It is with great please that I am able to announce that the next Blue Majority endorsed candidate: Dan Maffei, from New York's 25th Congressional District.

I am particularly excited about this endorsement for several reasons. First, I am from the district, and ever since Jim Walsh originally won the seat by a few hundred votes back when I was a freshman in high school, I have been itching for someone to defeat him. Second, Dan Maffei epitomizes one of my longest-running arguments about the need to run in every district. In 2004, no Democrat ran against Walsh, but in 2006 Dan came within 1% of defeating him. Third, having met Dan Maffei, I can honestly say that there is no member of Congress, or candidate for Congress, with whom I was more personally impressed and within whom I felt more personally comfortable (there are two or three who I feel roughly the same about). When we talked for over two hours over coffee and pizza, it felt like every idea we exchanged about strategy, policy, and life really clicked (like me, he went to local public schools, and hasn't exactly made a fortune working in progressive politics). Dan is a serious, brilliant progressive, who absolutely means more and better Democrats. Please, contribute to Dan today.

Here is a video Dan put together to introduce himself and the district to the readers of Dailykos, MyDD, Open Left and Swing State Project a few days ago:



Now, some of you might ask something to the effect of "wait-he is running against Jim Walsh, the Republican who just said he was now opposed to the Iraq War? Isn't that the sort of Republican behavior we should be encouraging, rather than immediately punishing with a major counter-endorsement?" If you are asking this question, I am glad you did, because even though the Maffei endorsement was decided upon several days before Walsh's announcement, since that time it has revealed the true danger Democrats face in offering up weak, meaningless, "compromise" bills on Iraq. The NY-25 is the first case study of how Democratic weakness in the House on Iraq can allow Republican to potentially blur the difference between the two parties on Iraq, and thus wipe out virtually our entire advantage heading into the 2008 elections.

Here is the situation. Over the past nine months, Jim Walsh has said he was in favor of withdrawal, and then voted a timeline that would actually mandate withdrawal. Even in discussions with local media yesterday, and in calls I made to his staff, he refused to come out in favor of a timetable. Walsh has said that he is in favor of oversight on Iraq, and then voted against oversight. He said he was opposed to the escalation, and then refused to vote against the escalation. In May, he said he was opposed to a blank check for Bush on Iraq, and then voted to give Bush a blank check on Iraq in the capitulation bill. Everything Walsh is saying now, he ha already said before. The key difference is not hat Walsh has changed his opinion, but that Democats in Congress are changing the legislation they are trying to pass through Congress.

Back in the spring, House Democrats forced votes on stiffer legislation that required real oversight and mandated withdrawal. It only received two votes form Republicans, because the many so-called moderate Republicans who are supposedly against Bush's policy in Iraq are not willing to pass binding legislation opposing Bush's policy in Iraq. They are, however, willing to pass meaningless legislation that suggests Bush should change course, but does not actually require him to do so. For example, Walsh is a co-sponsor of the Kirk-Lipinski bill that does not mandate any troop withdrawal whatsoever, but sets it as a "goal." Compromise bills of this sort are in abundance nowadays, and I imagine Walsh will vote for all of them. However, if a bill comes up that actually mandates troops withdrawal, there is still no indication that he would vote for such a bill. Given everything he has said on the matter, I bet he won't vote for mandated troop withdrawal.

This is the crux of the problem progressives face in the 2008 elections. Bad, Bush Dog Democrats are coming up with cover your ass legislation that won't do anything to drawdown our military involvement in Iraq. Instead, the actual impact of these bills will be to allow Bush Dogs and endangered Republicans alike to appear as though they oppose Bush's policies, and thus strengthen all of their hands for re-election. In short, weak Iraq legislation in Congress will help empower Bush Dogs, and help prevent progressives like Maffei from taking over Republican seats. This is the exact opposite of the more and better Democrats refrain that has been traveling around the blogosphere. Weak Iraq legislation will allow Republicans like Walsh to blur their differences on Iraq all over the country, and the result will be fewer, and worse Democrats.

In the first major case study of this kind for the 2008 elections, we can't let this stand. Supporting Dan Maffei means opposing weak, toothless Iraq legislation in Congress. It means taking a stand against a self-defeating Democratic strategy that will not only do nothing to drawdown the Iraq war, but will also go a long way toward wiping out any chance of a second Democratic wave election. It means supporting more and better Democrats, instead of reverting to the pro-war, minority status Democratic Party of 2002-2003.

Contribute to Dan Maffei on Blue Majority. Fight Bush dogs and Republican blurring alike. This lean-Kerry district is going to be a very big race down the road, and a place where a true progressive like Maffei can hold a seat for a long time to come.

Jim Walsh, Board Member of Council for a Livable World (the sister organization of the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation), gave a great radio interview last Friday on nuclear weapons, the recent Obama-Clinton spat, and that proverbial "table" for "On the Media," a program produced by WNYC and syndicated by NPR.

Walsh also recently put out a tremendous op-ed on keeping the nuclear option on the "table," in which he argues, "Presidential candidates who think they can go around threatening the potential use of nuclear weapons to look tough without serious international repercussions are living in a bubble." The full op-ed is available here.

NY-25's (Central New York, and suburban Rochester) now 10-term incumbent Jim Walsh was forced to run an actual competitive campaign for the first time in years last Fall when Democrat Dan Maffei pushed the 90% Bush Voter to within the margin of error, despite the institutional advantages a guy with 18-years of K-streets roots and who won over 90% of the vote while running unopposed in 2004.

Now, faced with a Maffei rematch, Walsh is forced to fundraise and really milk his Republican insider buddies for cash. So, this week he attended a fundraiser with Rudy Giuliani, raising over $200,000. But it's too bad he chose to do it Tuesday, missing 11 crucial votes in the process. That $11,764 per vote.

Let's see what issues Jim Walsh thought were worth less than $11,764 for his campaign coffers:

Jim Walsh, the long-term Republican incumbent from NY-25, is very mad at the voters for nearly removing him from office: How dare the plebs vote for anyone but the local lord, whose seat was handed down to him by his father since time immemorial? I mean, Syracuse is a thriving city, that has consistently been lavished with benefits from our various Republican masters in Albany and Washington, D.C. Of course the elected representative should be mad at the voters, rather than the other way around. Worst. Victory. Speech. Ever.

This must be what happens to members of congress who are only seriously challenged once every decade or so. They feel it is the responsibility of voters to support them, rather than the other way around. See Lieberman, Joe for another case study in this sort of attitude. How dare the people who actually vote have a differing opinion on a given war than the DLC wonks at my cocktail party!

Walsh only defeated Dan Maffei in this district by about 1,000 votes, even though Maffei received virtually no support from either the national party or, for that matter, from the netroots. This is one we alllet slip through our fingers. However, after the November 7th slaughter of the Republican moderates, the NY-25 is now the fifth most Democratic district in the nation held by a Republican, with a partisan voting index of Democratic +3.4. Combine this with Walsh's condescending, aristocratic attitude toward the voters, and the NY-25 has the makings of one of our best pickups opportunities in 2008. If Walsh can only squeeze out a 1,000 vote victory without being targeted either by the netroots or by the DCCC, then he is in a lot of trouble in 2008. Given that this is my hometown district, I can't wait to help to the presumptive Democratic nominee as much as possible. And this time, I mean a lot more than moral support and the occasional canvassing trip Upstate.

Anonymous MyDD commenter addressing me, July 21, 2004: Latest poll on NY-25, September 25, 2006: (July results in parenthesis)

Walsh (R): 44% (52%)
Maffei (D): 40% (23%)

Yes, it is an internal poll. However, we haven't seen anything from Walsh when it comes to polling, and this poll was conducted as a straight trial heat--no message testing. I can tell you, as much as I love my new home in Philadelphia, there is a large part of me that wants to be back in Liverpool, New York right now, knocking on doors for Dan Maffei. Autumn is beautiful up there. You can already see your breath at night, but as the leaves crinkle under your feet, and as you distinctly smell leaves burning in the distance, you just don't care. Just let me knock on another door. When we are done with that door, I'll beg you to let me knock on another. I promise to buy the first round at Clark's if you just keep knocking on doors with me for another half an hour. Enough with the charade that Central New York is supposedly Republican territory. Enough with the lie that has become Jim Walsh's "moderate" label. This is our chance--our first good chance in ten years to retake the 25th. Let's not waste it now.

I don't know every district, and I don't claim to. That anonymous poster wasn't the only insider who chided me for demanding a more wide-ranging, contest every seat, fifty-state strategy either. All I know is that those people will never know the joy of contesting every seat. I know that Jim Walsh is dropping like a rock, and Dan Maffei is rising fast. I know that this district has a PVI of Democratic + 3.4, making it the 11th most Democratic district held by a Republican in the country. I know that Walsh, who once was a "moderate," hasn't voted against the Republican leadership on almost anything since he won his seat on the appropriations committee, and thus the conservative movement swept into my hometown without anyone even noticing. I know what it is like to walk around and knock on doors in Onondaga County in the fall. I know that this seat is very winnable, and almost every sign of a national wave is starting to appear clearly on the horizon. I know that in 2004 Democrats didn't even bother to contest the NY-25th, but now that I know many are starting to experience the joy of contesting every seat.

I wish that we could have added every Democrat running for congress to the netroots page, because I know hat around the country a lot of people are starting to see their district the way NY-25 now looks. We can actually win, and we can even win in a lot of surprising places that we didn't think were even going to be competitive. Maybe we won't win everywhere when it is all over, but we will have changed the way people look at this district for a long time. Democrats can compete here too.

I wish we could have endorsed every candidate, but we can't. I think we have a lot of good choices, and please, contribute today. More importantly, find a Democratic campaign in your area, and get out there and go to work for that campaign. Experience the joy of contesting every seat. A wave is building, and we can ride this one a long way. As Senator Feingold said in his speech today, let's not just win on November 7th, but win in a way that will keep us in power for years, if not decades, to come.

P.S. Rochester Turning is becoming an exceptionally good blog on Upstate New York politics. In the 25th itself, you can't miss The Walsh Watch.

Majority Action today launched its first Internet ad criticizing Congressman James Walsh (NY-25) for his false claims on a radio call-in show in New York (WXXI 1370 AM "The Connection").  On talk radio show just a few days ago, Representative Walsh claimed that he never voted against the minimum wage, though he is on record doing so eight times.  He also refused to take responsibility for voting himself a pay raise while denying other New Yorkers a helping hand.  

Majority Action refused to let him get away with it...

Caller: "What about $5.25?  Why aren't you pushing for a better ..."
Walsh: "What is $5.25?"
Caller: "That's the national minimum wage."
Walsh: "I've never voted against the minimum wage.  That's not true."  

Actually, Walsh voted against raising the minimum wage EIGHT TIMES.

Caller: "You also voted to give yourself a raise during that same time period."
Walsh: "No.  Our pay raise is automatic."

As a matter of fact, Walsh voted to increase his pay SIX TIMES.

Typical Republican priorities: raise their own pay, refuse to bring the rest of America along with them.

Majority Action, which has already been the first group to incorporate text messaging into its television ads, began a series of Internet video releases today.  

Visiting my native Syracuse, NY a few weeks back, I was shocked to turn on the TV and see nine-term Republican incumbent Jim Walsh running campaign ads. I was even more surprised when a family member told me his opponent, former Democratic Congressional aide and Syracuse native Dan Maffei, had been running an ad campaign of his own for weeks.  Days later, Maffei's only viable competition, Paloma Capanna (D), dropped out of the race, all but guaranteeing a head-to-head matchup between Walsh and Maffei in November.  

Returning to D.C. after my trip up north, I began to notice growing mainstream buzz over the race--DCCC Chair Rahm Emanuel's fundraising trip to Syracuse, coverage in The Hill and CQ, and support from Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), former DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe and NY AG-turned gubernatorial frontrunner Eliot Spitzer have all contributed to Maffei's growing national profile.  

As today's filing deadline comes and goes, I'm struck by the possibility that Democrats have a shot in winning back the 25th District. With $176K cash on hand, Maffei has far out-raised previous Walsh challengers (Walsh won with 91% of the vote in 2004 and currently has $502K COH), and has begun to receive the kind of national attention others have sorely lacked. More important, Maffei has made some direct hits on Walsh's record. Tackling job loss, dwindling numbers of college grads returning home, and an embarrassing lack of funding for the Syracuse's public school system, Maffei stands ready to give Walsh a run for his money.    

Walsh's unprecedented $100 K in June ads prove he's nervous about the safety of his seat--and Maffei is doing everything he can to point out Republican failures at home and throughout the country. While I'm in no way affiliated with the Maffei campaign, the growing buzz around it is proof that we should be paying attention. It's time for a fresh face--and some new ideas--in NY-25.  Dan Maffei just might be the person to turn things around for Syracuse.  

6/26

The Watcher recaps and links to recent press releases.

http://thewalshwatch.blogspot.com/2006/0 6/press-release-roundup_26.html

Wishy Washy Walsh has a hard time taking a strong position on line item vetoes.

http://thewalshwatch.blogspot.com/2006/0 6/another-flip-flop.html