Representative Jo Ann Emerson (r) is comfortable looking after Washington special interests, eh?:

Republicans rally Tea Party activists to oppose the health-care legislation

By Perry Bacon Jr.

Washington Post Staff Writer

Sunday, March 21, 2010; 7:01 PM

Congressional Republicans rallied Tea Party activists to oppose the health-care legislation on the verge of being approved by Congress…

…As a group of several hundred protesters on the lawn of the Capitol shouted “No! No! No!” “Nancy, you will burn in hell for this!” and “Kill the bill!” rank-and-file Republican lawmakers came out to the balcony off the House floor in the midst of a series of procedural votes. Two different trios of GOP lawmakers, including Rep. Tom Latham (Iowa) and Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (Mo.), waved signs with the words “Kill” “The” and “Bill” as the crowd cheered….

[emphasis added]

Those same teabaggers?

As Tommy Sowers, the Democratic Party candidate in the 8th Congressional District has pointed out, “Our district has over 22% uninsured.” You’d think the incumbent republican would care about that, wouldn’t you? Unless they had friends elsewhere.

As we were putting together this post we received the following statement from Tommy Sowers’ campaign:

Sowers demands Jo Ann Emerson apologize for encouraging hateful protest

Yesterday, Congresswoman Emerson was involved in encouraging protesters at the Capitol.  Instead of contributing to the debate, she offended her office and the people she claims to represent. This supposed moderate chose to incite the same voices that used racial slurs and spat on lawmakers (including Emanuel Cleaver, a fellow member of the Missouri delegation) on the steps of the Capitol.

Sowers said, “I call on Congresswoman Emerson to issue a formal apology for inciting these protests.  As an 11-year veteran, I defended the Constitution and the right to protest, but lending support to a group that has spit on and called lawmakers racial slurs is beyond defense.  This may make sense to a DC politician trying to grab headlines and score political points.  But this is not the kind of representation that the Founders intended, nor what the people of Missouri and America expect.”

Shortly after Emerson’s protest, Tennessee Congressman Steve Cohen told reporters: “I think it is bad taste for people to go and encourage them. I can see this crowd getting out of control and they are being encouraged.”

The Sowers campaign couldn’t agree more.  Congresswoman Emerson must immediately apologize and disavow association with protestors that use hate and racial slurs.

Today was the first day of March and day 4 (or 5) of filing (Nobody filed last Friday and I haven’t checked to see if the place was open or not). 12 candidates filed for office today and 10 of them are going to get covered (Sorry Circuit Judges).

Four incumbent Congressmen filed today (Lacy Clay, Todd Akin, Jo Ann Emerson, and Blaine Luetkemeyer) and coincidentally, all four have primary challenges. The only member of the Missouri Delegation who hasn’t filed is Ike Skelton, who has given every sign of running for re-election. Congressman Skelton will be facing a primary opponent, Leonard Steinman of Jefferson City. Steinman ran for the State House in 2008 and lost to Bill Deeken by a 74%-26% margin. This is the first time Skelton has been opposed in a primary since 1994, where he won 82% against 2 opponents.

Also, Martin D. Baker filed as a Republican in the 1st Congressional district. Baker’s mailing address is in Sikeston, a 2 hour drive south of the district. Baker ran for Congress in the Jackson County-based 5th Congressional district in 2008, finishing 3rd in a 4 candidate field. Baker’s Republican opponent is Robyn Hamlin of North St. Louis County. Congressman Lacy Clay has a primary opponent and 2 Libertarians are having a primary for their nomination.

Republican Nola Wood filed in the 45th State House district vs. incumbent Democrat Jason Holsman and Republican Rodney Williams filed in the open 46th State House district. Constitution Party candidate Charles Harter filed in the 95th State House district vs. incumbent Republican Mike Leara.

Lastly, Holmes Osborne of Odessa became the second Democrat to file in the 122nd State House district. Who is the son of actor Holmes Osborne who you may remember from such roles as Eddie Darko in Donnie Darko and 83 other film and television titles. I went into this post thinking the actor and the candidate were the same and I am suspecting that is not true after receiving more information.

The first Democrat to file was Gary Grigsby who is a small businessman and all around awesome guy who would do an immensely better job than Mike McGhee.

No matter who wins the primary there, here’s to hoping that Mike McGhee (who was shaken into running again) loses re-election and finds a new career in Hollywood (presumably as an actor playing the “in over his head” elected official and not as a prop builder).

Aw, primary season. Sometimes it’s like a B movie. Without zombies rampaging the countryside, presumably. Over/under for Tuesday is 6 new candidate filings.

Congress Travels More, Public Pays

Lawmakers Ramp Up Taxpayer-Financed Journeys; Five Days in Scotland

…Eleven of the 12 legislators then left the five-day conference two days early…

…On Sunday evening, the last night for most of the lawmakers, they, their spouses and the congressional aides were seated in a private dining room at the Rhubarb restaurant, which has been described in the Sunday Times of London as “the preferred destination for cash-flash celebrities.” For a private dinner, the restaurant offers dishes including grouse with sauerkraut and prunes with Armangnac for $54 and a 12-ounce Chateaubriand steak with béarnaise sauce and Madeira jus, for two, at $106. Mr. Tanner’s spokesman said the lawmakers paid with their own money.

“That was awesome,” Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (D., Mo.) said to one of her companions afterward. A spokesman for Ms. Emerson said he didn’t know what such a remark would have been about and couldn’t confirm it…

[emphasis added, hat tip to RBH]

Go. Read the whole thing. You’ll just love the part about the “control room.”

Update:

Jo Ann Emerson’s party affiliation has been corrected on-line:

…”That was awesome,” Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R., Mo.) said to one of her companions afterward. A spokesman for Ms. Emerson said he didn’t know what such a remark would have been about and couldn’t confirm it…

[emphasis added]

I had the chance to see Tommy Sowers last night. Sowers is an Army veteran and a political science professor, and is currently running as the Democratic candidate for the 8th Congressional District seat currently held by longtime incumbent Republican Jo Ann Emerson. I enjoyed his talk, which centered around his can-do, results-oriented attitude. He emphasized the fact that the same people have been representing the district over and over again, with the same poor results. And I do mean literally poor – the 8th District is one of the poorest in the country, and is the worst for median income for females.

Ever since I first heard of Sowers through some of my VoteVets friends, I’ve liked what I heard. I would like to hear more specifics as he rolls out policy proposals, but if nothing else, he’s going to give Emerson a very strong run for her money, much stronger than any of her challengers for the last decade.  

Aside from having a common sense veteran representing Missouri’s 8th District instead of a lobbyist turned congressman’s wife turned congresswoman, there’s another upside to a strong Sowers candidacy. Because Emerson is essentially unchallenged every two years, she’s free to rake in big bucks from outstate PACS, then funnel the money into Republican campaigns all over the country. For example, in 2004, she sent $3000 to Sen. Jim “Obama’s Waterloo” Demint (R-SC). In 2008, her $4600 helped Republican Blaine Luetkemeyer top Democrat Judy Baker in Missouri’s 9th District. If she had to actually contest her own seat, she’d have to spend her corporate-fueled contributions on her own race, not on her pals around the country.

Which reminds me – tomorrow is the end of the quarter. If you like what you see (and I know that you do) – drop Tommy Sowers some coin right now.  

Tommy Sowers, announced Democratic Party candidate for the seat in the 8th Congressional District, spoke at the Truman Day rally in Poplar Bluff on Saturday, September 19th.

Our previous coverage of Tommy Sowers’ campaign:

Tommy Sowers (D) is running against Jo Ann Emerson (r) in the 8th Congressional District

…[applause] Good evening everyone. Thank you for that excellent introduction. And it’s an honor to be standing before you tonight. Especially on a night celebrating Harry S Truman. Some of my first memories were sitting on my grandfather’s lap in the newspaper editorial office looking at pictures of him and Harry S Truman. And when I think of what it means to be a public servant I think of him. I think of a guy that’s from the area. I think of a guy that served his country and always put the people first. So it’s an honor to be with, with you here tonight on this night.

You may have heard that I’m running for Congress. You may have seen it in the newspaper or heard it on the radio. But tonight I’ve got a very simple thing to do, a mission, for a military man. I need to tell you who I am and I need, need to tell you why I’m running….

…So first off, who I am. I’m a native. I was born and raised in Rolla, Missouri, I was schooled there, and generations of my family have lived there and still live there today. I’m a soldier and a veteran. For eleven years, I started off as a combat engineer getting trained up at Fort Leonard Wood, learning how to build stuff and then blow things up. Then I went to Iraq. I was a Green Beret, Special Forces and Ranger. And I had the opportunity to serve there with the finest men and women in uniform. I also had the opportunity to meet one of those women in uniform, which is my fiance, [inaudible][applause]. Baghdad is not where you expect you’re gonna meet your wife. [laughter]

I’m also an educator. My last assignment in the military was being a professor at the United States Military Academy. And now I teach up, up at what used to be UMR, before that the School of Mines, and it’s now the Missouri University of Science and Tech. I teach American government and politics. I teach the Constitution. I teach what the founders wanted Congress to do. Even though, when we watch the news, that’s not exactly what’s going on. It’s a tough challenge to teach that.

I’m a Democrat. It was one of those key things that I learned in the military. The Special Forces motto is de oppresso liber, which is “to free the oppressed”. And to look out and protect those that need the most protection. That to me is one of the core messages of the Democratic Party.

And finally, I was asked to do this. A couple years back I was at West Point and I got a call from some folks back home who asked me to leave the military, to leave the soldiers and the career that I loved, to come back here. And I looked and, and examined this race. I looked and examined the record. And I found out some stuff that I didn’t know. That we are one of the poorest districts in America. Tenth poorest. And if you’re a woman, you can do no worse. We’re ranked four thirty-five out of four thirty-five. That twenty-five percent of the kids live underneath the poverty line. That is unacceptable. And I knew then that I needed to come home and fight for my home.

As for why I’m running, we’ve got a very simple message. And I heard it tonight, I heard it two years ago, and I hear it everywhere I go as I travel around this district. It’s a simple statement. We can do better. [applause]

What do I mean by this? People tell me we can expect [inaudible] leadership. You all know what it means to be held accountable. You’re accountable to your family, to your business, to your church, to your employees and employers. In the military I lived accountability. I lived it every day. And I still remember my first company commander, I asked him, “Hey, sir, what am I accountable for here?” he said, “Hey LT, it’s simple, everything that your platoon does and everything that they fail to do.” That was accountability.

Now why should we expect anything different from our members of Congress and Jo Ann Emerson? In the last twelve years, in this district we’ve seen thousands of jobs lost. We’ve seen factories close down. We’ve seen homes foreclosed. But Congress, and Jo Ann Emerson, doesn’t want to be accountable for that

In the last twelve years we’ve watched the biggest surplus in history vanish and turn into the largest deficit in history. And Congress and Jo Ann Emerson do not want to be accountable for that. And now here we are in the midst of the greatest economic crisis since the great depression. Jo Ann Emerson had a seat at that table and instead of protecting us from Wall Street greed, she voted to bail them out. They want one more bailout for themselves. They want us to bail them out at the ballot box. Ladies and gentlemen, Jo Ann Emerson’s free ride ends now. [applause] The buck stops tonight.

You also talk in terms of better representation. Jo Ann Emerson wasn’t born here. She was born in D.C. She wasn’t raised here, she was raised in D.C. She wasn’t schooled here, she doesn’t live here. And fourteen months from now, in November of Twenty Ten when we beat her, she sure as heck isn’t moving back here. [laughter][applause]

We can do better. What can we do? We need a representative that is gonna fight for the small towns, the small communities, the small farms that populate this district. And not be funded by the big interests that fuel Jo Ann Emerson’s campaign. We’ve got some of the hardest working people in this district. I, I was raised with them, I know ’em, they’re in my blood. And they need someone who’s gonna fight for them. And fight for the level playing field and the key infrastructure that we need in order to compete. We can do better.

Now, I know I’m looking out over the loyal foot soldiers of the Democratic Party. You have seen many candidates come and try to take on this incredible machine. Now is the year.

What you’ve got in me is a fighter. I’ve been tossed in many situations where said, frankly, “You’re not getting through this.” And I know how to assemble the right team, get the right resources. We’ve got that team here. I’m getting advised by some of the, the greatest minds here. I can’t wait to, to pick these gentlemen’s brains. We’ve got and we’re assembling the resources so that we can have a fair fight. And over the next couple months you’re gonna see this campaign run.

We can do better. The final word is the key one. We. We. I need all of you. I need you on the team. I need your ideas. I need your passion. I need your resources. And it can start here tonight. If I haven’t met you tonight I want to meet you. Come up and introduce yourself to… we’ve got…he’ll sign you up tonight. We will build out the team that we need.

Talk to your friends. Let’s, let’s grow this party in this district. Let’s bring some of these folks back into the Democratic Party, the party that deserves to be representing this district. Join our team.

Now, this year, is the time. We can and we must do better.

Thank you very much. [applause]

The House Energy and Commerce Committee has helpfully produced a district-by-district breakdown of how HR 3200 (the America’s Affordable Health Choices Act) will affect Missourians.

Here’s a list of each district breakdown in Missouri:

   * Wm. Lacy Clay (MO-1)

   * W. Todd Akin (MO-2)

   * Russ Carnahan (MO-3)

   * Ike Skelton (MO-4)

   * Emanuel Cleaver (MO-5)

   * Sam Graves (MO-6)

   * Roy Blunt (MO-7)

   * Jo Ann Emerson (MO-8)

   * Blaine Luetkemeyer (MO-9)

Looking at some of the breakdowns, it’s interesting to note that Blunt’s district would benefit quite a bit. Of the 5 categories of benefits listed here, the 7th District is either the leader or the 2nd highest recipient in each category. 16,500 small businesses in Blunt’s district would be eligible for tax credits to pay for their health care plan. 12,500 seniors would no longer face a donut hole in their prescription coverage from Medicare. And so on.

Another interesting fact. The health care reform bill is largely financed from a surtax on the wealthiest Americans. Most families in Missouri won’t face this surtax – in most district the percentage of households that won’t face the surtax is over 99%! The 2nd, represented by Republican Todd Akin has the highest percentage of families that will face the surtax… at a whopping 2.6%.  Just as sure as I am that Akin will vote against any health care reform bill, I’m positive that he’ll claim “higher taxes on hard working Missourians” as a reason for his opposition. Sad, really.

Just as in the House vote on the stimulus today, Republicans in the US House of Representatives voted pretty much party line against the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act yesterday. It still passed overwhelmingly, and since it was already passed in identical form in the Senate, it now goes to the White House for President Obama’s signature.

Like I said earlier, protecting businesses against lawsuits, fair or not, is higher priority for Republicans than protecting women against discrimination. Note that Jo Ann Emerson, the “moderate” Republican from SE Missouri, switched her vote to opposition to the bill.

Like his buddy George W. Bush, John McCain believes that the economy is essentially good, and that all those of who are hurting just need to suck it up just like he did over the summer, when his campaign was flailing. The DNC does a good job of highlighting this disconnect in their newest ad:

And even leading Missouri Pepublicans object to the slender policy fixes that McCain actually has.

Look at Jo Ann Emerson’s piece in the SE Missourian on April 13th, for example. McCain’s big bugaboo is government spending, especially earmarks. (McCain has vowed to veto every bill with earmarks.) Yet as Emerson points out, earmarks are necessary for vital infrastructure, like roads and ports, all over the country.

Members of Congress, on the other hand, can be good advocates for the districts they represent. If not for our ability to check and balance the executive branch by raising local issues, life would be very different in rural America. In the 8th District, for example, the only way to ensure the roads we need get built is to insert an earmark – a guarantee the money will be spent for its intended purpose. Four-lane construction of U.S. 60 depends on earmarks for steel and concrete. OMB would never call this project a priority, and without federal funds it never would have happened.

Emerson also points out that the US Constitution gives Congress the power to appropriate funds. It’s good to see a (Republican!) member of Congress siding with Congress against the executive branch for a change. I hope she’s not just rehearsing for next January, when the rest of the Republican caucus will suddenly discover oversight.

I’ll add that even given the overly generous definition of earmarks McCain uses to buttress his argument, there are only $52 billion in congressional earmarks, hardly enough to offset the current budget deficit AND McCain’s proposed tax cuts for the wealthy. That definition of earmarks also includes American aid to Israel and funds for military housing. Can anyone see a McCain administration cutting funds for either of these items? Straight talk indeed.

More below the fold.

I don’t often agree with Kit Bond, but he’s correct about McCain’s flaky gas tax holiday. McCain proposed that we halt the 18.4 cents federal tax on each gallon of gas for the entire summer. But Bond exclaims, “I don’t see how cutting funds to fix bad roads and fight congestion helps families.” The lost tax revenue would deprive the federal highway fund of $8.5 billion. The lowered price would also spur demand for gas, which would only bring the price up even more over the long haul. Maybe McCain thinks that the traffic jams and crumbling roads will dampen demand. He’ll eventually fill us in with some straight talk, I suppose.

What we really need is a greater investment in alternate sources of energy and a larger commitment to conservation. These will actually create jobs, unlike the pennies McCain is throwing at the poor.

That picture, taken in the Mark Twain National Forest, soothes me; and I don’t want to imagine bulldozers anywhere near Lower Rock Creek.  But the U.S. Forest Service has granted approval for salvage logging operations in that area.  Bulldozers will tear wide “fire lines” throught the forest, which will make it easier for ATVs and loggers to get in and will ultimately make it easier to have a de facto road in a roadless area.  The delicate ecology will be disturbed.

So the Missouri Wilderness Coalition has proposed protecting that site, has proposed designating an additional 50,000 acres as federal wilderness and thus immune to the intrusions the Forest Service is about to allow.  50,000 acres sounds like a lot, but actually, it’s a piddling amount.  Jim Scheff of the Missouri Forest Alliance working with the Wilderness Coalition says:

“A big part of this is that, right now, only 4.3 percent of the entire Mark Twain National Forest is designated as wilderness,” Scheff said. “Almost the entire rest of the forest, about 95 percent, is open to some form of logging and other really intensive management.”

In other words, the Coalition is only trying to protect an additional 3 percent of the Mark Twain National Forest and the Ozark National Scenic Riverways.  That’s 7 percent, all told.  As Kat Logan Smith, executive director of the Missouri Coalition for the Environment, points out:  “Even God asks for 10 percent.”

But it’s a hard sell.  Many of the local hunters and anglers have been well satisfied with how the land has been handled in the last fifty years and figure that if the system ain’t broke, don’t fix it. They see this proposal as something that interfering city folk came up with.

Others like horseback rider Shannon Campbell, seem surprised at the proposal and reject it at once.

Standing at the Bar-K Wrangler Camp, … Campbell worried that while a wilderness designation won’t prohibit horseback riding at Swan Creek, it might restrict his ability to drive horse trailers into the forest.

And seeing the proposal originate in St. Louis is aggravating, he said.

“I think they need to stay up there and take care of things up there,” he said.

In fact, the proposal did not come from “city folk”.  Kat Logan Smith says that whenever she leaves St. Louis for a meeting about this issue, she never drives less than an hour and a half.  The address of the Coalition is in Boss, MO, in the heart of the Ozarks.

But Campbell’s scorn for ideas that originate in St. Louis illustrates a strategic mistake that some St. Louis members of the Wilderness Coalition made.  They jumped at the chance to get the Post-Dispatch to write a story about their proposal instead of first talking to local hunter/angler groups, warning them about the changes that are in the works, and getting them on board.  Ken Midkiff, another member of the Coalition, says that the way to go would have been to get the local people making individual phone calls to their federal representatives and then to get the news in the media.

Unfortunately, when Roy Blunt and Jo Ann Emerson found out about the article in the P-D, they were immediately horrified, and many of their constituents pretty much felt the same way. Coalition members had been hoping to get Kit Bond, who often endorses environmental legislation, to sponsor the proposal.  Now, however, he is also expressing reservations.

The damage done by that strategic error will take time to undo. Years, perhaps.