Democratic National Chair Urges Bipartisan Support on SCHIP Legislation

From the Democratic National Committee

Governor Howard Dean, Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, delivered the Democratic radio address this week. He highlighted the fact that while all of the Republican presidential candidates support borrowing $196 billion for the war in Iraq they all oppose spending $7 billion next year for the bipartisan plan to provide children health care.
Chairman Dean called on Republicans in Congress to join Democrats in overriding the President's veto of the Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), especially after Democratic leaders recrafted the bill in response to Republican concerns. Dean also drew a clear contrast between the Democratic and Republican presidential fields on the war in Iraq, the culture of corruption, and fiscal responsibility.

To listen to the address, click here:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Transcript of Radio Address:

Good morning. I'm Governor Howard Dean, Chairman of the Democratic National Committee.
I want to start by joining all Americans in offering my thoughts and prayers to the people of California devastated by the wildfires this week. And our thanks to the firefighters, the National Guard, local agencies, and neighbors for their extraordinary work. You serve as a reminder that when we work together, Americans can accomplish anything.

We need more of that spirit of cooperation in Washington, DC today. Despite significant bipartisan support for the country's health insurance program for our children or "S-CHIP," every single Republican running for president sided with President Bush in keeping our kids from getting the health care that they need.

Turning our backs on our children is not the way to lead our country. It's bad policy, but it's also politics at its worst.

Just weeks after vetoing S-CHIP, the Bush Republicans wanted to borrow a total of $196 billion to continue the wars in Iraq and then Afghanistan, but they wouldn't spend $7 billion for the health of our children.

The Republican leaders have made their choice. They want to stay in Iraq and deny our kids health care. It is wrong for the Bush Republicans to stand in the way of legislation needed to protect the wellbeing of our kids.

This week, Democrats in Congress re-crafted the legislation to reauthorize the Children's Health Insurance Program and provide health care for 10 million uninsured children. It is time for Republicans to join the Democrats in overriding President Bush's veto and to reauthorize this program. Eighty-one percent of the American people and governors of both parties from states all across the country support our effort to cover these 10 million uninsured children.

Again, all of the republican candidates for president support President Bush's veto on health care for our uninsured children. And every one of them supports spending a total of $196 billion to send brave Americans to fight in a civil war in Iraq. America can not afford four more years of a president who borrows for the war and denies health insurance for our kids.

It's a time for a return to American values-- and a return to the era of fiscal responsibility we saw during the last Democratic administration. It's time we restore America to its position of moral leadership throughout the world. And, it's time we fulfill our moral obligation to care for our nation's children.

I know it can be done. In my home state of Vermont, 99 percent of all children under the age of 18 were eligible for health insurance when I left office. If we can do that in a small state like Vermont, we can do it in the greatest country in the world.

The contrast in the presidential race is so clear.

Democrats want to end the war in Iraq, the Republicans would continue President Bush's failed strategy. While Democrats will ensure our kids have health care, the Republicans will deny our kids. The Democrats want to end the culture of corruption, the Republicans support the pardoning of corrupt officials.

And while Democrats will balance the budget and restore fiscal discipline, the Republicans will borrow against our children's future.

The choice is clear in 2008. If you believe in supporting our kids, making our economy stronger, creating jobs, and ending the war in Iraq, please vote for a Democrat in 2008.

I'm Governor Howard Dean, Chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Thanks so much for listening.

For those of you receiving this email from the Secretary of the Democratic National Committee for the first time, we are reaching out to Democratic leaders across the nation. We hope you will use this material on talk radio, for letters to the editor, and share it with your activist community. We would appreciate your feedback or other information that might be of help to us. Lastly, if there are others who may be interested in being included, please send us their names and email addresses. Thanks again for your help.

Tax plan may violate constitution

By Tim Evans and Jeff Swiatek
tim.evans@indystar.com

The constitutional amendment in Gov. Mitch Daniels' property tax plan is not just designed to make the tax cut permanent -- it's there to make it legal, too.

Without an amendment, the governor's plan to cap property taxes at different levels for homeowners, landlords and businesses could find itself on the losing end of a constitutional challenge, legal experts say.

And because more than one powerful business interest has lined up against the plan, the politically difficult two-year task of amending the state constitution appears essential.
At issue: whether the caps, welcomed by residential property owners but not by business interests, meet the constitutional requirement that taxes be assessed at a "uniform and equal rate."

The caps would limit annual property tax bills to 1 percent of assessed value for homeowners, 2 percent for landlords and 3 percent for businesses, and are a key component of the tax reform plan unveiled last week by the governor.

With the legislature's help, Daniels hopes to have the caps take effect in 2009, and he has proposed writing the limits into the state constitution. The earliest a change can be made to the constitution is 2010.

Article 10 of the Indiana Constitution says: "The General Assembly shall provide, by law, for a uniform and equal rate of property assessment and taxation."

"It does seem to me that when one class of property owners pays three times the amount of another, that is not uniform or equal," said Indianapolis attorney Thomas M. Atherton, a constitutional law expert.

Atherton, who was the lead attorney for the plaintiff in the St. John court case that led to sweeping changes in the property tax system in 2002, said he thinks it's likely that some business group will raise the constitutional question.

"The fact that the governor acknowledged the need to amend the constitution is evidence, I think, that until it is amended, you have a serious constitutional issue," he said.

The window for any such challenge would begin after the legislature enacts the caps. It would end if the proposed amendment took effect, Atherton said.

Once an amendment is adopted, he said, the issue becomes moot because there would be no constitutional grounds to challenge the caps.

Read more online at the Indystar.

NEW ALBANY: England, Hubbard square off for mayor

By ERIC SCOTT CAMPBELL
Eric.Campbell@newsandtribune.com

It’s the man of few words versus the man of many. Right?The popular perception of Republican mayoral candidate Randy Hubbard is that he never uses 10 words when five will do. Democratic opponent Doug England is seen as more likely to explain with 20 at least.

Of course, those perceptions have been embellished by each man’s political circumstance.England, 63, was mayor, the face and voice of the city, for eight years in the 1990s. Council members, constituents and reporters seek a mayor’s comments on a wide range of issues, and when the fate of a bill or project hangs in the balance, the right, detailed explanation can be crucial.

More recently, Hubbard, 64, spent eight years as Floyd County sheriff, the leader of a police unit with lots of ground to cover. But the nature of police work means sheriffs rarely have incentive to explain developments more than necessary, and public-relations duties often fall to other officers.

Debatable

The perceptions were cemented after a request from an IU Southeast journalism professor. In August, Jim St. Clair asked both men to debate each other Oct. 16 or Oct. 17.

England said yes. Hubbard said no.

Hubbard cited a scheduling conflict from the outset, later adding that he didn’t believe a traditional debate would be as valuable to voters as would speaking with them one on one. England kept the event on his schedule anyway and spoke by himself to a panel of College Democrats and an audience of 40, taking time to chastise Hubbard for his refusal.

The only joint appearance came at a Develop New Albany-sponsored forum Wednesday night. England and Hubbard fielded questions, but in two separate, consecutive sessions; neither man was allowed in the room while his opponent spoke.

The previous two general-election mayoral campaigns included debates. But they also included incumbent mayors — England in 1999, Regina Overton in 2003, both of whom were unseated weeks later. This year, incumbent Mayor James Garner’s bid didn’t make it past the Democratic primary, as England beat him by 1 percent of the vote.

Read more on the Mayoral Race at the News & Tribune.

GEORGETOWN: Three battle for two at-large seats on council

By CHRIS MORRIS
Chris.Morris@newsandtribune.com

A former Floyd County commissioner, an incumbent and a political newcomer will battle for two at-large seats in the upcoming Georgetown Town Board election Nov. 6.

Republican incumbent Margaret “Dean” Hammersmith faces Democrats Mike Mills and Karla Perkins for the two seats.

Hammersmith is finishing her first term on the board and said she is running for re-election because “there are things we started that we haven’t been able to complete for the betterment of the town.”

Mills, a former Georgetown Town Board member for three terms and Floyd County commissioner, said the main reason he is running is to straighten out the town’s finances.
“The place is practically bankrupt,” Mills said.

Perkins said she would like to sit on the board because, “if you want to be heard, you need to be involved.”

The main issue facing the town is where to build a sewage treatment plant. The town purchased 23 acres of land two years ago outside the town limits, but has faced legal challenges since announcing plans to build the plant on that site. A second site also has faced opposition.
“It’s been the people of Edwardsville (who) oppose us and they don’t have a dog in the fight. They live outside the territory,” Hammersmith said. “They all live a mile or mile and a half away from the site. If we don’t build a plant, they (state) are eventually going to force it on us.”
Mills — a 37-year veteran of the New Albany Police Department and current assistant chief — knows all about the sewer-plant issue in Georgetown. He said when he was on the board in 1980, he tried to get his fellow board members to build a plant. He said at the time, the state was going to pay 95 percent of the cost for the plant. However, the board voted it down.

The current board, he said, has gone about building a plant backward.

Hubbard continue to "dodge" debate

From the Floyd County Democratic Party

Despite the development of a forum hosted by Develop New Albany, the fact remains that Republican Mayoral candidate Randy Hubbard continues to avoid a full debate with our Democratic candidate Doug England.

The lack of Hubbard's concern for discussing the issues is a key difference in this years campaign. Earlier in the year, Hubbard was quoted by the New Albany Tribune as saying that he wasn't sure what issues needed to be addressed and that he "wanted to talk to the people" to get ideas. While Democrats certainly have no problem listening to citizens' concerns, you'd think a candidate for Mayor would have some ideas of his own.

By comparison, England has been the picture of a good candidate, reaching out to citizens using door-to-door and at forums, agreeing to debate his opponent, and presenting a clear message with a defined vision for the future of our city. To illustrate the difference, just look at England's website (http://www.dougenglandfornewalbany.com/) compared to Hubbard's. England offers not just information on him and his background, but discusses specific issues. Hubbard's site offers little more than outdated news stories and vague highlights on his plans for the city.

The Democratic Party is pleased that Develop New Albany is hosting the candidates to continue to explore their position on the issues. We are certain that our candidate presents a strong, positive message with the best vision for New Albany. We only wish our Republican counterparts would participate in this year's exchange to better illustrate the differences between the candidates.

Don’t call it a debate in New Albany mayor’s race

By ERIC SCOTT CAMPBELL
Eric.Campbell@newsandtribune.com

Mayoral candidates Randy Hubbard and Doug England have not appeared on the same stage yet in this campaign, a distinction that will continue even after a forum featuring both of them next week. The nonprofit Develop New Albany has organized an event for 7 to 9 p.m. Oct. 24 in the New Albany-Floyd County Public Library’s auditorium.

The format calls for Hubbard to answer questions about downtown development and neighborhood revitalization for 45 minutes, followed 15 minutes later by England answering the same questions, said Greg Sekula, vice president of Develop New Albany. That group’s board of directors will compile the list of questions. Neither candidate is expected to be present for the other’s discussion, Sekula said. Develop New Albany had wanted “for quite some time” to host a downtown-specific mayoral forum, finally getting both candidates to agree to a date last week, Sekula said.

Neither candidate pushed for changes to the format, he added.“We just wanted to give people another opportunity to hear issues,” Sekula said. In August, IU Southeast invited England and Hubbard to participate in a debate, scheduled for Wednesday. England agreed, but Hubbard declined, citing a prior commitment.The event is set to continue as a question-and-answer session with England alone. Republican Party chairman David Matthews said Monday that Hubbard is among party leaders who are convening Wednesday night.

A Message from Congressman Baron Hill: SCHIP Expansion

From Congressman Baron Hill
October 5, 2007

I understand that some are concerned with my recent vote on the SCHIP expansion. Let me start by saying a few things that I believe will clear up some of the misconceptions about this bill.

First, I know that we all agree about the value of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Expanding children's health insurance is a wonderful goal and the merit of this legislation is not in question. In fact, I have consistently supported the SCHIP program during my previous terms in Congress. And, just last week I voted to reauthorize SCHIP through November 16th of this year. Had we not taken that vote, the program would have expired entirely.

Secondly, this is not a case of children versus tobacco. There is much more complexity to the issue, which I will address in the content of this message to you. Finally, the fact that I voted "no" on this version of this legislation does not mean that I don't fully support an expansion of the program.

That said, I would respectfully ask that you consider my reasons for voting against this version of the SCHIP expansion. As a Member of Congress, who was elected to serve in the best interest of residents of the entire Ninth Congressional District of Indiana, I must look beyond a program's name to what is actually involved in such comprehensive legislation. While funding the children's health insurance program is something I have supported in the past, I cannot support taxing Hoosiers in order to pay for the mismanagement of other states' SCHIP programs. Under the current bill, too much of this federal funding will go primarily to states lacking in their coverage, something Indiana is not.

The State of Indiana has one of the most efficient SCHIP programs in the nation. Unfortunately, this legislation would give a well-performing state, like Indiana, less money than states with wasteful or inefficient SCHIP programs. It is estimated that Indiana would contribute approximately $300 million each year in revenue, and only receive about $50 million toward its SCHIP program. A lot of this money would go to bail out PAST mismanagement in these under-performing states, thus making Indiana a healthcare "donor state."

In sum, Hoosiers, through a 61 cent tobacco tax increase, will pay significantly more into the program than they will get out. The money will go to other states that have not effectively managed their SCHIP programs. I know that Hoosiers are feeling the burden of increased taxes from every angle - the rising price of gasoline and skyrocketing property taxes - and I cannot support another tax for a program that will least benefit Hoosiers. Further, this would be another program in a long line where Indiana does not get its fair share back from the federal government. Whether it is transportation dollars or housing money, Indiana is constantly getting shortchanged on the tax dollars it sends to Washington. This is simply not fair and must stop.

As you know, the President has now vetoed the legislation and there are simply not enough votes in the House of Representatives to override that veto. Because I wholeheartedly support this program, I believe it is absolutely imperative that we come together in the House to create a bill that the President will sign, and one that expands SCHIP in a way that is more equitable to Hoosiers. If we don't, then the children will indeed lose. I consider the SCHIP program an asset to our nation's children, but cannot simply vote for it on name alone.

I was elected to represent all of the constituents of the Ninth Congressional District, and therefore must take all of their concerns into account. That is what I have done in considering how to vote, and I have concluded, regrettably, that this particular proposal is neither equitable nor effective for Hoosier taxpayers or the families needing health coverage -- I think we can do better. Finding this solution will require bold leadership, and I believe that in this case, that leadership is ensuring as many children as possible have the coverage they need when they need it, and as soon as possible. Congressional gridlock will only delay this coverage, and I hope my colleagues in the House will join me in finding a realistic solution to the problem.

I value your opinions and take them into serious consideration when making decisions in Washington. I ask the same of you now: please consider my reasons for voting against this particular bill. Please separate it from my continuous support of the broader SCHIP program. I certainly understand if you still disagree with my decision. All I ask is that you try to understand my reasons. As always, please feel free to contact me or a member of my staff and someone will be happy to further address any concerns you may have.

Thank you for your time, and I look forward to seeing you in the district.

Sincerely,

Representative Baron P. Hill
Ninth District of Indiana
U.S. House of Representatives

Paid for and authorized by Hoosiers for Hill.

To the Editor: Republican Chairman Contradectory

To the Editor:

I was taken aback when I read the mud-slinging letter of Republican Chairman David Matthews, coming on the heals of a conversation that I had with him just about a week before. At a public event, he came and introduced himself to me. He presented himself in person to be amicable, yet claimed a certain naiveté when it came to politics. He told me he was intent on running a campaign based on the issues affecting the city of New Albany, so when he went public with this dirty politics letter just days later, I had to wonder about his intent.

Mr. Matthews is the third republican chairman in Floyd County in as many years. The revolving door of chairmen is bound to be the cause of disorganization on their side. He also told me he had to hit the ground running and had a lot to learn.

Let me use this opportunity for just such a teaching moment.

Lesson 1: Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Mr. Matthews was asked to be chairman of his party only after a terrible tragedy for which his predecessor is being prosecuted. In Clark County, the Republican party chairman resigned in disgrace because of a pending criminal investigation for Criminal Deviate Conduct after he allegedly sexually assaulted another man at a Republican party event. That was the same chairman who used mud slinging attacks for other Republicans.

Under what moral authority is Mr. Matthews wagging a finger at another person? His letter was certainly the first self-righteous stone, but I believe he has some serious self-reflecting to do about the party that he represents.

Lesson 2: Before removing the splinter from your brother’s eye, remove the plank from your own.

The Republican party has some serious house cleaning to do before they ever start to lecture others about morality. Here are some examples.

The Bush and his Republican administration is one of the leaders in cronyism and dirty tricks: Alberto Gonzales resigned under investigation; “you’re doing a heck of a job, Brownie” and the Katrina fiasco; the search for WMD’s that never existed; Karl Rove and the “Swift Boating” of honorable veterans who served their country with dignity.

Republican House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was indicted on charges of conspiring to violate campaign finance laws.

Republican Representative Mark Foley resigned amid reports that he had sent sexually explicit Internet messages to at least one underage male former page.

Republican U.S. senator Larry Craig was supposed to resign over his now famous arrest and conviction stemming from airport bathroom sex sting in Minneapolis.

Republican representative Dan Burton of Indiana’s 6th district, an outspoken critic of President Clinton, admitted he had an extramarital affair and fathered a child out of wedlock.

I will be the first to admit that the Democratic party has faults. I have my own personal shortcomings. However, it appears to me that the Republicans have cultivated a culture of corruption that needs fundamental change. These are transgressions at the highest level. It is up to the Republican leaders to set the example of their rhetoric. “Family values” means more than preaching to others about what you want them to do. Leading by example is much more effective. The example they are setting right now belongs in the tabloids of Hollywood and Malibu, California.

Lesson 3: Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
In the end, we are all human. We make mistakes. We ask to be forgiven. Then we dust ourselves off and get up and try again.

I am a Democrat because this is the party for me that recognizes the human condition. We all need dusting off sometimes. Sometimes we need a hand in getting back up.

As long as I am Chairman, I will support the Democratic mission of supporting working families, speaking for those without a voice, and promoting human dignity for all.

Doug England is also that kind of man. He has never stopped working for the people of New Albany. Even in the face of defeat, he never left New Albany. On the contrary, he worked even harder in revitalizing this town with his own time, talent and treasure. He has invested in business and done the work on boards and committees that have kept New Albany moving in the right direction.

Doug continues to want to discuss the real issues of New Albany. He is running a positive campaign based on ideas and progress. He has also asked the Republicans and Randy Hubbard to do the same. Mr. Hubbard has stated that he doesn’t have time to do this during the campaign, and has refused to debate Doug England at any time during this fall.

My questions, then, are:

What is Mr. Hubbard doing during his campaign for mayor if he doesn’t have time to debate the real issues?

If Mr. Matthews has started with mudsling from the start, is this what we can expect during the whole campaign? Do you think that the people of New Albany want or deserve this?

Why are the Republicans starting out with dirty campaigning so early? Is there something they want to divert our attention from?

Finally, I will end with this advice, Mr. Chairman. You seemed to have so desperately wanted my opinion when you spoke to me in person, so I will give it to you now:

Low- level people talk about other people. Mid-level people talk about events. High-level people talk about ideas.

I am eager to hear some more ideas. I haven’t from your side as of yet.

Randy Stumler
Floyd County Democratic Chairman

Most in Poll Want War Funding Cut

Bush's Approval Rating Ties All-Time Low

By Jon Cohen and Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, October 2, 2007

Most Americans oppose fully funding President Bush's $190 billion request for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a sizable majority support an expansion of a children's health insurance bill he has promised to veto, putting Bush and many congressional Republicans on the wrong side of public opinion on upcoming foreign and domestic policy battles.

The new Washington Post-ABC News poll also shows deep dissatisfaction with the president and with Congress. Bush's approval rating stands at 33 percent, equal to his career low in Post-ABC polls. And just 29 percent approve of the job Congress is doing, its lowest approval rating in this poll since November 1995, when Republicans controlled both the House and Senate. It also represents a 14-point drop since Democrats took control in January.

Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

Despite discontent with Congress this year, the public rates congressional Republicans (29 percent approve) lower than congressional Democrats (38 percent approve). When the parties are pitted directly against each other, the public broadly favors Democrats on Iraq, health care, the federal budget and the economy. Only on the issue of terrorism are Republicans at parity with Democrats.

Part of the displeasure with Congress stems from the stalemate between Democrats and the White House over Iraq policy. Most Americans do not believe Congress has gone far enough in opposing the war, with liberal Democrats especially critical of their party's failure to force the president into a significant change in policy.

At the same time, there is no consensus about the pace of any U.S. troop withdrawals from Iraq. In July, nearly six in 10 said they wanted to decrease the number of troops there, but now a slim majority, 52 percent, think Bush's plan for removing some troops by next summer is either the right pace for withdrawal (38 percent) or too hasty (12 percent would like a slower reduction, and 2 percent want no force reduction). Fewer people (43 percent) want a quicker exit.