A Little Bigger

We don't know about you, but after eating our way through Christmas, we're feeling a lot like the federal budget right now - a little bit too big.

We are not going to fire this blog up to every day status for a few more days, but we wanted to let you know what we plan on doing. Besides, we don't believe many people are using their time between Christmas and New Year's to follow politics. We aren't.

We intend to complete our series pointing out why Dave Obey has no grounds to call the President a security threat.

The House of Representatives isn't scheduled to come back into session till the last day of January, and won't be in session much in February, so the real action will begin in March (when Dave Obey will probably do what he can to continue growing government). During that time, we will look back at other votes Dave Obey has taken over the years that show him to be out of touch with the average person in the Seventh District.

We also hope to get a better handle on the race to send Obey into retirement. We believe it will start to shape up in late January. To that end, we will conduct another online poll around that time to see if people are paying attention.

We are kicking around the idea of having a "send me your Dave Obey story" series where guests contribute posts that we will highlight.

We have a lot of good ideas, and hope we can put them to good use next year as we seek to kick Obey Out of office.

Obey Security Votes #8

In the wee hours of Monday morning, Dave Obey voted against funding the Department of Defense for the remainder of this year. (Roll Call Vote 669) Apparently, Obey opposes giving our troops a pay raise, increasing the hardship pay, increasing the death benefit to families, more armor to protect our troops from IEDs . . . . the list of things Obey opposed in that bill goes on and on.

Beltway Politics

Well, after the United States Senate earlier this fall passed legislation allowing for oil exploration in ANWR - a provision that will help our mid-range needs for energy in this country - several weak-kneed Senators scuttled the provision when it came back from the House this week. It's another example of playing politics with our future. Dave Obey was excited as he opposed exploration in ANWR. If you look at Obey's votes, it's pretty clear, he OPPOSES energy independence in favor of his liberal special interest environmental friends in Washington. Bottom line: Dave Obey favors higher energy prices for the forseeable future. When you get your heating bill this winter or are filling your car at the pump, remember, Dave Obey did nothing to try and mitigate these prices.

Its Time to Celebrate

While we respect those who celebrate other holidays or no holidays at all, we at Obey Out celebrate Christmas. We intend to spend this time with our families and believe most of our readers will do the same. So, for the next two weeks, our posting schedule will be spotty at best as we travel and enjoy time with family and friends. We encourage you all to do the same.

As we fininsh 2005 and enter into 2006 we will maintain our commitment to exposing Dave Obey's out of touch record. Hopefully, we'll see the race pick up to replace him and we'll be able to comment on that as well.

Merry Christmas.

Thankfully - Congress Will Finally Go Home

Obey Out has learned that the House of Representatives intends to complete its business for the year sometime in the next 12 hours. What a relief. Dave Obey and his band of merry spenders may be defeated this year. Despite fierce opposition by Obey, Republicans will keep its spending bills at budgeted levels, they will pass a $41.6 billion deficit reduction act, and they will pass a 1% across the board reduction in discretionary programs. They've done this to offset the costs of Gulf Coast hurricanes and to ensure we are prepared for the avian flu. That's right, the era of Congress running up spending seems to be on hold for now. Maybe that's because they caught the USA Today/Gallup poll that said two-thirds of Americans want Congress to pay for things like Gulf Coast recovery by cutting spending rather than raising taxes or increasing the deficit.

Dave Obey has voted against the deficit reduction act, and will likely strongly oppose the 1% across the board reduction - proving once again that he is out of touch with a majority of Americans in addition to his constituents. We imagine we will see him on the floor later tonight bemoaning responsible spending. If you like C-Span, watch for Obey tonight when the Department of Defense Appropriatons bill hits the floor.

Obey Security Votes #7

Go Nick Go had a post about Obey voting against the creation of 700 miles of fence along the Mexican border to prevent large crossings of illegal immigrants as well as drugs and other dangerous activities. They didn't say something that we want to say here, that vote proves Dave Obey is way out of touch with Wisconsin. According to Rasmussen, 60% of the people in Wisconsin favor constructing a physical barrier along the Mexican border while only 25% oppose it. We believe that this percentage would be even higher in the Seventh District, perhaps putting Obey out of touch with at least two-thirds of all the voters in the Seventh.

Dave Obey's record is regularly out of touch with the people of the Seventh District and it should be exposed in 2006. We'll do everything we can to make sure of that.

Obey Security Votes #6

The next in our series of questioning how Dave Obey could say that President Bush was the greatest security threat is to point out that Dave Obey's record proves he is no fan of ensuring we have a capable intelligence community. On July 9, 2004, Obey even voted against an amendment expressing the sense of Congress that-- (1) the intelligence community should be revitalized by investing in the missions, people, and capabilities of the community; and (2) the efforts of the men and women of the intelligence community should be recognized and commended. (Roll Call 293)

This isn't Dave Obey's worst vote when it comes to our intelligence, but we think it sets the stage for a couple more votes we will highlight (including a vote that is absolutely inexplicable).

Obey Security Votes #5

Just one month after voting to cut defense spending by $20 billion over 5 years, Dave voted for an amendment to reduce by 5% the total amount authorized for the Department of Defense, Military Construction, and the Department of Energy National Security programs - that would have been a $13.5 billion ONE YEAR CUT FOR OUR TROOPS. (Roll Call Vote 214, June 19, 1997)

The only comfort we can take is that Dave Obey's plan to slash our defense/security capabilities kept getting defeated on a bi-partisan basis.

Obey Security Votes #4

Just a reminder for those new to this series, Dave Obey called President Bush the greatest security threat to our country. Obey Out's response is, Dave Obey has no leg to stand on when making that claim. Here is the next in our series of votes Obey took that tried to weaken our national security:

On May 21, 1997, Dave Obey voted for an amendment by Rep. Kennedy (MA) that would have cut $20 billion from our national defense spending (Roll Call Vote 146).

That's right, not only did Dave Obey want to reduce the amount of money available to recruit and pay our troops, he would have also cut funds for training, ammunition and technology.

Obey's Security Votes - Upcoming

This week the U.S. House will consider two bills that are aimed at shoring up our borders and protecting us from terrorist threats. In our ongoing series in response to Dave Obey calling President Bush the greatest security threat America faces, we thought we'd point out votes Obey's about to take.

HR 4437 would help create a more secure national border by going after employers who knowingly hire illegals, by increasing the penalties for alien smuggling, by empowering local law enforcement to catch illegal aliens and transfer them to the federal government for deportation, and much more. This bill is not the answer to our border security problem, but it is a good step in the right direction. Obey Out predicts, Dave Obey will vote no.

HR 3199 will renew provisions of the Patriot Act to ensure law enforcement continues to have the tools it needs to stop terrorist plots. Obey Out predicts, Dave Obey will vote no.

We're sure Obey will have a good excuse, a note from his doctor maybe, about why he's voting no. How he would have voted for it, if the Democrats could have changed one line. We at Obey Out realize that there are some very legitimate concerns with making sure the Patriot Act did not trample on our constitutional rights. Most of those concerns were addressed when they went through the process and are reflected in the final legislation. We also realize that no amount of legislation will prevent us from ever having another terrorist attack on our soil. We do believe however, that we should strike a balance between enabling law enforcement to protect us from potential attacks and the liberties and freedoms that make this the greatest nation on the face of the earth. We believe that this reauthorization of the Patriot Act is pretty close to that balance. However, Dave Obey will probably vote against it in a nod to his friends at the ACLU.

[UPDATE 12/14 2:37 pm] Obey votes No on Patriot Act

[UPDATE 12/16 1:45 pm] Obey votes against building border fences at the most dangerous/most illegally crossed sections of our border.

More Ethics Trouble for Democrats

While Democrats insist they have some moral high ground on ethics, enter former Alabama Governor and current Alabama gubernatorial candidate Don Siegelman, a Democrat.

According to this story (and many others) from ABC, "A federal grand jury on Monday indicted former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman and former HealthSouth Chairman Richard Scrushy on more charges in a political corruption case.

The new indictment accuses Scrushy of paying off Siegelman for a seat on the state health regulatory board, and accuses both men of wielding improper influence over the board."

the story goes on . . . "The indictment claims Scrushy made "two disguised payments" totaling $500,000 to Siegelman in exchange for Siegelman appointing him to the state's Certificate of Need Review Board, which decides on hospital expansions."

We at Obey Out in no way mean to suggest that anything Dave Obey (or an overwhelming majority of Democrats) has done is illegal or unethical (though we do find it interesting Obey is attacking special interests when two out of every three of his campaign dollars comes from DC-based political action commitees and DC-based lawyers and lobbyists). What we do think is that the Democrats claims that they are a party full of ethical angels while Republicans are the so-called "culture of corruption party" is completely ridiculous, absurd and well, false.

Obey's Security Votes #3

In February of 2005, Dave Obey voted against legislation that would have made it harder for terrorists to get government-issued IDs. The 9/11 terrorists had multiple IDs each, but Obey didn't find that a compelling enough reason to crack down on illegal immigrants obtaining IDs in the future. (Roll Call Vote 31)

We Couldn't Make This Stuff Up

Here is an op-ed from David Sirota, a liberal writer, about Democrat hypocrisy in Washington. It talks about how Democrats seek political contributions from special interests in Washington and are crowing about it at the same time they are criticizing Republicans (or in Obey's case, introducing legislation).

Here's an excerpt:

"Today's example is in Roll Call. House Democrats, who have attacked the GOP's "culture of corruption," deliberately placed a story in Roll Call headlined "House Democrats Redouble Wooing of K Street." The story was likely placed by the second-ranking Democrat in the House, Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD), as he is front and center bragging about the effort. Here's the excerpt:

"A House Democratic project designed to dip into deep K Street wallets entered its second phase of the 2006 cycle Tuesday, as a group of prominent moderate Members enlisted business donors to shell out thousands of dollars to help the party’s top-tier candidates. Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (Md.), along with Reps. Joe Crowley (N.Y.), John Tanner (Tenn.) and Ellen Tauscher (Calif.), met Tuesday afternoon with roughly 50 business-minded Democratic consultants, lobbyists and corporate officers to get them to commit to writing checks to their most worthy party hopefuls next year. The same group spent the better half of 2005 raising money from the same set of donors for the most vulnerable House Democratic incumbents. 'House Democrats are in a good position to make significant gains in next year’s election, so it’s an important time to work with our friends downtown to remind them we have common goals and that they have a stake in helping to elect Democrats,' Hoyer said."

In case you thought that Democrats aren't deliberately publicizing their efforts to shakedown corporate lobbyists - just look at Steny Hoyer's taxpayer-funded Minority Whip website (linked below). Members of Congress always put up stories promoting themselves - and here, incredibly, Hoyer is actually promoting a story about his work setting up a formalized system of legalized bribery - as if the story itself is a trophy to be flaunted."

This story goes on to say that Obey is being "courageous" for going after special interests. Maybe we'll send the writer a link to our blog and to Go Nick Go because it's pretty clear that Dave Obey has a pretty cozy relationship with special interests in DC.

Obey Says Republicans Savaging Programs

According to the Rice Lake Chronotype, Obey continued his negative campaign last week in Barron County. He said Republicans were "savaging really important programs." If you want to call changing the rate in the growth of government from 6.4% to 6.3% (that's growth, in other words more money is being spent either way) "savaging?" It shows Dave Obey either doesn't understand basic math or he's engaging in intentional negative political spin.

A math lesson for our Congressman, if you make $30,000 this year, and you are expecting a 6.4% raise to $31,920 but your boss comes in and says, "in order to make our budget, we will only be able to give you $31,890 next year," has your budget really been savaged by that $30 reduction in what you thought you might be getting? No. It would have been nice and every dollar certainly counts, but you have not been savaged. You would still be making $1890 more next year than you did this year.

More on Democrats and Special Interests

Dave Obey isn't the only one talking out of both sides of his mouth when it comes to special interests in Washington. While this seems to be the Democrats only plan to win in 2006, they're own house isn't in order.

Rep. Mollohan, the Ranking Democrat member on the House ethics committee and on a House appropriations subcommittee took $23,000 in political contributions from MZM, Inc, the same firm whose president bribed Duke Cunningham. We're not saying any of these contributions were illegal, but MZM was clearly contributing to both sides.

Rep. Jim Clyburn, a candidate for House Democrat Caucus Chairman took a $10,000 trip with lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who reportedly picked up the tab to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in January 1997. Abramoff also worked both sides of the aisle.

Update: According to this story, thanks to Red State, Mollohan has a relationship with another defense contractor, TMC. Remember Mollohan is the number one Democrat on the ethics committee. He's the one who with much righteous indignation earlier this year stopped that committee from organizing because Republicans weren't being ethical enough.

Again, we at Obey Out don't think this is illegal or even unethical. But, the Democrats have been running around saying Republicans were unethical (calling it a "Culture of Corruption") for doing the exact same things.

Obey - World Traveler

Today Go Nick Go has pointed out the 12 week-long all expenses paid vacations Obey took around the world over the last 5 years.

This on top of Obey accepting 67% of his campaign contributions from DC political action committees and lobyists raises interesting questions.

Obey Security Votes #2

On July 20, 2005 (Roll Call Vote 399) Dave Obey voted against the Foreign Relations Authorization Act which included sanctions against the UN for corruption (corruption which lead to allowing Saddam Hussein to perpetrate the Oil for Food scandal) and prohibited the transfer of arms to communist China.

Obey and Special Interests

Check out Go Nick Go's post on Obey's special interest fundraising. We find it interesting in light of how he seems to be trying to score political points with the legislation he called for this week.

Obey's Security Votes #1

Obey Out wanted to go back and really look at Dave Obey's statement calling the President the greatest national security risk. We will post a series of votes Dave Obey has taken that we believe gives him no solid ground to stand on when making such a claim.

The first vote we want to highlight was against reauthorizing critical anti-terror provisions in the Patriot Act (Roll Call Vote 414, July 21, 2005). While the Patriot Act has been controversial, many modifications were made to ensure the civil liberties of U.S. citizens are protected. And, lest you think this was a party-line vote, 43 Democrats voted for it.

Marriage Amendment Vote Today

The Wisconsin Senate is expected to pass for the second time the marriage amendment which would help send it on its way to the November ballot.

As we noted previously, Dave Obey has voted against similar measures in Congress.

Obey's Press Release Legislation - Part II - Obey's at Home in DC

We found another interesting tidbit in Dave Obey's legislation. It would require Members of Congress to stay in Washington more. Obey likes this because unless he's feeling any pressure to campaign in Wisconsin, he prefers to stay in DC. If you check his travel records over the last few years you'll see, Obey's not the type of guy who's willing to come back to Wisconsin every weekend. We at Obey Out knew that our Congressman had long ago become a creature of Washington, DC. This bill makes it official, he would rather stay in Washington to spend more of our money than to be in Wisconsin meeting with his constituents.

Obey Negative Campaign Continues

Continuing his negative campaign strategy, Obey apparently went on the radio and slammed President Bush.

It sounded like he was supporting the muted, but growing, Democrat calls to withdraw from Iraq immediately, though he voted against an immediate withdrawl. Obey's new reason, "no strategy to get out of Iraq will work." Of course, we know Obey voted against the infamous $87 billion to fund our troops in Iraq, but has also voted for other Iraq funding.

Obey's position is definitely negative and a bit confusing, but here's the question we ask, why doesn't Obey ever say, "here's my plan?" All he's done recently is talk about how bad Republican ideas are without offering any of his own. Analogies to baseball teams that moved from New York to San Francisco 50 years ago shouldn't be allowed to cut it from our Congressman. We deserve more. We deserve someone who has a positive plan for the future, not just someone who is constantly carping.

It's probably because he thinks we should get out of Iraq now and leave it to the terrorists, but the people of the Seventh District, whether they agreed with going into Iraq or not, want us to finish the job now that we're there. We agree.

Go Nick Go also has this post on the story.

Obey's Press Release Legislation

Go Nick Go wrote this post today about Dave Obey's attempt to sound like he's trying to clean up Washington. We like what GNG had to say about Obey being a part of the Democrat majority that never gave Republicans the time of day when it came to fairness in the process for 25 years. Most importantly, we think GNG is right on when they say that Obey's legislation is basically unoriginal and without any real substance. Good press release, little heft.

National Security Threat?

Thanks to the reader who tipped us off to this article from Bloomberg in which Dave Obey said about President Bush "That man is the biggest national security risk in the United States.'' This statement was made after the President brought Obey into a post-9/11 closed door meeting at the White House. Then Obey complained that President Bush wouldn't work with him.

We don't know about you, but if you're a Republican President and you invite a Democrat into the White House for a meeting and this is what he has to say about you immediately thereafter, how hard are you going to try to work with him in the future?

This is Dave Obey's style. He burns a bridge then complains that you aren't working hard enough or fast enough to rebuild it.

Food for Thought

Archy's Corner is an amusing section of Obey's Congressional website. Archy opines on "special interests" in this link:

"Some politicians who complain about
arthritis or aches in the back or the knees
would feel a whole lot better if they would
quit genuflecting so hard to special interests."

For a Congressman who has spent much of his career taking most of his campaign contibutions from special interests and non-Wisconsin interests, we find this quite interesting. We won't pry into Mr. Obey's personal medical history, but we wonder how his back and knees feel?

Will Obey Get Involved?

UW-Eau Claire has ended its policy of prohibiting Resident Assistants from leading non-university sponsored (unofficial) Bible studies in their dorm rooms under threat of lawsuit by one of the RA's. According to this article, the school has relented when a suit was filed in federal court alleging the violation of the First Amendment rights of the RA.

Dave Obey has called for taking away similar First Amendment rights from Air Force Chaplains, including offering an amendment on the House floor. Will he contend as well, that Resident Assistants in the college dorms across America cannot offer a voluntary, non-school sponsored Bible study in their rooms because they are agents of a university that receives federal dollars? Obey Out knows that to be consistent, Dave Obey would come down on the side of UW-Eau Claire, but we wonder if he's going to head down the road of abridging First Amendment rights again.

Marriage Amendment

The Wisconsin Legislature has begun hearings to pass the state constitutional amendment to protect the traditional definition of marriage. All indications are that this amendment will be on the ballot in November of 2006.

Dave Obey voted against the federal constitutional amendment to protect the traditional definition of marriage on September 30, 2004, (Roll Call Vote 484).

Obey also voted against HR 3313, the Marriage Protection Act, which would restrict the ability of liberal judges to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act. (Roll Call Vote 410, July 22, 2004)

The U.S. House of Representatives will likely vote on these measures, which did not become law last Congress, again in 2006. Dave Obey can once again put himself on the record against protecting traditional families in Northwest Wisconsin again.