Missouri Senate Race in New York Times Video

Yes sir, our own Senate race between Claire McCaskill and Josh Hawley is highlighted in a New York Times YouTube video presently. It asks a great question.

Can Claire McCaskill Hold On to Her Senate Seat in Missouri?

It's not a big surprise they'd cover this and for a couple reasons, at least. First, it's thought to be a close race. Second, it could be pivotal in the Republicans' keeping or losing control of the Senate.

I'll let the video speak for itself.


Vote, folks.

Get out there Tuesday and vote.

Senator Claire on getting American jobs back

I wrote our Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill on doing away with tax breaks for offshoring manufacturing and other work that could and should, of course, be done here in the States.

It seems difficult to believe our government representatives would have ever--EVER--given tax cuts to companies so they could offshore manufacturing and even profits but hey, that's what you get from a system that allows the wealthy and corporations to give campaign contributions (read: bribes) to our legislators for whatever legislation those wealthy people and corporations might want.

So, with that, Sen. McCaskill wrote me back the following:

For the past several decades, outsourcing has devastated many communities in the United States.  The jobs that have been most affected by outsourcing tend to be jobs with good wages and benefits, including many manufacturing jobs.  Plant closures can devastate communities, especially small communities where there may not be another major employer. 

And here's where it got good:

Unfortunately, tax and other policies in the United States actually can serve to encourage outsourcing, something I consider an outrage.  I am proud to co-sponsor S. 337, the Bring Jobs Home Act.  If enacted, this bill would cancel tax breaks for companies that move work overseas, including deductions for moving and other expenses.  The bill would also create a 20% tax credit for companies that move work to the United States.  The Bring Jobs Home Act has been referred to the Senate Committee on Finance, of which I am not a member, where it awaits further consideration.

You may be interested to know that I also believe that the American people should be able to know which companies are planning to outsource jobs, so that they can use their knowledge to make informed decisions in their communities and in the marketplace. 

That's why I introduced S. 3425, the Offshoring Notification Act, in the 112th Congress. 

This legislation would require any company planning to move jobs overseas to let affected workers know at least two-months in advance.  I also co-sponsored S. 3392, the Outsourcing Accountability Act, which would require big public companies to disclose in their financial statements the number of workers they employ in the U.S. and how many they employ overseas. 

So there are two things, at minimum, this Senator has done for us, the people and working and middle- and lower-classes.  Two things this Democrat has done for us.

Two big things that separate the Democrats from the Republicans, to be sure. 

So, if you're reading this (either of you), you might contact Sen. McCaskill and tell her you support her and this legislation and, more importantly, you should contact Missouri's other Senator, Roy Blunt, and tell him he should support it, too.

Cutting tax deductions for offshoring manufacturing--and profits--would go a long way to bringing jobs back home to our shores.

To us.

 

Senator McCaskill? Your vote today?

I could hardly believe what I read today about our Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill and her vote on the Farm Bill:

Which Democrats Just Voted against Food Stamp Funding?

From this article at The Daily Kos (bolding added for emphasis):

The Senate began its process of amending the farm bill this afternoon.  Fom what I can tell from the Senate website, as of now, three amendments have received a vote so far:

--Sen. Maria Cantwell's (D-WA) amendment "to allow Indian tribes to participate in certain soil and water conservation programs" passed 87-8.  The eight "No" votes were all Republicans: John Cornyn (TX), Ted Cruz (TX), Ron Johnson (R-WI), Mark Kirk (R-IL), Mike Lee (R-WY), Rand Paul (R-KY), Marco Rubio (R-FL), and Pat Toomey (R-PA).

--Sen. Pat Roberts's (R-KS) amendment to cut an additional $12 billion from the supplemental food assistance program (SNAP, or food stamps) failed 58-40.  Three  Republicans broke party lines against it:  Susan Collins (ME), Lisa Murkowski (AK), and Roger Wicker (MS).

--However, the amendment on which I would like to focus attention here is that of Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY).  Gillibrand proposed to restore the $4 billion that the current farm bill--designed by Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and Thad Cochran (R-MS)--cuts from SNAP (Supplemental Food Assistance, known as food stamps--as I indicated above) and to offset this restored funding with a limitation on crop insurance reimbursements. Our current crop insurance subsidies benefit large farms at the expense of smaller ones and are one of the many glaring manifestations of corporate welfare that Congress never fixes.  Gillibrand's amendment would, in essence, cut corporate welfare spending to restore social welfare spending.  Did this progressive proposal pass?  Not even close.  It failed 26-70:  not even a majority of Democrats voted for it.

Which Democrats voted against restoring food stamps--voting against veterans, children, seniors, and struggling to get by?

And that's when we find out that yes, as a matter of fact, our own Senator McCaskill voted against it.

I'm not saying absolutely here that she and all the Democrats who voted against it shouldn't have, necessarily.  I'd just like a good, intelligent, honest answer why they did.

This seems as thought it was a vote FOR the common worker AND would have been against corporate welfare.

What was not to like?

Then, coincidentally, I saw this New York Times editorial piece today:

There Was a Time When Ending Hunger Was a National Goal for Republicans and Democrats

What happened to us?  What happened to America?

It takes our Senator McCaskill from Missouri to set things straight in Washington

Perhaps you heard about this?

It seems certain executives in Washington would still be getting bonuses--large ones--even now, what with this sequestration in effect, supposedly cutting budgets of our federal government.

What the heck, right?

People are being laid off in all kinds of offices and work but another already-well-paid group gets bonuses?

Does that make any sense?

Naturally not.

So what one Senator rides in and proposes to right this wrong?

You got it, our very own Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill:

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) speaks during a press conference in May, 2011. McCaskill introduced a bill Friday that would eliminate bonuses for members of the Senior Executive Service during sequestration. (Photo: Geoff Holtzman / Talk Radio News Service)

Despite Sequester, High-Level Federal Executives Slated to Get Bonuses - Truthout

Washington - An elite group of federal employees is set to receive cash bonuses despite this year’s automatic budget cuts, according to a report that a Senate subcommittee issued Friday.

The report revealed that members of the government’s highly paid Senior Executive Service - who make up less than 1 percent of the federal workforce - had received more than $340 million in bonuses from 2008 through 2011. The bonuses came on top of annual salaries that ranged from $119,000 to $179,000.

In a process known as sequestration, $85 billion in across-the-board federal spending cuts took effect March 1, forcing the government to slash services and furlough workers. A month later, the Obama administration froze bonuses for the vast majority of federal workers.

But by law, agencies still must pay bonuses to Senior Executive Service employees who meet certain performance criteria, the report said.

Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill, a Democrat, introduced a bill Friday that would eliminate bonuses for members of the Senior Executive Service during sequestration. McCaskill leads the Senate Subcommittee on Financial and Contracting Oversight, which produced the report.

“The idea that some of the highest-paid federal government employees could be getting bonuses while others are being furloughed is outrageous,” McCaskill said in a statement. “This legislation will ensure that doesn’t happen.”

Senator Claire McCaskill.

You go, girl.

(And who's that other Senator we're supposed to also have? What's his name?  And what's he do?)

Notes on sacrifice

Notes:

First, it's great to see our own Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill joined this group and effort to give back to their country and people. It's more than just symbolic.

Second, the only "R" after any of these names belongs to one Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel.

Missouri's Senators working together!

Yahoo!

I'd never seen this before.

Maybe it's happened but I don't know of any instances of it. This from Senator Claire McCaskill's Facebook  page today:

Claire and Senator Blunt brought federal agencies together yesterday to help resolve a decades-long dispute that’s been delaying a project critical to families and businesses in the Bootheel. The Senators pledged to continue working together to resolved outstanding issues and bring a conclusion to these delays.

Now, if our Senators and legislators in Washington, particularly, but in Jefferson City, too, could only come up with a jobs bill, one that would repair, modernize and widen I-70 from St. Louis on the East to Kansas City on the West, so it isn't so dangerous, we'd really have some progress.

More on the meeting here: http://1.usa.gov/YZE9Xd

and here:  McCaskill seeks action on delayed St. John's Bayou project

Apparently, Todd Akin's staff can't make him not talk

He's at it again. Some more.



Did you get that? Republican, Missouri Senate candidate Todd Akin said “The bottom line is, you’ve got a conservative House, you got a bunch of Socialists in the Senate and you got a Commie president… that’s where we are.”

Surely Missourians are far brighter than to elect this clown to represent us in Washington.

Right?

Link: http://liberal-agenda.com/2012/10/the-ridiculousness-escalates-todd-akin-you-got-a-commie-for-a-president/

So, Congress is back from their 5 week recess

Okay, no complaints here about Congress getting 5 weeks more vacation time. This is going to be a conversation on what needs to happen, what lies ahead of them and what they need to do.

The Congress needs to come up with a budget compromise before the end of their year or we'll hit what has been too-frequently been called a "fiscal cliff" and it will be nothing but ugly.

News yesterday:

Moody's set to downgrade US without budget deal

Moody's says US government debt rating would be cut if no federal budget deal is reached

NEW YORK (AP) -- The U.S. government's debt rating could be heading for the "fiscal cliff" along with the federal budget.

Moody's Investors Service on Tuesday said it would likely cut its "Aaa" rating on U.S. government debt, probably by one notch, if budget negotiations fail.

If Congress and the White House don't reach a budget deal, about $1.2 trillion in spending cuts and tax increases will automatically kick in starting Jan. 2, a scenario that's been dubbed the "fiscal cliff," because it is likely to send the economy back into recession and drive up unemployment.

Of course, it's an election year, as we all know, and the Republicans don't want to have this president be anything close to successful so they seem to be flirting with the idea of not compromising with the other political party:

House Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, said he's not confident that Congress can reach a deal and avoid a downgrade. No serious negotiations are expected until after the November elections.

Did you get that? "No serious negotiations are expected until after the November elections."

That is some kind of disgusting.

It's irresponsible. It's unacceptable.

It doesn't matter what your political party or leanings, this has to do, purely, with doing their work, doing the "right thing" and getting and keeping this country going forward on its work.

It's mid-September and Congress isn't even going to sit down to seriously TALK about our national, federal budget until after our November elections?

That is pushing insanity.

Email your Conressional representative now, in both houses, the Senate and the House, and let them know this is utterly unacceptable to you and that we need a budget and solutions sooner, rather than after the election: http://www.contactingthecongress.org/

Big, ugly news from the Right Wing: disgusting

I am, once more, repelled and disgusted by the latest news this evening:

Sen. Claire McCaskill Getting Beefed-Up Security After Tea Party Activist Declares ‘We Have To Kill The Claire Bear’

They wonder why we loathe such ignorance.

And them.

Then, secondarily, there is also this headline hitting today:

Greene County, Virginia GOP Group's Newsletter Calls For 'Armed Revolution' If Obama Is Reelected

This is just more dangerous, stupid, irresponsible talk.

Fortunately, it's also illegal.

Whatever the details, this is, they are, just vile and disgusting, small people.

Links: http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/05/08/480519/claire-mccaskill-death-threat/; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/08/greene-county-virginia-gop-obama-revolution_n_1501510.html

Claire on Colbert tonight (it rhymes)

I just got an email from my good Senator Claire McCaskill's campaign manager, telling me Claire will be on The Colbert Report this evening.

That's great news to me.

Two great things at once--Stephen Colbert and my "good Senator" (as opposed to my bad, other one).

The thing is, though, their note cracked me up. Check out what they wrote and said to us out here:

"Tonight at 10:30 CT, Claire will go up against Stephen Colbert on The Colbert Report in a debate about secret political contributions that fund Karl Rove's organization and others like it.

As fans of the Report know, Colbert has been a champion of the political system that allows unlimited anonymous political contributions from corporations and billionaires – so much so that he’s created his own 501(c)(4) through a company called Anonymous Shell Corporation."

Wha?

"Colbert has been a champion of the political system that allows unlimited anonymous political contributions from corporations and billionaires..."?

Holy cow.

They couldn't be more wrong.

Do they not get that the ENTIRE SHOW is satire--political satire?

Do they not get that Stephen Colbert is doing a complete sendup of the system and ridiculing it for the absurd, broken mess of a system that it is?

From reading that promotional email, I have to come to the conclusion that they do not.

Wow.

That was--no, is--a stunner.

Get a clue, Claire.

Apparently you need to get a staff that is either more aware or brighter or, what? Under 75 years old?

Go get 'em, Claire

A Senator Fights Back "Claire McCaskill challenges outside political ads, but her voice may be drowned out"

And we know this to be disgustingly too true.

We've seen the Right Wing and Republicans gearing up for a big fight over the Senator's seat this Fall. Naturally, with the Supreme Court's ugly, ignorant and so-wrong "Citizen's United" ruling, opening up unlimited corporate and other coffers, these groups are going after all the vulnerable Democratic candidates for office they can.

Claire McCaskill is certainly one of those, sadly enough.

In spite of the fact that she's more standing up for the "little guy" and the working man and woman of the country, she's going to have to fight tooth and nail, so to speak, in order to keep her seat.

Her very Republican, Right Wing counterpart in the Senate, Roy Blunt, meanwhile, is fighting to have government have the first and last words on women's very personal, reproductive rights. He's also fighting for "Big Oil" and for a Canadian company, remarkably enough, so they can transfer their dirty tar sands oil from Canada, all across the US, down the Houston and our Southernmost states so it can go out to world oil markets, yet Ms. McCaskill has to fight for her seat.

It's disgusting.

We, as Missourians, have to stand up and make sure Claire is not surreptitiously ousted from the Senate this Fall.

She's not perfect, no--who of us, is? But she's working for us, for Missourians--the average guy and gal--and we need her in the Senate.

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/opinion/sunday/a-senator-fights-back.html?_r=1

At least one Missouri Senator supports fairer taxation

Fortunately and again, no surprise, but at least one of our Missouri Senators is wise and fair enough to have voted for the "Buffet Rule" for fairer taxation in the US yesterday. Our own Senator Claire McCaskill had wisdom and sense enough to vote for this bill that would have the wealthy of the nation pay at least what the rest of us--the middle- and lower-class of the country--pay in taxes, at least by percentage.

A little of what she so rightly said: "Those who think the solution to our debt crisis is to force middle class families to pay a higher tax rate than multi-millionaires, while expanding tax giveaways to those same multi-millionaires, are not serious about tackling our nation's fiscal problems." Go get 'em, Claire. Link: http://mccaskill.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=1533

Senator McCaskill, fighting the good fight

No government representative is perfect any more than any other human is. They're either doing a good job or they're not. It's my contention that US Senator Claire McCaskill is, in fact, doing a good job. Right now, she is in the news, for instance: McCaskill Continues Fight to end Automatic Pay Raises for Congress As part of agenda to Clean up Congress, McCaskill again calls for Congress to pass her bill to end automatic raises for Congress. Years ago, when this first took place and Congress voted into law the idea of automatic pay raises for themselves because they didn't want the issue to keep coming up--knowing we, the people, would virtually always be against the idea of raises for them--I know I was appalled. How is anyone going to vote, when you have the chance, but for a raise for yourself? And an automatic pay raise for yourself? How perfect is that? Who doesn't want that? And who but Congress has that option? Almost solely, they have this option alone. It was and is disgusting. It really should be stopped and Senator McCaskill is trying to get us back there, along with her effort to kill "earmarks" in our financing system. Both great ideas. So good on you, Senator, thanks very much. We appreciate these efforts. Please, by all means, keep it up. Link: http://mccaskill.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=1495

Senator McCaskill, pushing for accountability at the Pentagon

Our own Senator Claire McCaskill posted a fantastic column today on her Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/notes/senator-claire-mccaskill/the-time-is-now-to-reform-wartime-contracting/386134884732785), calling for the Pentagon and Department of Defense to get far more responsible and accountable with its "wartime contracting." Who can't be behind that? Our military gets billions upon billions of dollars from us, the citizens of the country, and it seems the least they could do is to be responsible with it and spend it wisely and with tight accountability. As it is, far too many millions and billions of dollars get either lost completey--nearly unbelievably enough--or just spent poorly. That actually ends up weakening even the military itself, let alone the nation.

It seems that she--Senator McCaskill--and Senator Jim Webb of Virginia, a combat veteran and former Secretary of the Navy have teamed up to propose S2139, "the Comprehensive Contingency Contracting Reform Act of 2012. The legislation strengthens contracting practices and improves accountability across government by: ■Elevating oversight responsibility, improving management structures, expanding planning requirements, and reforming contracting practices during overseas military contingencies; ■Requiring the government to identify how it will pay for military operations overseas; ■And improving the contracting process through greater transparency, competition, and professional education. So good for you, Senator McCaskill, and good for us. Thank you for this and keep more of this kind of thing coming, especially if you could make the next step cutting Defense spending by great amounts and as soon as possible.

Senator McCaskill keeps doing great things

First she made herself known as our own local auditor of government, helping to keep people honest and spending legal--and lower. Then, as our Senator, Claire McCaskill pushed for killing the spending, wasteful "earmarks" of our federal budgets. Now, Senator McCaskill is pushing for and introducing a bill "that would give President Barack Obama – and future presidents – line-item veto power" over the budget. And thank goodness. Everyone talks about reducing spending. Senator McCaskill keeps proposing good, sensible, workable ways we could--and should--reduce spending. Thank you, Senator McCaskill, from one Democrat to another. Link: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/02/10/3420610/mccaskill-introducing-line-item.html

Missouri on the list of "10 Senate seats most likely to change parties in 2012"

The Washington Post's "The Fixx" blog has come out with it's list of, as you see above, the "10 Senate seats most likely to change parties" this year and Senator McCaskill's seat is one of them, unfortunately and, honestly, no surprise. What they have to say: "4. Missouri (D): Republicans continue to insist that Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) is in deep trouble while Democrats insist that she is inoculating herself from President Obama and her party — look at her recent call for a permanent earmark ban — and that a lackluster field of GOP candidates could save her. Of the GOP field, National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (Texas) recently told the Wall Street Journal: “We have a three-way primary, and it really depends on who’s nominated, whether they are able to withstand what they know is coming at them in a general election.” (Previous ranking: 3) If there's anything remotely positive about this is that we used to be ranked 3rd most likely to have it happen. It's backed off a little bit, anyway. Here's hoping they're wrong. Link to original article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/could-2012-be-the-most-competitive-senate-election-in-years/2011/12/16/gIQAXEtlyO_blog.html

A disgusting vote from our Senators today

I can hardly believe what I'm reading but both Senators Roy Blunt AND Claire McCaskill voted today in the Senate to authorize the indefinite suspension of habeus corpus. I am so disgusted at this news--and at both of them--I can hardly speak. For a refresher, habeus corpus is Latin for "you may have the body". In the law, it "is a writ, or legal action, through which a prisoner can be released from unlawful detention... It has historically been an important legal instrument safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary state action. It is a writ requiring a person to be brought before a judge." The writ oh habeus corpus has long been a strong underpinning of our judicial system so people would not be held indefinitely, without being charged with some crime so they could defend themselves. That these two--and 59 other--senators would vote in favor of maintaining this is, I think, unconscionable. Fortunately, regardless of the outcome in Congress, President Obama has vowed to veto it. Here's hoping it fails completely, utterly, as it should. It should be pointed out that habeus corpus was first done away with, to set this up, in the George W. Bush administration, no surprise, what with their paranoia and disregard for the Constitution. Links: http://wearechangetv.us/2011/11/61-senators-betrayed-you-today-they-authorized-the-indefinite-suspension-of-habeus-corpus/#ixzz1fDOeH9Wg; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/29/senate-votes-to-let-military-detain-americans-indefinitely_n_1119473.html; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeus_corpus

Sen. Claire comes through again

Hoorah for Senator McCaskill. She's going after "earmarks" in Congress again. This out today: Toomey, McCaskill to call for permanent earmark ban Sens. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) will announce their proposal Wednesday morning at a Capitol news conference. The move comes one year after McCaskill and then-Sen.-elect Toomey penned a joint USA Today op-ed supporting a temporary moratorium on earmarks. For a definition: "an earmark is a legislative (especially congressional) provision that directs approved funds to be spent on specific projects, or that directs specific exemptions from taxes or mandated fees." The really bad thing about earmarks is that they are so "under the radar" and virtually unaccountable to the legislation process. With all the over-spending we have and debt, this makes far too much sense and is long overdue. Links: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/2chambers/post/toomey-mccaskill-to-call-for-permanent-earmark-ban/2011/11/29/gIQAlZAu8N_blog.html; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earmark_(politics)

Missouri pivotal in 2012 elections

From The Washington Post this morning:

Nine states expected to be central to battle for Senate, presidency

By Chris Cillizza, Sunday, March 20, 9:04 PM

The battle for the presidency and the Senate in 2012 are deeply intertwined, with as many as nine states expected to be central to both contests.

The national map shows four competitive Senate races featuring Democratic incumbents in states that have been at or near the center of the race for the presidency in the past several elections and will be so again in the next one.

In Florida, Sen. Bill Nelson is certain to face his toughest challenge since winning his seat in 2000. Sensing his vulnerability — and the importance of the state to the White House’s 2012 electoral calculus — President Obama held a fundraising event for Nelson earlier this month and Vice President Biden will do so this week.

The story is the same in Missouri, where Sen. Claire McCaskill, a strong Obama ally, is seeking a second term, and in Ohio, where Sen. Sherrod Brown is up for reelection. Both states were heavily targeted by Obama in 2008, and they will be again by both him and the eventual Republican nominee.

Whatever you do, folks, make sure you vote tomorrow and in November, 2012.  (And no snide remarks.)

Missouri Senators first priority?

With all of the hoo-haw coming out of Washington right now (see link below) about Republicans and Democrats mixing up their seating chart while the president gives his State of the Union address, it occurred to me that our Senators, Claire McCaskill and Roy Blunt, should absolutely be sitting next to and with each other, to show they're for Missouri and not themselves and not their own political parties, frst.

This should be a rather obvious, and not radical, idea.

Senators?

Like it or not, you'll be showing us your priorities Tuesday night, just by where--and with whom--you sit.

Link to original article:  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/us/politics/23seats.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha24