It's safe to say that the National Republican Congressional Committee is in a bit of chaos this morning. The NRCC is losing the money battle with its Democratic counterpart - by about $9 million in the latest campaign fund-raising cycle. And they're getting killed in the all important cash-on-hand battle - $22 million for the Democrats to $1.6 million for the Republicans. I believe that much of this has to do with the fact that the Republican base is fed up with the party, and won't start to give money to the cause as they have done in the past until the GOP cleans itself up. But if the party as a whole hasn't learned its lesson from 2006, it looks like it's starting to. The best way to get someone's attention is through money - or the lack of it.

Roll Call has an article up, Cole Pressured on NRCC Staff (sub. req.), that shows that House Minority Leader John Boehner has noticed the problems with fund-raising, and is starting to call people at the NRCC to account for it. The Politico also has a good article on the subject this morning, telling us that if Boehner forces the issue and cans the two people on the NRCC staff that he feels is most culpable for the NRCC's lack of success, its chairman Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma would resign in protest.

That might be the best outcome for all concerned. It appears as if Boehner is starting to realize that the Republican Party's problems are mostly internal, rather than external. GOP Congressional leadership should be looking at its membership and start pressuring problem incumbents to announce their intention now not to seek re-election, or face opposition in the primaries from the national party. That's probably not going to happen with Cole in charge of the NRCC.

The GOP needs to get new conservative candidates involved in about 40 to 50 Congressional races next year. That's the only way for the party to take advantage of the current extraordinarily high disapproval ratings for the Democratic led House. Only new candidates, without the old-boy network ties of many current GOP representatives, can make the argument that a vote for them is a vote for change - not more of the same. Perhaps this move by Boehner shows that he, indeed, is starting to "get" it.

There was an article in yesterday's Providence Journal that I'm surprised hasn't gotten more attention -- a reprint of a story Saturday in the Washington Post -- In Swing Districts, Democratic Enthusiasm Is Harder to Come By. It reports on an internal poll taken by Democratic pollsters in August that, until the article by Chris Cillizza and Shailagh Murray, had remained secret:

Conventional wisdom dictates that Democratic voters are thrilled with their choices for president, bursting at the seams to rally behind Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) or whoever gets the party's nod next year. A recent survey by Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, however, showed Clinton and Obama trailing former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani (R) in the 31 Democratic-held House districts regarded as most imperiled in 2008, and even potentially serving as a drag on those lawmakers' reelection chances. A poll found that if Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton tops the ticket in 2008, some vulnerable Democratic House incumbents will have reason to worry. The poll was conducted in August but has not been previously reported. It paints a "sobering picture" for Democrats, according to a memo by Lake and Daniel Gotoff that accompanies the poll report.

In those Democratic districts polled, voters were asked to choose between Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani, followed by the same question on Barack Obama and Rudy Giuliani. Rudy beats Clinton 49 to 39, and he beats Obama by a surprisingly small 41 to 40. This poll was taken before the losses suffered by the Democrats during the past two weeks on the Iraq War. With the above Presidential poll results, I'm gathering that the districts in question are more conservative than the usual Democrat held district. I'm wondering if the events in Congress over the past two weeks would make the Democrats' problems in those districts even greater.

It would seem that the new GOP strategy when it comes to party corruption centers on issuing a swift public condemnation of the guilty (or perceived guilty) individual followed by a swift ouster of the embattled colleague. Of course, this was the way it played it in regards to the action taken against Senator Larry Craig and to a great extent this swift action was a preventive measure to avoid the 2006 calamity.

According to the Politico, while the furor and outrage over the Mark Foley incident definitely played a role in members of the conservative base sitting home, there were other corruption scandals that contributed to massive GOP losses. In Ohio, Rep. Bob Ney's felony conviction greatly damaged the party as did the Rep. Duke Cunningham corruption scandal and criminal conviction in California. And who could forget the ouster of Tom Delay?

For the GOP, it is a smart move to take a zero tolerance policy towards party corruption. Unless the GOP remains proactive in this area and establishes that such behavior will not be tolerated and must stop, the party will be perpetually labeled the party of corruption and will suffer greatly because of it. Or, more accurately, it will continue to suffer greatly.

GOP jailbird Bob Ney was replaced last year in Congress by Democrat Zack Space, who'll have to defend his seat next November. It's still early but Space is criss-crossing Ohio at a furious pace, running like it's October '08 and the polls are split down the middle. Why? Because the Republican Party is already breathing down his neck. The GOP has tapped this as one of the most important races in the county and set Space's defeat as one of its top goals.

many voters said they were preparing for one of the longest and most brutal Congressional campaigns they have ever seen. "The national Republican Party is going to dump a whole lot of money into this district," said Lynn Elliott, 59, a Republican and a dairy farmer.

Both parties see Mr. Space's seat as an important prize. The 18th Congressional District, which Mr. Space represents, is Republican territory; President Bush received 57 percent of the vote here in 2004. Winning the seat is essential for Republicans to regain control of the House next year, said David Cohen, a political science professor at the University of Akron.

The GOP have an uphill fight with this one, mainly because Space is pretty darn popular, his fundraising rates are strong and even Republicans are saying he's doing a good job. And secondly because there's no clear Republican contender yet.

It won't be until after the primaries that the congressional races come into focus but you can be sure that Ohio's 18th district will be one that both parties will be keeping a close eye on.

As the election season approaches (endlessly it would seem) the Republican party is doing its best to maintain the fiction that President Bush is beloved by the population. Apparently, he's going to be headlining closed door fund-raisers for Republicans in Congress who are worried about losing their seats and actually want Bush to help them make money. But thanks to the wonderful world of the Internets (thanks to Sen. Ted 'onthetake' Stevens for that word) Bush will be raising money for the Democrats -- Darcy Burns in this case.

As of midnight last night almost 2,000 people had donated to the Democrat and by the time President Bush lands on Monday it will probably be over 3,000. Granted they are not giving at the $1,000 and $10,000 level the rich folks and lobbyists are for the Republican event but they are making a statement: When Bush or Cheney try to raise bucks for a Republican they will raise money (and attention) for the Democrat as well. There will also be a Town Hall on Iraq organized by the Burner campaign. Maybe the president can stop by and answer a few questions from Americans not vetted and approved by his handlers.

There's a dynamic setting up for this election. The Republican presidential candidates are trying to have it both ways. They are supporting Bush on the war (with the exception of the Republican libertarian Ron Paul) but running away from him at the same time. Like, 'I would do things differently on the war but it's the right war 'is a message that will not resonate with the 70% of Americans who no longer support this failed administration. What will happen when the Republican party settles on a nominee? How many times will that nominee be seen with Bush or Cheney? When they try to raise mega $$$ from those who have benefitted from the plundering of the Treasury will cameras be allowed? Because a picture of Bush/Cheney with the Republican nominee is worth a million votes. For the Democrat. Want to join those who have had more than enough? You can send your message here or here.

Rep. Rick Renzi (R-Ariz.) has announced that he is retiring at the end of his current term. Good thing, as he would have gotten destroyed had he chosen the re-election route.

That's because in April of this year, the FBI raided his family business looking for records concerning a land deal benefiting a friend and campaign donor. Also, it's alleged that there was a bit of legislation that Renzi was involved with that might also have benefited certain personal business interests. Not much more is known. So far, the FBI is staying pretty tight lipped about the investigation. All of these things are still just allegations -- that's why I used "flawed" in the title of this post rather than "corrupt.". However, I'm pretty certain that the latter description could soon be used to adequately describe Renzi.

Before Democrats start to celebrate, it's worthwhile to point out that had Renzi run for re-election under this cloud, he most certainly would have been defeated. While Democrats in Arizona already look as if they are going to back state Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick for the seat, this announcement gives the GOP the time to recruit a strong candidate. Renzi was one of the Republicans caught up in stories about corruption last October -- and he still won re-election by seven points. A "clean" Republican should do very well next November.

A preemptive apology and warning of scatological humor -- I've often observed that the CIA and the State Department needs a bureaucratic and personnel enema to regain operational sufficiency and effectiveness. The GOP does as well. I hope that this is the first of many Republicans under a cloud of suspicion that puts the good of the party over personal ambition and ego.

Reporting from Ohio, where Republican Deb Pryce will is retiring.

Republican Rep. Deborah Pryce of Upper Arlington will announce Thursday that she will not seek re-election to the congressional seat she has held since 1993.

Pryce has scheduled a news conference for 11 a.m. in Columbus. Although a Pryce aide declined to say what she will announce, Republican sources say she will not run next year.

Pryce, 56, has been a fixture in the U.S. House since her election in 1992. Republican sources say if she does not run, former Ohio Attorney General James Petro might seek the seat. Petro today declined comment.

OH-15 was one of the huge battlefields of 2006. Pryce spent $4.6 million, her opponent, Franklin county commissioner Mary Jo Kilroy, spent nearly $3 million. Perhaps she didn't want to go through that again. Or maybe she has a realistic view of the GOP's chances of taking back the majority in 2008 and has decided that she doesn't want to spend another two years in the minority.

In either case, she won't be the last GOP congresssman to resign this cycle, which will make it even tougher for the GOP to get the majority. The senate is also stacked against the GOP this cycle, so if they want to prevent the Democrats from controlling DC, it's going to be all about the presidency.

Channel 2 in Chicago is reporting that Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert is calling it quits and will not seek re-election next year.

While sources tell CBS 2 that he's leaving Congress after 22 years, he's ridiculed previous speculation along those lines.

Last January, he told CBS 2, "I just think that was wishful thinking on the part of some people. Some had me being an Ambassador some place, which had no founding at all."

But, the sources believe this time it's real, and they point to sure signs of his decision not to run again. Several key players in previous Hastert campaigns have already signed on with other politicians this time, including important advisors and a top fundraiser. Republican State Senator Chris Lauzen of Aurora said Hastert's political Web site is now out of action.

This is bigger news to the Chicago area than the GOP. John Boehner from Ohio is leading the GOP congressional delegation now. It may be that Hastert decided that this was a good time to retire and make room for new blood. But it also makes it a bit harder for the GOP to get the majority back next year. Democrats will attack this seat with a vengeance. Keep an eye out for the actual announcement.

After speculating whether this was 1968 all over again for the Democrats, I think we now have exhibit A. Cindy Sheehan has formally announced as an independent gunning for Nancy Pelosi's seat.

From AP:

Citing her son as inspiration, a tearful Cindy Sheehan announced her candidacy Thursday for the U.S. House of Representatives.

...Last month, she announced her intention to run against Pelosi if the speaker didn't move to impeach Bush by July 23. On Thursday, she said Pelosi had "protected the status quo" of the corporate elite and had lost touch with people in her district, most of whom, she said, want American troops out of Iraq.

...Sheehan admitted she has no funds for a campaign, but planned to immediately get started raising money. Without giving further specifics, Sheehan said she wouldn't accept money from corporations and would run on a platform of universal health care. Sheehan said she also wants to make college affordable and improve ethics in the legislative and executive branches.

So maybe now the Democrats will actually believe the conservatives and others who suggested that Cindy Sheehan is an unhinged woman trading on the goodwill of her dead son. Just who was it that fed the media reputation, who booked her on all those talk shows? Who funded her camp in Crawford? Talk about pigeons coming home to roost.

Cindy Sheehan, the anti-war activist whose son was killed in Iraq, has threatened to run against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi if Pelosi doesn't introduce articles of impeachment against George W. Bush in the next two weeks:

"I think all politicians should be held accountable," Sheehan told The Associated Press on Sunday. "Democrats and Americans feel betrayed by the Democratic leadership. We hired them to bring an end to the war."

With all due sympathy for Ms. Sheehan, she certainly does speak like a politician. The truth is that while dissatisfaction with the Iraq war played a big part in the shift in Congressional power, it is a bit of a stretch to say that many of us expected a cause and effect outcome on that issue alone. The national election was not similar to a California ballot initiative in which the populace gave the war a thumbs up or a thumbs down (though given the chance, it would have done the latter).

Moreover, the threat of running should Pelosi fail to start up the impeachment engine, is another self-righteous piece of grandstanding. Doesn't Sheehan realize that even if she were elected, she would be just one voice in many, unable to realize change without building consensus and reaching across the aisle? If you think Nancy Pelosi is a polarizing figure in politics, just try Congresswoman Cindy Sheehan on for size.

The Democrats came into office with a majority and high hopes. They pledged that they would change the "culture of corruption" in D.C. and make full-scale changes. That, of course, has not happened and the liberal caucus is not too happy with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi:

Protesting liberals grumble Pelosi has been too cautious setting policy during six months in the majority, especially regarding the Iraq war. The response is that Democrats will revert to minority status in the House if they stray too far to the left.

And they just may if the first six months of Pelosi's lack of leadership is any indication. Of course the war issue is paramount as Pelosi promised she'd take some kind of action. Unfortunately for her, realistic circumstances have won out and Pelosi realizes that she can't make the whole-sale changes the donks promised before the last election.

Since the Democrats took over, Pelosi has not lead the liberal caucus to any major victories -- check that, she has not won any real victories at all. The Dems have majorities in the House and Senate and have been bogged down in minutiae. Pelosi is not the leader they had hoped, she can't form coalitions and can't get any worthwhile legislation passed.

The Democratic presidential aspirants will face the same reality, if you coddle the far left base, you will eventually lose them when you actually have to make decisions and act in the best interest of the country. George W. Bush is facing true reality as we speak with the brutal backlash he's seeing with regard to the immigration bill.

The candidates have to learn that you can promise anything you wish, but once you get elected, conditions are not the same as they were when you were speaking to a large group of supporters. The downfall of once-respected leaders -- Pelosi, President Bush, John McCain, Trent Lott and Lindsey Graham -- shows just how serious issues are once they will affect those who've elected you.

And so it is in the year 2007 when you say something and become famous or infamous within minutes. Ron Paul's former assistant was perturbed at what the congressman had to say about the War on Terror and Muslim "root causes." Today, he decided to do something about it (note: the link to Redstate is a bit slow due to heavy traffic):

I am calling on Ron Paul to resign his seat, sooner rather than later. Otherwise Congressional District 14 voters from Victoria to Galveston will appear to be endorsing his treachorous, and near treasonous views on foreign policy.

...I am this morning, declaring my candidacy for Congress in the GOP primaries against Ron Paul. If he does not resign his seat, and if another Republican candidate does not declare against him, I will run a balls-to-the-wall campaign for Congress in Texas CD 14.

I am the guy that got Ron Paul elected to Congress in 1996. I can and will defeat him in 2008.

Eric Dondero, Fmr. Senior Aide
US Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX)
1997-2003

As I alluded to at the beginning of this post, the statements by Ron Paul and the rebuttal by Rudy Giuliani are the only two things to be remembered from this debate a year and a half out from the election. Paul may well have destroyed his career and Rudy bolstered his chances of gaining the nomination.

Paul is a ten-year Congressman no one, short of political junkies, had heard of until the last few weeks. Come November 2008, I suspect he will return to oblivion as Texans won't take too kindly to a sitting representative saying that America brought the attacks on ourselves. He's now an outcast and will remain so when it comes time for cash to be raised.

Matt Stoller notices U.S. Rep. Randy Kuhl (R-NY) bragging about securing $2.5 million in federal loans for a private business in his district (Kuhl is simultaneously attacking the Iraq funding bill for having too much pork; more proof that irony is dead).

The $2.5 million is set to head to a bowling alley. Rep. Kuhl is proud of this, since the money "will help Roseland Bowl by allowing the owners to restructure their debt to help improve the business and, importantly, save the 36 jobs there." Unsurprisingly, the owner of Roseland Bowl contributed $1,000 to Rep. Kuhl -- an interesting move for an endangered businessman (unless he knows his congressman responds to cash money).

But let's look at the bottom line on his excuse. Saving 36 jobs at a cost of $2.5 million? That works out to a per-job cost of $69,444.44. Somehow, my gut says that none of the employees of this bowling alley are making anywhere near that.

When you start talking about the good old days, it's a sign that you're too old to realize that these are the good old days.

Let me take you back to 1992. That was the year that a nice honest guy almost won the Democratic presidential nomination. Senator Paul Tsongas was the dark horse. Even those in Massachusetts who knew and loved him didn't believe that he could win. Yet, he surprised us all and he beat Bill Clinton in the New Hampshire primary. Known as Mr. Candor, he said "I have only one horse to ride -- truth."

Fast-forward to the present. Massachusetts Rep. Marty Meehan has announced he isn't going to run for reelection. With $5 million in his campaign chest, he has decided to become the Chancellor of the University of Massachusetts, Lowell. Running for his seat will be Niki Tsongas, the widow of former Congressman and Senator, Paul Tsongas. Who would have ever thought back in 1992, that the wife of Bill Clinton would be running for president and the wife of Paul Tsongas would be running for Congress?

President Bush is expected to call for an increase in troops and lay out his plans for Iraq going forward:

White House press secretary Tony Snow said Monday that Bush "understands there is a lot of public anxiety" about the war. On the other hand, he said that Americans "don't want another Sept. 11" type of terrorist attack and that it is wiser to confront terrorists overseas in Iraq and other battlegrounds rather than in the United States.

The president is also expected to ask for funding for job programs to decrease Iraqi unemployment. Most Democrats are against the troop increases, which is interesting because when the Iraq Study Group report was released, they praised it and said that we should follow the advice of the esteemed group. One of the ISG's recommendations was to increase troop levels up to 20,000.

The Democrats are making some comments about withholding funding led by Rep. Denis Kucinich (D-Mars):

Today, Representative Dennis Kucinich, a liberal Ohio Democrat, plans to outline a proposal for Congress to deny Bush any more funds for the war and have the United Nations lead a security force to stabilize Iraq.

"Our very majority was created through a determination by the people of this country that they wanted a new direction in Iraq," said Kucinich, who ran for president in 2004 on an antiwar platform and has announced a 2008 candidacy as well.

Pelosi is smart enough to know that withholding funds is not an option as the GOP would use that in the 2008 elections.