The Battle for Congress in 2006

“Congress by the Numbers

The full House is up for re-election in 2006 as are 33 Senate seats, including 15 Republicans and 19 Democrats. If six Republican seats are lost, Democrats win control. With Jeffords retiring in Vermont, it seems likely that Bernie Sanders will become the first left independent to serve in the Senate. Democratic Senators Sarbanes in Maryland and Dayton in Minnesota are also retiring. Other hotly contested races are in Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Washington State.
Also in 2006, 36 Governors will be up for election. There are 22 Republicans, including New York, Illinois, Ohio, Maryland, Massachusetts, Texas and an open seat in Florida where Jeb Bush is term limited. In addition 14 Democrats are up for election including Jennifer Granholm in Michigan and Janet Napoletano in Arizona and Bill Richardson in New Mexico.



I know in Tenn. Frist seat is up for grabs. It should be a hotly contested race. There are 3 Reps and 2 Dems who have said they are running for his seat.



thoughts about the other races?”

“33 Senate seats, including 15 Republicans and 19 Democrats.
Ewker
9:29:32 AM
10/31/05

I'm having trouble with the math there.”

“LMAO!”

“LOL @ pedx!
Come on pedx, cut poor Ewker some slack. He just cut n pasted something. ;-)”

“It's Dem math.
It's the intent that counts.

(Now if Ewker had included a source link, we could figure out the problem, but Ewker doesn't do source links, LOL)”

“The Ohio gov. position is up for garbs. Ou4r current gov, idiot Bob Taft is term limited (thank gawd).”

“NYS doesn't have term limits for the governor, but after 3 terms George Pataki decides to call it quits. It's probably a good thing, as we will get some fresh ideas coming from the governor’s office.”

““33 Senate seats, including 15 Republicans and 19 Democrats.
Ewker
9:29:32 AM
10/31/05

I'm having trouble with the math there.”
pedxing
9:19:34 AM
11/01/05



Maybe two Senators have to share a seat. Didja ever think of that?”

“Uncle "hic" Teddy sittin' on John Kerry's lap?”

“No, he's just passed out and lying on the floor.”

“I think that'd be awesome if they left one sit short on the floor of the Senate. When the music stops grab your seat. If you're still standing you don't get to vote that day. But you do win a cake.”

““No, he's just passed out and lying on the floor.”

Scratch that. I forgot Barbra Boxer's place is under the podium.”

“it was suppose to be 18 Democrats, there was a typo. Even a source link wouldn't have helped. Actually it should have been 17 Dems and 1 Ind but since Jeffords votes mostly with the Dems they included him

seats up for election:

15 Republicans:
Allen, George - Virginia

Burns, Conrad - Montana

Chafee, Lincoln - Rhode Island

DeWine, Mike - Ohio

Ensign, John - Nevada

Frist, Bill - Tennessee*

Hatch, Orrin - Utah

Hutchison, Kay Bailey - Texas

Kyl, Jon - Arizona

Lott, Trent - Mississippi

Lugar, Richard - Indiana

Santorum, Rick - Pennsylvania

Snowe, Olympia - Maine

Talent, James - Missouri

Thomas, Craig - Wyoming

17 Democrats and 1 independent:

Akaka, Daniel - Hawaii

Bingaman, Jeff - New Mexico

Byrd, Robert - West Virginia

Cantwell, Maria - Washington

Carper, Thomas - Delaware

Clinton, Hillary Rodham - New York

Conrad, Kent - North Dakota

Corzine, Jon - New Jersey**

Dayton, Mark - Minnesota*

Feinstein, Dianne - California

Jeffords, James - Vermont* (independent)

Kennedy, Edward - Massachusetts

Kohl, Herb - Wisconsin

Lieberman, Joseph - Connecticut

Nelson, Bill - Florida

Nelson, Ben - Nebraska

Sarbanes, Paul - Maryland*

Stabenow, Debbie - Michigan


* Not seeking re-election.
** Running in New Jersey's 2005 governor's race.”

“HA! you guys are hilarious.”

“Lott, Trent - Mississippi

A lock.
The few here that didn't like him have changed their minds. He's doing a great job of getting hurricane aid here.
He lost his own house here on the Gulf.

Most of those peeps are locks.”

“Lott deserves to win after the way he was (underground?) railroaded.”

“Looks to me like the Democrats just won the battle for control of Congress.


Nov. 1 (Bloomberg) -- Democrats forced a closed session of the U.S. Senate today to call for an investigation into the Bush administration's use of intelligence about Iraq, a maneuver Republicans dismissed as a political ``stunt.''

Democratic Minority Leader Harry Reid invoked a rule that requires a closed session on the Senate floor in which the galleries are cleared of visitors. Democrats threatened to use the tactic daily until Republicans convene hearings into the administration's use of intelligence surrounding the war in which more than 2,000 U.S. soldiers have died.

``Be prepared to face this motion every day until you face this reality,'' said Senator Richard Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist called the move ``an affront to the leadership of this grand institution.'' Typically, such sessions over intelligence matters occur only after the leaders in both parties agree, he said.

``The U.S. Senate has been hijacked by the Democratic leaders,'' he said. Reid and Durbin orchestrated a ``pure stunt,'' Frist said.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=aHX7JgfglMjc&refer=top_world_news”

“Statement by Senator Reid

Troops and Security First

This past weekend, we witnessed the indictment of the I. Lewis Libby, the Vice President’s Chief of Staff and a senior Advisor to President Bush. Libby is the first sitting White House staffer to be indicted in 135 years. This indictment raises very serious charges. It asserts this Administration engaged in actions that both harmed our national security and are morally repugnant. The decision to place U.S. soldiers in harm’s way is the most significant responsibility the Constitution invests in the Congress. The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really about: how the Administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions. As a result of its improper conduct, a cloud now hangs over this Administration. This cloud is further darkened by the Administration’s mistakes in prisoner abuse scandal, Hurricane Katrina, and the cronyism and corruption in numerous agencies. And, unfortunately, it must be said that a cloud also hangs over this Republican-controlled Congress for its unwillingness to hold this Republican Administration accountable for its misdeeds on all of these issues. Let’s take a look back at how we got here with respect to Iraq Mr. President. The record will show that within hours of the terrorist attacks on 9/11, senior officials in this Administration recognized these attacks could be used as a pretext to invade Iraq. The record will also show that in the months and years after 9/11, the Administration engaged in a pattern of manipulation of the facts and retribution against anyone who got in its way as it made the case for attacking Iraq. There are numerous examples of how the Administration misstated and manipulated the facts as it made the case for war. Administration statements on Saddam’s alleged nuclear weapons capabilities and ties with Al Qaeda represent the best examples of how it consistently and repeatedly manipulated the facts. The American people were warned time and again by the President, the Vice President, and the current Secretary of State about Saddam’s nuclear weapons capabilities. The Vice President said Iraq “has reconstituted its nuclear weapons.” Playing upon the fears of Americans after September 11, these officials and others raised the specter that, left unchecked, Saddam could soon attack America with nuclear weapons. Obviously we know now their nuclear claims were wholly inaccurate. But more troubling is the fact that a lot of intelligence experts were telling the Administration then that its claims about Saddam’s nuclear capabilities were false.
The situation was very similar with respect to Saddam’s links to Al Qaeda. The Vice President told the American people, “We know he’s out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know he has a longstanding relationship with various terrorist groups including the Al Qaeda organization.”

The Administration’s assertions on this score have been totally discredited. But again, the Administration went ahead with these assertions in spite of the fact that the government’s top experts did not agree with these claims.

What has been the response of this Republican-controlled Congress to the Administration’s manipulation of intelligence that led to this protracted war in Iraq? Basically nothing. Did the Republican-controlled Congress carry out its constitutional obligations to conduct oversight? No. Did it support our troops and their families by providing them the answers to many important questions? No. Did it even attempt to force this Administration to answer the most basic questions about its behavior? No.

Unfortunately the unwillingness of the Republican-controlled Congress to exercise its oversight responsibilities is not limited to just Iraq. We see it with respect to the prisoner abuse scandal. We see it with respect to Katrina. And we see it with respect to the cronyism and corruption that permeates this Administration.

Time and time again, this Republican-controlled Congress has consistently chosen to put its political interests ahead of our national security. They have repeatedly chosen to protect the Republican Administration rather than get to the bottom of what happened and why.

There is also another disturbing pattern here, namely about how the Administration responded to those who challenged its assertions. Time and again this Administration has actively sought to attack and undercut those who dared to raise questions about its preferred course.

For example, when General Shinseki indicated several hundred thousand troops would be needed in Iraq, his military career came to an end. When then OMB Director Larry Lindsay suggested the cost of this war would approach $200 billion, his career in the Administration came to an end. When U.N. Chief Weapons Inspector Hans Blix challenged conclusions about Saddam’s WMD capabilities, the Administration pulled out his inspectors. When Nobel Prize winner and IAEA head Mohammed el-Baridei raised questions about the Administration’s claims of Saddam’s nuclear capabilities, the Administration attempted to remove him from his post. When Joe Wilson stated that there was no attempt by Saddam to acquire uranium from Niger, the Administration launched a vicious and coordinated campaign to demean and discredit him, going so far as to expose the fact that his wife worked as a CIA agent.

Given this Administration’s pattern of squashing those who challenge its misstatements, what has been the response of this Republican-controlled Congress? Again, absolutely nothing. And with their inactions, they provide political cover for this Administration at the same time they keep the truth from our troops who continue to make large sacrifices in Iraq.

This behavior is unacceptable. The toll in Iraq is as staggering as it is solemn. More than 2,000 Americans have lost their lives. Over 90 Americans have paid the ultimate sacrifice this month alone – the fourth deadliest month since the war began. More than 15,000 have been wounded. More than 150,000 remain in harm’s way. Enormous sacrifices have been and continue to be made.

The troops and the American people have a right to expect answers and accountability worthy of that sacrifice. For example, 40 Senate Democrats wrote a substantive and detailed letter to the President asking four basic questions about the Administration’s Iraq policy and received a four sentence answer in response. These Senators and the American people deserve better.

They also deserve a searching and comprehensive investigation about how the Bush Administration brought this country to war. Key questions that need to be answered include:

o How did the Bush Administration assemble its case for war against Iraq?
o Who did Bush Administration officials listen to and who did they ignore?
o How did senior Administration officials manipulate or manufacture intelligence presented to the Congress and the American people?
o What was the role of the White House Iraq Group or WHIG, a group of senior White House officials tasked with marketing the war and taking down its critics?
o How did the Administration coordinate its efforts to attack individuals who dared to challenge the Administration’s assertions?
o Why has the Administration failed to provide Congress with the documents that will shed light on their misconduct and misstatements?

Unfortunately the Senate committee that should be taking the lead in providing these answers is not. Despite the fact that the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee publicly committed to examine many of these questions more than 1 and ½ years ago, he has chosen not to keep this commitment. Despite the fact that he restated that commitment earlier this year on national television, he has still done nothing.

At this point, we can only conclude he will continue to put politics ahead of our national security. If he does anything at this point, I suspect he will play political games by producing an analysis that fails to answer any of these important questions. Instead, if history is any guide, this analysis will attempt to disperse and deflect blame away from the Administration.

We demand that the Intelligence Committee and other committees in this body with jurisdiction over these matters carry out a full and complete investigation immediately as called for by Democrats in the committee’s annual intelligence authorization report. Our troops and the American people have sacrificed too much. It is time this Republican-controlled Congress put the interests of the American people ahead of their own political interests.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0511/S00029.htm”

“The Vile Man is so funny!
LOLOLOLOLOLOL”

“This proves the Democrats are less interested in working for the public, and more interested in gaining power.”

“The Dims basically threw a Hissy Fit because they didn't get what they wanted over Scooter Libby, Karl Rowe outsmarted them again yet again, and Bush put up a great Court nominee they are powerless to stop.
Rather than showing strength, as violin's silly spin would indicate, it shows a Party lowered to pulling stunts and acting like children.
Typical Dems, except for the half in the Gang of 14, the only 7 adults left in the Dem Party.

This little laughable stunt will come back to bite them in the a$$ big time.

The most foolish thing they did was reuniting all the Repubs that had been busy snipeing at each other.

They just guaranteed the Court swinging to the Right.”

“They've done this before and it's bitten them in the ass. They seem to think people don't see right through this behavior.

I love it!”

“Everytime they pull stunts like this, it reminds me of the sickening behavior they pulled at one of their own's funeral, Wellstone. Shows their true nature.”

“Democrat = no ideas.”

“It’s a ‘stunt’ to demand Congress perform it’s Constitutionally mandated oversight role?

Why do connies hate America?


Poor Bill Frist was the one throwing a hissy fit.”

“They just don't get it.”

“neither do you”

“Looks like the poor kid saw Tom DeLay before he got his teeth whitened, and prior to his daily make-up treatment.”

“So Buddha, issues 2-5; yes or no. Inquiring minds wanna know.”

“what do you think? I vote yes on all even issues every year to begin with.”

““what do you think? I vote yes on all even issues every year to begin with.”

You mean only the even numbered issues? The bad thing is I agree with some of what the issues want to do but I refuse to allow them to do it in the way they want. On one issue the board that is selected; the first two people selected appoint the second two members. WTF? And they get a blank check to boot? And they can't be held accountable to the voters? AND anyone off the street can be appointed without any qualifications? Two big fat thumbs down here.

If they want reform I'd rather they force the state to enforce the existing laws and create new standards but not by expanding government.

What say you?”

“I see what you are saying, but the problem is the lack of oversight with the current Secretary of State. I figured you'd be opposed to the panel thing (more government, etc), but the other issues are non-partisan unless we were rich. Allowing people to vote early is a conveinience thing, and bringing the contribution limit down would keep special interests (including unions), from being able to donate huge amounts of cash.

As for the redistricting, I'm all for it. I never liked gerrymandering to begin with. Some of the districts look like psychiatric ink blot tests after both parties got through with them. The 9 member panel would be bi-partisan, with hopefully folks like the moderate bi-partisan US senators running the show. It wouldn't have been an issue if Blackwell did his job properly.

Anyway, I'll be voting yes on issues 1-7. What do you think of issue 1?”

““Allowing people to vote early is a conveinience thing, and bringing the contribution limit down would keep special interests (including unions), from being able to donate huge amounts of cash.”

I’m all for these also. Early voting would be so much better for everyone because many people can’t even get out of the house to vote and more time is needed to get them in. I’m also all for limiting special interest groups of any kind especially corporate. The devil is in the details though. It seems as though they were poor detailed and laid out.

“As for the redistricting, I'm all for it. I never liked gerrymandering to begin with. Some of the districts look like psychiatric ink blot tests after both parties got through with them. The 9 member panel would be bi-partisan, with hopefully folks like the moderate bi-partisan US senators running the show. It wouldn't have been an issue if Blackwell did his job properly.”

The redistricting is stupid too. And it does stack the deck. I have no problem with a bi-partisan panel.

“What do you think of issue 1?”

I’m all for it. We have to do something to get money and business back into the state. And the fact that it’s bonds rather than corporate hand outs is a good thing because it’s more like investing in the state rather than giving handouts to corporations they could leave as soon as the goodies run out.”

“I'll be sending you a sign for your yard, lol. OK, now lets get back to bashing each other before others here think the world might end.”

“damn, Nigal and BB talking to each other without bashing each other and on another thread Bison and embear talking to each other in a calm collective manner

WTF is going on??”

“that isn't to bad, even s-rge says something worthwhile ever now and then. He likes the peanut butter halloween candy. He got one point for that..lol”

“Son of a bltch the very fabric of the universe is tearing!

It’s amazing what can be agreed upon when we don’t say dumb stuff like it’s all the democrat’s/republican’s fault. There's a whole slew of local money grabbers I'm voting against. Some would call me down right evil for some choices. Like the levy for the County Board of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities. This is the most wasteful bunch of do nothings I've ever seen that use societies weakest individuals to fuel their beurocratic greed. And these are the people who pay ME. Down with the Man in ‘06!

When it comes to state politics we probably agree on a lot. So what is your opinion of Taft? Is that big nasty thing on his a mole or a conjoined twin?”

“Oh, and go fukc yourself Buddha. There, feel more like home now? :)”

“damn, Nigal and BB talking to each other without bashing each other and on another thread Bison and embear talking to each other in a calm collective manner

WTF is going on??”
Ewker
3:14:17 PM
11/03/05


DANG!
Hey, let's try that Ewker!”

“Stove, heck your ok in my book. Do wish you could make the trip this weekend. Good luck with the Dr visit


is that sappy enough..lol”

“You damn sappy libbie! ;-)
last edited: 11/03/05 4:12:49 PM”

“Wall Street Journal/NBC News Poll:

Americans want Democrats to take control of Congress in next year's election, by a margin of 48% to 37%. The 11-point gap is the widest enjoyed by either party on that question since the poll began asking it in 1994.

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB113158656126793098-e_Q2UQQNLAWnZqaHSTfPjijCiH8_20061109.html?mod=blogs”

“NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll conducted by the polling organizations of Peter Hart (D) and Bill McInturff (R). Nov. 4-7, 2005. N=1,003 adults nationwide. Results below are among registered voters.

.

"What is your preference for the outcome of the 2006 congressional elections: a Congress controlled by Republicans or a Congress controlled by Democrats?"

.

Controlled By Republicans Controlled By Democrats Unsure
% % %
11/4-7/05
37 48 15
10/8-10/05
39 48 13
7/8-11/05
40 45 15
5/12-16/05 40 47 13”

“Good luck with the democrats holding onto that lead. The best we could do in 2004 was John Kerry. Did you watch the debates. How good does someone have to be to convince the American people to vote for him. Bush was an idiot and here we are with "4 more year".”

“mjc - it's now become so obvious, that the moderate hard headed morons are finally seeing the light. The other 34% are just dumb.”

“Don't blame this #&%!$ on me, I voted for Nader.”

“America's Dumbest Congressmen

10. Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY)
9. Representative Patrick Kennedy (D-RI)
8. Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT)
7. Representative Cynthia McKinney (D-GA)
6. Representative Jean Schmidt (R-OH)
5. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
4. Representative J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ)
3. Senator James Inhofe (R-OK)
2. Representative Donald Young (R-AK)
1.Representative Katherine Harris (R-FL)
”