Friday, January 12, 2007

Walberg's Committee Assignments

The Daily Telegram has an article about Tim Walberg's committee assignments.
7th District Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Tipton, will serve on the House Agriculture Committee and the Education and Labor Committee.
It is very interesting that he would serve on Education and Labor after the news from my earlier post. This from Congressman Walberg,
“That’s how I lobbied the leadership because that is what my constituents wanted,” the freshman congressman said. “These are three key issues for my district.”
So key that he does not even know how many auto workers there are in the district. I have heard that when he served in the State House Walberg would not even talk to labor.

I have been very impressed by Congressman George Miller, Dem. California, who Chairs the Education and Labor Committee. His first act was to put Labor back in the name of the Committee. When Republicans took control in 94 they took Labor out and called it the Education and the Workforce Committee. Congressman Miller understands how important Labor is in this country. I'm sure Miller will keep Tim Walberg on a very short leash.

Labels: , ,

IMPORTANCE of his district huh? This man would not understand his district if it came up and slapped him up one side and down the other. He his clearly there for a paycheck and that is all there is to it.

Walberg has a very clear understanding of minority of his district. He relates to and ably represents the ultra religious, who push for a theocracy in our country. He has very little knowledge of the other 80+ percent of us and he has done nothing since winning the election to learn about us.

He has surrounded himself with people who think just like he does. He is not motivated by money, but power and control. His brand of "conservativism" is all about "values." Not our values, or my values, but of ramming his "values" down my throat.
I've never figured out his "values" when he lied about and misrepresented Schwarz throughout the campaign. Those don't seem like any conservative or Republican values to me. He was elected by a small population of religious bigots. He is a liar and scoundrel and does not represent me or most of the 7th District.
What is more scary is that Walberg was named to the GOP House Policy Committee.

This is the "steering committee" for GOP legislative policy in the House.
I have a serious question! I've been researching this district and I am trying to find out why Walberg won the district.

Is it that extreme and does he really represent the mindset of this area?

Did he win due to the input of lies and paraphernalia from the Club for Growth pamphlets?

Did he win because his name was already known from his state legislature experience?

Can a Democrat truly win this area?

And what would a Democrat have to do to win in this area?

Will Sharon Renier run again?
In answer to the above poster. Walberg won because so few people voted in the August primary.

District-wide about 17 percent of the GOP voters went to the polls, Walberg won by a narrow margin, meaning that less than 8 percent of the registered GOP voters voted for him. (He calls that a Conservative mandate).

Most everyone who didn't vote in August were ashamed they didn't vote. Conventional wisdom said Schwarz would walk away with it, which he should have with an outstanding record of accompolishment as a freshman.

Walberg's and CfG's stream of lies drove voters AWAY from the polls. Apathy elected him.

Reiner ran a very poor campaign, the Dems abandoned her and she really had no chance of winning, the "real" election took place in August, while most of the electorate was on vacation.

Walberg once called Schwarz's 04 election a "fluke," but the reality is, August 06 was even more of a fluke which shouldn't have happened. Walberg is utterly unqualified to represent us. Fortunately, he in the minority and powerless.
What did Sharon Renier's campaign do wrong? Why do you say it was poorly run?

What would you do to fight Walberg when he and his CFG clearly use dirty tricks and Walberg gets lots of dirty money?

~~BTW...Just discovered this site. Thanks for doing it and updating it. I will bookmark it.
Renier is an all around poor candidate will little to none electoral experience. I knew Dems who would not vote for her. She had no money, and did fairly well despite of the fact. I attribute her showing due to the national Democratic tide, rather than anything she did. She also may have been helped by some disguised puff pieces run by the Club.

A moderate Democrat in the mold of Kim Tunnicliff or Mark Schauer could win this district if he is financed well and gets union backing.
Basically, Sharon didn't raise any money and she got little to no support from the Dems. She had some good issues and ideas, but without money, it's very hard to get your message out especially when CfG alone provided more than 80 percent of Walberg's funding

If you look at the dollars spent per vote between the two candates, you will see that he (CfG) outspent her more than 15-1 if not greater.

He actually raised very little from within the district, almost all of his cash came from plutocrats and ideologues from across the nation raised through CfG. They own him and bought him the seat. It's politics at it's very worst.
Schauer looks moderate because Walberg has gone so far to the right wing fringe.

Don't kid yourself, he's a liberal. But, he's not ethically challenged like Walberg and has the genuine best interest of his constituents regardless of political labels. I'm a moderate, but I'd probably vote for him.
Walberg does not deserve to continue to sit in congress. He is ripe for recall and his every vote is an indication that he is not worthy of the task. I will be away until March but then I intend to author a recall effort to bring him back to the electorate of this district to face the votes by himself without outside money. Many republicans are as disgusted with him as we liberals.

Don't fault Sharon Renier. She is her own person and ran her campaigns mainly by herself. I urged her to find a politically minded individual to lead her campaign and guide her through her candidacy. She was unable to afford such a luxury.

One of her insurmountable problems was her lack of acceptance by the democratic party of Jackson County, the congressional district and the state minions who disbursed the money. Had Schauer shared some of his Franklins with her, and endorsed her in the manner that he did Joe Schwarz, she would have made up the diffeence.
Schauer endorsed Scharz? Looks like Schwarz let him down too then!

Will Schauer run or can he stay in the Michigan Senate still?

He looks pretty good.

Regardless, other than money, what can a Democrat do to take this area?
The decision is simple: Schauer can have two more cozy years in the term-limited Senate, or he can challenge a vulnerable Freshman who Schauer can easily label as a do-nothing, idealogue and a hack.

Sharon was not, nor I think will ever be ready for prime time.
Maybe that's why Schauer didn't share his franklins with her.

I've heard other from people that they asked him to and that he refused.

Maybe that's why he wanted her to lose--to keep the field open for himself in 08.

When would he have to announce? When would he or anyone be allowed to start fundraising? And what would the MDP do to assist? (Since the MDP was clearly useless to Sharon Renier.)
Schauer is the odds on Dem favorite to run in 08. His Senate district is Calhoun and Jackson Counties and he has been pressing the flesh in both places, he already has a machine in place. He even graduated from Albion College, so he is a true resident of the District.

That said, he would have a difficult time with Schwarz if Joe chose to run again; they worked together in the Michigan Legislature, Joe was the Senator, Schauer was the Rep. and both were from Battle Creek, so they had a common stake in most issues and genuinely respect each other. They worked together on many projects and issues. If Schwarz doesn't jump in, expect Schauer to run with it and take the seat in 08. If Joe runs again, Schauer might have second thoughts and would stay in the Senate until his term is up and a new district is carved up in 2010.

Whatever happens, Walberg will be political road-kill in 08 from either party.
Renier couldn't raise any money, which is probably why nobody else (MDP or DCCC, or Schauer for that matter) stepped in to help her.. she never showed she was viable in the first place. It was basically a repeat of her '04 run, except this time the Wave and the awfulness of Walberg helped get her a lot closer than anybody thought she ever would.

Unless she does things absolutely differently the third time around, I can't see her getting any closer this time. Did she learn anything from the previous two attempts?
Schauer told the press and his fellow senators that he will finish up his four year term in the senate. Is there any fallout if he runs in two years?
"If you look at the dollars spent per vote between the two candates, you will see that he (CfG) outspent her more than 15-1 if not greater.

He actually raised very little from within the district, almost all of his cash came from plutocrats and ideologues from across the nation raised through CfG. They own him and bought him the seat. It's politics at it's very worst."

What I thought was funny was that he was accusing Swartz of being a liberal....far from it.
In a way, I'm glad he won THIS time, because his voting record so far is extreme. His seat should be an easy dem pickup next election.
Schauer's seat isn't a Democratic lock if he vacates in '08. It's a swing district. Nofs would be poised to run if Schauer goes for US HOUSE.
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home


August 2006   September 2006   October 2006   November 2006   December 2006   January 2007   February 2007   March 2007   April 2007   May 2007   June 2007   July 2007   August 2007   September 2007   October 2007   November 2007   December 2007   January 2008   February 2008   March 2008   April 2008   May 2008   June 2008   July 2008   August 2008   September 2008   October 2008   November 2008