take19 - TAKEN!!!

Sue says she's an independent voice, not beholden to her Conservative bosses in Washington.

So why does Rudy G., her new best buddy, call her a loyal Republican?

Which is it Sue?

Sue Kelly is running new TV advertisements on Cablevision with the campaign slogan "an independent voice in Congress." Nothing could be further from the truth, and these ads are an exercise in deception. Sue Kelly has voted consistently with the Republican majority and is responsible for supporting the horrific domestic and foreign policies of the Bush administration. She is clearly worried to be advertising this early and in this manner.

This particular ad focuses on her so-called environmental record. In fact, Sue Kelly has a dismal 17% rating by the League of Conservation voters. On her own campaign website, she claims that this is just because of some missed votes (see this post for more details on that excuse), but the fact remains that she voted to allow drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge (at least twice!), to allow mining on Federal lands (HER 4241), and to weaken the Clean Air Act (HER 3893). These were all very close votes in which many Republican "moderates" switched sides, but not Sue Kelly. She voted right along with the Republican majority.

Don't let Sue Kelly fool you with these ads. She is no "independent voice."

Let's take back the 19th!

Sue Kelly and her Republican Leadership had a problem - how to avoid the prospect of unpleasant campaign ads in the fall that compare the pay raise Congress gave itself to its failure to grant the first increase in the minimum wage since 1997?

In a cynical political ploy to deal with that “problem”, while simultaneously serving her “real” constituents - the super-rich - Sue Kelly voted on July 29 to couple minimum wage legislation with a permanent estate tax reduction. The minimum wage legislation would provide a gradual increase in the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour (in 2009) - an average annual benefit of $1200 for an estimated 6.6 million people. The massive reduction in the estate tax would give an average tax break of $1.3 million to a comparatively small number of multi-million dollar estates (about 8,200 estates in 2011), plus other tax “sweeteners” and have a total cost of $309 billion plus interest costs over the first 10 years!

Sue Kelly provided proof positive that her vote to increase the minimum wage was not the result of her sudden realization that it was "the right thing to do", when she voted against a Democratic effort to pass the minimum wage bill as a stand alone bill without the estate tax and other tax cuts.

Additional proof is that the minimum wage “increase” that was passed will actually decrease wages for restaurant workers and other tipped employees because it invalidates state laws providing a minimum wage for those workers. (Whatever happened to States Rights?)

And then there is GOP Rep. Mike Castle who said, in talking about the minimum wage increase “There’s a general agreement among Republicans [opposing the raise] that ‘maybe we don’t like it much, but we need to move forward with it just for political reasons.’”

Raising the minimum wage to a living wage is good for ordinary people, good for business, and good for the economy. Severely reducing the estate tax means a benefit for a few thousand very wealthy, while saddling our children and grandchildren with more debt and with cuts in vital federal programs like Veterans programs, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, and unemployment insurance.

Working families shouldn't be blackmailed into mortgaging their future in order to earn a decent wage. Could we please elect a Congress in 2006 that has the people of the United States as their priority? Let's start with the 19th Congressional District.

The Conservative Club For Growth has released its rankings of the porkiest Members of Congress and it found that our own Sue has quite an appetite for pork. Unfortunately, none of the projects detailed in the list happen to be in the district Sue claims to represent.

Way to go Sue! Not quite as bad as John Sweeney's 100% batting average in neighboring NY-20, but pretty close.

Capitalist Pundit, a local blogger, has more details on some of Sue's porkier moments. Maybe next time Sue will take a pass on $1 million for tourism development in Kentucky and actually pay attention to things that are going on in this district.

Apologies to Nathaniel Hawthorne, but it appears that there's a new scarlet letter in town and it begins with the letter R. Earlier this week, The Hill poked at suburban Buffalo Congressman Tom Reynolds, who is leading the Republican attempt to retain control of Congress, because he conveniently forgot that he was a Republican in his campaign literature, in his TV ads, and on his website.

So we decided to take a look at Sue Kelly's new campaign site and shock of shocks, the word Republican is MIA on her site too. It's not on this page, or this one or even this one.

Are things really so bad for Republicans in New York that they have to pretend that they're not Republicans? And exactly how do they plan to get rid of the Republican label on the ballot come November?

We knew that Sue would eventually turn to Rudy Giuliani, who uses the catchy moniker "America's Mayor", to inject life into her tired campaign. We just expected him to come here in mid-October. Rudy will be here next Wednesday at a $250 a plate fundraiser for Sue in Fishkill. The event even features an open bar, which ought to make all of those beer companies that contribute to Sue's coffers (as we noted here) pretty happy. The event is being hosted by Dutchess Co. developer David Stenger and his brother, Kenneth, a partner at a Wappingers Falls law firm.

Now why would someone like Sue who already has a significant fundraising advantage need to call in such a big gun like Rudy? In August, no less? After all, John McCain already came to the district in April. Perhaps she needs the money to continue paying for the dirty campaigning that's already going on in the district. After all, Swift-boating someone doesn't come cheaply.

Of course, Rudy isn't just stumping for Sue in person. He's also stumping for Sue here on his website. Indeed, Sue's picture appears just above another endangered New York Congresscritter: John Sweeney of NY-20. Be sure to take a close look at all of Sue's accomplishments -- a list worthy of the fiction best-seller list!

The middle-class is disappearing. Overwhelmed by the skyrocketing cost of living, more and more American families are struggling to keep up and many are falling by the wayside. Health care, housing, gasoline, heating oil, interest rates, groceries and other essential items just keep getting more expensive. Income for all, except big business and the very wealthy, just can't keep up with the rising expenses. The evidence of Sue Kelly's complete disregard for middle-class America is overwhelming and well documented in this blog and is further proven in a report card just issued by the Drum Major Institute.

DMI tallied key votes on issues that directly affect the middle class and I'm sure that those familiar with Sue Kelly wouldn't be surprised to hear her report card grade. 13%. Wow. If you ever scored 13% on anything - be it a social studies exam, work evaluation or anything else - would you expect to be rewarded? Well based on her voting record on issues such as bankruptcy, tort reform, estate tax, medicare, student loans, free trade agreements and energy policy, Sue Kelly failed miserably yet expects to be rewarded with re-election.

What do you think? Should Sue Kelly be rewarded for failing the middle class while serving the interests of big business and the wealthy? You'll have your chance to answer these questions come November 7th.

Apparently, the Republicans in Washington D.C. were so proud of the vote that Sue took the other day on outlawing the possibility of gay marriages that they've been busy calling around to local reporters here in the 19th trying to get them to nail some of Sue's democratic challengers on this critically important issue that apparently ranks right up there with affordable health insurance and a deteriorating economy for middle class Americans. Perhaps it's part of the Republican's so-called suburban strategy. Except that Mark Kirk, the Chicago area Congressman who is credited with that strategy actually voted against adding a constitutional amendment.

Are national Republicans really that worried about Kelly losing that they're already making calls for her? And how does that square with Kelly spokesman Kevin Callahan's repeated comments that the Congresswoman doesn't plan to start focusing on the race until the fall? That must be why Sue was the star of yet another Republican fundraiser on Wednesday night with the catchy name "Retaining our Majority IV". (We missed the invites to ROMPs 1, 2 and 3 now that Sue no longer lists her fundraising events on the NRCC website).

Why not give the fine folks at the NRC a call (202.863.8500) and tell them just how wrong they are on this issue? And while you're at it, tell them that Sue's own lackeys ought to be able to do their own dirty work!

Sue Kelly voted on Tuesday to permanently create a second class of citizens who, if the legislation passed, would not be able to enjoy the same rights that most others do. In another attempt to divide America, the Republican Party proposed an amendment to the Constitution that would prohibit some United States citizens from marrying their chosen partner. Thankfully, there are still enough rational members of Congress who voted 'no' on this legislation and kept it from passing.

We celebrated Independence Day a couple of weeks ago. It was a holiday created to honor the courage of those who signed the Declaration of Independence and led the American rebellion against tyrannical rule. Republican hucksters like Sue Kelly like to wrap themselves in the American flag and label themselves as patriots. Deriding those who disagree with their rhetoric as traitors, these disengenuous Republicans love to talk about how others in the world "hate us for our freedoms." Well, Sue Kelly and those of her ilk have no clue what freedom really means. Their idea of freedom is to force Americans to abide by their conservative Republican ideals of morality. For Kelly, and those like her, allow me to refer them to an historic document that was written and signed 230 years ago.

Do we remember this sentence from the Declaration of Independence? Sue Kelly doesn't.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Once again, Sue Kelly has shown she doesn't care about the welfare and safety of our children and grandchildren. This time, she voted to reject a motion by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI)to prohibit interstate gambling by minors on the internet. Conyer's proposal would have amended the INTERNET GAMBLING PROHIBITION AND ENFORCEMENT ACT, H.R. 4411.

What merit could Sue Kelly possibly see in permitting gambling by children?

Conyers' motion, which failed by a 167-243 vote essentially along party lines, would have required a “secure and effective customer identity verification system to assure compliance with applicable age and residence requirements.” Rep. Conyers said in support of his motion - "It makes sure that underage kids cannot gamble on the Internet, whether it is connection to interstate or intrastate betting...[T]o me, protecting children from being taken advantage of on the Internet is one of the most important things we can do as Members of the Congress."

You may recall from our recentpostthat Sue Kelly voted to remove the requirement that all handguns be equipped with safety trigger locks. Now she continues her theme of "Let Every Child be Left Unprotected" (is this going to be one of her campaign slogans?) by voting against the Conyers proposal.

Is Sue Kelly dangerous to families?

Back in April, we poked at Sue for needing to turn to Arizona Senator John McCain for help with her fundraising. Well, the second quarter numbers are now out and Sue is looking even more desperate. Why? Because the actual people that she depends on to vote for her here in the 19th aren't exactly lining up in droves to contribute to her campaign.

Indeed, a quick look at the second quarter numbers shows that Kelly is increasingly relying on big money PACs to fund her campaign. In the latest quarter, Kelly raised nearly $400,000. What's surprising is that nearly $250,000 of it (about 63%) is from PACs. This is up from the 54% that PAC donations previously represented. With very few exceptions, these PACs aren't located here in the 19th, which begs the question: exactly what do these PACs expect from Kelly in return?

Moving on to the indivdual donations, a quick skim shows that only around half of her individual contributions came from people who live in the district. Not that there's anything wrong with collecting money from people who live outside the district. But between the PACs and the people who don't live in the district, you have to wonder exactly who Sue is working for.

On Tuesday, Sue appeared to be very, very concerned about not being briefed about a Bush administration program that tracks financial transactions worldwide. After all, she's chair of the House Financial Services subcommittee that theoretically, at least, oversees exactly this sort of thing.

Said Sue: "Many in Congress who should have been briefed by this administration were not. What else is it that we don't know?". What indeed! As Rep. Barney Frank pointed out neither he nor Sue would have been briefed about this program at all if the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times hadn't been preparing stories on it.

Of course, the hearing on Tuesday was particularly surprising given that only a week earlier, Sue voted to condemn media leaks of what Republican leaders said was classified information -- the very same information Sue appeared to be upset over not knowing about on Tuesday. The pre-vote debate gave Republican hacks a chance to appeal to their conservative base by chastising the New York Times.

What changed from one week to the next? Perhaps Sue got a poll that showed that bashing the New York Times in its own backyard may play well in rural Alabama or other Conservative strongholds, but not in NY-19. How else to explain the sudden about-face?

So, she shuffles a few papers on national TV and makes it look like she's challenging the Bush administration. That might make great theater, but we're betting that people in the district see Sue for the hardcore conservative lackey that she really is.

Last week, Sue showed yet again just how moderate she really is claims to be by voting with the radical fringe of the Republican party on a piece of legislation so crazy, so out-there, that even "the pit bull of the House" on immigration issues, James Sensenbrenner, voted against it. Despite Sue's vote, the legislation failed by a vote of 90 to 318.

So what was Sue's big idea? Requiring passports to enter the U.S. from Canada. Never mind that Canada is a top tourist destination for many Americans and that while statistics vary on exactly how many Americans currently have passports (the low is 5%; the high is around 30%), it's pretty clear that requiring someone to spend nearly $100 just to see Niagara Falls (after all, the better view is in Canada), is a pretty stupid idea. So stupid that even a pit bull didn't fall for it!

Seems like Sue Kelly is telling us almost every day what a champion of small business she is. So you’d think that when a proposal is introduced that provides support to small business by making access to financing more available – a proposal supported by 20 small business groups - she’d be right up there, front and center, cheering it on and making sure it gets passed. Right?

Wrong.

Sue voted against this legislation! Sue Kelly voted to continue the burden of additional up front fees – ranging from $1500 to $50,000 - on Small Business Administration loans. Thank goodness the votes of Democrats, augmented by 17 of Sue’s fellow Republicans, foiled the attempt by Sue and her Republican Leadership to prevent passage of this legislation.

So, over Sue’s objections, the House approved an amendment (214 to 207) to an appropriations bill, HR 5672, vote #327, that lowers the cost of the Small Business Administration’s 7(a) loan program, by restoring $40 million to the program that had been cut by the Bush Administration. The Bush administration eliminated funding for the program two years ago, forcing small businesses to shoulder the cost of the loan program. As a result, entrepreneurs have had to pay additional upfront fees just to use the program – greatly restricting access to capital that small businesses need to remain the main job creators in the nation.

If you are a small business person, wouldn’t you want your member of Congress to help you get access to the capital you need to build your business?

Well, if that’s what you need, Sue Kelly is not your friend. And we think she knows that – maybe that’s why this vote wasn’t announced in one of her almost daily press releases!

Given Sue's political philosophy, it isn't any surprise that The Drum Major Institute for Public Policy found only 17% of Sue's votes favored the middle class.