At today’s Blog Watch:

[underline emphasis added]

Yeah, we know, we’ve had typos, too.

Via the Missouri Secretary of State:

Unofficial Election Returns

State of Missouri – General Election, Tuesday, November 06, 2012

U.S. Representative – District 8 (494 of 494 Precincts Reported)

Jack Rushin Democrat 73,755 24.6%

Jo Ann Emerson Republican 216,083 71.9%

Rick Vandeven Libertarian 10,553 3.5%

Total Votes 300,391

Apparently Representative Jo Ann Emerson (r) has announced, one month after running (and winning) reelection, that she is giving up her seat representing Missouri’s 8th Congressional District:

Missouri Rep. Jo Ann Emerson to resign from House

Posted by Sean Sullivan on December 3, 2012 at 11:17 am

Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.) will resign from Congress next February to become President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, she announced on Monday….

Electricity? Oh, right (via the Federal Election Commission):

2012 House and Senate Campaign Finance

Election Cycle:  2011-2012

Other Committees Contributions – EMERSON, JOANN

ACTION COMMITTEE FOR RURAL ELECTRIFICATI RECEIPT ARLINGTON VA 22203 02/23/2011 $3,000

ACTION COMMITTEE FOR RURAL ELECTRIFICATI RECEIPT ARLINGTON VA 22203 11/30/2011 $2,000

ACTION COMMITTEE FOR RURAL ELECTRIFICATION PAC ARLINGTON VA 22203 03/30/2012 $1,000

AMEREN FED PAC WASHINGTON DC 20004 03/30/2012 $1,000

AMEREN FEDERAL PAC WASHINGTON DC 20004 07/30/2012 $2,000

AMEREN FEDERAL PAC WASHINGTON DC 20004 09/24/2012 $2,000

AMEREN FEDPAC RECEIPT WASHINGTON DC 20004 06/29/2011 $1,000

AMEREN FEDPAC RECEIPT WASHINGTON DC 20004 04/20/2011 $2,000

AMEREN FEDPAC RECEIPT WASHINGTON DC 20004 06/29/2011 $1,000

AMEREN FEDPAC RECEIPT WASHINGTON DC 20004 11/18/2011 $1,000

ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION PAC RECEIPT BETHESDA MD 20814 09/30/2011 $2,500

ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION PAC RECEIPT BETHESDA MD 20814 03/11/2011 $2,500

GROWTH ENERGY PAC WASHINGTON DC 20002 06/29/2012 $500

GROWTH ENERGY PAC RECEIPT WASHINGTON DC 20002 11/18/2011 $1,000

KANSAS CITY POWER & LIGHT COMPANY PAC KANSAS CITY MO 64141 09/28/2012 $1,000

KANSAS CITY POWER & LIGHT COMPANY PAC KANSAS CITY MO 64141 07/30/2012 $1,000

KCP&L POWER PAC RECEIPT KANSAS CITY MO 64141 11/18/2011 $1,000  

NATIONAL RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATIONS ACTION COMMITTEE FOR RURAL ELECTRIFICATION PAC ARLINGTON VA 22203 05/30/2012 $2,000

XCEL ENERGY EMPLOYEE PAC WASHINGTON DC 20004 09/24/2012 $1,000

[emphasis added]

According to the FEC, from January 1, 2011 to October 17, 2012 Representative Emerson (r) took in $1,407,909.00 and spent $1,319,012.00 getting reelected to Congress.

For one month in office.

Such a deal.

Her Democratic Party opponent, Jack Rushin, raised $24,217.00 and spent $16,352.00 for the election.

Via Steve Benen at Political Animal:

July 05, 2011 3:20 PM

GOP concludes consumer safety is overrated

…Whatever the reason, the Republican-controlled House Appropriations Committee has approved a spending bill that not only slashes the budget of the Consumer Product Safety Commission but also cuts off all funding for a recently launched database of product-safety complaints…

….Republican Rep. Jo Ann Emerson of Missouri took the lead on this, and has struggled to explain why. There’s no great mystery here….

….The point of the database couldn’t be any more of a no-brainer. The Consumer Safety Product Commission has valuable information, but faces challenges in reaching the public. For very little money, the government has created an online resource that will help families make more informed choices, and create a new incentive for manufacturers to put safe products on the market. As Michael Lipsky explained recently, “One would think it hard to find a politician who opposes reducing preventable dangers to children.”

Meet the Republican Party of 2011.

No mystery, indeed:

…From 1984 through 1996, Jo Ann Emerson worked in public affairs or lobbyist roles for a slew of organizations, including the National Republican Congressional Committee, the National Restaurant Association and the American Insurance Association…

When you run for any office you raise money and fight the fight from the day you announce your candidacy to the last minute that the polls are open on election day. You owe that to democracy and to the voters. Unless, of course, you’re part of the inside the beltway conventional wisdom cocktail weenie circuit:

Most Outrageous, Absurd Candidates of 2010

By Stuart Rothenberg

Roll Call Contributing Writer

Nov. 18, 2010, Midnight

….Tommy Sowers (Missouri). The Democrat raised just shy of $1.5 million through Oct. 13 and yet drew only 29 percent of the vote in a campaign that stands out for being about nothing but smoke and mirrors.

….Still, even I am stunned at the absurdity of the campaign.

….Another Feifs e-mail [from Sowers’ campaign], this one on Nov. 1, the day before the election, went further: “In thousands of conversations with undecided voters in the district, Republicans and Independents tell us that they’re voting for a Democrat for the first time.”

As with most direct mail, the assertions here are propaganda, exaggeration, distortion and fiction. Still, isn’t there something at least a little wrong with prying cash out of people by leading them to believe that you can win when you can’t? Or were the Sowers folks so politically inept that in late October they thought their candidate could win?….

[emphasis added in original]

“…by leading them to believe that you can win when you can’t?…” Says who? That’s why we have an “election day” where people “vote” for candidates.

What’s absurd is that the punditocracy thinks that incumbents anointed by conventional wisdom should be given a free pass or face token candidates who just go through the motions.

Asshole.

I’ll take a candidate like Tommy Sowers any day.

If there’s one thing you can say about Tommy Sowers (D) campaign style in the 8th Congressional District race – he obviously thrives on engaging with the people in the district:

From Tommy Sowers’ campaign:

…out on the ground with Tommy doing our third Boots on the Ground operation (BOTG III) and it’s been fantastic.  Tommy was waiting tables in St. James today and talking to voters about the need for new blood in Congress (and their lunch order, of course.)…

Tommy Sowers (D) is challenging long time incumbent Jo Ann Emerson (r) in the 8th Congressional District. The district has the highest poverty rate in the state:

Missouri 8 20.5% (124,990) [poverty rate] 30% (43,283) [child poverty rate]

* 72,661 women (22.54 percent) in the district live in poverty

* 9,177 African-Americans (36.19 percent) in the district live in poverty

Rep. Jo Ann Emerson

And the unemployment rate ain’t exactly stellar either.

You’d think that the sitting U.S. Representative would be looking out after working people.

Nope.

Jo Ann Emerson has a history of voting against legislation for fair pay for working people:

H.R.12 [2009]

Title: Paycheck Fairness Act

Sponsor: Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [CT-3] (introduced 1/6/2009)      Cosponsors (200)

Related Bills: H.RES.5, S.182, S.3772

[….]

SUMMARY AS OF:

1/6/2009–Passed House without amendment.    

[….]

Paycheck Fairness Act – (Sec. 3) Amends the portion of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA) known as the Equal Pay Act to revise remedies for, enforcement of, and exceptions to prohibitions against sex discrimination in the payment of wages.

Revises the exception to the prohibition for a wage rate differential based on any other factor other than sex. Limits such factors to bona fide factors, such as education, training, or experience.

States that the bona fide factor defense shall apply only if the employer demonstrates that such factor: (1) is not based upon or derived from a sex-based differential in compensation; (2) is job-related with respect to the position in question; and (3) is consistent with business necessity. Avers that such defense shall not apply where the employee demonstrates that: (1) an alternative employment practice exists that would serve the same business purpose without producing such differential; and (2) the employer has refused to adopt such alternative practice.

Revises the prohibition against employer retaliation for employee complaints. Prohibits retaliation for inquiring about, discussing, or disclosing the wages of the employee or another employee in response to a complaint or charge, or in furtherance of a sex discrimination investigation, proceeding, hearing, or action, or an investigation conducted by the employer.

Makes employers who violate sex discrimination prohibitions liable in a civil action for either compensatory or (except for the federal government) punitive damages.

States that any action brought to enforce the prohibition against sex discrimination may be maintained as a class action in which individuals may be joined as party plaintiffs without their written consent.

Authorizes the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) to seek additional compensatory or punitive damages in a sex discrimination action….

The vote:

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 8

H R 12      RECORDED VOTE      9-Jan-2009      1:19 PM

QUESTION:  On Passage

BILL TITLE: Paycheck Fairness Act

—- AYES    256 —

Carnahan

Clay

Cleaver

Skelton

—- NOES    163 —

Akin

Blunt

Emerson

Luetkemeyer

—- NOT VOTING    14 —

Graves

[emphasis added]

Then there’s the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Again, Jo Ann Emerson is no friend of working people:

H.R.11 [2009]

Title: Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009

Sponsor: Rep Miller, George [CA-7] (introduced 1/6/2009)      Cosponsors (195)

Related Bills: H.RES.5, S.181

Latest Major Action: 2/11/2009 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

[….]

SUMMARY AS OF:

1/9/2009–Passed House amended.

[….]

Title I: Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 – Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 – (Sec. 3) Amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to declare that an unlawful employment practice occurs when: (1) a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice is adopted; (2) an individual becomes subject to the decision or practice; or (3) an individual is affected by application of the decision or practice, including each time wages, benefits, or other compensation is paid. Allows liability to accrue, and allows an aggrieved person to obtain relief, including recovery of back pay, for up to two years preceding the filing of the charge, where the unlawful employment practices that have occurred during the charge filing period are similar or related to practices that occurred outside the time for filing a charge. Applies the preceding provisions to claims of compensation discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

(Sec. 4) Amends the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 to declare that an unlawful practice occurs when a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice is adopted, when a person becomes subject to the decision or other practice, or when a person is affected by the decision or practice, including each time wages, benefits, or other compensation is paid….

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 9

H R 11      YEA-AND-NAY      9-Jan-2009      1:28 PM

QUESTION:  On Passage

BILL TITLE: Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009

—- YEAS    247 —

Carnahan

Clay

Cleaver

Skelton

—- NAYS    171 —

Akin

Blunt

Emerson

Luetkemeyer

—- NOT VOTING    15 —

Graves

And that paycheck fairness issue? There’s a history of votes against it, in 2008:

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 556

H R 1338      RECORDED VOTE      31-Jul-2008      7:33 PM

QUESTION:  On Passage

BILL TITLE: Paycheck Fairness Act

—- AYES    247 —

Carnahan

Clay

Cleaver

Skelton

—- NOES    178 —

Akin

Blunt

Emerson

Graves

—- NOT VOTING    9 —

Hulshof

[emphasis added]

And against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in 2007:

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 768

H R 2831      YEA-AND-NAY      31-Jul-2007      2:40 PM

QUESTION:  On Passage

BILL TITLE: Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

—- YEAS    225 —

Carnahan

Clay

Cleaver

Skelton

—- NAYS    199 —

Akin

Blunt

Emerson

Graves

Huslshof

—- NOT VOTING    9 —

[emphasis]

Yep, that’s consistency for you – looking out for anyone but working people.

Tommy Sowers: I’m Tommy Sowers. This is my truck. And this is a ton of horse manure that’s been dumped on me by Jo Ann Emerson.

Emerson took money from special interests to make up lies about me because she doesn’t want to talk about bad trade deals that sent our jobs over to Mexico and China. She doesn’t want to talk about that she’s an insurance lobbyist that voted for the big bank bailouts. Jo Ann Emerson has been in Washington too long. She’s part of the problem.

I’m Tommy Sowers and I approved this message.

The Sowers campaign sent out the following release:

Tommy Sowers releases “Horse Manure” ad

“She can dump all the horse manure she wants.

The voters aren’t buying it.”

[….]

….Campaign Manager Jonathan Feifs issued the following statement:

“The ads that Congresswoman Emerson has been running are horse manure. Instead of making up lies to scare voters, Emerson should answer for her ties to lobbyists, her vote for the Wall Street bailout, and her continual support of foreign trade deals that have devastated the economy of Southeast Missouri.”

Tommy Sowers commented:

“Congresswoman Emerson has been in Washington too long. She’s part of the problem, not the solution. She can dump all the horse manure she wants. The voters aren’t buying it. They know it’s time for new blood and they’re ready to retire Congresswoman Emerson this November.”

###

And there may be some movement in the polling, to boot:

…But those numbers aren’t quite as good as an April poll by the same firm that showed Emerson leading 71 percent to 18 percent, suggesting Sowers has made inroads…

….Joe Scarborough: All right, so Tommy, uh, man, you didn’t pick a good time to run as a Democrat, did you?

Mika Brzezinski: Yeah, except [crosstalk]…

Joe Scarborough: Oh six.

Mika Brzezinski: …he’s got good cred.

Joe Scarborough: Got, you got great street cred, but it’s tough out there for Democrats, isn’t it?

Tommy Sowers (D): Well, I tell you I think it’s the best year possible for a guy straight out of the military without a lot of political experience to be running for Congress. Throughout the Eighth Congressional District everything I hear is the demand for new blood. And it’s very party neutral. I, I was at a, uh, patriot rally about thirty-six hours ago and a guy came up to me and said, you’re that guy running for Congress. I said, yes I am. He said, now, you’re not the incumbent are you? Said, no I’m not. Well that’s good, you’ve got my vote.

Mika Brzezinski: That was the first question? [crosstalk] Oh boy.

Joe Scarborough: Well, we’re talking about, we’ve been talking about Afghanistan all morning. Should America get out of Afghanistan?

Tommy Sowers (D): Yes, we should. I mean, part of my campaign is ending the war in Afghanistan, and it’s because what they, what they teach in the military are the principles of war. And you just discussed it. The objective is one of the first principles they teach you.

Joe Scarborough: That’s what they teach at West Point [crosstalk]. Right away.

Tommy Sowers (D): Well, yeah. They teach that to you. And when you look at our objectives there right now, it is to train up the Afghan military and police so that one day we can high five them and leave. The problem of course is a question that Congress has been derelict in not asking. It’s who will pay for that military once we leave? The Afghans can’t, America won’t forever, and our allies won’t. So training up four to six hundred thousand Afghan tribesmen that will one day be looking for a paycheck is not in our nation’s long-term strategic interest.

[….]

Joe Scarborough: Tommy, is it time for a draft?

Tommy Sowers (D): Well, I, I disagree, Mike, at least in my district. In my district, when I, there’s seventy thousand veterans in my district, and when I am doing a town hall and I ask how many of you are veterans or related to somebody that’s currently serving, almost the entire room raises the hand. So, you know, this is why Afghanistan at least from, from my district, it matters in twenty-ten. It matters on a fiscal per, uh, perspective. When we are, we’re spending four hundred dollars a gallon for every gallon of gas we put into a humvee in, in Kabul, people are worried about that. When we’re building infrastructure halfway around the world when we should be building it right here at home, people want that to end. So it’s, it’s a very personal I agree with you…but from my district they they want us investing back at home….

Just asking.

Jo Ann Emerson (r), the incumbent in the 8th Congressional District, is running an ad attacking challenger Tommy Sowers (D) for his support of health care reform.

…Jo Ann Emerson fought the health care bill…

[Jo Ann Emerson Fought Obamacare]

…and is working for repeal…

[emphasis added]

That’s interesting.

On August 24th the Congressional Budget Office responded by letter [pdf] to a request for information from Senator Mike Crapo (R) concerning the effect on the deficit if health care reform legislation were to be repealed.

Their answer? Repealing health care reform legislation would increase the deficit by $455 billion:

…Health Care Savings under PPACA and the Reconciliation Act

Finally, you asked what the net deficit impact would be if certain provisions of PPACA and the Reconciliation Act that were estimated to generate net savings were eliminated specifically, those which were originally estimated to generate a net reduction in mandatory outlays of $455 billion over the 2010-2019 period. The estimate of $455 billion mentioned in your letter represents the net effects of many provisions. Some of those provisions generated savings for Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and some generated costs. If those provisions were repealed, CBO estimates that there would be an increase in deficits similar to its original estimate of $455 billion in net savings over that period.

[page]

CBO’s earlier estimate was based on the forecasts of economic conditions, health care spending, and other technical factors that CBO published in 2009. Since that time, CBO has prepared new baseline projections consistent with updated economic and technical information, and has also extended its baseline to include 2020. We have not updated the estimate of health-related savings reported in March, but CBO has no reason to believe that such an estimate would differ substantially from the original one.

I hope you find this information helpful…

“…I hope you find this information helpful…

Uh, I don’t think any republicans will. Just guessing. Do you think Jo Ann Emerson (r) will change her campaign ad? The answer to that is probably no. After all, republicans are getting a lot of mileage out of noise and distortion. Why should Jo Ann Emerson (r) be any different?

Previously: Tommy Sowers (D) in the 8th Congressonal District: clubbing Jo Ann Emerson (r) with the bailout

Tommy Sowers’ (D) campaign started airing a television ad and Jo Ann Emerson’s (r) campaign followed suit. The Sowers campaign issued the following statement in response to the Emerson ad:

“Emerson is trying to change the subject, because she doesn’t want to talk about her vote for the Wall St Bailout, her trade votes that have killed SE Missouri manufacturing, and […] the union pension bailout scheme she is sponsoring. All 3 are incredibly unpopular with voters in the district. This also serves as recognition of how threatened Emerson is by Tommy Sowers. She’s never mentioned any of her opponents by name in past TV ads, now she’s doing it more than 2 months before the election. She thinks her support in the district is a mile wide, but it’s an inch deep.”

Announcer: Where do they stand? On health care Tommy Sowers wants government in charge.

[Tommy Sowers, Government Run Health Care]

Sowers supports keeping the Obama health care takeover.

[Tommy Sowers, Southeast Missourian, 11,8/09, “Sowers Said He Would Vote For It.”]

Higher taxes, more spending, less control of your care.

[Tommy Sowers, Higher Taxes, More Spending, Less Control]

Missouri needs a leader…

[Missouri needs a Leader]

…not an Obama Pelosi yes man.

[Tommy Sowers, Obama-Pelosi, Yes Man]

Jo Ann Emerson fought the health care bill…

[Jo Ann Emerson Fought Obamacare]

…and is working for repeal so doctors make decisions, not bureaucrats. Putting people before politics…

[People Before Politics]

…Jo Ann Emerson for Congress.

[Paid For By Team Emerson. Approved By Jo Ann Emerson.]

Jo Ann Emerson:  I’m Jo Ann Emerson and I approved this message.

Okay. Let’s deconstruct this just a little bit. To advocate that the health care reform bill is destroying a health care system that’s working you should probably point out the stuff you think works.

Let’s see, universal access to affordable health care? Nope. People without health insurance get their medical care late and in hospital emergency departments where the care is most expensive. Who pays for that? Uh, the hospitals recoup those costs by charging those with insurance more.

“…Jo Ann Emerson fought the health care bill and is working for repeal…”

Prohibitions against restricting coverage of preexisting conditions? Prohibitions against denying people the insurance coverage they paid for because the actually got sick (rescission)? Really, Jo Ann Emerson thinks those provisions of the health care bill need to be repealed?

“…so doctors make decisions, not bureaucrats…”

Uh, what color is the sky in Jo Ann Emerson’s world? Insurance company bureaucrats don’t make our health care decisions for us now? Really?

“…Obama Pelosi…”

Uh, Jo Ann Emerson is not running against Nancy Pelosi, she’s running against Tommy Sowers, who also happens to be a veteran. That’s a nice touch by Jo Ann Emerson, by the way, having veterans surround her at the end of the commercial. I wonder if this comment came up while they were filming that scene for her commercial? Just asking.

“…Putting people before politics…”

Her campaign can’t be serious in using that cliche phrase in a political commercial – unless they’re delusional or think everyone else in the world is too stupid to compare her words with her record.

Uh, by the way, as a member of Congress didn’t Jo Ann Emerson have access to government health insurance before the health care bill was signed into law? Just asking.