Democrats

Dead Dems Walking: TPM's List Of Candidates Who've Been Written Off By Their Party

Brian Beutler | November 2, 2010, 7:24AM

Majority Leader Steny Hoyer with other House Democrats

Returns for 435 House elections will start rolling in a few hours from now. Well before they do, though, most Dems had long conceded that more than a handful of races are already lost. With these seats for all intents and purposes off the table before the polls opened, the number of truly contested seats the GOP needs to win control of the House is effectively much smaller than the magic 39.

Assuming the House does change hands, then, the big open question is how big the swing will be. There are scores of seats in play, but the battle lines have already moved past over a dozen House members who, in most cases, have already been written off by their own party.

If you're keeping score tonight, don't hold your breath for any of these Democrats.

Read more »

Nancy Pelosi

The Next Gingrich? How Democrats Could Win, And Pelosi Still Lose

Brian Beutler | October 21, 2010, 11:48AM

Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner

A small but growing number of Democrats have abandoned House Speaker Nancy Pelosi -- the GOP's second-favorite bogeyman in contested districts. Depending on how you count, about five have even said they oppose her continued Speakership if the Democrats retain the House.

That may sound like no big deal -- who cares if some of the most conservative Democrats in the House won't vote for Pelosi, so long as a majority of her caucus still supports her, right? Wrong.

The Speaker is a unique office-holder on Capitol Hill, elected by a plurality of the full House of Representatives. Even if Democrats can retain the House, their margin will likely be slimmer than it is now. And that could touch off a scenario in which there's a majority of Democrats in Congress, but a minority of members of Congress willing to vote for Pelosi as Speaker.

Read more »

GA-08

Could Unsealing Divorce Records Seal GOPer's Electoral Fate In Georgia?

Evan McMorris-Santoro | October 18, 2010, 8:40AM

Austin Scott

Sometime before the election, a Georgia judge will decide whether the Republican nominee for Congress in the 8th Congressional District's 2001 divorce records will remain under seal until after the election. The decision, according to one newspaper editor and one Democratic activist, could be the turning point in Rep. Jim Marshall's (D) battle for reelection in the Peach State.

Chatter about just what's in the divorce records of state Rep. Austin Scott, the Republican facing Marshall, first began when Scott was considering running in the Republican primary for Lt. Governor, according to Macon Telegraph columnist Charles Richardson. Allies of the sitting Lt. Governor -- also a Republican -- "started leaking" info on the divorce while Scott was making his decision, Richardson says. After Scott decided to run for Congress against Marshall -- one of two Democrats in Georgia's Congressional delegation -- back in April, a Democratic activist and blogger picked up the cause and filed a motion to get the records unsealed. A judge will decide whether to unseal them on Oct. 26, just days before the election.

So what's in the records? No one knows for sure. But two separate political operations attempting to track them down -- as well as Scott's recent public freakout at the notion of their release -- suggest what's in them is what opposition researchers like to call "gold." Marshall's in a tough race (a Republican poll in late September in showed the incumbent Democrat down eight points to Scott), and some on the ground in Georgia believe that the juicy details of a messy divorce could make all the difference.

Read more »

Health Care

Health Care Pulling Democrats On Left And Right, With Obama In The Middle

Christina Bellantoni | October 21, 2009, 1:40PM

United States Capitol

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is the power player right now, negotiating a careful merger between two bills with a goal of reaching 60 votes in his chamber. But the two other major players - the White House and Speaker Nancy Pelosi's House are left in a bit of a holding pattern.

Top White House staffers are helping with the merger, but sources tell TPMDC it's a more hands-off approach (for now) as Reid (D-NV) builds something that his caucus will fully support. Meanwhile, Pelosi (D-CA) is presenting the "robust" public option as the more fiscally responsible choice in hopes of pushing the conservative Blue Dogs closer to support it.

Pelosi is working hard to hit the 218 votes needed for passage by bringing together the most divergent factions in her caucus.

President Obama, for his part, urged Democrats last night to consider unity over the perfect bill, highlighting good things in "the bill you least like."

Progressive Democrats learning of the president's comments this morning were baffled since there seems to be growing support for the public option and the Congressional Budget Office is expected to score the bill with that included as less costly than originally anticipated.

Read more »

Jim Marshall

Blue Dog Jim Marshall Again Compares Current Health Care System, Including Medicare And Medicaid, To Soviet Union

Eric Kleefeld | October 19, 2009, 3:06PM

Rep. Jim Marshall (D-GA)

Blue Dog Rep. Jim Marshall (D-GA) appeared on Fox this afternoon, and compared the current health care system -- including Medicare and Medicaid -- to the Soviet Union.

"We've got this sort of central payment system, which is a fundamental problem. It's health insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, making the payments, and we've got consumers and doctors pretty divorced from the costs associated with the decisions that are being made," said Marshall. "As a result, we've had an explosion in cost. I think we've got to see a fundamental change in the system that we've got right now for payment. If we don't do that, we'll continue to have opportunities to fix waste, fraud and abuse, because systems that are centrally planned and controlled -- like the Soviet system -- are just full of those kinds of issues."

Marshall has previously made this comparison, saying back in September: "Beginning in World War II, American health care gradually migrated to an inefficient, Soviet-style system of central control and planning provided by health insurance companies, Medicare and Medicaid."

Jim Marshall

Blue Dog Congressman: American Health Care Already "Soviet-Style" With Insurance, Medicare And Medicaid

Eric Kleefeld | September 23, 2009, 3:04PM

Rep. Jim Marshall (D-GA)

Rep. Jim Marshall (D-GA), a Blue Dog Democrat, made an interesting declaration at a town hall in his district: That our health care is already a Soviet-style system of central control and planning by the insurance companies -- and by Medicare and Medicaid.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that Marshall distributed a handout at the event. (A copy was also provided to us by Marshall's office.) It referred people to an Atlantic article on the economic distortions in our present health care system, and how care is damaged by disconnecting the patient from the true costs, even with the best of intentions. Key quote from Marshall:

Much of the health care reform debate overlooks this inconvenient truth. I can't. Although it is tough to do politically, this reform effort gives us the opportunity to help our fellow citizens while at the same time helping the country. We should take that opportunity. I believe we need to gradually transition to a health care system that gives individual Americans greater control and responsibility for their health. Our current system is fundamentally broken. It is well intended but grossly wasteful.

Central planning and control didn't work well for the Soviet Union. And it isn't working for American health care, either. That's a pretty dramatic indictment. But it's true. Beginning in World War II, American health care gradually migrated to an inefficient, Soviet-style system of central control and planning provided by health insurance companies, Medicare and Medicaid. Our current system largely divorces patients and doctors from the cost of care, causing an explosion in overall costs for little or no overall benefit.

Read more »