WurfWhile

For many this may be a ‘no-brainer’ but I think it good to start things off by assuming little. What’s the case for supporting a Democratic Congressional Candidate that wasn’t your choice in the primary?

First, the basics. Any of the three Democratic candidates, Tammy Duckworth in the 6th, Joe Shannon in the 13th and John Laesch in the 14th is more progressive and better for their district than their respective Republican opponents, Peter Roskam, Judy Biggert and Dennis Hastert. Based on that comparison they deserve your vote.

Do they deserve your volunteer time? That, in some respects, is a different question. One of the first questions is are you a good fit for the campaign? That certainly has to do with the candidate and their Republican opposition - but it also has to do with the style of the campaign. It’s likely that no DuPage Democratic Candidate’s campaign will turn down an offer of help - but that isn’t the same as meeting your expectations of what your “help” means. Bridget Dooley, a Cegelis supporter, has described her initial contacts with the Duckworth campaign and Tammy Duckworth. My few contacts with the Duckworth campaign post-primary were less emotionally charged, and more positive, but that certainly doesn’t make the Duckworth effort a ‘Dean-style’ campaign. Both Cegelis and Scott supporters are more likely to expect greater discretion and input than the Duckworth campaign is used to permitting. If and whether that changes may affect which volunteers feel comfortable signing on for Duckworth. One expects differences in all three remaining Democratic congressional campaigns - and the Duckworth campaign is not unique in that respect. Just because a new campaign doesn’t share a campaign style you were a part of recently isn’t by definition bad - there might be something to learn. At the very least, if you’re like Bridget and care about the issues, you should give a different campaign a try (and if not at the national level, then at the state level).

6th Congressional Comparisons

The 6th district general election offers stark contrasts. If Tammy Duckworth is not as progressive a candidate as Christine Cegelis, Tammy’s positions on most important matters are nonetheless very progressive and often diametrically opposed to State Senator Peter Roskam’s record and public positions.

Healthcare

Tammy Duckworth believes congress need to expand healthcare access for all Americans - and would start with covering all children. Tammy believes “we need to come up with some sort of basic health care program that is affordable and within the ability of all Americans.”

Peter Roskam has not yet taken a stand on any issue (at least on his website) but his background does not bode well for those concerned about affordable healthcare access:

- Roskam rejected Governor Rod Blagojevich’s plan to provide health coverage to all children in Illinois, AllKids, without offering an alternative for coverage;
- In 1985 Roskam was a Legislative Assistant for Health Care and Education for Congressman Tom DeLay; and
- Roskam has supported limiting court relief for victims of medical malpractice as a ‘cure-all’ for our healthcare access crisis. As I have argued repeatedly, not only are caps on damages for legitimate victims immoral (what kind of price would you put on pain and suffering for 30, 40, 50 years or more in extreme cases) - but they don’t reflect the real problems and politics involved that deny us affordable healthcare access.

Social Security

Tammy Duckworth is against privatizing Social Security and supports the secure, government guaranteed retirement system.

Peter Roskam ducked a Social Security vote against President Bush’s private accounts in May last year - suggesting he may support Bush’s discredited private account scheme that would cost Americans their government guaranteed retirement security - costing Americans money when they depend on it most.

Civil Unions & Gay Marriage

Tammy Duckworth supports civil unions and is against a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

Peter Roskam is against civil unions and for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

Guns

Tammy Duckworth supports background checks and waiting periods for handgun purchases and opposes measures like Peter Roskams’s bill to get rid of gun buying records after 90 days. She is for “common sense” gun control, that would include a ban on assault weapons.

Peter Roskam offered his own bill in the state senate to get rid of gun buyer records after 90 days and has been pretty aggressively pro-gun - his original bill would have prevented suburban localities in Illinois from banning handguns - something viewed as so radical it was stripped away by members of the Illinois House in revising the bill. Roskam also has said that he hasn’t “seen gun control that’s worked or been effective in crime control” - and his record shows he believes in less gun regulation.

Abortion

Tammy Duckworth supports a woman’s right to choose abortion and determine her healthcare needs with her doctor.

Peter Roskam is anti-abortion

Stem Cell Research

Tammy Duckworth supports stem cell research.

Peter Roskam is against stem cell research.

While not every progressive agrees with every issue, there is a reason why former Majority Leader Tom DeLay, Grover Norquist and Vice President Dick Cheney back a candidate in this race - a candidate they call their own. Peter Roskam represents them and their policies. Tammy Duckworth represents Democrats on the issues.

13th Congressional Comparisons

There is a perception that Judy Biggert is a moderate Republican. While it’s certainly true that she is more moderate than Peter Roskam, it is also true that once you get beyond abortion politics (where Judy is pro-choice, but against third-trimester abortions and Joe Shannon views Roe v. Wade as “settled” law he would not change, but is personally pro-life), Judy’s positions often toe the line with the Bush Administration - which is to say they do not address the real issues of most real Americans.

Healthcare

Joe Shannon supports universal healthcare by requiring federal minimum standards and experimentation at the state level supported in part by federal tax dollars (a plan modeled in part after Senator Russ Feingold’s healthcare for all proposal). He sees it both as the humane thing to do for the American people and the right thing to do for American business, that faces increasing costs and competitive pressures from businesses in other countries that have universal healthcare. With a minimum coverage “at least as good as the health insurance of members of Congress” Shannon’s proposal involves serious reform.

Judy has no commitment or policies for providing healthcare to all Americans.

Energy

Joe Shannon believes that developing alternative fuel options to oil and gas is a national security issue, a economic development issue (since the 13th district is home to Argonne National Laboratories and numerous technological and energy firms) and an environmental issue because of the pollution problems caused by traditional fossil fuels like oil.

Judy Biggert’s record shows she supports the Bush Administration’s reliance on oil and gas, is against higher fuel mileage standards for motor vehicles that would reduce our dependence on oil and improve our environment, and has voted against alternative fuel incentives that would make America more energy independent. From OnTheIssues:

- Voted for authorizing construction of new oil refineries. (Oct 2005)
- Voted for the Bush Administration national energy policy (Jun 2004)
- Voted for implementing Bush-Cheney national energy policy (Nov 2003)
- Voted against raising CAFE standards (i.e. improving motor vehicle fuel efficiency); incentives for alternative fuels. (Aug 2001)
- Voted against prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR. (Aug 2001)
- Voted against starting implementation of Kyoto Protocol. (Jun 2000)

Economy

Joe Shannon supports overtime pay for employees who work overtime and is against attempts to take that pay away like HR 1119 - the “Family Time Flexibility Act introduced and co-sponsored by Judy Biggert.

Judy Biggert has advocated HR 1119 which unions and many working people oppose because it would put employee wages and schedules more at the mercy of employers, who are the main beneficiaries of the “time flexibility” offered.

Education

Joe Shannon believes supporting higher education is key to the future of Americans and America - he would restore the cuts to higher education in the current budget passed by congress and signed by President George W. Bush, who advocated the cuts.

Judy Biggert voted for the cuts to higher education, making college less accessible and affordable to her constituents.

Ethics

Joe Shannon believes we need to show strong ethical leadership in congress and be above reproach.

Judy Biggert serves on the ethics committee and while on it

- Biggert voted to weaken the ethics rules in a vote that seemed intended to protect Tom DeLay.

- Biggert later flip-flopped and voted to put the old ethics rules back into place when it became clear that gutting ethics rules was unpopular.

14th Congressional Comparisons

On the issues there was often little substantive difference in policy between John Laesch, who won Tuesday, and Ruben Zamora - the main differences are between them and Congressman Dennis Hastert.

Healthcare

John Laesch believes in health coverage for all Americans and proposes expanding Medicare coverage, as a voluntary alternative, for all Americans.

Dennis Hastert has not supported health coverage for all Americans and does not have any proposals to achieve it.

Energy

John Laesch supports energy conservation, the expansion of alternative energy sources to oil currently available and the greater use of renewable energy.

Dennis Hastert has supported raising gas prices to give tax money to oil companies that Hastert says himself are making record profits. I could say more, but is it really necessary?

Education

John Laesch wants to “[r]eplace ‘No Child Left Behind’ with an education policy that provides resources for all children to receive the best education possible.” He also seeks to “expand higher education opportunities so that every teenager will have the assistance they need in earning a college degree or attend[ing] technical school.”

Dennis Hastert, a former wrestling coach in Yorkville, IL, has embraced “No Child Left Behind” and budgets that underfund public education and college education. Policies that contributed to Yorkville schools having a referendum that, if it didn’t pass, would result in no more extra-curricular activities for public school students.

“On Monday, January 23, the Yorkville District #115 School Board unanimously passed a resolution stating that all district-wide extra curricular activities, including athletics, inter-mural programs, music programs, drama programs, and student clubs, will be eliminated if the March 21 referenda fail.

Additionally, the resolution states that district school buildings will be closed at 6:00 p.m. on school days, and all district school buildings will be locked down on weekends in order to conserve on energy costs. In turn, all agreements with … Yorkville Wrestling Club,… and all other previously arranged programs, which use school building for their meetings and activities after 6:00 p.m., will be discontinued.”

Economy

John Laesch supports a living wage. The current federal minimum wage was increased to $5.15 an hour September 1, 1997 - and no longer has it’s original purchasing power, much less the ability to meet the needs of basic family expenses like food, clothing and shelter.

Dennis Hastert, despite being Speaker of the House during a time of Republican rule in both Congress and the White House, has not raised the minimum wage while in power.

John Laesch supports fair trade so that American workers can compete on a level playing field with foreign workers in the world economy.

Dennis Hastert does not support fair trade.

John Laesch believe in responsible spending and reducing the $7.2 trillion national debt to improve our economy.

Under Dennis Hastert, Speaker of the House since 1999, fiscal responsibility has fallen and the national debt has soared:

- Among the first actions of the 108th Republican Congress (2003-2004) was to depart from their long-held view of the federal debt limits and change the rules to eliminate “the requirement that a separate vote to raise the debt ceiling be taken when a tax or spending bill that requires an increase in the limit on the country’s debt is voted on in the House” (this is Rule 27, the “automatic public debt rule,” in the House Rules). This rule remains in effect for the current 109th Congress (2005 - 2006).

- The federal debt has grown from $5.656 trillion in fiscal year 1999 to $7.933 trillion in fiscal year 2005 - an increase of over 40% - with no plan to reduce the debt and more debt on the way.

- Since Dennis Hastert became Speaker of the House the national debt ceiling increased from $5.95 trillion, a limit that hadn’t been raised since 1997 to $9 trillion - or $28,000 of national debt burden per American. That’s four times the debt limit was increased in four years by the House of Representatives.

These are some key comparisons between the Democratic candidates and the Republican candidates. There are more. Even with the limited selection here there is a Democratic difference. You can make that difference.