The president ambled down to the Tar Heel State today to talk about health care I guess. I didn’t go even though Raleigh is only  about 3 hours or less from here. For some unknown reason, I didn’t receive an invitation. Apparently some other more prominent people failed to receive an invitation as well, since they were not there. Specifically, Sen Kay Hagan was busy elsewhere. Three of the “Blue Dog Democrats” from Congress were also awol. Reps Heath Shuler, Mike McIntyre and Larry  Kissell apparently had other more pressing business.

Seems sort of odd, does it not that you would not be there when your president visits your state. You know, hop on Air Force One, zip down for a great photo-op and  be back in D.C. for dinner. Especially since Gov. Perdue and most of the state’s top  Democrats were there. Guess the Blue Dogs were back in the capitol having their arms twisted to vote for the health care bill. Wonder if they were meeting with one or both of the Emanuel brothers?

It appears from listening to Maxine Waters that some members of the party’s more liberal wing are totally on board with the attention the Blue Dogs are getting and perhaps the influence they may be wielding. It can be kinda fun to watch Democrat vs Democrat, but one should remember that at sundown, they are still Democrats.

Yesterday evening, the House of Representatives passed an historic climate change bill which will reduce the level of greenhouse gases emitted in the U.S. over time by requiring polluting businesses to purchase credits to continue to pollute at current levels. Businesses who pollute less will be able to profit from selling the credits to businesses who aren’t willing to change their polluting ways.

The vote was close. 8 Republicans joined the Democratic leadership to pass the bill, while 44 Democrats joined Republicans in voting against the bill.

On close votes, casual observers of politics look to see which members bucked their party. That’s useful, but I think it’s smarter to look at Member’s vote here through the lense of last fall’s Presidential election.

The team at CQ makes that easy with their website showing Presidential voting patterns of these districts. CQ points out that President Barack Obama carried 34 House districts represented by Republicans. Similarly, Republican Sen. John McCain carried 49 districts represented by Democrats in the House.

President Obama carried the districts of  7 of the 8 Republicans who bucked their party and voted with the Democrats:

Mary Bono Mack, Mike Castle, Mark Kirk, Leonard Lance, Frank LoBiondo, John McHugh, Dave Reichert and Chris Smith. (McCain carried Chris Smith’s district with 52% of the vote, but Smith, who has a pretty strong  record on environmental issues,  voted with the Democrats.)

And now the for the 44 Democrats who voted with the Republicans. They are:

Jason Altmire, Michael Arcuri, John Barrow, Marion Berry, Dan Boren, Bobby Bright, Christopher Carney, Travis Childers, Jim Costa, Jerry Costello, Kathy Dahlkemper, Artur Davis, Lincoln Davis, Pete DeFazio, Joe Donnelly, Chet Edwards, Brad Ellsworth, Bill Foster, Parker Griffith, Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, Tim Holden, Ann Kirkpatrick, Larry Kissell, Dennis Kucinich, Jim Marshall, Eric Massa, Jim Matheson, Mike McIntyre, Charlie Melancon, Walt Minnick,  Harry Mitchell,  Alan Mollohan, Glenn Nye, Solomon Ortiz, Earl Pomeroy, Nick Rahall, Ciro Rodriguez, Mike Ross,  John Salazar, Pete Stark,  John Tanner, Gene Taylor, Pete Visclosky and Charlie Wilson.

Sen. McCain carried all of these districts except for those represented by Mike Arcuri, Jim Costa, Jerry Costello, Artur Davis, Pete DeFazio, Joe Donnelly, Bill Foster, Larry Kissell, Dennis Kucinich, Glenn Nye, Solomon Ortiz, Ciro Rodriguez, Pete Stark and Pete Visclosky.

For Democrats looking for retribution against these 14, I’d give the following members a pass. They won election narrowly and President Obama narrowly carried their districts.

• Mike Arcuri (N.Y.-24) won reelection with 52% of the vote, while Obama won the district with 50% of the vote.
• Larry Kissell (N.C.-8) won election with 55% of the vote, while Obama carried the district with 52% of the vote. Kissell beat an entrenched self-funding Republican on his second try.
• Glenn Nye (Va.-2) won election with 52% of the vote, while Obama narrowly won it with 50% of the vote. Nye needs to retain the support of independents and Republicans if he’s going to get re-elected. If you’re interested in learning more about his race, check out my previous blog posts on Rep. Nye.

But what about the other 11 Democrats who voted with the Republicans, despite representing districts which backed President Obama?

These 8 Members gave the White House and Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s team a heads up they would not be supporting the bill:

• Artur Davis (Ala.-7) was unopposed and Obama won his district with 71% of the vote, but Davis is running for Governor and to be competitive statewide, he needs to tack substantially to the right on issues like this. I’m guessing the leadership gave him a pass.
• Dennis Kucinich (Ohio-10) won reelection with 57% of the vote and Obama outperformed him with 59% of the vote. He said on the House floor that the bill was too friendly to the coal industry. (The West Virginia delegation disagrees with you, Congressman.)
• Jerry Costello (Ill.-12)  won reelection with 71% of the vote. Obama carried the district with 56% of the vote. Costello voted against the bill, “because it does not provide a bridge for coal and other fossil fuels to develop and demonstrate new technologies to provide reliable energy and meet the necessary reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.”
• Joe Donnelly (Ind.-2) won reelection with 67% of the vote. Obama carried his seat with 54% of the vote. He said he opposed the bill because he believed that, “climate change is real and should be addressed as part of a comprehensive reform of our national energy policy. At the same time, I could not support the cap-and-trade bill that passed today because it could put jobs at risk.”
• Bill Foster (Ill.14) won reelection with 57%, while Obama carried it with 55% of the vote. He said he opposed the bill because he believes, “we have a responsibility to act in a way that comes with the lowest possible cost to the economy. A more thoughtful and measured bill could have mitigated significantly more greenhouse gas per dollar of expenditure.”
• Pete Stark (Calif.-13) won reelection with 76% of the vote, while Obama won 74% in the district. Like Rep. Kucinich, Rep. Stark thinks the bill is too weak, particularly on the coal industry.
• Pete DeFazio (Ore.-4) was unopposed for reelection. Obama carried his district with 54% of the vote. Rep. DeFazio told Bloomberg News, “I don’t know how you could be much more friendly than this bill to coal interests.”
• Pete Visclosky (Ind.-1) won reelection with 70% of the vote, while Obama won 62% in the district. Rep. Visclosky thinks the bill is a job killer. The Congressman is tied up in the PMA lobbying scandal (earmarks-for-campaign-cash) which also involves Virginia Congressman Jim Moran. Nice.

What about the remaining three Congressmen? According to Politico, all three Congressmen promised to vote for the bill and flipped at the last minute.

• Jim Costa (Calif-20) won reelection with 74% of the vote and Obama won 59% of the vote in his district. This district is based in Fresno, but depends on agriculture for jobs. Just last week, the Congressman made a plea for Federal help for his drought stricken district. He said in a statement that the last minute amendments to the bill were not enough for him to support it. Somehow, I expect when Interior Secretary Ken Salazar visits Rep. Costa’s district on Sunday, he will get a stern talking to.
• Solomon Ortiz (Texas-27)  won reelection with 58% of the vote and Obama won 53% of the vote in his district. His spokesman told a local paper in advance of the vote that the Congressman would likely oppose the bill because his district has, “many low-income families, farmers and oil refineries that would be hurt by the cap-and-trade provision.” Given his flip flop, I wonder if Federal funds for this project in his district will be forthcoming.
• Ciro Rodriguez (Texas-23) won reelection with 55% of the vote while Obama won 51% in the district. Despite a pre-vote hug and kiss from Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the Congressman spurned the bill and ran from the floor as soon as he cast his flip flop vote.
• Worst of all was Florida Congressman Alcee Hastings who promised to vote yes, but skipped the vote altogether. Yet another reason not to like Rep. Hastings!

As angry and disappointed as I am in those 11 Democrats who represent districts Obama carried, I am particularly proud of the following 20 Democrats who voted with President Obama depite representing districts Sen. McCain carried.

They are:

• Vic Snyder (Ark.-2)
• Gabrielle Giffords (Ariz.-8)
• Betsy Markey (Colo.-4)
• Allen Boyd (Fla.-2)
• Suzanne Kosmas (Fla.-24)
• Baron Hill (Ind.-9)
• Ben Chandler (Ky.-6)
• Frank Kratovil (Md.-1)
• Collin Peterson (Minn.-7)
• Ike Skelton (Mo.-4)
• Heath Shuler (N.C.-11)
• Harry Teague (N.M.-2)
• Michael McMahon (N.Y.-13)
• John Boccieri (Ohio-16)
• Zach Space (Ohio-18)
• John Murtha (Pa.-12)
• John Spratt (S.C.-5)
• Bart Gordon (Tenn.-6)
• Tom Perriello (Va.-5)
• Rick Boucher (Va.-9)

(I’m particularly proud of Virginia Congressmen Rick Boucher and Tom Perriello. Thank you both!)

Now for those 26 Republicans who represent districts Obama carried and STILL they voted with the GOP. These folks deserve our contempt and a credible Democratic opponent in 2010.

• Dan Lungren (Ca.-3)
• Elton Gallegy (Ca.-24)
• Buck McKeon (Ca.-25)
• David Drier (Calif.-26)
• Ken Calvert (Calif.-44)
• John Campbell (Calif.-48)
• Brian Bilbray (Calif.-50)
• C.W. Bill Young (Fla.-10)
• Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (Fla.-18)
• Peter Roskam (Ill.-6)
• Judy Biggert (Ill.-13)
• Donald Manzullo (Ill.-16)
• Joseph Cao (La.-2)
• Dave Camp (Mich.-4)
• Fred Upton (Mich.-6)
• Mike Rogers (Mich.-8)
• Thad McCotter (Mich.-11)
• Erik Paulsen (Minn.-3)
• Lee Terry (Neb.-2)
• Pat Tiberi (Ohio-12)
• Jim Gerlach (Pa.-6)
• Charlie Dent (Pa.-15)
• Randy Forbes (Va.-4)
• Frank Wolf (Va.-10)
• Paul Ryan (Wisc.-1)
• Tom Petri (Wisc.-6)

Virginians, did you notice Congressmen Randy Forbes and Frank Wolf on this list of GOP members who disregard their constituents? I sure did.

I hope that the more liberal members of my party remember that we have to be pragmatic, if we’re going to hold our majorities. That why we need to give Democrats who represent McCain districts a break. But at the same time, we need to find Democrats to run against Republicans like Forbes and Wolf, who routinely vote against the will of their constituents. In my view, it may make more sense to run centrist Democrats in these types of districts.

Doug Clark examines some of the questions surrounding the “Buy American” frenzy associated with the stimulus bill:

“(A Business Week report) notes that some “buy American” requirements have been in place for years. There are limitations, the article states. For example, the rules don’t apply “if they’ll increase the cost of the overall project by more than 25%.”

When you’re talking about projects costing hundreds of billions of dollars, potentially overpaying by up to 25 percent adds up to a huge penalty for taxpayers. Not many of us could manage our household budgets that way, no matter how much we might want to limit our personal spending to the immediate neighborhood.”

House Agriculture Committee Passes Legislation to Bring Transparency and Accountability to Derivatives Markets

H.R. 977 Builds on Last Year’s House-Passed Bill to Strengthen Oversight and Prevent Manipulation of Futures Markets

WASHINGTON – Today, the House Agriculture Committee approved legislation to increase the transparency and strengthen oversight of futures, options and over-the-counter (OTC) markets. By voice vote, the Committee approved the Derivatives Markets Transparency and Accountability Act of 2009 as amended, a bill sponsored by Committee Chairman Collin C. Peterson of Minnesota.

The legislation, H.R. 977, will bring greater transparency and oversight to futures and OTC derivatives markets. It toughens position limits on futures contracts for physically-deliverable commodities as a way to prevent potential price distortions caused by excessive speculative trading. The bill also imposes a clearing requirement on OTC derivatives contracts and empowers the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) with the ability to suspend trading in naked credit default swaps under certain
circumstances.

“This bill broadens and improves on last year’s bipartisan derivatives legislation that passed the House by a wide margin,” Chairman Peterson said. “The urgency to fix the problems in regulated and unregulated futures markets magnified by the credit crisis and the collapse of some of America’s largest financial institutions: entities that were heavily involved in the trading of off-exchange credit derivatives like swaps contracts. Their failures have put the American taxpayer on the hook, so just sitting back and doing
nothing is not an option. Congress should act quickly and pass a bill that will bring much-needed transparency to derivatives markets.”

H.R. 977 contains provisions similar to a bipartisan bill to strengthen the oversight of futures markets from the 110th Congress. That bill, introduced by Chairman Peterson, passed the House last September by a vote of 283-133. In addition, the Committee held three hearings on credit derivatives late last year, along with two hearings last week with industry and stakeholder groups to examine derivatives legislation.

Provisions included in the Derivatives Markets Transparency and Accountability Act would:

a.. Require all prospective over-the-counter transactions to be settled and cleared through a CFTC-regulated designated clearing organization, unless exempted by the CFTC in accordance with specified criteria. In some cases, the clearing requirement can be met through a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulated clearing agency or a properly regulated foreign clearinghouse.

b.. Give CFTC the authority, with the President’s consent, to suspend naked credit default swap trading whenever a SEC shortselling suspension order is in effect.

c.. Close the so-called “London Loophole” by requiring foreign boards of trade to share trading data and adopt speculative position limits on contracts that trade U.S. commodities similar to U.S.-regulated exchanges.

d.. Require CFTC to set trading limits for physically-deliverable commodities, in order to prevent excessive speculation.

e.. Empower the CFTC to criminally prosecute people who violate commodities legislation.

f.. Limit eligibility for hedge exemptions to bona-fide hedgers.

g.. Improve transparency by requiring that CFTC disaggregate and separately report the trading activity of index funds and swapdealers in agriculture and energy markets.

h.. Call for new, full-time CFTC employees to enforce manipulation and prevent fraud.

i.. Authorize CFTC to take corrective action if it finds disruption in over-the-counter markets for energy and gas.

During today’s business meeting the Committee considered and adopted several amendments to the underlying bill. The Committee approved:

a.. A manager’s amendment by Chairman Peterson, by voice vote, containing technical and clarifying corrections, and changes regarding position limits and CFTC authority to suspend credit default swaps trading.

b.. An amendment by Representative Larry Kissell (D-NC) regarding the composition of governing boards of publicly traded exchanges.

c.. An amendment by Representative Earl Pomeroy (D-ND) requiring that CFTC hold hearings twice each year regarding appropriate levels of speculative position limits.

d.. An amendment by Representative Leonard Boswell (D-IA) regarding alternatives to clearing through derivatives clearing organizations.

Congressional oversight of commodity futures trading is under the jurisdiction of the House Agriculture Committee. Previous Committee action on derivatives legislation from the current Congress as well as previous sessions of Congress, including hearing opening statements and bill summaries can be found on the House Agriculture Committee website at http://agriculture.house.gov/inside/legislation.html.

By MIKE BAKER Associated Press Writer

Integrity has always been a top drawer issue with me as it should be.  Why not?  When a person or a company loses their integrity why on earth would anyone want to be associated with them?  No one with any degree of self respect wants to be associated with crooks and liars.   Unfortunately, in recent years we  have all had a rotten example set by everyone from Presidents and Congressmen to ministers, parents and of all things school teachers.  It is no wonder the corruption has sluffed over into our society.  You don’t ‘teach’ children the ins and outs of corruption without their using what they’ve learned.  Now we have top CEO’s looking out for no one except themselves, and it permeates every aspect of our society.   Unfortunately, adults and children are going to have to ‘learn’ the meaning of integrity and how devastating lack of integrity is to our society overall.

Integrity isn’t something you verbalize on cue like some of the reverends that we hear on TV who the next week are back on TV charged with child abuse.  Integrity is the inner core of oneself.   Integrity is something that is there whether anyone is watching or not.   Integrity gives us self-respect, humanness and strength.  Integrity is the cornerstone of our person and of our nation and even our world.  Most of us hate being lied to or stolen from.  That is what corruption and lack of integrity does to people.  There is no self-respect and no respect of others left.  Integrity has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with who we are.

Now we are being told that we are entering the new age of integrity in Washington and I sincerely hope that is true.  I really believe Barack Obama and Joe Biden are men of integrity.   I will say that I will never forget some of the things I saw some of Obamas supporters do during the campaign that I felt didn’t reflect much integrity, but that wasn’t him.  If he runs again though, I hope he will make it clear to supporters that he expects them to stand up for his level of integrity or not actively support him.  It wasn’t pretty.  However, again, I look forward to his setting the example in Washington and insisting on impeccable integrity in his administration… no exceptions.

Once we have an example set by our president, we have to ‘expect’ integrity from corporations and ceos and congressmen/women, from ministers and teachers and hold those accountable who try to milk the system and dispense with integrity.

During the 2008 Campaign, I was fortunate enough to meet several of the candidates running for various offices.   One of those was Larry Kissell who was running for US House of Representatives from the 8th District in North Carolina.   Larry has always seemed to me to be an honorable man and though he isn’t from my district, I’m happy to see him become one of the incoming Representatives.  I hope he does the job that he promised and that we the electorate expect.   If not, I will work just as hard trying to get the new guys and the more experienced ones out of office as I worked trying to get them elected.  I’m simply tired of ‘tell them anything, but do nothing’ elected officials at all levels.   However, I truly believe that Kissell is one of the ‘good guys’.   With that said, though he is already elected, I will post one of the videos that I think shows some of Larry’s strong points.