Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Al Doyle supports the Working Families Party

"We need to send a message to Eliot Spitzer and Mike Bloomberg: End luxury decontrol and keep our homes affordable. Vote Row E."
- Stuyvesant Town-Peter Cooper Village Tennant Association President Al Doyle
You can take the "Count On Me" pledge at:
http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/countonme/doyle.html


Technorati tags: | | | |

Gloria Steinem is voting Working Families

"I'm proud to vote on the Working Families line -- to not only support the best Democrats but to encourage them to have the courage of their convictions on progressive values."
- Gloria Steinem, Author/Activist
You can join Gloria and thousands of others who have taken the "Count on Me" pledge to vote for Eliot Spitzer on the Working Families ballot line, Row E, at:
http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/countonme/steinem.html

Technorati tags: | | | |

Working Families Party endorses Jimmy Dahroug for State Senate

The Working Families Party endorses Jimmy Dahroug for State Senate in New York's 3rd District.

David Ochoa won the WFP primary in the 3rd District and as a result will unavoidably be on our ballot line. However, after losing the Democratic primary, David Ochoa suspended his campaign and endorsed Jimmy Dahroug.

There's a good chance to win this year's State Senate race in New York's 3rd District and replace the incumbent with a friend of Working Families.

In the spirit of unity, we endorse Jimmy Dahroug for State Senate and urge voters in Suffolk County to support the best candidate for working families for State Senate, Jimmy Dahroug.

See all of the WFP endorsements.

Technorati tags: |

Nydia Velasquez supports the Working Families Party

"I support the WFP because affordable housing is my top priority and no one fights for affordable housing like the WFP."
- U.S. Representative Nydia Velasquez
You can take the "Count On Me" pledge at:
http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/countonme/velasquez.html


Technorati tags: | | | |

Monday, October 30, 2006

Carl McCall supports the Working Families Party

"I support the Working Families Party because they represent the values I've fought for my entire life – good jobs for New Yorkers, health care we can afford and a secure retirement."
- former New York Comptroller Carl McCall
Listen to Carl talk more about his support for the Working Families Party and take the "Count On Me" pledge at:
http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/countonme/carl.html


Technorati tags: | | | |

Cynthia Nixon is voting Working Families

"I'm voting Working Families because it's the best way I know to cast a vote for fair funding for public schools."
- Sex and the City star and education advocate Cynthia Nixon
Cynthia Nixon will be voting for Eliot Spitzer on the Working Families Party ballot line, Row E.

Why? Because Cynthia knows that the more votes on the WFP line, the more politicians pay attention to the WFP agenda. Simple as that.

So take the "Count on Me" pledge and help us build the momentum we need going into Tuesday's vote. It'll only take a minute, and it gives us a sense of where to focus our energies on election day.

You can take the "Count on Me" pledge at:
http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/countonme/cynthia.html


Technorati tags: | | | |

Friday, October 27, 2006

WFP sightseeing in Suffolk

Take a look at this giant sign out in Mastic Beach in Suffolk County, at the corner of Mastic Rd. and Lincoln Ave.


Looking good. Here's another picture of the same sign, with a basketball hoop in the background for perspective.


Take the "Count on Me" pledge.

Technorati tags: | | |

Thursday, October 26, 2006

The Nation on voting Working Families

Katrina vanden Heuvel in her blog Editor's Cut talks about our "Bring 'em Home" pledge.
Pete Seeger and the WFP

In these critical midterm elections – with so much on the line – a disastrous war in Iraq; the continuing erosion of our bedrock rights and liberties; and deepening economic inequality . . . the great singer and activist Pete Seeger has written a powerful letter on behalf of the Working Families Party (WFP) and its slate of candidates on the ballot in New York.

The WFP aims to send a strong antiwar message to the politicians, and it has updated and re-recorded Seeger's Vietnam-era classic, Bring 'em Home as part of its "Bring Them Home" campaign.

In his letter Seeger writes, "Here in New York, voting on the Working Families line is the best way to tell the politicians, bring them home, bring them home." Seeger quotes a key verse of his song to capture the spirit of the WFP message: "the world needs teachers, books and schools . . . And learning a few universal rules."

In addition to ending the war, the WFP agenda calls for universal healthcare, affordable housing, a living wage and closing the income gap through progressive taxation. The WFP claims an organized and diverse bloc of voters committed to economic populism, and it uses its electoral power to push major-party politicians to follow its agenda. Democratic gubernatorial candidate, Eliot Spitzer, solicited Working Families as his first endorsement.
Sounds good to us, what do you think?
By pulling the lever for the WFP (Row E on the ballot), voters can support a candidate while also making a clear statement that the WFP and its antiwar stance represent their values.

"When you vote on the Working Families Party line, your vote carries a distinctive message. Start bringing American men and women serving in Iraq back home. Right now," said WFP Executive Director, Dan Cantor.

With Spitzer far ahead in the polls, and real and justified disappointment among progressives about Clinton's position on the war, there is a concern that New York's voter turnout might be low. But for those committed to ending this war, and sending that message loud and clear to Clinton and her fellow-Democrats – show up for this election and vote for Spitzer and WFP candidates in down ballot races.

As Seeger reminds in the close of his inspiring letter, "Our votes do count. And if we vote to bring the troops home, they count even more."
Take the Bring Them Home pledge.

Read more:
Technorati tags: | | | | |

Wednesday, October 25, 2006

Republicans on the defensive

The polls are jumping back and forth, but they show we're in striking distance in 5-6 Congressional races here in New York.

MyDD got their hands on a leaked memo from the Republican National Campaign Committee that shows which races they're worried about. Here's the edited New York list:
  1. NY-26, Rep. Reynolds (R) v. Jack Davis (D-WFP)
  2. NY-24, OPEN SEAT Meier (R) v. Michael Arcuri (D-WFP)
  3. NY-29, freshman Rep. Kuhl (R) v. Eric Massa (D-WFP)
  4. NY-20, Rep. Sweeney (R) v. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-WFP)
  5. NY-25, Rep. Walsh (R) v. Dan Maffei (D-WFP)
NY-24 and NY-26 are classified as "4"s, meaning "leaning Democrat; expect to lose most of these seats unless there's serious change." NY-29, NY-20 and NY-25 are classified "2"s, meaning "leaning Republican; if there's a wave, some could be in trouble."

Let's make sure those worries come true. Make an emergency donation to expand our get-out-the-vote plans or sign up to call voters from home this weekend.

Technorati tags: | |

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Join the Movement: Bring Them Home

Pete Seeger's message to Bring Them Home has touched a chord. Thousands of people have taken the "Bring 'em Home" pledge to vote on the Working Families Party line this November.

Your pledge and your vote will give us the momentum we need to end this war.

Take the "Bring 'em Home" pledge at:
http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/bringthemhome/


Here's the coverage in the New York Times:
"The [Working Families] party sent an Internet antiwar commercial via e-mail last week to more than 100,000 New York voters, urging them to vote for Democratic candidates on the Working Families Party ballot line - as opposed to the Democratic Party line - as a way of sending a message that they opposed the war. The e-mail missive includes a letter from the rock musician BobPete Seeger supporting the party's effort, which it calls "Bring Them Home."

Party leaders said they wanted to hold Mrs. Clinton accountable for voting in 2002 to authorize military action in Iraq, as well as other candidates whom they endorsed, like Mrs. Clinton, and who initially supported the war. Mrs. Clinton's name will appear on both the Democratic Party line and the Working Families Party line on the Nov. 7 ballot.

"Our difference with Senator Clinton is a difference in degree - her phased redeployment doesn't go far enough, fast enough," said Dan Cantor, executive director of the Working Families Party."
Take the "Bring 'em Home" pledge at:
http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/bringthemhome/


Read more:
Technorati tags: | | | | |

Monday, October 23, 2006

NY Times on the WFP's Take Back Congress campaign

Over the weekend the New York Times covered the Working Families Party's effort to Take Back Congress. Read on:
"Nevertheless, leaders of the Working Families Party, hoping to play a small but crucial role in this fall's Congressional elections, have started an effort to swing unaffiliated voters to Democratic candidates in three tight Congressional races.

The party is focusing on unaffiliated voters in New York's 24th and 29th Congressional Districts and Connecticut’s 5th Congressional District, which all have a Democratic candidate cross-endorsed by the Working Families Party. Both New York and Connecticut allow "fusion" elections in which candidates may run on more than one party line.

In New York's 24th District, Michael A. Arcuri, a Democrat, is battling State Senator Raymond A. Meier, a Republican; and in Connecticut's 5th District, State Senator Christopher S. Murphy, a Democrat, is challenging Nancy L. Johnson, the Republican incumbent.

Working Families is financing direct mail, door-to-door canvassing and phone banks in those districts. In New York's 29th Congressional District, the party will begin a direct-mail effort on behalf of the Democratic candidate, Eric Massa, who is challenging Congressman John Randy Kuhl Jr., the incumbent Republican.

The tight focus on upstate, unaffiliated voters is something of a departure for the Working Families Party, which was founded by a coalition of labor unions and community organizations in 1998. Its supporters are most heavily concentrated in the New York City area, where the party has worked largely in support of liberal Democratic candidates. But party officials said that polling they conducted but did not release showed that a large number of independent voters in the three districts supported views traditionally associated with liberal Democrats, like being in favor of universal health care and in opposition to free trade.

According to the poll, the party said, many of those surveyed said they believed that both major parties were indifferent to such concerns, and that they might be open to voting for a Democratic candidate on a minor party line if the candidate had their values.

"People see our message about jobs and health care not as a left-wing message," said Dan Cantor, the party’s executive director. "They put it dead center in focus groups. Trade deals, universal health care. These independent voters are like incipient progressives."

Mr. Cantor also cited past efforts by the party, like its work in 2002 on behalf of Representative Tim Bishop of Suffolk County, as evidence that the party may prove able to provide candidates with crucial voters in tight races. Mr. Bishop, who ran on the Democratic and Working Families lines, beat a Republican incumbent by about 2,500 votes; he earned 2,700 votes on the Working Families line. Of those 2,700, more than half came from people who also voted to re-elect Republican Gov. George E. Pataki.

"Having that extra line, giving independents a place to go, and having them work to get out the vote, all of that was very helpful to me," Mr. Bishop said in an interview.

The party will spend at least $400,000 — a third of it donated from New York’s Democratic Congressional delegation — on the effort, a large amount for the party, though a relatively small expenditure given the millions of dollars being spent by the Democratic and Republican campaign committees and the candidates themselves."
It's a good article; in New York the 24th and 29th Congressional Districts are the focus of Take Back Congress, though the article leaves out the work we're doing to drive up turnout in every contested Congressional race. If you want more background, read about our upstate victories, including how the WFP provided the margin of victory to elect Brian Higgins to Congress from Buffalo in 2004.

As we make the final push, I can't say often enough how close we are to winning. Everyone thinking about getting involved, everyone who cares about these races and the direction of our country, should do something to help. You can make a difference.

You can make calls from home or come phonebank with other enthusiastic supporters or make a donation to Take Back Congress.

Read more:
Technorati tags: | |

Friday, October 20, 2006

Wanted: weekend callers to reach New York voters

This is the fourth weekend for the Take Back Congress - New York phonebank from home, and we want to make it the biggest one yet!

The calling is going great. We're calling independent and swing voters with our kitchen table message of good jobs and universal health care - and they're agreeing. The percentage of voters we're talking to saying they're voting Republican is at 11%. And that's calling swing (not base) voters who vote in every election. If we talk to these people, we'll win.

Everyone's who has made calls is calling again, and we're close to doubling the number of callers. All you need is an hour over the weekend, the ability to be on the phone and online at the same time, and the desire to take back Congress!

We need you. Call from home to Take Back Congress. Sign up today - http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/calls/

Technorati tags: | |

Thursday, October 19, 2006

A special message from Pete Seeger

Protest music has been around for thousands of years. It just leaks out every so often and helps make history.

A group of young people and not-so-young people have gotten together to sing one of my songs that I wrote around 1965 about the Vietnam War. And they've done what I did a few years ago; they're singing it about the situation in Iraq. "Bring 'em Home!"

You can watch them singing and share it with your friends right here:
http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/bringthemhome

What they are saying is we need to send the politicians a message in a language they understand: election day votes. Here in New York, voting on the Working Families line is the best way to tell the politicians, bring them home, bring them home.

We're in a very dangerous situation. The problems in the Middle East are not going away — they're getting worse. Churchill said, anybody who thinks, when they get into a war, that they know what's going to happen, is fooling themselves. With all the power that the American military establishment has, they still cannot predict all the things that are going to happen.

To quote Martin Luther King, the weakness of violence is that it always creates more violence. Darkness cannot drive out darkness. Only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate. Only love can do that.

That's the message at the end of the song, "the world needs teachers, books and schools . . . And learning a few universal rules." I'm glad they left that verse in.

Watch the video and then pass it on:
http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/bringthemhome

There's a saying from William James a young friend painted on my barn. It goes: "I am done with great things and big things, great institutions and big success, and I am for all those tiny invisible molecular moral forces that work from individual to individual . . . like so many rootlets, or like the capillary oozing of water, which, if given time, will rend the hardest monuments of pride."

Apply this to the current situation: Take this and share it with your friends and family. Technology will save us if it doesn't wipe us out first.

We need to spread this message. Back in the sixties, I'd go from college to college to college singing songs. That's how folk songs were shared. Sure, some person who thought it was an unpatriotic song might boo, but a few seconds later he'd be drowned out by a few thousands voices who started cheering enthusiastically. Made the poor guy start thinking.

Change comes through small organizations. You divide up the jobs: Some people sing bass, some sing soprano. Some copy the sheet music, others drive and pick up those who ride the subway. You take small steps. They all add up.

Take a small step today. Here's your part: Tell your family and your friends about what we can do to send a message to the politicians to bring our troops home. And then vote on election day.

The very worst thing is for people to say: "My vote doesn't count. So why bother to vote at all?" Our votes do count. And if we vote to bring the troops home, they count even more.

Let's bring them home:
http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/bringthemhome

In solidarity,

Pete Seeger

Technorati tags: | | | | |

Bring Them Home. Send a Message.

Divisions and inequality founded on race and class are more enduring, but the most important, immediate issue facing our country today is the war in Iraq.

The Working Families Party has produced a short video/ad updating Pete Seeger's folk anthem, "Bring 'em Home."

Please check it out here:
http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/bringthemhome/

Technorati tags: | | | |

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

WFP Statement on the 47th State Senate District

"While another candidate is technically, unavoidably and unfortunately on the Working Families ballot line, the New York State Working Families Party enthusiastically supports Democrat John Murad for State Senate in the 47th District. We urge voters in Central New York to support the best hope for working families for State Senate, John Murad."

-- Alex Navarro, Communications Director, NYS Working Families Party

Cynthia Nixon and Rep. Charlie Rangel in the same room

Rep. Charlie Rangel, the dean of the New York Congressional delegation and a strong supporter of Take Back Congress, has just announced that Thursday night at 6pm sharp he'll be joining Sex and the City star Cynthia Nixon, Congressman Jerrold Nadler, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, Senator Eric Schneiderman, Assemblywoman Linda Rosenthal and Councilwoman Gale Brewer at a reception for Take Back Congress.

We'll hear about the state of the New York Congressional races 3 weeks before the election and the innovative strategies behind Take Back Congress.

You're invited too, buy your ticket online at: http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/cynthianixon

New York magazine
Capitol Confidential

Technorati tags: | | |

Indecision in the UK

No direct connection to WFP and NY politics. But somehow strangely appropriate in the week of CBGB's demise.



Tony Blair. The Clash. Iraq? Pretty cool.
(via Wonkette)

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Count on Me - three weeks until it's decided

The Count on Me campaign is a 7-week drive to identify 200,000 progressive voters who will give Eliot Spitzer a clear public mandate for progressive change by voting for him for Governor on Row E, the Working Families Party ballot line.

The Village Voice's political column Power Plays covered our Count on Me campaign. Here's what they had to say:
"Eliot Spitzer's lock on the governor's mansion is so tight Marist didn't even survey that race in their latest poll of state contests. Luckily, Quinnipiac did—and found the attorney general with a 73-21 lead over someone named John Faso. This is good news for Eliot Spitzer, but not-so-good news for people who support Eliot Spitzer but want their help to matter, like the Working Families Party, which has (as usual) cross-endorsed the Democrat. (He also has the Independence party line) The WFP gains clout when its votes help major party candidates win, but it looks like Spitzer might just pull this one off all by his lonesome. So emails are going around asking voters to sign up at the WFP website "pledging" their vote to Spitzer, who "knows that every vote he gets on Row E . . . is a vote for progressive change to solve problems with our schools, health care, housing and jobs."
We're building steam, and now you can get involved where ever you are. We've put a downloadable Count on Me pledge form online - check it out, print it out, get people you know to sign it and then send it in.

Universal health care is the top issue people care about, followed by living wage jobs. Here's what people who take the Count on Me pledge are saying:
"Medicare for All, single payer health insurance."

"Clean elections. No fraud in elections"

"A truly open legislative process"

"Environmental Sustainability"

"Support for the CFE school funding reform position"
Pledge to vote on the WFP ballot line and let us know what change you want to see.

Technorati tags: | | |

Monday, October 16, 2006

Cynthia Nixon stumps for Take Back Congress

Counting on sordid Instant Messages to carry Democrats to victory on November 7?

Come hear Sex and the City star Cynthia Nixon give you the inside scoop on why sexually explicit emails alone are never enough.

To TAKE BACK CONGRESS, we need to move beyond scandal and support innovative strategies that will help Democrats win. Please join Cynthia Nixon, Congressman Jerrold Nadler, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, Senator Eric Schneiderman, Assemblywoman Linda Rosenthal and Councilwoman Gale Brewer in supporting the Working Families Party's campaign to TAKE BACK CONGRESS this Thursday, October 19!

With your help, we will TAKE BACK CONGRESS, and our country, this fall.

Show your support by joining us on Thursday, October 19th, at 6pm sharp!

Buy your tickets online at: http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/cynthianixon

Levels of Support: Miranda: $1,000 Carrie: $500
"Mr. Big:" $250 "Steve the bartender:" $100

OR mail checks to:

Take Back Congress, 2-4 Nevins St. 3rd Fl., Brooklyn, NY 11217

Who: Sex and the City star Cynthia Nixon, Congressman Jerrold Nadler, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, Senator Eric Schneiderman, Assemblywoman Linda Rosenthal and Councilwoman Gale Brewer

What: A fundraiser for the TAKE BACK CONGRESS campaign

When: Thursday, October 19th, 6pm Sharp!

Where: 302 W. 86th St. (West End Ave. and Riverside Dr.)

For more info contact: Alexandra @ 718-222-3796 ext. 221 or atager@votewfp.org

New York is a key battleground in the fight to take back Congress, with five competitive races, including an open seat that is a top priority for Democrats. TAKE BACK CONGRESS is a campaign of the Working Families Party to persuade independent voters (the "swing" voters in these districts) to support Democratic candidates using direct mail, phone banks, radio, and door-to-door canvassing. Winning in New York is critical to taking back the 15 Republican-held seats nationally needed to elect a Democratic majority to the House this fall.

To buy tickets go to: http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/cynthianixon

For more details go to: http://www.takebackcongress2006.org

Technorati tags: | | |

Saturday, October 14, 2006

National Journal ranks New York high (again)

The new National Journal rankings are out and, once again, New York ranks high on the list of states with competitive Congressional races. Here's how they rank our races in terms of closeness:
15. NY-24, WFP endorses Mike Arcuri
17. NY-26, WFP endorses Jack Davis
33. NY-20, WFP endorses Kirsten Gillibrand
36. NY-29, WFP endorses Eric Massa
57. NY-19, WFP endorses John Hall
58. NY-25, WFP endorses Dan Maffei
The National Journal wants to know, "Anyone else sensing that the targeted New York congressional races are all turning away from the GOP?" We are, what do you think?

Today's online calling was a success - we'll see if tomorrow's callers can match it. You can still get involved: Sign up for weekend calling from home or weekday calling from a phonebank.

Technorati tags: | | |

Friday, October 13, 2006

Come see Mike Arcuri debate on Oct. 24th

Mike Arcuri and Dick Cheney-clone Ray Meier will debate on Wednesday, October 25th, at 7pm in the New Hartford High School gym.

We'll see if the Reynolds-Foley page scandal comes up in the debate. Before he resigned, Mark Foley donated $100,000 to the National Republican Campaign Committee, which is headed by New York incumbent Tom Reynolds. Now the NRCC and the Republican leadership that covered things up for Foley are pouring money into advertising in the 24th District to hide Ray Meier's record and smear Mike Arcuri.

Here's a quote on Meier's tainted money from the Arcuri campaign:
"Raymond Meier accepted over $25,000 this year alone from disgraced Congressmen who knew about Mark Foley's unacceptable behavior and did nothing. Either Foley's Republican colleagues don't know the difference between right and wrong, or worse, they chose political expedience over morality. Instead of siding with Americans across the country who are appalled by this failure of judgment, Raymond Meier continues to be bankrolled by his leadership rather than stand up for what's right"
And here is Ray Meier's defense:
"In America, we don't judge people until an investigation is finished"
That's Ray Meier - willing to look the other way, happy to do what he's told.

Help us win this race: call from home, call from the district, call from New York City or make a donation.

Technorati tags: | | | | |

Thursday, October 12, 2006

Calling to Take Back Congress

If you want to Take Back Congress and have an hour free this weekend then you can call voters from home with us.

The calls are easy. You'll get an over-the-phone training on calling voters. We'll tell you what to say and then you'll make calls using the latest internet-based predictive dialing technology.

You'll need to be online and on your home phone or cell phone at the same time to call. Your computer will call for you, and you'll log the results of each call online on your computer. We've been using this system for the past 2 weekends, and it's actually a lot of fun!

http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/calls/

The November election will decide who controls Congress. Here in New York, 5 D-WFP Congressional candidates are on the verge of winning their races for Republican-held seats. Enough of us calling together can make the difference - all from the comfort of your own home.

We've already got the volunteer callers we need to call 2/3 of these 20,000 voters. Now we want to find the rest of our callers online.

These are voter id calls. We have 20,000 likely voters that we want to call who can be won over by the Working Families Party's kitchen table message about health care and jobs. It's out of these 20,000 people that we'll find the voters we need to win. Let's Take Back Congress!

http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/calls/

Technorati tags: | |

Wednesday, October 11, 2006

Late night political blogging

Elections mean late nights, so expect blog posts to come after most people's work day ends.

I've blogged a lot about Mike Arcuri's Congressional campaign in NY-24, and more recently about Jack Davis' race in New York's 26th Congressional District. The pundits rate those two races as the top two Congressional campaigns in New York.

But an underdog campaign that I'm also excited about is Eric Massa's Congressional campaign in the 29th District against incumbent Rep. Kuhl. A friend of mine was out riding her bike in the district, and she said there were a sea of Eric Massa signs up. Combine that grassroots energy with Rep. Kuhl's thoughts on Iraq and Katrina, and this is a race that Eric Massa can win.

This analysis of a September poll (it's well worth reading all of it) shows Eric Massa is right behind Rep. Kuhl, 40% to 43%, and makes the case that as Eric Massa becomes better known he will pull ahead.

So that's the key. Can we introduce Eric Massa to enough voters to win his Congressional race and Take Back Congress. We're phonebanking this weekend - sign up to call from home.

And here's a good primer on Eric Massa from Swing State Project.

Technorati tags: | | | | |

Tuesday, October 10, 2006

Reynolds compared to DeLay

Congressional Quarterly (via Swing State Project) is now rating Jack Davis' challenge to Tom Reynolds in New York's 26th Congressional District as "Leans Democratic".

From the CQ article:
"And nowhere is that more true than in New York's 26th District, where the re-election prospects of four-term Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds - head of the Republicans' national House campaign organization - have seen a stunning reversal of fortune. The controversy over Reynolds' handling of information about Foley's activities has prompted CQPolitics.com to change its rating on the race to Leans Democratic from Leans Republican.
. . .
The Leans Democratic rating does not mean that Reynolds definitely will lose on Nov. 7: His past popularity, strong fundraising advantage and the Republican lean in his upstate New York district gives him at least a chance of reversing the tide running strongly against him.

But all of the momentum appears on the side of the Democratic nominee, factory owner Jack Davis, who had been running a vigorous underdog campaign even before the Foley scandal erupted.

The contest is a rematch of the 2004 race in which Davis held Reynolds to an unexpectedly close 56 percent to 44 percent edge. Now, three separate polls since late last week showed Reynolds trails Davis by significant margins.
. . .
Reynolds - who has defended himself by saying that the e-mails in question were not the sexually explicit ones to other young men that were later revealed - says he mentioned the matter to the office of House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois, a matter of serious dispute since the scandal broke.

This has led many critics to demand to know why Reynolds didn't think the matter required a more thorough investigation, and whether he would not have been much more aggressive if - in his role as chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee - the lawmaker making inappropriate contacts with pages had been a Democrat rather than a Republican."
In case you're curious, the other Republican-held seats that CQ rates as "Leans Democratic" are Mark Foley's and Tom DeLay's. Tom Reynolds and Tom DeLay, two incumbents who would do anything to win elections.

Turning to the other New York races, Mike Arcuri's race in New York's 24th District is rated "No Clear Favorite", John Hall (NY-19) and Kirsten Gillibrand (NY-20) are rated "Leans Republican", and David Mejias (NY-3), Dan Maffei (NY-25) and Eric Massa (NY-29) are rated "Republican Favored".

Seven seats in play with four weeks to go, and I think the races are closer than those rankings show.

Help push our D-WFP candidates over the top: phonebank or donate.

Technorati tags: | | | | | | | |

Monday, October 09, 2006

Count on Me - four weeks to go

The Count on Me campaign is a 7-week drive to identify 200,000 progressive voters who will give Eliot Spitzer a clear public mandate for progressive change by voting for him for Governor on Row E, the Working Families Party ballot line.

As people take the Count on Me pledge, they've been telling us why they're casting a progressive vote on Row E. Universal health care is the #1 answer, with living wage jobs close behind and campaign finance reform, fair funding for schools and affordable housing all with their supporters.

Here are some of the reasons people are giving for their vote on Row E:
"I want to see working class minds in office making the decisions that need to made to straighten out what is supposed to be for the people!"

"Better jobs. Better health care."

"Bulk prescription drug buying"
Add your two cents and take the Count on Me pledge.

Technorati tags: | | |

Sunday, October 08, 2006

Davis leads Reynolds by 15 points

A Zogby International poll for the Buffalo News has Jack Davis 15 points ahead of incumbent Rep. Tom Reynolds. Davis was already running a strong race against Reynolds in New York's 26th District, holding Reynolds accountable for trade agreements that have left the district hemorrhaging jobs.

But then the Mark Foley scandal broke. Now we know that Tom Reynolds knew about the emails Mark Foley sent to underage pages, and that Reynolds' Chief of Staff had tried to cover up the scandal and had told Republican higher-ups about Foley years ago.

To most of us, Reynolds' role in the scandal is inexcusable. Reynolds' first response was to cover everything up, and then to hide behind kids instead of coming clean. Now he's trying to fast-talk his way out of trouble, and when that doesn't work it's safe to expect Reynolds to start sliming Jack Davis with negative attacks. Since Reynolds is the Chair of the RNCC, he'll have a ton of money to sink into negative ads.

So now both Davis' Congressional race in NY-26 and Mike Arcuri's race in NY-24 are rated "toss up" by the pundits, including the New York Times and the Cook Report (pdf). At least three more New York Congressional races are close, with underdog upsets looming. How big will the Democratic surge in New York be this year? That's up to us.

Volunteer today.

Technorati tags: | | | | | | | |

Thursday, October 05, 2006

2 New Polls Show Davis Leading Reynolds

Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research:
Davis 50%
Reynolds 42%
n=522, October 3-4
client: Jack Davis
Link

Survey USA
Davis 50%
Reynolds 45%
n=482
client: WGRZ-TV
Link

Technorati tags: | | | | | |

Benefits to a higher minimum wage, part 407

I came across an article by Susan Hansen on TomPaine.com talking about a higher minimum wage and the economy that I'd like to share. If you don't read the whole thing, here's the key part:
"[S]tates leading in manufacturing exports - such as Washington - or foreign direct investment - California and New York - are the states that pay higher wages. But states such as Arkansas, Idaho and West Virginia - which have cut their labor costs most drastically since the 1970s - rank in the lowest quartiles in terms of exports. Higher state labor costs are also associated with faster growth in gross state product, education levels, productivity and personal income.

International data support these conclusions as well. According to the World Competitiveness Index, the most competitive country in the world is Finland, and the other Scandinavian "welfare states" with generous unemployment and health care policies also rank in the Top 10. Countries such as Estonia, Ireland, Singapore, and South Korea, which have invested heavily in education, have also attracted high levels of foreign investment.

What about jobs and employment? My research showed that trends in state labor costs have little impact on unemployment rates, which remain higher in central cities and in isolated rural areas. Despite its drastic cuts in state labor costs, West Virginia still has the nation's highest unemployment rates. Job growth is modestly greater in states with lower labor costs. But many of these jobs are part-time, low-paid and offer few, if any, benefits. Thus declines in state labor costs are associated with a number of negative social outcomes: higher rates of crime, poverty, suicide, divorce and births to single mothers. Creating a few more low-paid jobs does not counter these adverse trends.

Congress and the presidency, firmly under Republican control, may invoke international competition and "globalization" to justify their refusal to raise the minimum wage and for shifting the tax burden from wealth and capital to workers' wages. But in many states, political officials have made other choices: to increase the state minimum wage, to enact the Earned Income Tax Credit to benefit the working poor, to expand rather than restrict access to workers' compensation and unemployment benefits. The global economic system is not a static, immutable force over which we are powerless. Indeed, it is the officials we elect who can influence how the costs and benefits of globalization are distributed."

Read this sentence again: "Higher state labor costs [read: a higher minimum wage and better benefits] are also associated with faster growth in gross state product, education levels, productivity and personal income."

Here in New York, the Working Families Party was able to muscle through a minimum wage increase. We took heat for it, including from some surprising quarters, but we did it because it made working families lives better and because it bettered the state.

Congress needs to follow suit. Republicans running for Congress this year have had the chance to raise the minimum wage, and they haven't done it. That's something to think about when you go to vote.

And if you've made up your mind, help us throw the bums out.

Technorati tags:

Blatant Plagiarism ... for Economic Justice

Sometimes someone else writes something so dead-on that we have no choice but to cut-and-paste whole cloth. Tuesday's NLRB decision excluding nurses and other workers with limited supervisory duties from union membership was a stab in the back of working families.

With apologies to Podesta & company, here's what the Center for American Progress says about it today:
Working Americans Under Attack

Workers' rights have been severely crippled. On Tuesday, President Bush's National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) -- "easily the most anti-worker labor board in history" -- issued a decision that will deny the right to organize to as many as 8 million workers in 200 occupations. Under the Taft-Hartley Act, "supervisors" in an organization are prohibited from joining unions. In a party-line vote of the five-member NLRB, the three Bush appointees voted to broadly interpret who can be called a supervisor, extending to someone who "spends as little as 10 percent to 15 percent of his or her time overseeing the work of others." AFL-CIO President John Sweeney noted, "The rights of anyone who spends 7 hours and 10 minutes a day on routine duties and 50 minutes on 'supervisory functions' are at risk." Working Americans' right to organize has suffered under the Bush administration. Currently, 32 million workers -- 25 percent of the workforce -- have no right to form a union under federal, state, or local law. Even though productivity has steadily risen, the restriction on workers' rights has contributed to lower wages and a "middle class in turmoil." Tuesday's NLRB decision is a defeat for workers everywhere. In a blistering dissent, the two board members appointed by former President Clinton warned that the ruling "threatens to create a new class of workers under Federal labor law: workers who have neither the genuine prerogatives of management, nor the statutory rights of ordinary employees."

'FAR OUT OF STEP WITH WORKPLACE REALITY': The 1947 Taft-Hartley amendments to the National Labor Relations Act were never meant to exclude professional workers who have no power to hire, fire, or discipline employees. But that's exactly what the NLRB ruled on Tuesday. In 2001, the Supreme Court -- with Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority -- forced the board to reexamine the definition of "supervisor," ruling that the definition set by the then-Clinton appointee-dominated board was too strict. But as the AFL-CIO's Stewart Acuff points out, Tuesday's Oakwood Healthcare, Inc. ruling goes "far beyond the clear intent of Congress, far beyond NLRB precedent, far more than necessary to comply with the Supreme Court's 2001 Kentucky River decision that gave rise to the ruling, and far out of step with workplace reality." The majority wrote that a supervisor is now someone who can assign "an employee to a certain department (e.g., housewares) or to a certain shift (e.g., night) or to certain significant overall tasks (e.g., restocking shelves)" or someone who has "men under him" and can decide "what job shall be undertaken next or who shall do it."

EXACERBATING THE CARE CRISIS: The nation is undergoing a "care crisis." A recent study in the Health Affairs medical journal "found 6,700 patient deaths and 4 million days of hospital care could be avoided each year by increasing staff of registered nurses," which requires not only training additional nurses, but also recruiting and retaining them in hospital positions. The Oakwood ruling will directly affect nurses, classifying more as supervisors ineligible for union protection. Lower unionization levels definitely won't help recruit more nurses or improve healthcare. Acuff notes, "Nurse unions lead the way in advocating for lower patient-to-nurse ratios and limits on mandatory excessive overtime, both of which have major consequences for patient care. It is no accident -- and has been documented by solid scholarly research -- that heart attack survival rates are higher for patients in hospitals where nurses have a union than in hospitals where nurses do not have a union." Vanessa Quinn, an emergency room nurse in upstate New York, said that expanding the definition of who is a supervisor is disastrous: "If we can't get young people into nursing, we're in trouble. They need to know they can go into this profession and take care of a family. Without union protection, pay will not be competitive."

WIDE-REACHING RESTRICTIONS FOR MILLIONS OF WORKERS: The Oakwood decision will go far beyond nurses though. The conservative National Association of Manufacturers yesterday applauded the NLRB's Oakwood decision, stating that it "updated a few decades of old 'us vs. them' workplace notions and brought federal labor law closer to the realities of the 21st Century workplace." But the problem with the ruling is precisely that it ignores the realities of the 21st century workforce, which, as Sweeney notes, "is more skilled and educated than those of previous generations. Workplace hierarchies have flattened out. Few employees today are in jobs that don't require them to exercise some independent judgment, to show someone else how to perform a task, to pass assignments on to co-workers. This should not cost them their right to a union voice on the job." By spending as little as 10 percent of the day "supervising" others -- even "minor, incidental, or occasional supervisory duties" -- an employee will lose the right to union representation. As the New York Times noted, "most of the nation's more than 20 million professional workers could fall into that category because many professionals, like a doctor overseeing nurses or a lawyer overseeing a secretary, could be deemed supervisors under the board's new guidelines." By 2010, this number could jump to 34 million professional workers, accounting for over 23 percent of the workforce.

Technorati tags:

Wednesday, October 04, 2006

NY Times weighs in on Reynolds - Foley scandal

From an editorial in today's New York Times:
"The more the House Republican leaders try to defend themselves on the Congressional page scandal, the worse it looks. They still do not seem to appreciate how serious this is, especially for a party that poses as the arbiter of morality. And they appear to be trying harder to deflect blame from themselves than to get to the bottom of what actually happened. The F.B.I. has begun investigating, but that will be a prolonged process, and the voters have to render a verdict in five weeks. There is evidence emerging that they should consider.
...
Mr. Reynolds, who was one of the few members of Congress to know about the Foley problem early on, insists he did all he had to when he "took it to my supervisor," Mr. Hastert. But Mr. Reynolds is a key member of the House leadership, and his constituents need to know whether he knew enough to have done more than he did. We'd also like to know why, in the months when Mr. Reynolds was one of the few people to know of Mr. Foley's misconduct, Mr. Foley contributed $100,000 to Mr. Reynolds's Congressional campaign committee."
Read the whole thing. Is this who we want running Congress?

Technorati tags: | | |

Reynolds Developments: In the Last Hour...

Via Capitol Confidential: Kirk Fordham has "resigned" (before he could be "fired"). It only took a few hours longer than predicted here yesterday afternoon.

Via The Politicker: StopTomReynolds.com has launched (courtesy of the Democratic Rural Conference).

Technorati tags: | | |

A Problem with Urban Outfitters

Maybe this popular knowledge, but it was news to us. This comes from Manhattan User's Guide, not one of our usual news sources:
A reader better informed than we are pointed out that both Anthropolgie and Urban Outfitters are owned by Richard Hayne.

Jonathan Valania wrote an excellent piece on Hayne in the Philadelphia Weekly a few years ago in which he reported that Hayne had donated $13,150 to Rick Santorum and his PAC over the years. (Santorum, as you'll recall, is anti-abortion, anti-gay rights, and in favor of teaching intelligent design.)

Hayne claimed in that article that his stores had no political affiliations or agenda. But Valania points out that a list of Santorum campaign donors included Urban Outfitters.

And the t-shirts at Urban Outfitters certainly seem to be an expression of a political point of view. In 2004, the store carried a t-shirt that declared "voting is for old people." You might accept their explanation that the message was meant ironically, but there's this:

Last year, the store sold a t-shirt that read "New Mexico, Cleaner than Regular Mexico."

And Urban Outfitters had no problem carrying the game Ghettopoly until the heat was on them.

Richard Hayne has every right to sell whatever's legal in his stores. You have every right to know where your dollars are going. Your money, your choice.
Good reason to think twice before patronizing one of those stores.

Tuesday, October 03, 2006

WFP on the Radio Wednesday: If Reynolds Knew...

WFP executive director Dan Cantor will be on the radio tomorrow in Western New York and will say that Congressman Tom Reynolds should resign if he knew that, as has now beeen reported, his chief of staff, Kirk Fordham, was actively involved in attempting to cover up Mark Foley's online activities. As Grg Sargent writes at TPM Cafe:

Reynolds has now denied knowledge of Fordham's work to protect Foley, the AP reports.

If Reynolds is to be believed, then he should fire his chief of staff. And if Reynolds' is not telling the entire truth, then he should resign.

Listen to Cantor between 8 and 8:10am on Wednesday morning on WHLD 1270 AM.

Of course, as fast-moving as this story is, either Reynolds or Fordham may actually have resigned by then.

Technorati tags: | | |

Editorial Boards Echo WFP Call for Independent Investigation of Foley Scandal

Tell Attorney General Gonzales and your members of Congress to appoint a special counsel to investigate a possible Foley cover-up.

The Working Families Party

For immediate release: October 3, 2006

EDITORIAL BOARDS ECHO WFP CALL FOR INDEPENDENT HOUSE INVESTIGATION

NEW INFORMATION: REYNOLDS STAFF TRIED TO BLOCK ABC REPORT;

Working Families Reiterates Request for Special Counsel

NEW YORK, NY -- Editorial boards around New York State today called for an independent investigation of how the Republican congressional leadership handled allegations of predatory sexual conduct by former Congressman Mark Foley. And new information makes the need for an independent investigation more pressing:
Congressman Tom Reynolds' (R-NY) chief of staff, Kirk Fordham, tried to broker a secret deal last Friday to get ABC News to cover up the worst part of the Foley child predator scandal, the lurid five-plus-page instant message chat in which Foley asked a child to measure his penis and then led the child into a detailed discussion of masturbatory techniques. (AmericaBlog)
On Sunday, the executive director of the Working Families Party (WFP), an independent political party in New York, wrote to U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez demanding the appointment of a special prosecutor to determine whether House leaders Denny Hastert and Tom Reynolds violated criminal laws by covering up the Foley scandal.

Today, an editorial in the Albany Times Union said,
"Given the potentially explosive nature of this case, along with the chances that other high-level lawmakers might be caught up in this scandal, an independent investigation seems to be warranted. By asking for a Justice Department investigation instead, Mr. Hastert has placed his trust in Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who has a reputation for accommodating Republican interests. The public deserves better. The pages deserve better."
And an editorial in the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle said,
"An independent investigation must be opened immediately. House Speaker Dennis Hastert wants the attorney general involved. The key is to get this investigation into the hands of someone with a reputation for impartiality and thoroughness."
Dan Cantor, WFP executive director, reiterated his party's call for a special prosecutor:
"A growing chorus of respected voices are demanding that we get impartial answers to the key question: Why didn't the House leadership with knowledge of Foley's activity take action to stop sexual predator before the news media published the incriminating internet exchanges? Given the politicized context of the scandal, only a special counsel independent of the Bush Justice Department can be depended to find out, and hold the wrongdoers accountable."
The text of the WFP's request for a special counsel follows below:
THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY
2-4 Nevins Street, 3rd Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11217

October 1, 2006

The Honorable Alberto Gonzales
United States Department of Justice
Robert F. Kennedy Building
950 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530

Re: Request for the Appointment of Outside Special Counsel for the Investigation and Prosecution of Violations, or Conspiracy to Violate, Criminal Laws Relating to Mark Foley Affair

Dear Attorney General Gonzales:

The Working Families Party, an independent political party in New York State calls on the United States Department of Justice to appoint an outside special counsel with the independence to investigate and prosecute any and all criminal acts committed by any member of the U.S. House of Representatives relating to the apparent cover-up of the Mark Foley affair. Due to the severe threat to the integrity of the Congress, it is essential that such a counsel be appointed immediately. Such crimes are serious felonies and they need to be fully and independently investigated.

An independent investigation by a prosecutor, not subject to dismissal by any political appointee or elected official, is the only way to ensure that all those who participated in the cover-up of Foley's activities are held accountable for committing these serious crimes. No person is above the law, not even a member of Congress.

Republican members of Congress called yesterday for a criminal investigation of Foley's activities. That is a step in the right direction but does not go far enough. To borrow a phrase from Watergate, the cover-up is sometimes worse than the original crime. That deserves an independent investigation. According to a report by Ben Smith of the New York Daily News,
"On July 27, 2006, the [National Republican Congressional Committee], which [Rep. Thomas] Reynolds chairs, accepted an unusually large contribution of $100,000 from Foley. Hard to imagine something of that size just slipping past the chairman."
To be blunt, this has every appearance of "hush money" accepted by the political committee controlled by Representation Thomas Reynolds (R-NY). The actions or inactions of Reynolds and Speaker Hastert must be investigated immediately.

The Appointment of an Outside Special Counsel Is Plainly Warranted. As you know, the Justice Department's own regulations require the appointment of an outside special counsel when a three-prong test is met. 28 C.F.R. part 600.1. First, a "criminal investigation of a person or matter [must be] warranted." Second, the "investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney’s Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department." And, third, "under the circumstances it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter." If this three-prong test is met, under the federal regulations that govern the Justice Department, a special counsel must be selected from outside the government who has the authority to secure necessary resources for investigation and prosecution and who would have full investigatory and prosecutorial powers. 28 C.F.R. parts 600.3-600.6.

In this case, the most senior members of Congress have acknowledged the need for a criminal investigation. Because the political nature of the affair has put control of the House of Representatives at risk, a Justice Department under the direction of President Bush faces a deep conflict. And the potential stain of these allegations on a branch of Congress elevates the public interest to a level mandating appointment of a Special Counsel.

We thank you for your attention to this critically important matter. We trust you will review the facts and allegations and take the only appropriate action: appointment of an outside special counsel to conduct a thorough and independent criminal investigation. We look forward to the Department’s response. Please contact us to arrange a meeting to discuss this request.

Very truly yours,

Dan Cantor
Executive Director
Working Families Party
Tell Attorney General Gonzales and your members of Congress to appoint a special counsel to investigate a possible Foley cover-up.

Technorati tags: | | | | | | |

Monday, October 02, 2006

Jack Davis Has Questions for the Reynolds Campaign

Jack Davis sent out a press release with two questions for Tom Reynolds this evening:
"Why did you take $100,000 from Mark Foley after you knew he was engaging in questionable online activity?

Why didn't you ask your chief of staff, Kirk Fordham, what Fordham's former boss Mark Foley was doing e-mailing 16 year old kids?"
Technorati tags: | | | | | | |

Jack Davis Campaign Statement on Reynolds-Foley

Statement from Curtis Ellis, Communications Director, Jack Davis for Congress:
"No issue is more important than the safety and security of our children. Like all of us, Tom Reynolds has a moral obligation to protect our children. Reynolds should have been demanding accountability from Mark Foley. Instead, he was demanding a $100,000 campaign contribution – and took it."
Technorati tags: | | | | | | |

"The Place Will Burn Down" - Stephanopoulos on the Risk to the GOP

(Via The Note) ABC's George Stephanopoulos on the risk to the House GOP from the Foley Affair:
"Right now it's a category 3 hurricane and it's picking up steam. Republicans all across the country are getting questions about it. But here's the key question: Did any Republican leaders know about those x-rated emails that ABC's Brian Ross is talking about? If they did, it's game over. The leadership will have to resign. It will cost Republicans control of Congress. As one top GOP aide told me this morning, 'the place will burn down.'"
Tell Attorney General Gonzales and your members of Congress to appoint a special counsel to investigate a possible Foley cover-up.

Technorati tags: | | | | | | |

Sunday, October 01, 2006

Foley's "Hush Money" Requires Special Counsel for Reynolds and Hastert

THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY
2-4 Nevins Street, 3rd Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11217

The Honorable Alberto Gonzales
United States Department of Justice
Robert F. Kennedy Building
950 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530

Re: Request for the Appointment of Outside Special Counsel for the Investigation and Prosecution of Violations, or Conspiracy to Violate, Criminal Laws Relating to Mark Foley Affair

Dear Attorney General Gonzales:

The Working Families Party, an independent political party in New York State calls on the United States Department of Justice to appoint an outside special counsel with the independence to investigate and prosecute any and all criminal acts committed by any member of the U.S. House of Representatives relating to the apparent cover-up of the Mark Foley affair. Due to the severe threat to the integrity of the Congress, it is essential that such a counsel be appointed immediately. Such crimes are serious felonies and they need to be fully and independently investigated.

An independent investigation by a prosecutor, not subject to dismissal by any political appointee or elected official, is the only way to ensure that all those who participated in the cover-up of Foley’s activities are held accountable for committing these serious crimes. No person is above the law, not even a member of Congress.

Republican members of Congress called yesterday for a criminal investigation of Foley’s activities. That is a step in the right direction but does not go far enough. To borrow a phrase from Watergate, the cover-up is sometimes worse than the original crime. That deserves an independent investigation.

According to a report by Ben Smith of the New York Daily News,
"On July 27, 2006, the [National Republican Congressional Committee], which [Rep. Thomas] Reynolds chairs, accepted an unusually large contribution of $100,000 from Foley. Hard to imagine something of that size just slipping past the chairman."
To be blunt, this has every appearance of “hush money” accepted by the political committee controlled by Representation Thomas Reynolds (R-NY). The actions or inactions of Reynolds and Speaker Hastert must be investigated immediately.

The Appointment of an Outside Special Counsel Is Plainly Warranted. As you know, the Justice Department’s own regulations require the appointment of an outside special counsel when a three-prong test is met. 28 C.F.R. part 600.1. First, a "criminal investigation of a person or matter [must be] warranted." Second, the "investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney’s Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department." And, third, "under the circumstances it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter." If this three-prong test is met, under the federal regulations that govern the Justice Department, a special counsel must be selected from outside the government who has the authority to secure necessary resources for investigation and prosecution and who would have full investigatory and prosecutorial powers. 28 C.F.R. parts 600.3-600.6.

In this case, the most senior members of Congress have acknowledged the need for a criminal investigation. Because the political nature of the affair has put control of the House of Representatives at risk, a Justice Department under the direction of President Bush faces a deep conflict. And the potential stain of these allegations on a branch of Congress elevates the public interest to a level mandating appointment of a Special Counsel.

We thank you for your attention to this critically important matter. We trust you will review the facts and allegations and take the only appropriate action: appointment of an outside special counsel to conduct a thorough and independent criminal investigation. We look forward to the Department’s response. Please contact us to arrange a meeting to discuss this request.

Very truly yours,

Dan Cantor
Executive Director
Working Families Party

UPDATED: Tell Attorney General Gonzales and your members of Congress to appoint a special counsel to investigate a possible Foley cover-up.

Technorati tags: | | | | | | |