Cross-posted around the blogosphere yesterday. I am posting here because a few of the links have not appeared in previous posts at Bleeding Heartland. -desmoinesdem
Welcome to the latest diary in my series on the Democratic primary in Iowa’s third Congressional district. Ed Fallon is challenging Leonard Boswell, who was first elected to this seat in 1996.
Today, I consider who would represent this district more effectively in Congress.
Here are links to my previous diaries on this campaign:
the introductory diary, with biographical information on Boswell and Fallon
The cases for Fallon and Boswell
Boswell and Fallon pick up the pace
Will Democrats vote on the issues?
As I wrote last week, Fallon can win this primary if Democrats vote for the candidate closest to them on the issues. Boswell’s strategy appears to be to shift voters’ focus to other factors.
The latest e-mail message I received from the Boswell campaign continued the trend. I reproduced that e-mail in full at Bleeding Heartland. To summarize, it began with a reference to Fallon’s support for Ralph Nader in 2000 and ended with a paragraph stating flatly, “Ed Fallon is no Democrat.” It also highlighted this blog post, “Fallon Faces Campaign Finance Questions,” which I will address in an upcoming diary on the financing of the Boswell and Fallon campaigns.
The e-mail cited Boswell’s loyalty to the Democratic Party twice and mentioned his clout as the 135th most powerful member of the U.S. House of Representatives. However, most of the message contained negative information about Fallon.
To state the obvious, an incumbent who is confident about his standing does not go hard negative on his challenger two and a half months before the election. Boswell is worried.
I’ll deal with the Nader issue again near the end of this diary. But first, I want to address the question of who would represent my district more effectively. It’s an important question, since Boswell is playing up his hard work and influence in Congress, as opposed to his voting record on the key issues raised by Fallon.
One measure of an effective legislator is the bills they get passed. For example, Tom Harkin got the Americans with Disabilities Act through the Senate during his first term, which was quite an achievement.
Boswell’s campaign has charged that Fallon didn’t get any significant legislation passed during his years in the Iowa House. Democracy for America has countered that Boswell “has only managed to get 2 bills out of committee and enacted into law” during his six terms in Congress.
None of this is surprising, because Republicans controlled the Iowa House during Fallon’s entire 14-year tenure and have controlled the U.S. House during most of Boswell’s time there.
According to a press release from the Fallon campaign, Boswell told Iowa Public Television in March:
“Well, I think we just look at our records. You look at his record, look at mine and there is quite a contrast, a big contrast. Go up to the state legislature, Kay, you know a lot of people up there, and see what they have to tell you about working with Mr. Fallon or not working with him I might say. And his reputation up there is speakers talk to me, the majority leader of both houses, the caucuses and so someone that they never got any support out of and if there was one red light on the board it would likely be his and the different things that he didn’t support.”
In response, Fallon’s campaign released comments from legislators in both parties who served with Fallon and praised his work. Fallon’s campaign website lists his accomplishments in and out of the legislative arena.
Fallon worked on many land-use issues in the Iowa House, and I remember one bill in particular that he got through committee on an overwhelming bipartisan vote. (At the time, Fallon was executive director of 1000 Friends of Iowa, a group promoting responsible land use that I am also involved in.)
Unfortunately, Republican Majority leader Chris Rants refused to allow Fallon’s bill to come to a vote on the House floor, because everyone knew it would have passed easily. This kind of thing is a fact of life when you’re in the legislative minority, but it doesn’t mean that Fallon would not be able to deliver for the district in a Democratic-controlled U.S. House of Representatives.
Several campaign communications from Boswell have touted his ranking by Knowlegis as the 135th most powerful member of the U.S. House. They point out that this makes Boswell “more powerful than nearly 70 percent” of the members of Congress.
To put this in perspective, I looked up the whole class of 1996 as ranked by Knowlegis. Of the 47 House representatives first elected in that year who still serve, 31 were Democrats. Boswell ranks exactly in the middle of that group; 15 House Democrats first elected in 1996 are more powerful than he is, according to Knowlegis, and 15 are less powerful.
Digging further into the Knowlegis rankings, I found that 15 House Democrats first elected in 1998 are more powerful than Boswell, seven House Democrats first elected in 2000 are more powerful than Boswell, eight House Democrats first elected in 2002 are more powerful than Boswell (including Rahm Emanuel and Chris Van Hollen), eight House Democrats first elected in 2004 are more powerful than Boswell, and three House Democrats first elected in 2006 are more powerful than Boswell.
I don’t mean to discount Boswell’s efforts on behalf of his constituents. But let’s not kid ourselves–it’s not as if Fallon is challenging the Ways and Means Committee chairman, whose level of influence in Congress could not be matched for many years.
Of course, power rankings are not the only measure of effective representation. I would like my representative’s voting record to reflect my opinions and values. I belong to a lot of environmental groups as well as the “flash activist network” organized by Credo (formerly Working Assets). I can’t tell you how many times I have received action alerts urging me to contact Boswell to support this bill or oppose that bill. Most of the time, I’m supposed to ask Boswell not to side with the Republican or Bush administration position on these bills.
Why are these action alerts necessary? Bruce Braley, the freshman who represents Iowa’s first Congressional district, and Dave Loebsack, the freshman who represents Iowa’s second Congressional district, seem to know instinctively what position to take on these bills without getting a barrage of phone calls from constituents. To cite the most recent example, a few days ago Sierra Club’s Iowa chapter urged its members to contact Boswell’s office to
ask him to cosponsor HR 39, a bill that would permanently protect the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. […] All other Iowa Democratic members of Congress have already cosponsored HR 39.
According to Knowlegis, Braley is the 327th most powerful member of the House and Loebsack ranks number 362. Given a choice between the 135th most powerful House member, who doesn’t consistently stand up for my values, and a less-powerful representative who reliably cosponsors good legislation, I would prefer the latter.
As I mentioned above, Boswell’s campaign depicts the incumbent as a more loyal Democrat than Fallon.
They like to mention that Boswell voted with House Democrats more than 90 percent of the time in 2007. What they don’t tell you is the subject of an article in today’s Des Moines Register: that was the first year he had ever voted with the majority of House Democrats at least 90 percent of the time. Click the link to see the chart, and you’ll find that three out of the first four years Boswell was in Congress, he didn’t even vote with the majority of Democrats 70 percent of the time. In other years, the percentage ranged from the 70s to the mid-80s.
It’s not just the number of times Boswell has voted with the House Republicans–it’s also the importance of the issues at stake.
Speaking for myself, I can cut Boswell slack for his vote on the resolution authorizing the use of military force in Iraq, because October 2002 was a very tough political environment for Democrats, and he was facing a strong challenge. I’m talking about issues like:
fast-track trade authority
the 2005 bankruptcy bill
the 2005 energy bill
permanent repeal of the estate tax
amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to allow warrantless wiretapping
weakening the right of habeas corpus
If Fallon were representing my district, I wouldn’t need to worry about how he would vote on those issues.
Another theme running through Boswell’s campaign communications is his “hard work” on behalf of the district. I assume that their message-testing poll in January found that this was one of his strongest points with Democrats. I certainly don’t question his work ethic. My question is, to what goal is he applying himself?
Boswell sits on the House Transportation Committee, and he has secured various transportation-related earmarks for the district. He has mentioned some of these in literature supporting his candidacy and in letters to constituents (such as one I quoted from in last week’s diary).
I haven’t seen Boswell use his position on this committee to advance a forward-thinking, environmentally-sound transportation policy. That is in start contrast to Tom Harkin, who recently introduced a “complete streets” bill that could substantially reduce our contribution to global warming, among other benefits.
While Boswell has supported some good projects, I don’t think every earmark for my district is a good earmark. Proponents of a controversial proposed beltway in northeast Polk County are counting on Boswell to secure the federal funding that would be needed. Many community activists are concerned about the economic and environmental impact of this road project. For them, Fallon would be a more effective legislator, because he would not seek funding for an unnecessary and harmful four-lane highway.
Before I end this diary, I want to return to the matter of Fallon’s support for Nader during the 2000 campaign. Boswell and his surrogates mention this as often as possible, with good reason. Reading the comments below my previous posts, as well as the comments below sarahlane’s recent diary on the race in IA-03, you can see that some progressive bloggers agree that we should reject Fallon’s candidacy because of support for Nader eight years ago (even though Gore carried Iowa).
For those who think this should be a deal-breaker, I want to remind you that Democrats in the third district do not have the luxury of many candidates to choose from. A dozen or more Democrats have their eye on this seat after Boswell retires, but only Fallon has stepped forward to challenge the incumbent.
Why should I hold a grudge over something Fallon has apologized for many times, when Boswell has repeatedly voted against my interests, and against the majority of House Democrats?
If Boswell wins this primary, I can look forward to many more action alerts and (in all likelihood) disappointment when Boswell fails to stand with more progressive Democrats in Congress. For all I know, John McCain may be elected president, and Boswell will support some of his bad ideas on taxation, energy policy and the environment.
Upcoming diaries in this series will deal with the candidates’ sparring over campaign finance issues and the question of Fallon’s electability. Feel free to suggest other topics you’d like me to cover.