October 15th, 2010
See which House, Senate and governors' races are considered closest.
Wall Street Journal
By BRODY MULLINS and DANNY YADRON
WASHINGTON—A late effort by Democrats to match record fund raising by conservative organizations has come up short, leaving the party more reliant than usual on the campaign efforts of labor unions.
A key pro-Democratic group, recently created by top party insiders to build a "firewall" around the Democrats' majority in the House, said Thursday it hoped to raise $10 million. That's a fraction of the $50 million that an alliance of GOP groups said Tuesday they would spend to help Republicans in dozens of House races.
"We are David vs. Goliath," said Ramona Oliver, a spokeswoman for the new Democratic group, called America's Families First Action Fund. Founded this summer, it began raising money after Labor Day to help counter Republican fundraising efforts. It once hoped to help protect up to 30 Democratic House seats, but is now focusing on just 18 campaigns, Ms. Oliver said.
In total, outside conservative groups—such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, American Action Network and American Crossroads—could spend more than $300 million on TV advertisements, campaign mailings and other efforts to elect Republicans to Congress this year. Outside Democratic groups, by contrast, plan to spend about $100 million on those activities. The largest labor unions say they will spend $200 million combined, but most of their focus will be on rallying union voters.
The spending by outside GOP groups is key because in the last three election cycles Democratic outside groups have substantially outspent their GOP rivals.
Overall, the Democratic party and its candidates still have more money at their disposal than their GOP rivals. In the closest 40 House and 12 Senate races, the Democratic candidate, on average, has twice as much money in the bank as the GOP opponent, according to the most recent fund-raising data. That's in part because many are incumbents who can more easily raise big money in advance of the election.
But among outside campaign organizations, Democrats are being outgunned, helping erase the Democrats' overall financial advantage. This lets Republicans inject money into races where Democrats had a big cash advantage, leaving Democratic candidates more reliant on the get-out-the-vote activities of the largest labor unions.
Evan Tracey, who runs a group that tracks political ad spending, said outside Republican groups were running ads in 70 House races while Democratic groups are running ads in nine House campaigns.
"Fewer targets, less money," said Craig Varoga, who runs a pro-Democratic campaign group called Patriot Majority. Mr. Varoga said his group would spend between $7 million and $8 million to help Democrats in a "half-dozen or so" congressional races. In the 2008 election, the group spent $14 million in 22 campaigns, Mr. Varoga said.
People who run outside Democratic groups said they were raising less money than in prior elections because donors were upset Democrats didn't accomplish more with President Barack Obama in the White House and strong Congressional majorities.
Some of the Democrats' biggest donors are sitting on the sidelines, including George Soros, the billionaire investor, who has donated millions of dollars to campaigns in the past decade.
Jim Jordan, a Democratic political consultant, plans to spend "several million dollars" on advertisements to help Democratic candidates through a group called Commonsense Ten. He said some donors were increasingly alert to the funding disparity. "There are signs of a thaw, but it's late," Mr. Jordan said.
Spending by the largest labor unions on the 2010 elections is expected to amount to about 10% of the total spent to elect Democrats by political parties, outside political entities and the candidates themselves. A precise number is hard to calculate because not all spending is made public. There is also a time lag in the spending disclosures.
In interviews, major unions said they planned on spending as much as or more than they did on the midterm congressional races in 2006. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said they hoped to create a "firewall" in some of the closest House races to protect the Democrats' majority.
In a meeting with reporters this week, Mr. Trumka said 37 of the 75 House seats in play were what he called "high union density" districts, from the suburbs of Chicago to the working-class regions of Pennsylvania.
"We feel an incredible responsibility," said Karen White, political director for the National Education Association, a teachers' union. She said her union planned to spend $40 million on the 2010 elections, an increase from 2006, and last week it announced a $15 million ad campaign in close House races.
The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees will send resources even to help elect Democratic candidates who haven't always backed its causes. "There are some candidates who are going to get some resources from us who in a normal year would not," said Larry Scanlon, the union's political director.
Under current likely election scenarios, GOP candidates would need to win 59% of those Democratic seats up for grabs to gain control of the House.
The Service Employees International Union said it would spend $44 million on the 2010 elections, up from $35 million in the 2006 midterm elections. In Virginia, the SEIU launched an ad this week attacking the Republican trying to unseat freshman Democratic Rep. Tom Perriello. In California, the SEIU is spending $5 million this fall to help elect Jerry Brown as governor.
The AFL-CIO said it was on pace to deploy 200,000 volunteers to campaign on behalf of candidates this election, its most ever in a midterm election. The union said it has distributed 17.5 million flyers on visits to worksites advocating the election of mostly Democratic candidates.
The nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics said the Democratic Party and candidates had raised a total of $1.25 billion so far for the election. The comparable GOP figure is $1.1 billion.
October 15th, 2010
October 15th, 2010
October 14th, 2010
By Frank Houck
This is a solution for national debt. This chart has been confirmed by nine sources of whom I have not met. Unfortunately to protect it for the people I can't reveal it to you. However, I can demonstrate the results.
Results that would create an almost nation-wide, utopian effect with free education, free health care, ample social services, zero tax burden and elimination of the national debt. This solution would be overseen by a citizen group limited by one year of service. At the end of that year, a new group of local citizens would perform the will of the people.
The Blue line represents the actual revenue from taxes to the government over the years.
The Red line represents the actual expenditures of the government over the years
The Yellow line with triangles demonstrates what happens to the expenditure line with the new revenue applied to it.
And the Green line projects the actually return from the process that includes the surplus from having installed the process.
Notice in the end of the time line. There is nearly a 1.5 trillion dollar surplus. At this time there would be no taxes and the manufacturing/ industrial base would be (at a minimum) four times it is today.Neither of these calculations is represented by this chart;nor is the$ 2.5 trillion flowing through the economy which is created by a populace unburdened by taxes. Without detailed calculation and projection, these basic numbers reveal a whopping $ 4 trillion yearly surplus!
Think of it. . . the government would have to do nothing --while you would pay no taxes, enjoy free health care, free education and affordable housing of your choice. Our nation would have more jobs than people to apply. Does this sound like something you could live with? Your Congress doesn't think so.
October 14th, 2010
9 p.m. ET on C-SPAN, their first and only meeting of the campaign and a rare instance where a debate really might decide a race. Expectations are for the most explosive incident in Nevada since whenever the last nuclear test was. Early odds from the Hot Air election desk: 75 percent chance that Reid says something crazy, 20 percent chance that Angle says something crazy, five percent chance that a knife fight breaks out in the audience between their supporters.
They’re dead even in the RCP poll of polls, but if Angle performs well and convinces the few remaining undecideds that she’s not the krazy kook Reid’s been telling them she is, that tie won’t last long. From the Times, an amazing fact to mull while we wait:
The Angle campaign reported this week that it had raised $14.3 million in the third quarter of this year, bringing her fund-raising total to about $17.8 million. Mr. Reid has not yet reported his take, but his aides made clear that despite extensive efforts, he would fall well short of Ms. Angle’s haul. Going into the third quarter, he had raised about $19.2 million…
Underscoring just how much this race has become a proxy for both sides nationally, records analyzed by CQ Moneyline show that 80 percent of the money donated to both campaigns has come from outside of Nevada, a near mirror image of the other major Senate races.
So deeply loathed is Reid by the conservative base that not only are they donating from all over the country, they’re doing it at an eye-popping pace. I can think of three guys who find that fact even more worrisome than Reid does, given what it portends for the future of Republican contributions against widely despised Democrats. One of them’s named Barack, the other two are named David. See if you can guess who they are.
If you can’t get to a TV, watch live right here. And bear in mind, whenever you hear Reid call her “extreme” — which should be often — that likely voters apparently have already made up their minds about which party is dominated by extremists and it ain’t the GOP. To help get you in the right frame of mind, a choice clip from a classic below. The fight’s been brutal and it won’t end until the 15th round, but Angle will be left standing. I think.