Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney appears to have gained some much needed traction this past week following the announcement that he raised $23 million in the first quarter of campaigning -- beating out all other Republican presidential candidates.
Former First Lady Nancy Reagan has invited Republicans seeking the party nomination in 2008 to participate in a debate May 3 at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.
Nine candidates have accepted the opportunity to attend the event, according the Politico:
Sen. Sam Brownback (Kan.)
former Virginia governor Jim Gilmore
former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani
former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee
Rep. Duncan Hunter (Calif.)
Sen. John McCain (Ariz.)
Rep. Ron Paul (Texas)
former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney
former Wisconsin governor Tommy G. Thompson.
The event will be broadcast by MSNBC and streamed online at Politico.com. The second debate will be held January 30, which, as the Politico notes, is "the final GOP debate before the 2008 Super Tuesday primary in California and several other key states."
Presidential hopeful and Arizona Sen. John McCain is getting mixed reviews for his candid campaigning style.
In recent weeks the senator has decided to let bloggers, and not just reporters, board his Straight Talk Express campaign bus for some up-close and personal discussions about everything from the War on Terror to McCain-Feingold to earmarks.
On conference call Wednesday McCain took questions for a full half-hour, kidding openly with those on the phone, inviting more bloggers to join him on the bus and referring to them as "you jerks."
It will be interesting to see how everything turns out in the end. Will America accept McCain for his willingness to open up to the people 24/7 or will he be shunned in the end for his blunders? Does a candidate need to keep his distance a bit to appear presidential or can he get away with being "humanized" before the public as he makes his way toward the Oval Office?
House Minority Leader John Boehner (R.-Ohio) told bloggers that the recent passage of the Democrat-backed, pork-filled emergency war supplemental by Congress is just the beginning of a bigger fight between the Democrats and the Bush Administration.
“There a fight brewing,“ he said, “and I can tell you that I’ve urged the White House to make this the fight of all fights.”
Boehner said all Republican members, with the exception of two black sheep, voted against the supplemental bill, which sets a withdrawal date for the troops and ties hands of generals in field.
The leader said Iraq is such a focus for him that he's mentioned the war in every speech he's given in the past 14 months.
Members are coming in and out so fast it's hard to post stuff up quick enough over here. Mary Katherine Ham of Townhall was smart enough to bring a video camera and has captured snippets of what House members are saying over here on blog row this afternoon.
House members are slipping from the budget topic into everything else, which keeps things exciting. Rep. Denny Hastert said his focus is currently on energy reform. He said among the alternatives Americans need to focus on is further development of nuclear energy, which won't likely happen under the reign of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who represents the state of Nevada where Yucca Mountain resides.
"It’s just wrong that one person has the power to block the source of power that [this country needs]," said Hastert. Adding that “We should work and strive to make sure we become more energy independent.”
Over here on Capitol Hill, House leadership continues to stress the importance of the "new media" in getting out the Republican message. Both House Conference Chairman Adam Putnam and House Minority Whip Roy Blunt thanked bloggers for their participation today.
Putnam said part of the purpose of today's blog row is to get "our guys comfortable with the new media." He said that is the best way to get the Republican minority message out to the American people.
House Minority Whip Roy Blunt said Republicans have the opportunity to define in the next few months who they are to the American people, and the Democrats are helping by defining who they are as they continue to increase spending.
Between the Iraq supplemental and Continuing Resolution passed in January and the budget sure that will most likely be passed tomorrow, Dems will have spent $50 billion more than anyone has asked for, Blunt said. "And it's only March 28."
In addition, he said that "we're beginning to see what happens when you don't deal with the entitlement programs," an issue Democrats refuse to address.
Frustrated taxpayers may say it doesn't matter which party is in power because politicians are all the same, Blunt said, but "as much as we need to improve who we are, I think the last 100 days have proved we are not all the same.”
Republicans lost the congressional majority because we weren't who we said we were, Rep. Paul Ryan (R.-Wis.). Ryan is the ranking Republican member on the House Budget Committee and has proposed an alternative budget to counter the Democrats'.
Ryan said the Democrats' budget is too dependent on taxes -- requesting a $392.5 billion tax increase -- to balance the budget.
"Every working American will be hit by this," said Ryan.
Ryan said the only real promise in the Democrat budget is to raise taxes to balance budget. Republicans want to rein in spending.
"The Democrats have absolutely zero savings in their budget," he said. And they won't address entitlement reform -- pushing it back to 2012.
"That's the height of irresponsibility," Ryan said.
Ryan said his budget plan is to keep spending low and slow the rate of the growth of government, whereas the Democrats' puts government ahead of the taxpayer.
"Revenues are coming in at an all-time high," he said. "We don't need to raise taxes anymore. We need to rein in spending."
I'm here on Capitol Hill with six other bloggers waiting for House Republicans who are coming to discuss the Democrats' bloated budget plans which will impose the largest tax increase in history. Around 40 members are expected to address us today, including many in leadership. They plan to make a few remarks and then open the floor for questions.
Bloggers include Mary Katherine Ham (Townhall.com), Mark I (RedState), Stephen Spruiell (National Review), Robert Bluey (RobertBluey.com), Pat Cleary (NAM), and Brian (The Influence Peddler).
The Club for Growth PAC has sent out a press release denouncing the passage of the Iraq spending bill which had been stuffed with pork by Democrat leaders.
The Club, a conservative PAC devoted to restoring fiscal responsibility to Congress, also singled out five freshmen who broke their word by voting for the bill: Representatives Nancy Boyda (KS-2); Heath Schuler (NC-11); Nick Lampson (TX-22); Tim Mahoney (FL-22); and Harry Mitchell (AZ-5) all ran on platforms of fiscal responsibility and promised voters they would cut out earmarks, not vote them in.
The Club's president, Pat Toomey, had this to say about the disappointing actions of the freshmen.
“Unfortunately, these candidates will say anything to get elected, but when push comes to shove, they roll over and play dead at the smallest command from their Democratic Party leaders,” said Mr. Toomey. “The U.S. Congress though, is not a canine obedience school. American taxpayers want to be represented by responsible stewards of their hard-earned money, not poodles. Ultimately, these congressmen will be held accountable for their empty promises and their cavalier attitudes towards American taxpayers.”
Over on the House floor, members have voted to require President Bush pull U.S. troops out of Iraq by fall 2008, according to the Associated Press.
Bush has already threatened to veto the bill, which passed by a vote of 218-212. Republican Representatives Walter Jones (N.C.) and Wayne Gilchrest (Md.) joined Democrats in their efforts to override the President's control in the Iraq War and should be held accountable for their actions. Find their contact info here.
On the other hand, 14 Democrats didn't fall for Pelosi's bribe and ought to be commended for putting principle before partisanship:
John Barrow (Ga.)
Dan Boren (Okla.)
Lincoln Davis (Tenn.)
Dennis Kucinich (Ohio)
Barbara Lee (Calif.)
John Lewis (Ga.)
Jim Marshall (Ga.)
Jim Matheson (Utah)
Michael McNulty (N.Y.)
Michael Michaud (Me.)
Gene Taylor (Miss.)
Maxine Waters (Calif.)
Diane Watson (Calif.)
Lynn Woolsey (Calif.)
As the San Diego Tribune notes in an editorial today, House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D.) had to add $24 billion in pork projects to the emergency $100 billion military appropriations bill to get enough support for its passage, which means she was buying votes to set her own agenda in Iraq.
The Tribune opines:
This is disgusting. That Pelosi insists this extra spending doesn't qualify as pork is bad enough. But the idea that taxpayer funds are being doled out by the multibillion for unrelated domestic programs to influence a profoundly important vote on Iraq should offend everyone. What does it say for the dozens of House members that this tactic apparently swayed? That on any issue, there is a price at which their convictions are for sale?
House Democrats pulled a bill to grant voting rights to Washington, D.C., after Republicans offered a motion that would repeal the gun ban for the District.
The move is a clear signal that Democrats have lost control of House floor after minority Republicans presented the Democratic majority with a politically unpalatable motion that their conservative members would be forced to support for fear of angering the gun rights community.
Fifty-two Democrats voted with Republicans on a similar measure to repeal the gun ban in 2004. That would be more than enough support for Republcians to add a repeal to the voting rights bill - something a majority of Democrats would vehemently oppose.
AmSpec's Prowler reports that Wall Street Journal editorial writer Peggy Noonan might soon be writing speeches for presidential hopeful Mitt Romney (at least, if Romney's team has its way):
Former Governor Mitt Romney, who insists he is a Reagan Republican, is attempting to further burnish that self-imposed mantle by hiring former Reagan Administration speechwriter Peggy Noonan, according to campaign insiders.
Noonan, according to Romney sources, has spent time in Boston with Romney, and around the time of such a meeting published a column in the Wall Street Journal examining one of Romney's chief rivals for the Republican nomination, Sen. John McCain.
Noonan and Romney haven't discussed a job, according to the sources. Thus far, it has been Romney ruminating about the need to bulk up on talent in every area. "We don't know if Noonan is interested, but we're interested in her," says a fundraiser with ties to the Romney camp. "I heard the meeting went well."
The Noonan hire would be but another shakeup in Romney's ranks in the past few weeks. Already, Romney has adjusted his national field operations, as well as his finance team. There is also talk that the campaign is attempting to tweak its policy positions, holding brainstorming sessions in Washington last week with a diverse group of lobbyists and former Bush and Reagan Administration staffers.
Last year Rep. Mike Pence (R.-Ind.) disappointed conservatives by pushing a guest-worker/amnesty plan as a solution to the nation's illegal immigration problem. Now, less than three months into 2007, he has sided with D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton in voting as a member of the House Judiciary Committee to send a bill to the floor that would give the District of Columbia a vote in the House of Representatives for the first time in history.
The Judiciary Committee voted 21 to 13, largely along party lines, to approve the legislation. But in a dramatic move, a leading conservative Republican, Mike Pence (Ind.), who had been undecided, joined Democrats in voting yes.
"It's heartfelt," Pence later told D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) as she thanked him for his support. He added, "I want to be helpful next week," when the measure goes to the floor.
One other Republican on the Judiciary panel backed the measure: Chris Cannon (Utah). His Republican-leaning state would pick up a seat under the bill, which seeks to maintain partisan balance while adding the vote of the heavily Democratic District.
The bill, sponsored by Norton and Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.), would increase the size of the House from 435 to 437 seats. Norton is currently allowed to vote only in committees, not on final passage of legislation. The bill would leave the District without voting representation in the Senate.
Pence, the 2005 HUMAN EVENTS Man of the Year, was seen as a rising star in the conservative movement for his accomplishments as former chairman of the Republican Study Committee and his strong commitment to social and fiscal conservative values but has since lost some of his shine for his wayward stance on immigration and now D.C. representation.
It appears that Mitt Romney donated quite a bit of money to conservative organizations before announcing his presidential bid, at least according to a New York Times article published last weekend. Here's an excerpt:
WASHINGTON, March 10 — In the months before announcing his bid for the Republican presidential nomination, former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts contributed tens of thousands of dollars of his personal fortune to several conservative groups in a position to influence his image on the right.
Last December, a foundation controlled by Mr. Romney made contributions of $10,000 to $15,000 to each of three Massachusetts organizations associated with major national conservative groups: the antiabortion Massachusetts Citizens for Life, Massachusetts Citizens for Limited Taxation and the Christian conservative Massachusetts Family Institute.
Mr. Romney and a group of his supporters also contributed a total of about $10,000 to a nonprofit group affiliated with National Review. Over the past two years, he contributed $35,000 to the Federalist Society, an influential network of conservative lawyers. And in December 2005, he contributed $25,000 to the Heritage Foundation, a leading conservative research organization.
The recipients of Mr. Romney’s donations said the money had no influence on them. But some of the groups, notably Citizens for Life and the Family Institute, have turned supportive of Mr. Romney after criticizing him in the past.
As the story continues to circulate the web, contributors to National Review Online (mainly Kathryn Jean Lopez), have defended the donations.
Just a few quick facts, for the record: Romney's foundation gave $5,000 to the National Review Institute, a fact fully disclosed at the time. The other $5,000 that post refers to was from a group called Evangelicals for Mitt. The contributions were among others solicited by NRI to defray the costs of the NRO 10th Anniversary event it hosted.
What I want to know is: where's our check? Just kidding. I am curious to know, however, what the other top candidates have done along the same lines. I have to say that I'm at least glad to see Romney trying to get in good with the right -- unlike presidential hopeful John McCain who seem to have decided they just aren't worth his time.
Rep. John Campbell, chairman of the budget and spending task force for the Republican Study Committee, recently started a blog at Townhall.com called "Green Eye Shade."
An excerpt from his introductory post explains its purpose and its peculiar name:
Welcome to the Green Eyeshade Blog. I'm John Campbell, Congressman from the 48th District in California. I am also a Certified Public Accountant. Hence the title of this blog. For those of you who don't know, green eyeshades were the headwear of choice for accountants in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
But this blog is not for fashion conscious bean counters. It is for anyone who thinks that federal taxes and spending are too high, the federal government is too big and the deficit needs to go away.
So far the congressman appears to be blogging pretty regularly and he also appears to actually be doing the work himself -- something quite unusual among elected officials.
Dennis Kucinich's 2004 presidential campaign will have to repay the federal government $137,358 for using federal matching funds for campaign purposes when he was ineligible to do so, and for failing to adequately document small contributions received at several "pass the hat" type fundraising events, the Federal Elections Commission decided today.
[...]
Even though he trailed in every 2004 primary, the FEC found that Kucinich continued to use federal money for campaigning until the Democratic party officially made John Kerry its presidential candidate on July 29, 2004. After March 4, the law allowed him to use only privately collected money for campaign purposes.
Most of the money Kucinich will have to repay - $135,518 - is for improperly spending federal matching funds. The $1,840 remainder is for improperly documenting small campaign contributions.
While some conservatives (and of course, liberals) will choose to cast a stone at Gingrich (and I'm not saying they should or shouldn't), it's interesting to think about why the mastermind behind the 1994 Republican revolution chose to release this information now. The guy's a thinker -- certainly not the kind to paint himself into a corner and get caught. No sirree, he chose to release the information and with calculated reason.
The puzzle pieces seem to come into place if you consider Gingrich, a conservative icon in the eyes of many, has held off on making an announcement regarding a presidential bid, repeatedly saying he will decide in the fall of '07.
First of all, conservatives are fairly forgiving people and for Gingrich to come forward and make such a statement shows a willingness to admit his faults and imperfections -- a big change from what seems to be the typical political move these days to just cover things up.
Second of all, by getting all his baggage on the table now it will all be old news by the time August rolls around -- which means there will be less ammo for the liberal press and any possible competitors to fire at Newt should he announce an official run for the Oval Office.
