Of course, we stopped by our local caucus location for Clark County Commission District G Democrats. And we were actually somewhat surprised to see the Painters' Hall fill up like that. The room held hardcore activists, local candidates, and even some high profile candidates.
State legislators reminded the audience that the balance of power in Carson City is at stake this fall. And of course, Congressional candidates reminded the audience that the balance of power in Washington (DC) is also at stake this fall.
Rep. Steven Horsford (D-North Las Vegas) met with local NV-04 Democrats at his caucus site. NV-03 candidate Erin Bilbray made the rounds at various caucus locations with significant NV-03 territory, including the District G site in Henderson. And even up north, Washoe County Democrats got fired up and ready to go.
Meanwhile at the District G site, a very special (yet familiar) guest dropped by. Rep. Dina Titus spoke with caucus goers and let them knew she'd be working hard alongside them this year.
Once again, Nevada faces a fun filled and hotly contested even numbered year election cycle. And once again, Nevada Democrats are preparing as they know best. First come the caucuses, then come the voter registration drives, then come the field offices, then...
Last week, we tried to warn them. If Republicans in Congress are truly determined to kill comprehensive immigration reform (CIR), they must be prepared to live with the consequences. And now, we have our first sign of the consequences ahead.
Jon Ralston caught wind yesterday of a new Magellan poll showing strong support among voters of Congressional District 3 for CIR... And voters of Congressional District 2. NV-03 voters support the bipartisan Senate CIR bill 68-30, while NV-02 voters support it by a margin of 64-33. And pluralities in both districts say they'll think more highly of their respective Representatives if they pass CIR.
So what do they think of their respective Representatives now? In NV-02, Mark Amodei sports an OK 42-33 favorability rating. But in NV-03, Joe Heck has fallen underwater in NV-03. Here, Heck's favorability rating is 41-45. Ouch.
This actually comes on the heels of a PPP poll released earlier this month that showed Rep. Heck barely ahead of a Democratic challenger as anger was building against the most recent G-O-TEAmanufactured crisis. As we've discussed before, most Americans want a government that works. Yet this month, we've seen anything but that.
One would think the G-O-TEA's EPIC FAIL of a Shutdown Sh**fest would light a fire under enough @sses to accomplish something, anything, so Republicans can put this FAIL Whale of a month behind them. However, that's not happening. Instead, many Republicans seem all too happy to kill reform.
And they wonder why their poll numbers suck? This is why. Millions of American families, businesses, and workers demand solutions. Yet instead of providing solutions, the G-O-TEA hardliners just want to create more problems with their seemingly endless manufactured crises. And to make matters even worse, Republican "leaders" are all too willing much too often to indulge in G-O-TEA delusions of grandeur.
Reps. Heck and Amodei may be backbenchers, but they're not completely powerless. If they want CIR, they can step forward and demand it. Other Republicans did so this month in calling for an end to the manufactured crisis, and it worked last week when the federal government finally reopened.
And ultimately, their political future may very well depend on the fate of CIR. Does Rep. Heck want to serve another term? And does Rep. Amodei want to serve in the majority? This shouldn't be a tough call.
President Barack Obama left town, Mitt Romney was due the next day, and just up the road from a billboard advising Nevadans to abandon their underwater homes, the conservative group Americans for Prosperity inflated a giant Uncle Sam. [...]
It is only midsummer, but in the swing county in a swing state, the presidential campaign is fully under way. The election here is a closely watched test of Obama's ability to repeat his victories four years ago in areas of the country still reeling from the recession.
Like elsewhere, the economy is the focus of the campaigns. On a wall in the Obama office hangs a chart suggesting the jobs outlook was even worse before Obama was elected, and Apple Inc. announced last month it will build a $1 billion data center here. [...]
In his convincing victory in Nevada in 2008, Obama became the first Democratic candidate for president to carry Washoe County since Lyndon Johnson in 1964.
This year the county of about 425,000 people on the eastern slopes of the Sierra Nevada is once again in play.
Make no mistake, Northern Nevada is back in the spotlight. Even though Clark County has over 70% of the state's population, Washoe County and the rurals have outsized turnout and can still make a big splash in statewide elections. And on top of that, Washoe just happens to have perhaps the hottest and most high-stakes Legislature race in the entire state. So really, there are several reasons why Reno is taking such a prominent role on the campaign trail this year.
So what's the state of play like? Honestly, it looks like both sides are very heavily engaged on the ground. When I visited Reno in March, Washoe Democrats were definitely revving up their engines and preparing to race. And since then, I've been hearing from the ground that they're staying awfully busy.
But then again, so are Washoe Republicans. In fact, that's the biggest reason why they've filed for divorce from the Nevada GOP. Long story short: They're functional, the state party is not, and they no longer want the state party's "Dysfunction Junction" (arriving directly from the Clark County Official Ron Paul Fan Club GOP) weighing them down.
And with so much happening on the ground, the campaigns are even more compelled to stay on top of it all. That's why Nevada Democrats don't mind seeing Barack Obama & Shelley Berkley get to know voters in Washoe County. And that's why Nevada Republicans are begging Mitt Romney to do the same.
Romney will return Friday for a major fundraiser put on by Reno entrepreneur/business owner Patty Wade. Donations to attend one of a handful of fundraising opportunities arranged by Wade range from $2,500 to $25,000.
In her email to prospective donors, Wade warns that this could be Romney’s last visit to Northern Nevada before the election.
“The national campaign has told us that this will likely be Gov. Romney’s only campaign appearance in Northern Nevada prior to the election in November,” Wade wrote.
Really, this is Romney’s last visit to Washoe County? It’s closed to the public, an exclusive gathering dominated by rich folk.
Sounds like a good way to lose Nevada, considering Washoe County is the battleground county in a battleground state.
Nonetheless, Nevada isn’t quite on the knife’s edge. Among the polling averages of the 11 states considered toss-ups under the most generous definition in 2012–Nevada, Iowa, Colorado, Virginia, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida and Missouri–Nevada has the second largest gap, at +5.2 percentage points for Obama. That’s reflected in campaign resource allocation as well. Despite consistent spending in the Silver State, the President’s campaign has directed more to states like Iowa, North Carolina and Virginia. American Crossroads, the Republican third-party group spending on Romney’s behalf while he awaits his party’s nomination, has spent more in almost every swing state than in Nevada.
None of which is to say Nevada’s six electoral college votes don’t matter, the state won’t be very closely contested or that Obama and Romney won’t be back in Washoe county before November. They probably will. Just don’t expect them to dawdle too long.
Actually, this is what no one in Washoe County likes to hear. Even if Washoe Republicans have their act together and Mitt Romney is at least holding his own in Reno, that may not even matter in the end as long as Nevada Democrats power up their field machine in Clark County. And as long as that's happening, gold medals may remain out of reach for Mitt Romney and Dean Heller... And perhaps Michael Roberson as well.
But at least for the time being, Reno is the epicenter of the electoral earthquake hitting Nevada now. We just have to wait and see who ultimately gets hurt by it.
Well, I wouldn't expect less from the former Nevada Mining Association President who just happened to serve in the state legislature as well. Mark Amodei wants us to know that it's hard out there for the multinational mining corporations. That's why he insists we must deregulate mining some more.
The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed a bill introduced by U.S. Rep. Mark Amodei, R-Carson City, to streamline the permitting process for mining operations.
Earlier this month, H.R. 4402, the National Strategic and Critical Minerals Production Act of 2012, passed the House by a vote of 256 to 160.
The bill was the second introduced by Amodei that has passed the House since he was elected in 2011.
In his floor remarks on the bill during testimony on July 11, Amodei said the bill sets a 30-month time limit for the permitting process, unless the applicant agrees to an extension.
“This does nothing to tax law, this does nothing to safety law, this does nothing to supplant NEPA and this does nothing to supplant any state things,” Amodei said.
Oh, really? I wonder why he hasn't said that to communities across this country who will have a more difficult time protecting their natural resources if Amodei's bill becomes law. HR 4402 aims to eliminate strong environmental review of proposed mining projects and prioritize mineral extraction over conservation AND recreation for most federal lands. It's all about speeding up the permit process so mining companies can pump up their profits, even if they make people suffer in the process.
As PLAN warned earlier this year, HR 4402 takes us in the wrong direction on mining policy. It's bad enough that our state allows the mining industry to walk all over us. We'll only make matters worse if we allow for mining to weaken federal regulations necessary to protect communities from unnecessary damage.
Last spring, Nevada didn’t have anyone in Congress who was open to the idea of bringing nuclear waste to the state. Now, it has Republican Rep. Mark Amodei — and he says he’s ready to take on the pro-Yucca enthusiasts and try to work out a compromise.
It’s the first specific test of how far he’s willing to push his party on Yucca, and when they push back, whether he’ll fall into party line or object with his vote, as several Nevada representatives have before him. [...]
In the House, there’s probably no Yucca agitator more vocal than Illinois Rep. John Shimkus, who led a delegation of lawmakers to Yucca Mountain last year and has told colleagues he’s tired of Reid’s pushback.
But Amodei believes he can talk to Shimkus and that the time is ripe to start a conversation.
Despite his readiness to pursue a third way, Amodei may nonetheless find himself running up procedural quirks of the legislative process that have stymied lawmakers before him, including Nevada Rep. Joe Heck’s best-intentioned efforts to strike a compromise solution last year.
When presented last year’s almost identical appropriations legislation on Yucca, Heck, who is opposed to bringing nuclear waste to the state, attempted to repurpose $25 million to go toward a nuclear reprocessing research facility at the site instead. Amodei believes that for Yucca Mountain to be feasible as a reprocessing research facility, Nevada would have to accept the waste.
Well, at least Amodei is being a little more honest in his capitulation "move to compromise" than Heck. Joe Heck tried to argue last year that he really didn't want to allow nuclear waste to be trucked into the state, but his attempt at compromise was dead from the start mostly because Nye County doesn't have nearly enough water needed for the kind of reprocessing Heck championed. It was really just another attempt to keep Yucca open so that G-O-TEA dreams of a nuclear waste dump in Nevada wouldn't die.
And now, we have yet another attempt at reviving Yucca. Yet despite the overwhelming and bipartisan opposition to Yucca (with even Dean Heller and Brian Sandoval flatly opposed!), Mark Amodei and Joe Heck keep playing footsie with out-of-state G-O-TEA radicals looking to shove toxic waste down our throats. Never mind that Yucca lies on an active fault and would be an extremely dangerous place to store radioactive waste, Heck and Amodei want to be "good team players" and stay in John Boehner's good graces.
OK, OK, I'm back! Have you really missed me that much? Since at least some of you have been asking about the state of the Congressional races here in Nevada, I figured I'd update you on what's happening here in The Silver State.
So what are you waiting for? Come with me. You're in The Wild, Wild West now. Let's play!
Ever since the new map emerged, we've been on a wild political roller coaster ride here. Some candidates were quick to jump in, yet some have already been forced to jump out. Overall, the new map provides Nevada Democrats with exciting new opportunities. And while there are still some clear challenges present now, the trend going into the future is looking great.
NV-01 (Urban Las Vegas, Paradise, & Spring Valley)
US-Pres 2008
Obama (D) 64.51%
McCain (R) 33.05%
NV-Sen 2010
Reid (D) 62.40%
Angle (R) 33.09%
She's back! And she won't be leaving us again any time soon. Dina Titus may perhaps provide us with the most dramatic, yet ultimately upbeat, comeback saga of 2010/2012. Two years ago, she lost NV-03 by the narrowest of margins (only 1,748 votes, or 0.66%). But this year, she's set to win big in the new NV-01. It's just over D+11, so Dina no longer has to worry about tough, grueling campaigns... For herself.
Still, she doesn't want to take any kind of back seat to this year's action. At the Clark County Democratic Party Convention this month, Dina Titus made it clear that she doesn't want to just go back to Congress next year, but she wants to go in the majority.
NV-02 (Reno, Carson City, & Rural Northern Nevada)
US-Pres 2008
Obama (D) 49.43%
McCain (R) 48.23%
NV-Sen 2010
Angle (R) 49.57%
Reid (D) 43.96%
Mark Amodei has really lucked out. He hasn't been good at raising money, he doesn't seem to be building much of a strong profile, and his district may be trending the other way. Yet despite all this, one of his Democratic opponents has already dropped out of the race. And despite all this, hardly any one is seeing this race as all that competitive.
Why? Last year's special election catastrophe probably has a big role in this. The "major league candidates" have pretty much been scared away since then, leaving only a handful of "minor league contenders" to compete for the honor of losing to Amodei this November. At this point, Democrats' only hope is that somehow President Obama wins NV-02 again and wins well enough to create down-ticket momentum up north. And while that may be possible, it will be incredibly difficult for even that to really make Amodei sweat.
This race may quickly fall off the radar entirely if Amodei doesn't step into major doo-doo any time soon.
Race Rating: Likely Republican (Hold)
NV-03 (Henderson, Enterprise, Summerlin South, & Southern Clark County)
US-Pres 2008
Obama (D) 53.53%
McCain (R) 44.58%
NV-Sen 2010
Reid (D) 48.75%
Angle (R) 47.03%
While Mark Amodei has lucked out, Joe Heck has not. Funny enough, NV-03 became slightly redder after redistricting while NV-02 became slightly bluer. Yet despite that, Joe Heck has run into quite a bit of trouble lately.
Why? It's still a "Purple District" that's developing more of a Blue tint. So Joe Heck's positions on issues like women's rights, Social Security & Medicare, and green energy are looking increasingly out of touch with his district. This is why Heck's campaign kickoff in February turned out to be a rocky start.
And this is why this race will probably (yet again!) be the key barnburner that determines not just the composition of Nevada's Congressional Delegation, but also the balance of power on Capitol Hill.
Race Rating: Tossup
NV-04 (North Las Vegas, Summerlin, Northwest Vegas, & Rural Central Nevada)
Oh, yes. Kind of like what happened in 2010 when Nevada Republicans had a bunch of "D List" candidates itching to lose to Harry Reid, they again have a bunch of "D List" candidates itching to lose to Steven Horsford. Unlike NV-Sen 2010, it seems like Danny Tarkanian may finally break his recent losing streak and get past the G-O-TEA primary. But like (Sharrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrron Angle in) NV-Sen 2010, "Baby Tark" just doesn't seem to have much (other than his famous last name) to offer to voters.
What this race will probably come down to is turnout. As long as OFA turns out tons of Democratic voters in Clark County for President Obama, Horsford will probably have at least a fairly smooth sail to Congress. Republicans' only chance here lies with poor turnout in Clark County.
NV-04 (R to D)
NV-03 (R to D)
NV-02 (R... Well, probably still R.)
NV-01 (D... & proud to be.)
This is really tricky. But if I had to stop the flipping somewhere, it would probably be at NV-03. Either way, the race there may be decided by another razor thin margin. But with even Joe Heck's campaign sensing trouble there, John Oceguera can't be counted out. But other than a possible close race in NV-04, the rest looks to be a snooze-fest.
So The Beltway's favorite gossip rag, Politico, has a breathless piece this morning about the new G-O-TEA plan to sell Paul Ryan's "Doom of Austerity" plan to America: Just don't talk about what's actually in it!
Last year, they were blindsided by the backlash to the Wisconsin Republican’s plan. It was immediately framed by Democrats as ending Medicare, crushing Medicaid while keeping taxes low for the rich. Ryan, who was being pitched as a presidential prospect for the party, receded as his plan came under attack from all sides.
The 2012 plan is — simply put — to not talk about the plan too much. [...]
GOP leaders are suggesting members use props. In a presentation, the NRCC said members should try to “inoculate” themselves in a campaign season by using “credible third-party validators (mom or seniors),” according to a party document.
Above all, the Ryan budget rollout was designed to conform to a new political reality for Republicans: Changing entitlements is difficult, not popular but necessary. And even the true believers — like Ryan himself — need to build coalitions when they pitch big ideas.
To ensure the plan landed well nationally, Ryan personally reached out to presidential candidates to brief them on it. Romney endorsed the plan this week.
And DC Republicans are pointing to Mark Amodei's win in NV-02 last year as living proof of their plan working (politically, that is).
Amodei gave up talking about the particulars of the Ryan budget. He started saying the status quo was unsustainable. He tagged Marshall as supporting Obama’s health care bill, which he said cut from Medicare. When talking about the Republican plan, he said it would “save and protect” the senior health care program.
Amodei sent out direct mail that branded him as the “the one candidate working to protect Medicare.” They enlisted his mother to star in an advertisement vouching he would protect the program.
The contrast worked. [...]
“Here’s what I’m real comfortable telling people,” Amodei said in an interview in Washington on Wednesday. “I’ll tell you the truth about your program, and I’ll fight to save it, but in order to tell you the truth and to fight to save it, you can’t continue to do nothing. Can you fix it all in a year? Absolutely not. Can you fix it in five years? No you can’t. But you better start now.”
Here's what Politico is missing. First off, Barack Obama isn't behaving like Kate Marshall. Secondly, it doesn't look like Shelley Berkley, John Oceguera, or Steven Horsford plans to behave like Kate Marshall. Thirdly, Paul Ryan's plan would still destroy Medicare if enacted. And finally, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum have wholly embraced Paul Ryan and his plan to destroy Medicare. That's why House Republicans are spinning this like crazy now.
Beginning 2023, the guaranteed Medicare benefit would be transformed into a government-financed “premium support” system. Seniors currently under the age of 55 could use their government contribution to purchase insurance from an exchange of private plans or traditional fee-for-service Medicare. But the budget does not take sufficient precautions to prevent insurers from cherry-picking the the healthiest beneficiaries from traditional Medicare and leaving sicker applicants to the government. As a result, traditional Medicare costs could skyrocket, forcing even more seniors out of the government program. The budget also adopts a per capita cost cap of GDP growth plus 0.5 percent, without specifying how it would enforce it. This makes it likely that the cap would limit the government contribution provided to beneficiaries and since the proposed growth rate is much slower than the projected growth in health care costs, CBO estimates that new beneficiaries could pay up to $1,200 more by 2030 and more than $5,900 more by 2050. Finally, the budget would also raise Medicare’s age of eligibility to 67. Some seniors who would no longer be eligible for Medicare would pick up employer coverage—but they would pay more in premiums and cost sharing. And since the budget would scale back or eliminate other coverage options, hundreds of thousands of seniors would become uninsured.
The budget would eliminate the exiting matching-grant financing structure of Medicaid and would instead give each state a pre-determined block grant that does not keep up with actual health care spending. This would shift some of the burden of Medicaid’s growing costs to the states, forcing them to — in the words of the CBO — make cutbacks that “involve reduced eligibility for Medicaid and CHIP, coverage of fewer services, lower payments to providers, or increased cost sharing by beneficiaries—all of which would reduce access to care.” The block grants would reduce federal Medicaid spending by $810 billion over 10 years, decreasing federal Medicaid spending by more than 35 percent over the decade. As a result, states could reduce enrollment by more than 14 million people, or almost 20 percent—even if they are were able to slow the growth in health care costs substantially.
Joe Heck has to do this. On one hand, he has to look "moderate" in order to win reelection in NV-03. But on the other hand, he's still expected to mostly be a loyal follower of Paul Ryan and "Tea Party, Inc." So what's someone like Heck to do? Oh, just lie about Medicare and lie about Democrats' position on Medicare!
When House Republicans unveil their 2012 budget on Tuesday, they are expected to include a Medicare privatization plan endorsed by one Democrat — Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR). That, Republicans will claim, proves their controversial overhaul proposal has bipartisan support.
Leading Democrats say they won’t let the GOP get away with it.
“We don’t see a difference in principle between the original Ryan plan and the so-called Wyden-Ryan plan,” Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) a party surrogate on health care issues, told reporters on a conference call Monday morning. “It’s equally bad or only marginally different but still would end Medicare as we know it.” [...]
“They [seniors] don’t want Medicare itself to be diminished in some way,” Schakowsky said, “or to become too expected and therefore ruined.”
So no matter how hard both the national G-O-TEA and Nevada's G-O-TEA representatives try to spin Paul Ryan's new budget proposal as a "bold, courageous, bipartisan plan to save Medicare", it's really just another attempt to pass the same old plan to destroy Medicare and take away needed health care from many Nevadans.
Brower was appointed to the Senate seat to replace the late Sen. Bill Raggio, R-Reno, who resigned before the start of the 2011 session. Brower refused to speculate on his political future beyond 2012 when asked if he was considering a run for Nevada attorney general. Democrat Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto will be termed out of office in 2014.
“I am 100 percent focused on getting elected to this Senate seat,” he said.
When asked by host Sam Shad if he would commit to a full four-year term in the Senate, Brower said: “I can’t predict the future, Sam, I just don’t know what is going to happen. I’m just not even going to think beyond 2012.”
It might be understandable if Greg Brower is suffering from short-timer’s syndrome. He’s running to represent Nevada’s 2nd Congressional District and the Reno Republican’s state Senate seat will likely move to Clark County after redistricting.
Still, Brower’s symptoms have become so pronounced that his party’s legislative leaders recently sat him down for a talking-to about his notable absences from committee hearings and floor debates.
Brower has been present at roll call for nearly every floor session and committee meeting. He’s missed no floor votes. However, he’s developed a routine of taking extended breaks after being marked present or leaving early while his colleagues on the Education or Health and Human Services committees work late into the evening.
The practice has irritated some of his colleagues, Republican and Democrats. [...]
Brower missed large sections of the public schools hearing on April 20. Two days later, when he was absent from the higher education hearing before the Senate, Horsford, sent the sergeant-at-arms to fetch Brower from his office.
Four days later, Brower officially announced his congressional campaign.
When asked whether he has left committee or floor meetings to attend to campaign business, Brower dodged the question..
“My focus is on the session and representing my constituents,” he said. “That’s what I am here for.”
(This Sun article was written before the Nevada Supreme Court approved a new Legislature map that actually moved Brower and Leslie into the new SD 15 in western Washoe County.)
So when the NV-02 seat was wide open, Brower was quick to jump on that opportunity to run for Congress. But when that didn't work out, the game plan shifted to running for State Senate this year, only for Brower to set himself up for a run for Attorney General in 2014. Yet even as Brower's initial expectation of a smooth sail to election didn't quite pan out that way, he still won't commit to actually serving the full term!
And Greg Brower thinks he can legitimately attack Sheila Leslie for simply filing in the district she now lives in? Who's he kidding?
Brower also defended Sandoval for his announcement last week that he would continue a package of expiring tax increases into the 2013-15 budget to avoid any further budget cuts to education. Brower voted against continuing the 2009 taxes in the 2011 session even though Sandoval supported the decision as a compromise to finalize the current budget.
“I think what the governor is trying to do is move this state forward,” he said. “And that means leadership on real issues like the budget. And I think that’s what we saw last week and that’s what we’re going to continue to see. And to the extent this governor is going to take a leadership role in moving this state forward, I stand solidly behind him.”
There was little disagreement voiced among the three, who Las Vegas Sun political reporter Jon Ralston has dubbed “the leading candidates.”
All said they were supportive of Ryan’s budget plan, and that they would have voted for the Pence Amendment to defund Planned Parenthood. Education, they all agreed, should be dealt with on a local level, and the role of the Department of Education should be highly diminished, or the Department should be gotten rid of all together. On energy, all called for more domestic sources of energy, whether it be green energy, offshore drilling, or nuclear energy.
Amodei disputed the use of the phrase “green energy” saying that term “is another way of saying politically correct energy.”
Asked about their feelings on the Tea Party movement, Lippold and Brower expressed hearty approval.
“Any time you have citizens getting involved directly in how their government is run, it is a good thing for the United States,” said Lippold.
“I couldn’t agree more,” said Brower. “Any movement that makes government more accountable is a movement I can get behind.” [Emphasis mine.]
Oh yes, Greg Brower loved him some "tea party" when he wanted teabaggers' votes in the NV-02 special election. But apparently now that he's simultaneously "pivoting himself to the center" in a more evenly split and increasingly Democratic leaning State Senate district and "angling" himself for a future statewide run, Brower is abandoning the "po' lil' teabaggers" and embracing Brian Sandoval's and Michael Roberson's newfound love of extending taxes and funding public education.
(Jump to 13:30 on the video below. Keep going to 9:50 for all the good stuff.)
At least give Sheila Leslie credit for refusing to morph on TV into something she's really not. She's always been consistent in stating what she believes in and who she wants to work for, and that doesn't look to be changing any time soon.
Greg Brower, on the other hand, is now trying to look "moderate" after spending the last year pandering to "tea party" extremists, voting against badly needed school funding that Brian Sandoval now admits we can't afford to take away next year, and even voting against basic civil rights, such as ensuring fair employment and creating a safe learning environment. Hell, Brower even voted against critical infrastructure improvement projects that invested in our state and put more Nevadans to work. Greg Brower may now want to talk a good "moderate" game, but his actual votes in the Legislature last year tell a totally different and rather "TEA" tinged story.
So perhaps before Greg Brower tries again to attack Sheila Leslie for moving into the district she now lives in, he should take a look at his own record and try to give SD 15 voters an honest answer as to who he really serves.
This is probably the quirkiest and funniest story of 2011. At the start of the year, everyone was wondering what kind of deal would be made to please most incumbents and share the treasures of Congressional gerrymandering. Honestly, that's what I was thinking when I released my first scenario for changing Nevada's Congressional map. I mean, come on... Nevada's Legislature had always been able to agree to a bipartisan gerrymander that kept most happy. Couldn't they do it again?
By April, the answer was starting to sound like one big fat "NO!" And as spring sprang and the budget brawl was becoming increasingly brutal, Nevada's pundit class was finally starting to realize that a huge "game change" was in the works. And despite the Legislature brokering a budget deal in late May (once the state Supreme Court forced it), a compromise gerrymander was looking increasingly impossible. And once sine die was reached in early June, the legal fight officially became a battle royale... And I noted that it wasn't exactly a bad thing.
Maybe this really isn't a bad thing? After all, the current districts we have are a result of a bipartisan "incumbent protection" gerrymander. Perhaps now that judges will decide the new district boundaries rather than politicians looking to protect their own behinds and/or use redistricting as a bargaining chip for something else, we'll see Congressional and legislative districts that actually make more sense. Here's to hope!
In August, redistricting took a weird turn when Judge James Todd Russell appointed "special masters" to handle the map drawing... And decide all the legal issues that he was supposed to rule on! By October, Secretary of State Ross Miller rushed to the Nevada Supreme Court to beg our state's highest court to end what seemed to be turning into a fiasco. By then, most of our state's politicos were begging Governor Sandoval and the legislators to try one more time to agree on some sort of redistricting compromise. Jon Ralston most notably asked the Gube and the Leg to "make them (Judge Russell and the "special masters") irrelevant", but I wasn't ready to give up on our new bold experiment just yet.
So is independent redistricting perfect? Nope, just look at what's happening next door. But by the same token, we can also look next door and see an overall better functioning process that gives voters more control than the usual powers that be. And that would be quite the "special" departure from the usual politics that surrounds redistricting here in Nevada.
I honestly don't know if the current judiciary mess or retrying the Legislature is the better path to take for this current round of redistricting here. But moving forward, we really need to reexamine our State Constitution (which currently requires the Legislature to redraw its own districts and Congressional Districts) and ask if we really want to endure this kind of nonsense ten years from now.
I noted that despite many legal and political hiccups, both Arizona and California ultimately ended up with fairer and more logical Congressional and Legislature maps. Maybe if we just let this process work, Nevada could also be as lucky?
Oh, we certainly ended up so! The new maps were released in mid October, and the new state of play suddenly sent a whole lot of politicians scrambling. And in addition to Congress, the Legislature also saw a huge overhaul as both Assembly and Senate districts shifted southward.
Of course, this made the Nevada GOP furious. Funny enough, they were originally pushing for court drawn maps in the hope of the redistricting law suit landing on the lap of a Republican friendly judge. And of course, they got that! However, they still threw a temper tantrum once the new maps emerged. Why? Oh, it wasn't a gerrymander... And all of a sudden, they were forced to acknowledge the shift of the balance of power from rural white Republicans to multicultural and multi-ethnic urban and suburban Democrats.
Huh? When did the Voting Rights Act ever elevate "population minorities" to the same legally protected status as racial minorities? Is [Assembly Member Pete] Goicoechea [R-Eureka] really trying to claim that rural Nevada is "discriminated against" when it has the most subsidized government services of any of us? I dare Pete Goicoechea to go to West Las Vegas and talk with the residents who remember the "Mississippi of the West" days, when no African-Americans were allowed to even step in the front door of any Strip casinos! And I dare him to go to East Las Vegas and talk with the residents who are still enduring the anti-Latin@ xenophobia that his party's US Senate candidate tried to tap into to win last year. [...]
So what's the real objection here? Simple: Population. And Power.
For decades, rural Nevada, along with Washoe County, has had disproportionate power and control over state affairs. Even though Clark became the most populous county in the state in 1960, we still haven't yet seen Clark become all that much of a force in Carson City. Again, look at the distribution of state college funds, and the distribution of public safety funds, and the constant resistance to progressive tax reform despite growing support statewide.
This really looks to be "The Cow Counties' Last Stand". Deep down, they know that Nevada is changing. Not only is Nevada's population growing more diverse, but it's also becoming more urban as Greater Las Vegas continues to reinvent itself. As we talked about on Monday, the "Bonanza" vision of Nevada is fading as the state makes the transition from bucolic desert wonderland to dynamic urban destination. And as we make that transition, our attitudes are changing on issues like taxes, land use, environmental stewardship, civil rights, and the overall needs for government.
It wasn't an easy ride to Tonopah on Saturday, especially not since NDOT had construction delays near Goldfield. So many of us from Vegas were already in a crabby mood when the NSDP Central Committee meeting got started. And many of the folks from Reno and the rurals were still in a crabby mood because of the NV-02 aftermath. Early on, I had a feeling that Central Committee meeting wouldn't be an easy ride.
Don't believe me? Believe Public Policy Polling's (or PPP's) August results here in Nevada and in Colorado, and remember that these polls were done at about Obama's most recent nadir in national approval. Obama was beating all the Republican candidates here and in Colorado, and for the most part by healthy blowout margins, even while his national numbers were slumping. And consider that PPP's latest national poll showed Obama bouncing back to stronger leads against Perry and Romney, and that other recent polls have shown the same trend. With even Jon Ralston throwing cold water on the Nevada GOP's flaming hot and crazy claims of building some sort of "Great Red Tide" next year (like the one from last year that never materialized?), why should we feel obligated to make things easier for them by setting our hair on fire and acting defeatist?
This is what I was thinking about on Saturday while I was hearing some Central Committee members falling into this very trap of panicking, setting their hair on fire, and acting defeatist. And coming from places like Tonopah, Fallon, and Ely, I can understand why those members feel the way they do. However, they're not getting the whole picture. Rural turnout has strongly benefitted Republicans for the last several cycles, so what happens in Tonopah is far from accurately indicative of what happens statewide.
Does this mean Democrats should just give up on the rurals? Most certainly, not! In fact, NSDP Chair Roberta Lange spoke plenty on Saturday about the party's commitment to organizing statewide. And lead Caucus 2012 organizer Leora Olivas explained what's happening throughout the state to prepare for caucus time. A vote from Fallon counts as much as a vote from North Las Vegas, so it's critical to extract as many votes as possible from both locales. But by the same token, we'd be foolish to mourn the "reddening" of Nevada just because of one low turnout special election dominated by conservative interests and mostly excluding Nevada's Democratic base.
Later in the meeting, Young Democrats of Nevada President Michael Cabrera was honored for YDNV's work in strengthening young progressives' voices throughout the state, from the robust growth of UNR Young Dems to the recent progress made in Clark County. This is what we need to see more of... This, and all the canvassing, voter registration, and other voter outreach efforts OFA is doing, and all the other work that local activists and Dem clubs are doing all over Nevada. If we commit to doing more of this and less of the usual whining, Democrats will win up and down the ballot next year.
Some of the folks in the room seemed to get this, but then one more food fight emerged over whether or not to regularly do Central Committee in Tonopah. Some liked the idea of "shared sacrifice" for all, but others felt it would unfairly punish the vast majority of Democratic Central Committee members in Clark County. Again, I understand that we shouldn't ignore any part of the state. All of Nevada matters. However, I think there are better ways to reach out to Nevada voters and include folks from across the state than always holding meetings in a sparsely populated corner of the state.
So often, we on the left end of the spectrum get too busy infighting to realize we have much fiercer opponents our little "Lefty World" construct. We can't keep making that same mistake. We have far too much work to do and not enough time to waste on infighting. I just hope I wasn't the only one who got that message before leaving the Tonopah Ramada Inn.
Well, at least I had a lovely scenic drive home to calm me down after that last difficult week.
Within the [new CNN and Bloomberg] polls there were bad numbers for the President on the economy more generally, which has been the case for months. Obama's approval on this handling of the economy is 36 percent in the CNN poll and 33 percent in the Bloomberg, which matches Gallup, NBC/WSJ, ABC/WaPo and others in the last week or so.
But CNN also asked about the choice between President Obama and Congressional Republicans, who have sustained a huge hit themselves after the debt ceiling fight. 46 percent still say they prefer the President, to 37 percent who prefer Congressional Republicans. 15 percent say they prefer neither. The Bloomberg poll showed a tighter split, but still chose Obama 43 percent of the time to the GOP's 41.
Within the CNN question there are some interesting results. Those under 50, a group more likely to be unemployed, went for Obama by a 51 - 33 split. Even a quarter of self-described conservatives choose Obama over the Congressional GOPers, along with 50 percent of moderates and 78 percent of liberals.
Economic pessimism continues to infiltrate the thinking of American voters, and you don't have to look hard for an answer as to why. When CNN asked whether respondents feel they are better off today than they were three years ago, 58 percent no. It's not surprising given a previous CNN poll that showed 8 in 10 people think we are still in a recession, which means that many voters think we have been in a downturn since the President was elected. Gallup showed that there's been little help from the actual economic indicators, so there are many legitimate reasons for Americans to remain upset. But has the data shows, the GOP hasn't provided a silver bullet on the economy either, and voters are yet to embrace them as economic stewards. The jobs plan, which is enjoying initial support, is unlikely to change that view.
And if you want to dig deeper to see this story for yourself, look at the CNN internals and the Bloomberg internals. Even in the worst case scenario (Bloomberg's), Republicans can't beat President Obama on the issue the Beltway media pundits have all concluded should be Obama's political anvil sinking him next year. And according to CNN, American voters yet again proclaim that they want more focus on job creation than deficit reduction, and that they much prefer Democratic job creation ideas (such as aid to state and local governments, and infrastructure programs) than the Republicans' pandering to crazed teabaggers (in wanting to slash Social Security and Medicare to death).
Of course, last night's special election results weren't good for Obama or Congressional Democrats, but on the other hand many in DC are forgetting the local dynamics of both races. Here in Nevada, Kate Marshall positioned herself to essentially run against Obama, which demoralized the Democratic base and caused the entire election to be played on the Nevada GOP's turf. And in New York, Orthodox Jews and older white "Reagan Democrats" turned hard Republicans made that election into a referendum on Israel, social issues, and internal Brooklyn & Queens political drama. And while special elections tend to produce dramatic results as of late, they rarely provide a clear forecast of the political climate of the following election cycle.
What will be far more telling in the coming weeks and months, however, is what happens to the economy next, how politicians and political parties react to the state of the economy, and how voters respond to the politicians' reactions. Greg Sargent and Kevin Drum correctly point out that most Americans' view of Obama pretty much hinges on the state of the economy.
People who aren't pure partisans really do vote mostly based on the state of the economy, and they don't seem to care much why the economy is bad. When times are tough, they throw the bums out. It doesn't much matter if the bums have been trying hard.
But is it possible to overcome this dynamic if you barnstorm the country making it clear that your opposition has been working day and night to keep the economy in a ditch? The historical evidence doesn't provide much hope on that score, but then again, I'm not sure an incumbent in recent memory has really tried very hard to make something like this stick. Certainly Obama hasn't given it much of a go yet. But there's still time before next November.
Actually on that last part, Drum misses something... Something that we Nevadans saw for ourselves last year when the same Beltway media pundits were writing Harry Reid's political obituary long before Election Day.
While I agree that the state of the economy very much drives voters' decisions, the ultimate destination doesn't have to be "throw the bums out", especially when the replacement of "the bum" is someone whose agenda goes directly against what the voters want. Again, Reid proved this strategy works when he clearly demonstrated the consequences Nevada would have faced had we replaced him with Sharron Angle. Don't underestimate President Obama's ability to pivot like this and place the blame for economic turmoil exactly where it belongs.
And considering what Republican primary voters seem increasingly likely to do, this is exactly what Obama needs to be doing. How Obama and Republicans address American concerns about the economy will have much more of an effect on next year's election than a couple special election results from last night.
Russian/former Soviet immigrants with no historic ties to the Democratic Party but who strongly support a conservative Israeli government supported a Republican for Congress in part because they believe, erroneously, that Barack Obama is anti-Israel. (Many of them probably also believe he is a Muslim.) The most conservative non-Staten Island district in New York City supported a rich "outsider" candidate over a sloppy and unexciting Democratic politician. Barack Obama is in trouble among very, very conservative pro-Israel voters, as he already was before. The political makeup of the House of Representatives has barely changed and this district is likely to cease to exist soon. Addressing the myth that he's anti-Israel is probably one of the least important things President Obama needs to do between now and the next election, because he still has the support of most of the American Jewish community. Regardless, media attention paid to this race will give him even more trouble passing his "Jobs Bill."
Oh, and...
If David Weprin wins today...
... it means [...]
A Democrat won a traditionally Democratic district in New York City, despite a surprisingly strong showing from a wealthy challenger. The district will likely cease to exist soon. The press will not announce this victory as a vote of national support for Obama's "mandate" and will in fact soon forget all about this race because "favorite beats underdog" is not a very entertaining story.
The winner of the Amodei-Marshall race will serve the remainder of Heller's current House term, which runs through 2012. He or she will have to run for the office again next year to keep the job.
By then, it may well be in a very different district, since the task of drawing new congressional district maps has been placed in the hands of Carson District Judge Todd Russell, who has named a commission to assist with that job.
For today's election, however, the district is the same one Heller ran in a year ago. It includes all of 16 Nevada counties and a small piece of Clark.
Amodei, a former state senator, has said repeatedly he doesn't believe in raising taxes to fix the nation's debt because it would further delay any economic recovery. He has signed a no-tax pledge to emphasize that point, saying the answer is to make government smaller, not raise the debt ceiling.
Marshall, currently in her second term as state treasurer, has said she would keep the Bush tax cuts for most Americans but eliminate those breaks on the rich. She also said she would eliminate tax loopholes for wealthy corporations, granting them breaks only for creating jobs.
This is in his district, and this would hurt his constituents if built... But Mark Amodei doesn't care.
For three decades, firm opposition to any sort of nuclear development for Yucca Mountain has been a rite of passage for any candidate seeking national political office representing Nevada.
But the past few congressional races, Republicans have been bending that rule.
Mark Amodei, candidate for Nevada’s 2nd Congressional District seat, told the editorial board of the Las Vegas Sun on Monday that he would be happy to keep funding the development of the Yucca Mountain project through the Energy Department, with the hope of turning it into a bastion of nuclear research and reprocessing.
“I don’t celebrate every time somebody says it’s funded at zero,” Amodei said. “I support Joe Heck’s efforts. I think there are opportunities to do things out there.”
What he's talking about is Joe Heck's amendment that would have allowed for nuclear reprocessing at Yucca Mountain. They think this is a "win-win" for them in that they can tell us they "don't support Yucca" while giving Republican Congressional leadership "local cover" to continue pushing to open Yucca. They know GOP leadership won't accept anything less than turning Yucca into a nuclear waste dump. And since there isn't enough water in southern Nye County to allow for reprocessing, Heck's proposal simply isn't feasible to begin with.
So why do Mark Amodei and Joe Heck insist on keeping Yucca Mountain on track to open? Do they really care that little about their own state that they seek to "represent" in Congress?
When the leaders of the Nevada state Republican Party picked their recent state party chairman as the GOP candidate to represent NV-02 in the U.S. House, they thought they had saved the seat for Republicans. But the latest polling suggests that the party’s nominee could be in real trouble.
After Rep. Dean Heller, R-Nev., accepted an appointment to the U.S. Senate to replace resigning Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., the Nevada Secretary of State declared an open ballot election (meaning there would be no primary) to replace Heller, but the state GOP changed the process via lawsuit. Mark Amodei, who resigned as state GOP chair to run for Congress, received the nomination after he won a huge majority of votes in a closed process held by the party's state GOP central committee. The committee not only had the power to vote for the candidates, but to choose who qualified as a contender. Shifting the nominating power from the electorate to the party leadership precipitated former U.S. Senate nominee Sharron Angle's withdrawal from the race.
When Amodei won the party nomination, he promised the state central committee, "I will do my level best to make your decision here today look like a smart one." Now three weeks out from Election Day, Amodei looks vulnerable.
Daily Kos/Public Policy Polling (PPP), a Democrat-leaning firm, released a survey showing Republican nominee and former state party chairman Mark Amodei clinging to a bare one point lead over his opponent, State Treasurer Kate Marshall, D-Nev., in the race to represent Nevada's 2nd district in the U.S. House of Representatives. On the other hand, a Republican-leaning firm, Magellan, showed Amodei with a 48-35 lead. But PPP has polled very accurately this year around the country, especially in the recent Wisconsin Recalls. PPP’s tighter poll results correspond with July fund-raising reports that showed Amodei losing the money war by almost 2-1.
The National Republican Congressional Committee has closed the funding gap by spending heavily on Amodei's behalf. The NRCC's decision to intervene in this race suggests that national GOP leadership thinks Amodei could lose without significant help.
So why is there so much concern? Well, most observers are expecting a low turnout election. And in a special election with low turnout, almost anything can happen.
Early voting starts this weekend, and mail in ballots are already being sent back at this moment. And the PPP poll was done last weekend. No wonder why DC Republicans are panicking.
Some of the readers of the Reno Gazette-Journal have contacted me to say that reports of last week’s poll on the special election for the open seat in the 2nd Congressional District are bogus.
It showed that Republican Mark Amodei has a 13-point lead over Democrat Kate Marshall with three weeks to go until the Sept 13 election. It would be almost an insurmountable lead, with so little time remaining.
Yet three readers sent e-mails last Friday after the story appeared, saying Marshall was referred to by another name during the robo polling sponsored by Americans For Prosperity, considered a conservative group with Republican leanings.
"I was contacted by the poll to which you refer in your article today," Kathleen Fogarty wrote last week. "Kate Marshall’s name was not even offered as a candidate. Instead, they listed Kate Jackson as a candidate. I would have voted for Marshall, but when her name was not offered I just hung up. I did listen to the message twice though before I hung up to make sure I heard it correctly."
• “I need to cozy up to Paul Ryan and give him whatever support he needs.” – Mark Amodei, on Paul Ryan (Las Vegas Sun, Jul. 14, 2011)
• “I like a lot of what he [Rep. Paul Ryan] has to say in terms of Medicare, I think that’s excellent.” (Republican Congressional District 2 debate, Jun. 15, 2011)
• The Las Vegas Sun reported, “Amodei has embraced Ryan’s plan” (Las Vegas Sun, Jul. 14, 2011)
• Amodei praised the Ryan blueprint. “I like a lot of what he has to say in terms of Medicare. I think that’s excellent.” (Politico, Jun. 20, 2011)
Public Policy Polling for Daily Kos & SEIU (8/18-21, likely voters, no trendlines):
Kate Marshall (D): 42
Mark Amodei (R): 43
Timothy Fasano (AI): 3
Helmuth Lehmann (I): 3
Undecided: 8
(MoE: ±4%)
Now contrast that with what Kate Marshall has been doing this summer.
She was here last weekend to talk to voters. She did house parties in Henderson and addressed everything from Medicare to the military. You don't have to read her issue statements and second guess them.
And on Sunday, I was out canvassing in the North Las Vegas section of the district. Believe it or not, NV-02 actually comes this far south. And believe it or not, voters in the neighborhood I walked with a group of friends on Sunday (including one who actually lives right there) are not used to being engaged in this kind of conversation and actually being asked for their votes.
People here had questions about job creation, Medicare, renewable energy, foreclosures and much more. They know people out of work, and they saw their neighbors being foreclosed out of their homes. They didn't have time for double-speak. They didn't have time for politics as usual. And they really didn't have time for someone who wanted to "get cozy" with Paul Ryan's agenda of attacking the middle class.
Kate Marshall is well known in Nevada, and well liked. She’s won two statewide elections here. She has a solid chance to win this election, particularly given the extreme positions of her opponent. Even though it’s a conservative district, CD2 doesn’t necessarily like fringe ideologues like Mark Amodei.
Kate Marshall is a prudent thinker. She has always maximized the use of our tax dollars as Nevada’s State Treasurer. She led the way to save the Millennium Scholarship. She has reinvested Nevada’s state budget giving us larger returns. [...]
Kate Marshall wouldn’t put our economy, our credit rating, the value of the dollar and the entire global economy at risk by voting against raising the debt ceiling. Mark Amodei has made it clear he would. Apparently he doesn’t care if our economy plummets and we all lose our jobs. He’s an ideologue.
Kate Marshall will shake things up in Washington, putting Congress back to work for us. She’ll be a budget hawk, but she won’t destroy the very things that have made America great. She’ll guard Medicare and Social Security, which Mark Amodei wants to slash and burn. She’ll fight for you and your children’s education opportunities.
Mark Amodei may have loaded "tea party" friends tossing out bogus "polls" and paying for multi-million dollar disinformation campaigns, but they're learning the hard way they can't just buy this election for him. We the people still matter. We need real solutions coming out of Congress right now, and Kate Marshall actually wants to get working on that.
Yesterday, Southern Nevada actually had a chance to meet a Congressional candidate. Normally, this wouldn't be a big deal. We see campaigns come and go all the time... Except for those who live in the 2nd Congressional District. Unfortunately because the last round of redistricting led to so much gross gerrymandering, NV-02 was redrawn in 2001 to dip into Clark County neighborhoods as far apart as Primm, Anthem Highlands, The Northeast Valley, and Mesquite. So all too often in the last decade, they've been lost in the shuffle as no one really bothered to pay attention to them...
Until now.
Kate Marshall is running in the NV-02 special election to fill this seat vacated by Dean Heller when Brian Sandoval appointed him to the US Senate. And yesterday, Kate actually came here to Clark County to meet with voters. She did a free "meet & greet" in Sun City Anthem in Henderson, then came down to Green Valley (also in Henderson) for a low-dollar grassroots fundraiser.
I was at the low-dollar grassroots fundraiser yesterday (since my neighbor who lives across the wash & golf course from me hosted it!), and I took some video from the Q&A session. If you're as much of a policy wonk as I am, you'll enjoy these next 24 minutes.
And if not, here's a quick summary:
Afghanistan- Kate favors bringing our troops home, but only as long as the military commanders on the ground approve of the timeline and no troops are put in danger.
Social Security & Medicare- Kate made it crystal clear yesterday that she opposes ANY effort to cut either program or do anything else to harm seniors' health care.
Climate Change- Kate favors comprehensive climate legislation and aggressive green jobs programs to get Nevada working again, and she would like to see more legislation to allow for reasonable renewable energy development on available public lands.
Wall Street- Kate said she would like to see prosecutions of those whose misdeeds contributed to the 2008 crash.
Budget- Kate described how she's worked to balance her budget in the Nevada Treasurer's office and exclaimed she isn't afraid to look for wasteful spending and strip it out. However she also said "across the board" cuts should be off the table, as it would not be fair or smart to slash public education, Medicaid, or other vitally needed services.
Immigration- Kate supports comprehensive immigration reform that includes smart border security and dealing fairly with the undocumented already here.
And there's even more in the video if you'd like to watch. And if you'd like to help us win here, please sign up to volunteer. Thanks!
Mark Amodei is getting some powerful Republican assistance on the campaign trail today: House Speaker John Boehner, the nation’s top-ranking member of the GOP, is coming to Reno.
It’s primarily a fundraising trip. Boehner is speaking at a $5,000 and $10,000 per-head breakfast for Amodei. Boehner won’t attend any public events as he did for Jane Corwin in New York’s 26th in May — the last closely contested special election, which Republicans lost in an upset.
Yep, "The Boner" is coming here to Nevada. And while The Sun article points toward differences on the debt ceiling debacle, it doesn't mention how Amodei neatly fits into the extreme teabagger agenda Boehner has allowed to wreak havoc on Congress and the entire country. And it doesn't go in depth to point out why John Boehner is coming to Nevada to fundraise for Mark Amodei.
Amodei is trying hard to create "nuance" and avoid "yes and no issues"...
It's becoming increasingly clear whose agenda Mark Amodei will push. It certainly isn't the one of working class Nevadans.
"You have to go where the money is... And that means entitlement programs."
That's what Mark Amodei aims to do. He'll do whatever he can to please GOP leadership despite him knowing what their plans would do to harm Nevada's working families. Amodei has made it clear to teabaggers that he's ready to go along with Boehner and Ryan in killing Medicare, even if he tells non-teabagger audiences a different story.
Don't be fooled by Amodei's slick twists of words and proclamations that he's "not a yes or no kind of guy". Let him speak for himself. And his words are on record.
“I'll fight to preserve Social Security and Medicare because we need a balanced budget,” said Marshall, Nevada's current state treasurer. “We can't do that on the backs of our seniors.” [...]
Marshall, meanwhile, has focused on Amodei's support for a Republican budget that calls for privatizing Medicare.
While he has praised the budget pushed by Republican Rep. Paul Ryan and approved by the Republican-led House, Amodei has also questioned the Medicare component, and vowed to protect senior citizens. Amodei, however, has said he would consider increasing the Medicare eligibility age to 67.
Marshall has said she would not support any plan to raise the Medicare eligibility age.
Kate Marshall now needs all the help we can give. Election Day is less than a month away, and early voting will begin next weekend. If we don't want to see more of John Boehner's political games and Paul Ryan's extreme ideology, then we just can't send Mark Amodei to Congress.
