Ah, yes, those open seats. Representative Mark Bruns (r) is term limited out. In Cole County Democrat Cyrus Dashtaki and republican Daniel Klindt are busy raising money, though it appears they’re going about doing so in different fashions.

First, let’s take a look at the results of previous races in the district:

Official Election Returns

State of Missouri General Election  – 2008 General Election

Tuesday, November 04, 2008

State Representative – District 113 – Summary

Precincts Reporting 20 of 20

Bruns, Mark J. REP 10,086 61.5%

Mueller, Al DEM 6,316 38.5%

Total Votes   16,402

Official Election Returns

State of Missouri General Election  – November 2006 – General Election

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

State Representative – District 113 – Summary

Precincts Reporting 19 of 19

Bruns, Mark J. REP 7,141 56.4%

Kunce, Lucas DEM 5,513 43.6%

Total Votes   12,654

Hmm, an off year election was more competitive. Go figure. 2010 is an off year election, isn’t it?

Cyrus Dashtaki filed his fourth quarter campaign finance report with the Missouri Ethics Commission on January 14th:

Detailed Summary of Committee Disclosure Report

Committe: MISSOURIANS FOR DASHTAKI

1. TOTAL RECEIPTS FOR THIS ELECTION PREVIOUSLY REPORTED $11,105.00

2. ALL MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $9,840.00

9. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS ELECTION(SUM 1B + 7A – 8A) $21,445.00

28. MONEY ON HAND AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 25 + 26 – 27) $19,554.34

35. TOTAL INDEBTEDNESS AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 29 + 30 + 31 – 32 – 33 – 34) $832.62

[emphasis added]

Nice fundraising quarter. And where did the money come from?:

Detailed Summary of Contributions And Loans Received

Committee: MISSOURIANS FOR DASHTAKI

Report Date: 1/10/2010

Carpenters for Sound Legislation Jefferson City MO 10/09/2009 $300.00

Carpenters Local Union No 945 PAC Jefferson City MO 10/09/2009 $150.00

Friends of Chris Kelly Columbia MO 10/11/2009 $150.00

Friends of Joe Vaccaro Inc. St. Louis MO 11/19/2009 $100.00

Electrical Workers Voluntary Political St. Louis MO 11/19/2009 $200.00

Friends for Tim Green Ballwin MO 11/19/2009 $300.00

Shelter Insurance State PAC Columbia MO 11/19/2009 $300.00

Volunteer Political Fund Kansas City MO 11/25/2009 $500.00

Citizens for Mike Talboy Kansas City MO   12/28/2009 $250.00

Commonfolk Missourians Jefferson City MO 12/28/2009 $250.00

Organized labor and a few Democratic Party office holders. And there are a lot of individual small dollar contributions (a few from family members, a few from attorneys, and a few from state employees – hey, this district is in Cole County).

Daniel Klindt (r) filed his amended fourth quarter campaign finance report with the Missouri Ethics Commission on January 12th:

Detailed Summary of Committee Disclosure Report

Committe: DAN KLINDT FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE

1. TOTAL RECEIPTS FOR THIS ELECTION PREVIOUSLY REPORTED $11,736.46

2. ALL MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $7,620.00

9. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS ELECTION(SUM 1B + 7A – 8A) $19,356.46

25. MONEY ON HAND AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (INCLUDING FUNDS IN DEPOSITORY, CASH, SAVINGS ACCOUNTS AND ALL OTHER INVESTMENTS) $7,415.34

28. MONEY ON HAND AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 25 + 26 – 27) $14,054.43

35. TOTAL INDEBTEDNESS AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 29 + 30 + 31 – 32 – 33 – 34) $0.00

[emphasis added]

Hmm. Rough parity, less cash on hand. That equals a higher “burn” rate. Before we satisfy our curiosity about that “burn” rate, let’s take a look at where the money came from:

MBA Capitol Region PAC Jefferson City, MO 12/15/2009 $325.00

Missourians for Mark Bruns Jefferson City Mo 12/14/2009 $3,000.00

[emphasis added]

Hmm. The usual suspects. And a few insurance and realty people, too. The list of individual contributions is rather short by comparison.

How interesting. Representative Bruns (r) is a member of the Special Standing Committee on Government Accountability and Ethics Reform. Evidently he won’t be concerned about campaign contribution limits when it comes to pursuing “ethics reform” this session.

And that “burn” rate? From his October 1, 2009 campaign finance report with the Missouri Ethics Commission:

Detailed Summary of Expenditures And Contributions Made

Committe: DAN KLINDT FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE

ReportDate: 10/1/2009

B. ITEMIZED EXPENDITURES ALL OVER $100 AND ALL PAYMENTS TO CAMPAIGN WORKERS

Cole Co Fair Board Jefferson City Mo 07/31/2009 Ham Donation to Samaritan Center $225.00

Friends of the NRA 08/12/2009 Table at banquet $400.00

Thriftway Foods Linn MO 09/16/2009 Food for BBQ $950.57

Why is it that republican campaign expenditures sometimes resemble a free food program? Just asking.

From a fundraising perspective this race looks competitive.

Previously:

Not really. They forgot about Joe, Evan, Ben, and Mary

Claire Never Fails to Disappoint, Does She?

The Johnson County, Missouri Democratic Club meets monthly on Thursday evenings in downtown Warrensburg. The membership of the club includes Democratic Party activists and a significant number of the members of the Johnson County Democratic Central Committee. A motion addressing health care reform, and specifically, Senator Claire McCaskill’s (D) recent statement, in the aftermath of the Massachusetts special senate election was offered under new business by a member of the club and central committee.

The monthly meeting of the Johnson County Democratic Club in Warrensburg, Missouri.

The motion:

January 21, 2010

We, the members of the Johnson County Democratic Club, are disappointed by the recent statement Senator Claire McCaskill made after the special senate election in Massachusetts.  We are especially disappointed in the following:

As I said to somebody last night:, everybody needs to get the Washington wax out of their ears and listen and pay attention that people out there believe that we are going too far, too fast. (January 20, 2010)

 

Actually, the results Massachusetts indicate that by not passing health care reform and proposing a watered-down version the Democratic-controlled Congress has not gone far enough and has gotten there much too slowly.

First, polls show that a majority of voters for the winning Republican candidate support a single payer option.  

More importantly, voting patterns reveal that the strongest areas of support for President Obama in Massachusetts had a turnout lower than the statewide average.  In other words, the results in Massachusetts suggest that Democrats did not vote in necessary numbers because the democratic-controlled Congress has not gone fast enough and far enough in enacting the agenda we elected them to pass.

We, the members of the Democratic Club of Johnson County, worked last year for health care reform and regulation of our financial institutions and government support for working people.  

If our elected officials do not feel that the Democratic agenda is worth fighting for after the loss in one special election, we will surely lose in November.  

We, the members of the Johnson County Democratic Club, call on our elected officials in Washington, Senator McCaskill and Representative Skelton to remember that they are Democrats first and enact the agenda we all fought for in 2008.

If they fight for us in Washington now, we promise we will fight for them in Johnson County in 2010 and 2012.

There were approximately forty individuals in attendance. These are the local people who go door to door, make the phone calls, make the literature drops, register new Democratic Party voters (in large numbers), and write the campaign contribution checks. These are also some of the people who know people without insurance or have family members without access to affordable health care or who are without access to affordable health care themselves. And they didn’t just work their tails off in 2008. These are the people who are and were the lead volunteers who do and did the heavy lifting in 2004 and 2006, too.

After extensive discussion the motion passed overwhelmingly by a voice vote. There was some dissent.

The club will forward the motion to Senator Claire McCaskill, Congressman Ike Skelton (D), and Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan (D).

As Richard Trumka of the AFL-CIO said a while back:

…but to our friends, the leaders in every level of government who aren’t afraid to stand up for workers, well we want them to know that so long as they stand with working people the American labor movement will always, and I mean always stand with them. [applause]

And then there’s that other group. Those fair weather friends who can’t seem to decide, quite frankly, which side they’re on. I’m talkin’ about politicians who love to have our help come election time. They love to see us makin’ those door knocks, those telephone calls and passin’ stuff out on their behalf, and tellin’ all our members how they ought to jump up and down and vote for them. But then they seem to forget about us after the votes are counted. Now you know who I mean. They’ve been in the news a lot lately. They’re the ones who say that they’re all for health care reform so long as it doesn’t offend the insurance companies and the drug companies. They get those big contributions from both and then they pretend this is somehow about principle, that they just happen to be defendin’ those big companies.

They’re the same people who say that the way to pay for health care isn’t to tax the rich, it’s to tax our health care benefits. They’re the ones who lack the guts to tell the truth. That the only way that we’re ever gonna get a handle on the health care crisis is by creating a public system that puts people before profits, not the other way around. [applause]

Well…, we need to send them a special message. That is, you may have forgotten what labor, the labor movement did for you when you got elected, but, by God, we’re not gonna forget. And if you stab us in the back on the Employee Free Choice Act and health care and a bunch of other things don’t you dare, don’t you dare ask for our support next year, whenever you’re running. [applause] We need people who stand up for workers. [applause]….

Massachusetts is what happens when a very unhappy base sits on its hands come election time. It ain’t pretty.

At Tuesday’s Operation Free event, three veterans spoke about the reasons we need to wean ourselves off foreign oil. (Michael Bersin would have covered their remarks at an event in Warrensburg today, but it was canceled because of technical difficulties with the bus.) Each of the men covered a different aspect of the problem.

Matt Victoriano, a former Marine who served two tours in Iraq, focused on how we are funding our own enemies:

And my experiences over there led me to ask a lot of questions–one of which was, “Why is there a tendency for us and our representatives to stand in front of large American flags and proclaim patriotism and our strength in fighting terrorism and shoving boots up the backsides of terrorists, when we knowingly are going out and funding those terrorists, funding the roadside bombs, funding the RPGs and small arms fire.” Um, our way of life right now, our economy, our energy policy is dependent on countries who want us and our way of life dead.

And this is something that our military, all the branches, the CIA, the Department of Defense have all come to recognize. Over half of our energy comes from foreign countries. Last year we spent $66 billion on oil from Saudi Arabia alone. Now Saudi Arabia, our intelligence and military branches recognize, since the 1980s has spent over $70 billion dollars on Wahabi extremists. And Wahabi extremism is the focal point of international terrorism at this point in time. Those Wahabi extremists primarily are the ones over in Iraq and Afghanistan right now setting off the roadside bombs. Every dollar that we put into our gas tanks contributes to those bombs that are going off overseas and killing and injuring our troops.

Again, this is something that the Marine Corps, the Army, the Air Force, the Navy all recognize. They’re not waiting for Congress to sign a bill. They’re not sitting at a table arguing statistics and facts and climate, uh, data. They’ve all come out and said “Our energy policy is a direct threat, and we’re gonna take steps on our own.” This year the Marine Corps purchased a hydrogen fuel cell power plant in Twenty Nine Palms, California, the largest military training site in the world. The Navy has pledged by 2020 to get half of its energy from renewable energy sources; the Air Force, 25 percent of its energy by 2025. The Army has created the Army Energy Security Implementation Strategy. These are all significant steps that they’re all taking.

You know, I was a Marine, and I’m in the National Guard right now. I listen to my chain of command when they say there’s a problem. And they’re saying right now that our energy policy is a problem. And we all need to take steps to change it, because it’s not somebody that we don’t know that’s going to be affected by this. It’s people like myself and our friends and families, that are going to be overseas fighting, for reasons that we don’t need to be.

Odd, isn’t it, how the military, which is considered a conservative organization, is miles ahead of Congress in recognizing the national security implications of our dependence of foreign oil. Political conservatives, on the other hand, aren’t just ignoring these problems. They’re denying them. The difference between them and the military conservatives is that the military brass has run smack dab up against reality in Iraq, whereas someone like Roy Blunt still believes that Exxon-Mobil’s bottom line constitutes reality.

One of the other veterans on the tour, Brendan Flynn, described another forward looking attitude among the military brass, their recognition of the dangers that climate change will present for this country, for its military, and for the planet.

The Pentagon, the CIA, the National Security Agency, the National Intelligence Council, they all agree that climate change is actually one of the highest profile threats that’s gonna face this country and the world in the next ten, fifteen, twenty years. These agencies don’t necessarily agree on much of anything. But they all agree on this, you know. And these aren’t folks who are, you know, these folks are by no means tree huggers. These are folks like James Wolsey, you know, who said that this is the first time since the Civil War that we’ve funded both sides of a war. These are folks like the National Intelligence Estimate of President George W. Bush, the last one in 2007, said that this was one of the over-the-horizon threats that we’re gonna be facing.

So, what’s the answer? The answer, in fact, for both of these issues is … to develop clean American energy, that we can produce here in America, so America can take back control of our energy future. You know, and, as the Secretary [of State] said, that’s something America has always done better than anyone else in the world–innovation–is developing business opportunities.

Now if we could just get the party of business out of our way so that we could develop our business opportunities, we might set about saving the planet and our own economy.

Via TPM, we learn that Roy Blunt has  gotten a little post-Scott Brown bump: he now polls 49% to Carnahan’s 43%.  Will Carnahan’s damage control take her down the McCaskill path, or will she stand up and fight for the Democratic base?

I share the opinion of the Erstwhile Conservative that Ed Rendell puts the case for doing the latter as well as anyone I have heard over the last two days:

It’s too late for McCaskill; we can only hope Carnahan listens to the stand-up branch of the party.

While reading Cynthia Davis’ comments about her proposed “Marriage Matters in Missouri Bill,” HR1234, I figured something out about the mental processes of people like Davis and the Tea Partiers who have endorsed her as “their” candidate. Talking Writing about one of the more innocuous aspects of her proposed legislation, a provision to waive part of the marriage license fee for couples who get some type of premarital counseling, Davis offers this observation:

I was surprised to discover that $27 of the marriage license fee goes toward child abuse and domestic violence shelters.  Why should the innocent citizens who are doing something honorable, moral and foundational to our civilization be forced to pay for the damage caused by those who are behaving dishonorably?  Statically, people who are “living together” are more likely to beat up their partners and children than married people, but they are not being asked to pay for domestic violence or child abuse.  The philosophical premise behind this fee is insulting to all married people.

Oh wow, I thought. I’m married and yet I would not be insulted at all if part of my marriage license fee had gone to help women and children trapped in abusive relationships, married or not.

Then I got it. What Davis is talking about is an aspect of the “freedom” that rings the Tea Partiers’ bell over and over. They are not worried abut the “freedom to be you and me” – they don’t even like that type of freedom – but rather freedom from the claims that individuals in a comity might be expected to exert on each other. In other words, it’s nothing more than narrow, bougie, mean-mindedness.

Ever wonder why the Tea Partiers throw tantrums about government spending, even when it is demonstrably beneficial and would actually pay for itself – like rational health care reform would? It’s because the spending is used for other people, very likely people who might be a little different from God’s select variety of tea people. They feel directly affronted that their money might be used for somebody who is poor and/or black (remember Saint Reagan’s “welfare queens”?), or those who have a different life style (perhaps cohabiting “dishonorably” per Davis). That’s what it means to usurp the freedom of a Tea Partier.  

Just for the record, I have to add that Davis’ assertions about who is involved in domestic violence aren’t just mean, they are also not necessarily true. For one thing, domestic violence is not well reported or understood, so sweeping statements about who is actually being abused and who is doing the abusing cannot be well substantiated.  

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) does collect and publish statistics for those cases that are reported to law enforcement agencies.  According to the BJS, individuals most likely to suffer from domestic violence are women who are separated – and the offender may be the separated spouse or a boyfriend.

Violence that culminates in homicide, however, is most likely to involve those noble married folks whom Davis believes to be so direly insulted by the wedding license fee. And jut to be clear, in 70-80% of domestic violence homicides, which, as we have seen, predominantly involve married couples, the guilty partner had a history of abusing his or her victim.

                                             

This is an open seat race.

Previously:

Campaign Finance – July 2009: Alexia Norris (D) in the 30th Legislative District

30th Legislative District: Alexia Norris – October 2009 campaign finance report

The Democratic Party candidate in the 30th Legislative District, Alexia Norris, filed her fourth quarter campaign finance report with the Missouri Ethics Commission on January 15th. There are two republican candidates – their numbers are below the fold.

It was another good quarter:

Detailed Summary of Committee Disclosure Report

Committe: COMMITTEE TO ELECT LEXI NORRIS

1. TOTAL RECEIPTS FOR THIS ELECTION PREVIOUSLY REPORTED $18,580.92

2. ALL MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $6,460.00

9. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS ELECTION(SUM 1B + 7A – 8A) $25,553.92

28. MONEY ON HAND AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 25 + 26 – 27) $20,147.84

35. TOTAL INDEBTEDNESS AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD

(SUM 29 + 30 + 31 – 32 – 33 – 34) $250.00

[emphasis added]

No loans. Very good numbers.

Let’s take a look at contributions:

Detailed Summary of Contributions And Loans Received

Committee: COMMITTEE TO ELECT LEXI NORRIS

Report Date: 01/15/2010

Missourians for Working Families Independence, MO 12/20/2009 $1,000.00

[emphasis added]

There are also individual contributions (a few from attorneys, some from people associated with universities, some from Democratic party office holders, and other individuals) and a good number of contributions from Democratic state representatives.

The first of the republican candidates, Sherri Plunkett, filed her Statement of Committee Organization (pdf) on November 23, 2009 (it was scanned into the system on December 10th). Her fourth quarter report was filed on January 12th:

Detailed Summary of Committee Disclosure Report

Committe: CITIZENS TO ELECT SHERRI PLUNKETT

1. TOTAL RECEIPTS FOR THIS ELECTION PREVIOUSLY REPORTED $0.00

2. ALL MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $2,825.00

9. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS ELECTION(SUM 1B + 7A – 8A) $3,095.00

28. MONEY ON HAND AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 25 + 26 – 27) $2,532.86

35. TOTAL INDEBTEDNESS AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD

(SUM 29 + 30 + 31 – 32 – 33 – 34) $0.00

[emphasis added]

Where did the money come from?:

Detailed Summary of Contributions And Loans Received

Committee: CITIZENS TO ELECT SHERRI PLUNKETT

Report Date: 12/31/2009

Jim Plunkett, Inc. Platte City, Mo. 12/04/2009 $1,000.00

A few individuals and, quite possibly, a relative?

One could be curious about the political contribution history of an individual (from the Federal Election Commission):

PLUNKETT, JIM

KANSAS CITY, MO 64152

J P I

NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONTRIBUTIONS

06/03/1998 250.00 98033272881

PLUNKETT, JIM

PLATTE CITY, MO 64079

PLUNKETT CONSTRUCTION/PRESIDENT

  GRAVES, SAMUEL B (SAM)

   VIA GRAVES FOR CONGRESS

09/30/2003 1000.00 23992013934

09/30/2003 2000.00 23992013934

PLUNKETT, JIM

PLATTE CITY, MO 64079

SELF/BUSINESS OWNER

  GRAVES, SAMUEL B (SAM)

   VIA GRAVES FOR CONGRESS

03/30/2002 2000.00 22990641771

PLUNKETT, JIM MR.

PLATTE CITY, MO 64079

J.P.I. GLASS/CONTRACTOR

  BUSH, GEORGE W

   VIA BUSH-CHENEY ’04 (PRIMARY) INC

11/19/2003 2000.00 24990263239

LUNKETT, JIM MR.

PLATTE CITY, MO 64079

JIM PLUNKETT, INC./PRESIDENT

  GRAVES VICTORY COMMITTEE

02/14/2008 1000.00 28990826774

And via the Missouri Ethics Commission:

C000937 PLATTE COUNTY REPUBLICAN CENTRAL COMMITTEE — Jim Plunkett Platte City, MO 03/31/2006 $625.00 — APRIL – COMMITTEE QUARTERLY REPORT

C000745 HOUSE REPUBLICAN CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE — Jim Plunkett Inc. Platte City, MO  Platte County Commissioner 04/24/2006 $5,000.00 — JULY – COMMITTEE QUARTERLY REPORT

C000745 HOUSE REPUBLICAN CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE — Jim Plunkett, Inc. Platte City, MO  Platte County Commissioner 11/01/2006 $2,000.00 — 30 DAY AFTER GENERAL ELECTION

C001157 MISSOURIANS FOR LOUDON — Jim Plunkett Inc. Platte City, MO 07/27/2006 $1,125.00 — AMENDED – 8 DAY BEFORE PRIMARY ELECTION

C051019 MISSOURIANS FOR MATT BLUNT INC — Jim Plunkett, Inc. Platte City, MO 12/02/2005 $1,200.00 — AMENDED JANUARY – COMMITTEE QUARTERLY REPORT

C051108 CITIZENS FOR RIDGEWAY —   Jim Plunkett, Inc. Platte City, MO Platte County Commissioner 10/08/2007 $650.00 Yes   —   JANUARY – COMMITTEE QUARTERLY REPORT

C041537 0032ND SENATORIAL DISTRICT REPUBLICAN COMMITTEE — Jim Plunkett Inc Platte City, MO 3/31/2008 $4,000.00 — APRIL – COMMITTEE QUARTERLY REPORT

C081049 HULSHOF FOR GOVERNOR INC — Jim Plunkett Inc. Platte City, MO   7/3/2008 $1,350.00 — 8 DAY BEFORE PRIMARY ELECTION

C010247 REPUBLICAN SIXTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT COMMITTEE — Jim Plunkett, Inc. Platte City, Missouri 09/04/2008 $2,000.00 — OCTOBER – COMMITTEE QUARTERLY REPORT

Hmmm. There’s obviously plenty more where that came from.

The second of the republican candidates, Nikolas Marshall, filed filed his Statement of Committee Organization (pdf) on November 6, 2009 (it was scanned into the system on November 12th). An Amended Statement of Committee Organization (pdf) was filed on November 25, 2009 (and scanned into the system on December 10th). His fourth quarter report was filed on January 13th:

Detailed Summary of Committee Disclosure Report

Committe: COMMITTEE TO ELECT NICK MARSHALL

1. TOTAL RECEIPTS FOR THIS ELECTION PREVIOUSLY REPORTED $0.00

2. ALL MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED THIS PERIOD $12,125.00

9. TOTAL ALL RECEIPTS THIS ELECTION(SUM 1B + 7A – 8A) $12,334.60

28. MONEY ON HAND AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD (SUM 25 + 26 – 27) $12,125.00

35. TOTAL INDEBTEDNESS AT THE CLOSE OF THIS REPORTING PERIOD

(SUM 29 + 30 + 31 – 32 – 33 – 34) $0.00

[emphasis added]

And where did the money come from?:

Detailed Summary of Contributions And Loans Received

Committee: COMMITTEE TO ELECT NICK MARSHALL

Report Date: 1/14/2010

Nick Marshall Parkville, MO 12/04/2009 $2,500.00

Eric Zahnd for Platte County Prosecutor Platte Woods, MO   12/20/2009 $500.00

Nick Marshall Parkville, MO 64152 12/31/2009 $2,500.00

[emphasis added]

And a few others.

$5000.00 of your own money will up the total and establish your grass roots bonafides, eh?

Very interesting. The republican Platte County Prosecutor is supporting a different candidate than the republican Second District Commissioner. Very interesting.