once.

Oops.

Is This Indiana Civil Rights Lawyer the Great Progressive Hope of 2018?, by Michael Powell (Vice)

Dan Canon is suing Trump, calling out white supremacy, and running for Congress. But can he win?

Less than a day after announcing his campaign for Congress in the parking lot of a brewery near his New Albany, Indiana, home, Dan Canon stood on a bench on a well-trafficked pedestrian bridge over the Ohio River telling anyone who would listen why they deserved healthcare. Some kept walking, some stopped to join in the growing circle around him.

"Healthcare is your right, and you have to assert that right. You get a small group of people that believe that and it spreads. If we tell our elected representatives we [have that right], well, they're not doing their jobs,” he told them in his role as a political busker. “So what do you do? You fire them!”

That’s the sort of personalized campaign Canon is running to flip Indiana’s Ninth District from red to blue. The progressive civil rights attorney is one of the most fascinating midterm House candidates in the country, a longtime advocate for causes ranging from gay marriage to immigration to cannabis who spends his free time acting in community theater, playing in bands, and marching in protests. If he can get into Congress, it'll be proof for a lot of leftists that yes, their preferred candidates really can win.

He has his work cut out for him: In 2016 Donald Trump won the district by 27 points and Republican Congressman Trey Hollingsworth beat his Democratic opponent by 14 after moving from Tennessee in 2015 ...

This important point remains:

The incumbent Hollingsworth has one advantage over any eventual Democratic opponent—he’s one of the wealthiest members of Congress, with almost $60 million in assets. Canon says his advantage will come through optics and lived experience. “You have people like Trey Hollingsworth who come to a district as an outsider millionaire with multi-generation wealth and doesn’t understand living paycheck to paycheck, doesn’t understand making the choice between paying for health insurance and paying the rent, or scrounging for change in the couch to buy a Big Mac,” Canon told me. “These are things that I’ve actually experienced, and I think gives me a point of identification with lots of other people. Very few if any candidates at an office this size understand those very real problems because of the prevalence of money in politics… It’s difficult for working-class folks to run for office.”

Hollingsworth is a plutocratic carpetbagger, and I'd say the same thing if the situation occurred in reverse, and it was a Democrat from Massachusetts.

Just one more quote.

“[Dan’s] message focuses a lot on fighting for individuals. It manifests itself in different issues, but he’s articulating a vision that goes deeper than what previous candidates have had to offer.”

The speaker is none other than multi-chairman spider web spinner Adam "Boy Wonder" Dickey, and after one wades painfully past the robotic code language, there's a grain of unintended truth.

Not only is Canon running against Republicans outside the Democratic Party, but also the ones within it -- and not only Washington County's implanted Falangist.

Another of Adam Dickey's hilarious DemoDisneyDixiecratic shit shows provides timely comic relief.


Those progressive themes Canon repeats aloud?

Try imagining Jeff Gahan uttering any of them, privately or publicly. More bluntly, the only future hope for Dickey's local DemoDisneyDixiecrats is that Canon wins, and the party is reshaped by younger, more progressive activists -- and this phenomenon, should it occur, would transform Jeff Gahan into Doug Leatherbury.

Or is it the other way around?

ON THE AVENUES: David Duggins’ violent “jokes” will continue until the New Albany Housing Authority’s morale improves – or Duggins is fired. We advocate the latter.


SHANE'S EXCELLENT NEW WORDS: "Individual bullying is usually characterized by a person behaving in a certain way to gain power over another person."

Tuesday, October 17, 2017

9th district primary opponents Dan Canon and Liz Watson raised lots of money in the 3rd quarter. We know Canon, so let's have a look at Watson.


According to Ballotpedia, five Democrats have declared for the primary in May, 2018. The winner will contest incumbent Trey Hollingsworth's 9th district congressional seat.


Note that Ballotpedia lists Chatlos twice, as a Democrat and as an Independent.

Yesterday Dan Canon's team took to social media to reveal his 3rd quarter fundraising proceeds.

Congressional Candidate Dan Canon has record-setting quarter

New Albany, Indiana— Dan Canon, Congressional candidate in Indiana’s 9th district, today reported raising over $208k, the most ever by a Democratic Challenger in the 9th District in the 3rd quarter of a non-election year.

Canon’s fundraising came overwhelmingly from small-dollar donors, with over 1600 individual donations including donations from all thirteen counties in the district. These amounted to a median donation of $27. 86% of donations were $100 or less. In addition, the campaign is building an unprecedented field operation to engage constituents across the district.

So did Watson, who barely trailed Canon on the tote board.

Liz Watson, Candidate in IN-09, Raises More Than $200,000 in Third Quarter

Watson out-raised Republican incumbent Trey Hollingsworth

Liz Watson, candidate for Congress in IN-09, raised more than $200,000 by the September 30th fundraising deadline. In doing so, Watson has out-raised Republican incumbent Trey Hollingsworth and nearly every candidate running for Congress in Indiana.

USA Today had a look at these early fundraising returns.

The most noteworthy numbers for third quarter fundraising were put up in southcentral Indiana where both New Albany attorney Dan Canon and Bloomington attorney Liz Watson each raised more than $200,000. That’s not only more than the $127,400 raised in the past three months by freshman Rep. Trey Hollingsworth, R-New Albany. But it’s also more than the recent amounts raised by any other House candidate in the state except Rep. Jackie Walorski, R-Jimtown.

It occurs to me that while Canon is well known in New Albany and metro Louisville, readers might not be familiar with Watson, who rode the Democratic Party's Harvest Homecoming parade float with Canon.

I'm not sure if any of the other candidates did, although it's possible. Later Watson posted this at Fb:


I posted a comment asking the candidate about Tenille's housing status and costs, given the state of affordable housing in New Albany amid Jeff Gahan's putsch and subsequent hostile takeover of public housing. She replied via Messenger that she'd like to learn more about these topics.

Accordingly, I was happy to provide the candidate with a list of NA Confidential links on the putsch, and I hope to speak with her about it very soon.

In the meantime, via Watson's web site, here's her pitch.

Meet Liz Watson

Liz Watson is running for Congress because she wants to bring good jobs, affordable health care, and high-quality public education to Indiana’s working families. Liz has fought for Hoosiers in the nation’s capitol, and she has seen the dysfunction in Washington up close. Liz believes it’s unacceptable that working people are being left behind by politicians who would rather stand up for special interests than for Hoosiers.

Liz has led and won important fights throughout her legal career to help hardworking people get high-quality, good-paying jobs. As a working mom, Liz understands that today's families need affordable health care, high-quality child care, predictable schedules, paid sick days and family leave, and fair pay. She has written policies to raise the minimum wage, protect working people from being cheated out of their pay, and to create pathways to the middle class.

Liz learned the values of hard work and fair play the old-fashioned way. She worked the cash register at Fazoli’s, waitressed at Steak ‘n’ Shake, and sold clothing at L.S. Ayres. Through these experiences, she learned the value of a dollar while saving for college.

Liz’s roots in Indiana date back to the Civil War, when her great-great grandfather fought for the Union from Huntington, Indiana. She comes from generations of hardworking Hoosiers: a postal inspector, carpenter, refrigerator and electrical repairman, teachers, and the owner of the Feed and Grain Store in Shoals.

It’s wrong that today Indiana families who work hard and play by the rules struggle to keep their heads above water. Liz believes we should invest in workforce training and in the future of our young people, especially in proven models like apprenticeship, make community college and universities more affordable, and support our small business job-creators.

Liz gets results. When she learned that pregnant women working in retail jobs were being told they couldn’t make simple changes at work like carrying a water bottle or being able to sit down during a long shift, despite doctors’ orders, she filed a complaint and got the policy changed. Fighting for working people and the right to organize has been the hallmark of Liz’s career and continues to motivate her to serve her community.

For too long, Congress has done everything to help special interest billionaires and little to help Main Street. Liz will work to get hardworking Hoosiers a long overdue raise, fight against trade deals that threaten Hoosier manufacturing, support small businesses, help people juggle work and family life, and protect public education and affordable health insurance–including for those fighting the grips of opioid addiction.

Liz and her husband Craig are both teaching at Indiana University. Their two young children are attending the same elementary school that Liz attended as a child, and they love spending time with Liz’s parents who live a few miles away.

Liz brings the experience and drive that we need to win for Hoosiers in Congress, and she will never stop fighting for Indiana’s families.

Monday, July 17, 2017

Dan Canon to release detailed policy statements; local Democrats announce Game of Thrones night at the Roadhouse.


If we were to submit Dan Canon's platform to 10 prominent local Democrats at random, how many would NOT reel in horror?


POLICIES

In the coming weeks, I will be releasing detailed policy statements that will appear on CanonForIndiana.com. Please click here and sign up to be notified when new policies go live. If you have a specific question or an issue you do not see addressed here, please email info@CanonForIndiana.com.
  • Universal healthcare as a right for all people, beginning with basic transparency and cost controls along with a public option that is basically a Medicare expansion; ultimately phasing in a true single-payer system over time.
  • Nationwide paid parental, family, and sick leave through an expansion of the federal Family Medical Leave Act, similar to the programs currently in place in Washington state, New York state, and elsewhere.
  • An immediate and substantial increase in the minimum wage, and the creation of an independent commission to determine and recommend an appropriate minimum living wage by region.
  • Comprehensive campaign finance reform, including a constitutional amendment to overturn the Citizens Uniteddecision; ultimately strengthening democracy by moving to low-cost, publicly financed campaigns.
  • Legislation that ends the practice of partisan gerrymandering (should the Supreme Court uphold the practice), and the establishment of independent committees to redraw congressional and other districts.
  • Legislation that bans discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity or expression in employment, housing, and places of public accommodation.
  • Nationwide automatic voter registration, similar to the system recently instituted in Illinois and eight other states.
  • Removal of marijuana as a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act, and ultimately the cessation of all federal criminal regulation of cannabis.
  • Legislative support and strengthening of public schools (PK-12), including protecting the federal Department of Education, increased Title I funding, and the formation of partnerships with teachers to ensure that resources are properly allocated in order to abrogate and reverse the de facto segregation of schools by race and income.
  • An immediate and varied strategy to address the opioid crisis, including a nationwide prescription drug monitoring program, increased availability of mental health/telehealth services (especially in rural areas), and increased access to safe, natural, non-addictive opioid alternatives.
  • Abolition of private prisons and a prohibition on involvement by private, for-profit corporations in any way within the carceral system, particularly with regard to inmate healthcare.
  • Defend a woman's right to make her own health decisions and support policies proven to lower demand for abortion while being resolute in the commitment to reproductive freedom for all; safe, legal, and accessible abortion; repeal of the Hyde Amendment; fully subsidized coverage of contraception as well as quality pre-/post-natal care.
  • Comprehensive immigration reform, including transparency within the detention system, a prohibition on moving accused immigrants to detention facilities more than 100 miles from their place of apprehension, a path to citizenship for certain qualified undocumented immigrants and their families, and a prohibition on involvement by private, for-profit corporations in any way within the immigration detention system.
  • Abolition of the federal death penalty. It doesn't do any good, it's too expensive, there's too much potential for error, and citizens should never be willing to give the state the power to kill its own people.
  • Fully subsidized public higher education nationwide, under a system similar to those in Tennessee and New York State, through a baccalaureate degree or substantial equivalent; this would begin in community and technical schools and gradually expand to all public universities.
  • Abolition of the electoral college.
  • Legislative strengthening and increased enforcement of antitrust/anti-monopoly laws, particularly including laws specifically designed to restore stability to small local businesses by breaking up financial, agricultural, pharmaceutical, media, and other monopolies.
  • A legislative reversal of the case of McKleskey v. Kemp, which keeps civil rights lawyers from bringing actions to correct systemic race discrimination within the criminal justice system.
  • A guaranteed public-jobs program that provides meaningful work to those who are willing and able to take it, primarily in rebuilding and improving American roads, bridges, public transportation, energy grids, rural broadband access, and in environmental cleanup/preservation; ultimately the program would aim to result in 100% (voluntary) employment over time.
  • Establishment of a universal basic income (see, for example, the beginnings of UBI recently enacted in Hawaii), to work in tandem with the guaranteed jobs program within a projected time frame.
  • Legislative strengthening of the EPA, including increased enforcement powers to deal with Flint-type crises, to ensure breathable air, drinkable water, and clean soil.
  • Establishment of a separate, politically independent agency tasked with immediately addressing the urgency of global climate change via geoengineering and other innovations, and given broad enforcement powers to address the root causes (e.g., deforestation and irresponsible energy consumption).
  • Simplification of agricultural tax policy and incentivization for farmers to help eliminate food deserts in Indiana.
  • Protection and strengthening of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and expanding its reach to cover important individual consumer purchases such as automobiles.
  • Protection and strengthening of labor unions, including vigorous enforcement of the National Labor Relations Act both privately and through the National Labor Relations Board, and enacting stronger measures to prevent retaliation against workers who wish to organize.
I fully understand and recognize that these goals will not be achieved overnight. But I believe they are achievable. We have to start with a vision of what we want for America 25 years or more in the future and have a clear plan for how we intend to get there. Real change starts with the belief that a better country is possible, and the will to start working on it together. We can never make these ideas mainstream, we can never convince anyone that these ideas are right, if we keep treating them like pipe dreams ourselves. We can be incremental in our methods, but we must be revolutionary in our aspirations.

Thursday, October 25, 2012

Shelli Yoder and Todd Young "spar" in debate.

In which there is a reference to craft beer, natch.

Indiana’s 9th District hopefuls spar, Jobs, health care central issues for Young, Yoder exchange, by Ryan Trares (Daily Journal of Johnson County)

... Young said the way to foster business and make new jobs is to scale back regulations and let the free market work.

“This campaign can be summed up in one word — trust. Are we going to trust our large, interventionist government to get our economy running? Or are we going to trust the American people,” he said.

Yoder agreed that the power to spark jobs lies with the people. She advocated more support for entrepreneurs and small businesses as opposed to big corporations. Public-private partnerships could be used to foster innovative new businesses in green energy and biotechnology. Where government could help would be to invest in infrastructure, including improving bridges, ensuring airports are sound, and helping get broadband technology to all people.

“It’s become a social justice issue that people have been cut out of the 21st century because of where they live,” she said.

Monday, October 22, 2012

Courier-Journal and Publican back Shelli Yoder.

The most annoying part about owning a small business is keeping the restrooms clean.

A close second is the knowledge that we’ll generally be at a competitive disadvantage compared to the chains, our chief competition, both in terms of economies of scale in daily purchasing and providing employee “benefits” like health insurance.

My viewpoint hasn’t changed: Access to health care is among the most significant aspects of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It should be regarded as is a right, not a variable benefit dependent on a roll of the dice. If all of us share the costs rather than a few, isn’t this state of equality the very essence of a favorable economy of scale, one that “benefits” all of us, and not just a few?

It is delightful that the Courier-Journal, a bosom friend to the Southern Indiana oligarchs when it comes to shilling for unnecessary bridges, has endorsed the candidate for our 9th district congressional seat most inclined to enrage Southern Indiana oligarchs: Shelli Yoder. The newspaper’s endorsement focuses on contrasting views of “Obamacare” between Yoder and the incumbent, Todd Young.

We don’t know whether Mr. Young, 40, of Bloomington, is hearing similar stories. He declined an invitation to meet with The Courier-Journal editorial board.

But his record speaks for itself. In addition to seeking to repeal health care reform, Mr. Young, a member of the House budget committee, supports the budget plan of Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney’s running mate, which would drastically cut federal spending and reshape Medicare into a “voucher” plan for senior citizens.

I’m supporting Yoder, too, and for the same reasons. I genuinely enjoyed meeting Young and having a beer with him, and I’d happily do it again, but I profoundly disagree with his political platform. During the same span of time, I’ve run into Yoder at least four times, and the most substantive of our chats was about health care. I’ll tell you what I told her.

I personally resent the view so common among Southern Indiana’s oligarchs that small business owners must march in anti-social lock step by expressing stereotypical reactions toward taxation and regulation, to the extent of unthinkingly supporting whatever candidate fluffs their insecurities most effectively. Yes, it is true that taxes and regulations often grate, but the problem with pandering on this basis is that removing so-called burdens from my own business’s back so often places them on someone else’s, and buries problems without solving them.

We’ve had numerous employees over the years without insurance or any reasonable prospect of health care short of the emergency room and subsequent indigence claims. We’ve tried our best to provide insurance for some employees, but never have been able to come anywhere close to helping all of them. Perhaps we would come closer to the universal if the expenditure were for supplemental benefits, not primary insurance. At any rate, it is my belief that in America, the power of the collective easily can be harnessed to begin resolving the crisis, leaving individuals and businesses free to concentrate on their own lives, aims and goals.

It this makes me a socialist, so be it. It’s never been a pejorative to me, anyway.

If a work ethic means anything in politics, then Yoder is going to come very close to winning a race in a district so gerrymandered to preclude such an oligarch-unfriendly outcome. I wish her luck.

Monday, June 25, 2012

John Griffin Miller: "As Paul Simon said in Mrs. Robinson, 'any way you look at it you lose.'”

Let's let John Miller tell his story. Whatever your opinion of John, there are numerous topics for fruitful discussion included therein.

How To Lose in Politics By Telling the Truthby John Griffin Miller

Or how I tried to get either side (or any side) to accept reality
and work for their own (and everyone else’s) best interests.


 ... Actually, the media and the electorate couldn’t have cared less about the election, preferring to wait until minutes before the election and allow a tiny fraction of the voters to make the decisions for them. As Paul Simon said in Mrs. Robinson, “any way you look at it you lose.”

I like to blame the media, since they are the gatekeepers of information, those with the time and wherewithal to present the important facts, although with less and less time and less and less freedom to do their jobs effectively. But voters who don’t demand more from the fourth estate share some of the blame, too. However, the deeper, underlying rationale for the problem is that all parties, and the corporate media, and the voters, and the elected officials themselves, like the system just the way it is. In my sermons to voters, the party functionaries, the media, I always got the same blank stare, which had a couple possible explanations ...

Saturday, March 03, 2012

John Miller is running for Congress.

John Miller has filed to run for 9th District US Congress as an "American-style Democrat." Details can be found at his web site.
John Griffin Miller for Congress

John Griffin Miller has been a nonprofit manager for about 10 years following a 25-year career in executive retail management. With experience in church governance, purchasing, construction, information technology and human resources, he works for a military charity near Fort Knox, after building houses for low-income families in southern Indiana for 8 years.

He is 55 and the father of four grown children. He lives in Corydon.

Monday, May 03, 2010

Alert "Hot Wheels": Schansberg makes his 9th district pick.

Predictions, observations and questions about the GOP's highest profile contest tomorrow, from a former candidate and current (gasp) Travis Hankins supporter. No spoilers here, so click on the link to see who Eric thinks will win:

Who's going to win in the 9th (District)?, by Eric Schansberg (Schansblog).

We've had a unique GOP primary here in the 9th District of Indiana -- presumably, the only time a five-time candidate has gone up against two serious campaigners.

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Schansberg to eschew Libertarian run for Congress, will work for GOP's Hankins.

Tribune sez:

Schansberg ditching Libertarian run to chair Hankins campaign (by Daniel Suddeath).

A former suitor of Indiana’s 9th District U.S. House seat, Eric Schansberg chose not to run in 2010 because he found a candidate that reflects his core political principles ...

... But he isn’t totally exiled from the race. Schansberg has volunteered for Republican Travis Hankins’ team, and is serving as campaign chairman ...

... Hankins emphasizes issues that Schansberg also touted during his two runs at the House: Reduction of the size of government, instilling Congressional term limits and like Schansberg, Hankins is pro-life on abortion.
Schansberg elaborates on the forthcoming Republican primary at his blog:

The 9th District Republican primary: an overview.

One last thing: Does (Mike) Sodrel's entry help (Todd) Young or Hankins more so? On the one hand, Sodrel divides the establishment vote (at least somewhat). On the other hand, Sodrel divides the segment of voters who are most interested in social conservatism.

Monday, January 11, 2010

Do it to us one more time: Hill vs. Hot Wheels, coming to a vomitorium near you.

From the C-J, and for the dreary, annoying record.

Sodrel to run for Congress again; will face GOP rivals

Discuss if you wish. Personally, I cannot understand any conceivable benefit to the regional GOP of having Sodrel once again delay the development of younger, more capable candidates, but if that's what it takes to drive another stake through his political heart, then so be it.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Open thread: In the 9th, Hill vs. Sodrel IV enlivened by the Libertarian.

Only a handful of days remain until the conclusion of a seemingly endless political campaign that surely must have started in 2002 … and, in fact, did.

That’s when Mike Sodrel challenged Baron Hill for the first time, and lost, setting the stage for a successful rematch, then another loss, and now a fourth effort. In the end, there have been enough sequels to embarrass even Rocky Balboa.

Considering the Libertarian candidate Eric Schansberg's second 9th district bid, my personal 9th district electoral strategy remains as it was in 2006, when I gleefully paraphrased Abraham Lincoln:

"If I could vote for Hill to beat Sodrel I would do it and if I could vote for Schansberg to beat Sodrel I would do it and if I could leave all of them alone and skip the election to beat Sodrel I would do that. The thing is to beat Sodrel.”

Two recent NAC articles considered a few of the angles:

Indiana's 9th district contest: A million miles on a set of retreads? Are you kidding?

Schansberg: " ... Nose-holders in both parties now have an option which would allow them to sleep better at night."

Granted, we may already have beaten this one to death, but comments are welcomed just in case.

ELECTION Q&A: U.S. Congress 9th District (New Albany Tribune)

Baron Hill for Congress (D - incumbent)
Mike Sodrel for Congress (R)
Eric Schansberg for Congress (L)

Monday, October 20, 2008

Schansberg: " ... Nose-holders in both parties now have an option which would allow them to sleep better at night."

With the Libertarian candidate's permission, here is Eric Schansberg's unedited response to my post on Sunday, Indiana's 9th district contest: A million miles on a set of retreads? Are you kidding?

---

In a word: an eloquent beat-down of Sodrel; "palpable resignation" in choosing Hill; and considerable respect with disagreement on some issues for me.

Thanks for your kind words!

Thoughts on two of the labels you used...

You refer to my "fundamentalist religious orientation". As an aside: is this a good time for a reference to "choice" vs. "was I born that way"? ;-) In any case, I'd be more careful throwing around a label like that.

First, it's not true about me in general terms. Anyone who knows me in terms of my theology and Christian walk would be hard-pressed to make that pejorative stick.

Second, you connect my fundamentalism to my views on abortion. Again, I'd take care with that assertion as well-- if one's views are based on a bizarre view of a sacred text (the Constitution) and decades-old science (on when life begins).

More broadly, and I don't know you well enough to say this about you, but many in your crowd suffer from various forms of fundamentalism with respect to the State, Nature, and so on.

And then there's the term "progressive". You might want to check the Progressive Handbook on this. But I don't think you're allowed to claim the label when you publicly support a candidate who does nothing substantive to get us out of Iraq, says nothing about the 15.3% tax on every dollar earned by the working poor, nothing about the negative rate-of-return on Social Security for African-Americans, and so on. I'll admit that Hill seems quite strong on keeping our kids away from porn and supporting our veterans. But that hardly seems like enough for a "progressive" to actively promote the status quo.

Instead of progressive, I think you mean "pragmatist". Of course, I need voters to be more principled. And with Hill cruising to victory with a 11-15% lead, nose-holders in both parties now have an option which would allow them to sleep better at night.

I'd love to win. That said, assuming a second-tier miracle is not in the offing, reaching 10% is within reach. (We were at 7% in the last poll.) Reaching double-digits would hopefully lead to a national discussion of third-party candidates (including various types of "progressives")-- something all of us, presumably, want to see.

Don't waste your vote this time. Vote Schansberg for Congress on November 4th.

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Indiana's 9th district contest: A million miles on a set of retreads? Are you kidding?

If you happen to be reading from afar, be aware that my blog and I both reside in Indiana’s 9th congressional district, which for much of my life – 34 years, to be exact – was represented by Lee Hamilton, a Democrat.

When Hamilton retired in 1999, he was succeeded by Baron Hill, also a Democrat, but one that cannot be identified with the party’s liberal wing.

(Excuse me if I err in taking for granted that such a beast even exists in the American two-party, non-genuine-choice system.)

Hill served two congressional terms before being defeated by Republican Mike Sodrel in 2004. Sodrel, a trucking magnate, actually lives just outside New Albany, a fact that is largely meaningless, but one that I diligently report in an effort to find something favorable to write about the mercifully short-lived political phenomenon of Sodrelism.

In truth, when it comes to Sodrel’s unapologetically Falangist political orientation, there is very little positive to say. During his two years on Capitol Hill, Sodrel’s fawning fealty to the miserably failed George W. Bush bordered on the pathological. With no visible prompting, he could be counted on to prostrate himself before King George in what amounted to an unappetizing display of groveling reminiscent of the Ottoman Empire at its zenith.

Sodrel’s running yet again, and I see that the man dubbed by his foes as “Millionaire Mike” is selling himself (no puns, please) as “Million Mile” Mike in his recent television ads.

Considering Sodrel’s numerous previous bids for the seat, why not “Million Yawn Mike”?

I prefer “A Million Votes with the Discredited Bush Mike.”

Or, to recognize the storybook rags to riches to sags tale: “Million Mile Farce” to Washington … and back again.

As is the case with John McCain, Sodrel and by far the very worst president in American history – a graveside giggle by Warren G. Harding is permitted at this juncture – have been politically joined at the hip in ways that right-wingers would decry as blatantly pornographic if all involved were San Franciscans wearing leather and chains.

Did Sodrel vote against the interests of W even once during his appropriately shrunken congressional tenure? Perhaps, but the percentage of agreement surely exceeded 95% – and that’s roughly 90% too often.

What I don’t understand is why the GOP is not considering longer-term electoral interests in this race. Not that I want a theocratic Republican to win, but can any of our resident pachyderm apologists explain the tactical wisdom of Sodrel’s latest bid for Congress?

Perhaps Sodrel hasn’t yet pole vaulted past the suggested sell-by date as obviously as McCain has, though he’s rapidly gaining ground in the competition to be chronologically irrelevant. So, is the party just buying time by running a putrefying political retread in a season when the electoral (read: economic) climate probably is not conducive?

But why not let a “next generation” candidate get his or her feet wet this time, then be infinitely better placed to contest the seat in 2010?

Hill should win, and that’s good enough, even if it isn’t as good as it might be. The persistent problem for progressives in this moribund district is that Hill must always lean center-right to remain viable in a constituency that merrily views Attila the Hun as a flaming liberal.

Hill’s name came up in conversation recently, and I was asked, “Do you like him?”

My response: “I like him way more than Sodrel.”

Still, the fact that local Republicans regard Hill as Nancy Pelosi’s illegitimate sibling remains reason enough to reelect him, enthusiastically or otherwise.

I might add that I genuinely respect Eric Schansberg, the soon-to-be perennial 9th district Libertarian candidate, and find his views far more palatable than Sodrel’s. As a third party nominee, the educator and economist has the luxury to gleefully dissect the positions of both major party bidders.

Unfortunately, Schansberg’s fundamentalist religious orientation (in particular, a strident anti-abortion stance) effectively dissuades me from supporting him even if his presence in the race immeasurably enlivens the economic debate.

His isn’t so much an endorsement as a preference expressed with palpable resignation, and so I’ll be voting for Hill. I’ll continue to read Schansberg’s blogs and wish him further success in academia. Sodrel should retire from politics and focus on the family business, and the GOP should find someone younger and more capable.

Gee, thanks for asking.