What does "done" mean?

I am a software engineer, and last week we had a discussion about what it meant to be “done”.  Some thought it meant when you get your work completed, and it went to the quality assurance group.  My boss thought it was when it got the quality assurance group’s blessing.  I tend to take it a step further and think “done” is when the customer is using it and it meets their needs.  Anyway, it got me to thinking about what Congress thinks “done” is.

Our former Congressman Jason Altmire’s definition of “done” was easy to find.  The one thing he was most proud of was the 29 bills he introduced that were passed by both the House and Senate and signed into law by the President.  For him, “done” meant at the very least that the bill became law.

Erin McClelland is running for the House of Representatives in my district (PA-12).  Her definition of “done” takes it a step further than that.  She talks passionately about solving problems and that passing bills are simply steps along the way to solving the problem.  It seems that for any problem, she has a solution, a plan to implement it and facts to back it up.  For her, “done” is when the problem is solved.

Now let’s get to the House of Representative’s definition of “done”.  ­Speaker­­ John Boehner has often said “The House has done its job.  It’s time for the Senate and the President to do theirs” just before leaving town for one of their many vacations.   

Their definition of “done” is when they pass a bill and throw it over the wall to the Senate.  It is more than just talk, because you can see it in the quality of their work.  When your definition of “done” is simply completing a task with no concern for where it goes from there, then the quality is secondary.  You are just checking off an item and saying you did it.  I see that when a software engineer thinks “done” is when he or she can check off that something was completed.  If often comes right back with a bunch of issues.

The border security bill they passed in August was a good example.  After saying they couldn’t pass anything and that the President should deal with the child immigration problem himself, they passed the bill on August 1^st just before leaving on a month-long vacation.  They had no concern whether it would pass the Senate or be signed by the President.  The President said he would veto it before it was even voted on.  Their one and only goal was to pass something, so they can say they did it.  As far as they were concerned, they were ‘done”, and Speaker Boehner said as much.

The other problem with their definition of “done” is that they are more likely to pass bills to make a statement like voting to repeal the Affordable Care Act at least 50 times, or to sue the President for doing something they wanted to have happen anyway.  One can go on and on about times Congress claimed they were “done” knowing that it will never become law.

If I just threw something over the wall with no concern for whether it can make it through to the next step in the process, I would be fired.  I would never let my son get away with that either.  However, that seems to be how the House works.

My own Congressman, Keith Rothfus, has been remarkably short on solutions compared to his predecessor, Jason Altmire or his possible successor, Erin McClelland.  His definition of “done” seems to be limited to pointing fingers and “holding people accountable”.  He has shown little interest in coming up with solutions and solving problems.  Most of his speeches focus on identifying problems and assigning blame rather than solving them.

Erin McClelland’s definition of “done” means that quality matters. Bills are written with the intent that they can pass the Senate and will be signed by the President, because they are intended to solve a problem and not just make a statement.  It means getting people together with different interests to agree on a solution that can make it to the President’s desk, because you or your party can’t just do it yourselves.

It is very easy fulfilling the House’s definition of “done” or Keith Rothfus’s definition as well.   It is hard work fulfilling Erin McClelland’s definition of “done”, but she has a history of getting things “done” in the healthcare field both in her own business, and using her expertise in fixing medical errors.

Our government needs more people that believe that “done” means that the problem is solved no matter how difficult the solution might be.  Replacing Keith Rothfus with Erin McClelland would be a very good start to changing the definition of "done".

Dueling phone town halls

Call waiting is a nice feature that I rarely have to use.  Tonight Jason Altmire and the Mark Critz campaign held dueling town halls, and it was nice being able to switch between the two calls.

Jason Altmire fielded questions for about 45 minutes.  He said he had about 6000 people on the call.  It was pretty clear that they were not filtering the questions, and he capably answered whatever was thrown at him.  This included questions about a pro-Critz mailing that most of us received in the mail today and his vote for a balanced budget amendment.  One thing that has impressed me is his ability to clearly answer questions, and the patience he shows making sure the constituent understands.

Mark Crtitz was not on his own town hall.  It was primarily a union affair which included AFL-CIO PA President Rick Bloomingdale and Secretary/Treasurer Frank Snyder.  This call lasted about half an hour which was mostly spent talking about how Critz supports working families and Social Security, and asking people to vote for Critz.  They said there were 3000 people on this call, and took a couple questions.  I really wish Mark Critz had been taking part in the town hall.  After all, he is the candidate.

Can Mark Critz win in the General Election?

This question has been bothering me for quite some time.  Mark Critz wants voters in the primary to think of him as the better Democrat, but does that make him the better candidate in November and the better person to represent us in Congress?

Most of his support comes from unions.  I can't help but wondering if that is really because he is not Jason Altmire than anything else (Altmire becomes target for unions over healthcare law vote).  Many union leaders claim that Altmire promised that he would vote for health care reform, while Altmire says he told them he would likely support it but it depends on the final version of the bill.  I guess Altmire wanted to read it to see what was in it before voting on it.  Altmire's version of the union meetings is supported by some union leaders and those unions are supporting him.

One question I have is if Critz wins and the unions have succeeded in getting their revenge on Altmire, will they still be there as enthusiastically for Critz as they are now?  The only real difference between them is this promise that Altmire allegedly broke.  Critz is firm that he would not have supported health care reform either.

First of two of the issues that became large in this campaign are Altmire criticizing Critz voting "present" on a vote for a tea party budget that Altmire went against party leadership to vote "no".  The second is Altmire's vote for a balanced budget amendment.  In a general election, I think both issues could benefit Altmire and hurt Critz.  Voting "yes" or "no" and not playing games like voting "present" is an example of the kind of games many people here hate.  I liked that Altmire didn't play this game and voted "no", and I think a lot of voters in our district would agree.

I think that a balanced budget amendment would be a disaster for this country.  I don't think any rational Republican would really want it either if they were really honest about it, but Altmire or Critz won't be running against a rational Republican.  The concept, however, has widespread support.  Altmire's vote for the balanced budget amendment makes this a non-issue in the general election.  However, the Republican Tea Party challenger and the super pacs will beat Mark Critz like a rented mule over this issue.

Two other challenges for Mark Critz are that he is not as polished a speaker as Jason Altmire and he knows little about our area and we know little about him.  Critz's performance at a televised debate a couple week's ago was poor. The low point was when he stopped answering a question to say "My commercial is on TV.  Hey look at that." and pointed to a TV monitor off camera.  Parts of it were painful to watch.

Jason Altmire has been our representative for three terms.  He is very visible and is on TV quite a bit both locally and nationally.  His accomplishments are well known.  Mark Critz seems to be more comfortable working behind the scenes as he has for so many years under John Murtha.  This makes it a bit more difficult to see his accomplishments.  He also admittedly is just learning about our area having spent most of his life around Johnstown.  Will he represent this entire region or stay in the Johnstown area?  Altmire already has relationships built in our area as does the Tea Party challenger.

On Critz's side is his campaign manager, Mike Mikus.  Mikus may be the best campaign manager in our area having successfully lead both of Critz's previous campaigns, Altmire's second campaign against Mellisa Hart and most recently, Rich Fitzgerald's campaign for County Executive.  He probably knows Allegheny County and its politics was well if not better than anyone.  His knowledge and experience are the real reason this is a close race more than anything else.  If anyone can bring Critz to victory in November, it is Mikus.  I think he is outgrowing running local elections and is ready for a bigger challenge.  If Critz loses, I think any smart statewide candidate should snap him up immediately.

Jason Altmire has governed not as a loyal Democrat, but as a representative of our conservative Republican leaning district.  This positions him well for general elections, but makes him unpopular among liberal Democrats.  The things Altmire is being criticized for in the primary would make him a stronger candidate in the general election.  He can say he stood up to Nancy Pelosi (He didn't vote for her for majority leader.), unions and the liberal Democrats on one side, and stood up to the Tea Party and the Republicans on the other.  This plants him right in the middle even if it pisses off everyone on both sides.

Will Mark Critz portraying himself as a loyal Democrat and getting endorsements from people like President Clinton hurt in the general election?  I could easily see the Clinton endorsement commercials rewritten as a negative ad by the Republicans.  I could see the union endorsements, the voting "present" issue  and his vote against a balanced budget amendment all being used against him.  When I checked to see if he voted for Nancy Pelosi for majority leader I found that she sponsored a fundraiser for him.  That will be used against him as well.

The voters will decide who they want on Tuesday.  The Democrats in our district need to elect the best candidate that can win in November, because I don't even want to consider what it would be like to be represented by a Tea Party candidate who doesn't even live in our district.

Pro-lifers going after Altmire

I received a phone call last night about a rally to support women and girls at Jason Altmire's office this afternoon.  They didn't tell me, of course, that it was a pro-life group that was going to protest his vote against defunding Planned Parenthood

I wonder how many people who understand that Planned Parenthood actually supports women and girls, and thought that the rally was to support his vote were fooled into going.  It could make for a fun event.

Planned Parenthood does a lot of good for their low income clients.  It provides health care services that they could not otherwise afford such as helping women have safe and healthy pregnancies.  You don't believe me?  Take the words of none other than Dick Scaife, the owner of the right wing newspaper the Tribune Review:  Don't defund Planned Parenthood. His passionate appeal is a lot better than anything I can say.

If you want to get rid of Planned Parenthood, remove the reason for their existence by supporting health care reform and making sure it is fully implemented.  Most people don't put two and two together, but the reason we need places like Planned Parenthood is because most of their clients can't afford health care on their own.

I got another phone call last week, and supported Planned Parenthood with a donation.

Jason Altmire is Correct

Congressman Altmire has taken a lot of heat lately from the left for not backing Nancy Pelosi for House Minority Leader.  This posting from Crooks and Liars is an example.  The interview with Chris Matthews is worth seeing.

Much of  the criticism is coming from people who know nothing about our district.  Altmire is a lone Democrat and voice of reason in an area represented mostly by right wingers:

• My Republican State Representative is Mike Turzai who is Tommey-like in his beliefs.
• My Republican State Senator, Jane Orie, is under indictment and still easily won re-election.  Unlike Christine O'Donnell, she looks like and may actually be a witch.  She at least believes in the occult, and may have cast a spell on her voters for all we know.
• My Republican McCandless town councilman told me that it is too bad that we can't open North Park up for commercial development when I mentioned to him that I was surprised at how big McCandless Crossings is.  This was after Jason Altmire fought for the much needed renovations to North Park Lake after years of neglect.
• Just north of us is Cranberry, the home of State Representative Daryl Metcalfe, who makes Sharon Angle sound rational.
• Altmire's district went overwhelmingly for John McCain and probably supported Toomey over Sestak as well.
• Altmire's far right-wing opponent, Keith Rothfus, ran commercials that criticized Altmire simply for voting for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House.  

The House and Senate Democrats need new leadership and a fresh start.  This is not to take away from their accomplishments which I posted about before.  I look at it similar to how a coaching change can turn around a team by bringing in a new perspective.  The Penguins won the Stanley Cup after bringing in Dan Bylsma.  New Democratic leadership in the House and Senate could bring about a similar change.

We need fresh new leaders in these positions that can inspire not only the Democratic Party, but the American people.  I think the House and Senate Democrats need to look beyond the normal seniority-based leadership structure to people that can inspire us that we may not have even heard of yet.

Post-Gazette Endorses Jason Altmire

4th U.S. House: Altmire is the better choice for Congress

It is a pretty normal endorsement, but a few things stood out to me:

• "He favors repeal of the federal health insurance law, calling it unconstitutional and unprecedented in expanding government power."  Jason Altmire didn't vote for the law as well, but is taking the common sense approach that we need to fix what is wrong with it rather than just repeal it and replace it with nothing.  If Rothfus had said something similar rather than just parroting the Republican talking point, I might have taken him seriously.  Rothfus is also forgetting to mention that the health care law was based more on Republican ideas and proposals than "Government Run Healthcare" that progressives would have preferred.  As with many, many Republican ideas like Cap and Trade, if Obama supports it, it is suddenly socialist and evil.

• "He called the $787 billion stimulus "an abject failure" and said Congress should have cut taxes to stimulate growth." A large portion of the stimulus was a tax cut that we all enjoyed. Keith Rothfus didn't know this?  The problem with the tax cut was that we got it through reduced withholding taxes rather than wasting our tax dollars like Bush did by sending out physical checks, so no one noticed.  Most economics also agree that the stimulus also prevented a depression.

• "Mr. Rothfus is not convinced that human activity is causing climate change." So he is a climate change denier as well. He is probably also in support of global warming as well, because it is opening up shipping lanes through the Arctic Circle.

I met Mr. Rothfus and he is a nice enough person.  The problem is that he is nice, and will simply be John Boehner's lap dog (I picture him as a little white terrier.).  He will be a reliable 100% yes vote for the Republican agenda with little ability to make a difference.  His campaign is a boilerplate Republican campaign that Melissa Hart used twice and lost.  He brings nothing new to the table, and simply echos the Republican talking points.  Has he said anything original?

If you want someone who will vote 100% of the time for the Republican agenda even if his district is against the Republican policies that will increase the deficit by trillions of dollars go ahead and vote for Keith Rothfus.

Who the heck are Americans for Job Security?

It seemed that all of a sudden we are seeing these anti-Altmire ads from American's for Job Security like this one:



I was curious who the heck they were, so I did a little digging and found this New York Times article about them: Under a Tax-Exempt Cloak, Political Dollars Flow. The weirdest thing about the article is that it starts out talking about them pouring $1.6 million dollars into a referendum to restrict the development of a mine in Alaska.

Rather than some kind of grassroots organization they are simply another well financed group pretending to be out for out best interests. The reality is that the only jobs they want to secure are their own and the people that are really paying for it. They share offices with Crossroads Media, a Republican consulting firm. In Alaska, they were fronting a wealthy Alaskan who was really paying for the advertising.

The people of our district are pretty smart, and have gotten to know Congressman Altmire and his long list of accomplishments for our district over these last two terms. We have seen boilerplate commercials like this about him for just as long. Those commercials haven't worked here before and they won't work now.

Primary Thoughts

I worked at my local poll after work Tuesday. There were two people that I noticed voters were genuinely excited about. On the Republican side was Keith Rothfus who easily dispatched Mary Beth Buchanan. I was really hoping Buchanan would win, because it would be fun watching her blow her top on a regular basis. Too bad we will miss out on that.

"Experts" are already dismissing him and practically giving Altmire his seat back. The rationale is that he isn't the fundraiser Buchanan was. I think it will be a hard fought campaign with Rothfus running a low budget campaign working mostly on the ground and Altmire mostly on the air, because that is where their strengths currently lie. No one should forget that Altmire won a similar low budget ground campaign 4 years ago against a well financed Melissa Hart.

The person on the Democratic side that people seemed to be excited about was Dan DeMarco. Maybe they were just excited about another write-in opportunity on the voting machines. There were 4578 write-in votes for the Democratic nomination to the State Senate. We won't know the results for some time, but I have a hard time believing that a majority of those write-ins voted for Jane Orie.

DeMarco will also have to run a strong ground game, but will have the benefit of Jane Orie's indictment and her overall disposition which lately has not been very positive. Just looking at their campaign fliers, he looked warm and friendly, and she looked like she was going to bite my head off. I think DeMarco will be well served to maintain the positive vibes against Orie's negative vibes.

Later, I'll post on the Governor's race where John Corbett seems to be losing it (I hope I don't get subpoenaed for saying this.), and the Senate race where I think the more you find out about the real Pat Toomey the less you will like him.

The last very local race is for State House which will pit career politician Mike Turzai against Dr. Sharon Brown. She got 4166 votes in the Democratic primary which is significantly higher than any other nominee for Turzai's seat in the last 10 years. If you add in the votes Turzai received, she got 37% of the overall vote. That is a pretty good starting point considering that in the general election, the closest a Democrat got was 28%.

She will also need a strong ground game as well and might be well served to work with Dan DeMarco. The two of them working together against the pair of Mike Turzai and Jane Orie might be a good tactic.

They could tie Turzai in with Orie's troubles and also benefit from the anti-incumbency mood. No one that we will vote for in the fall has been in office longer than Turzai and Orie. Both are career politicians just like the kind that people hate. The only other incumbent that we will vote for is Jason Altmire, and he has only held an office of any kind for 4 years. That is hardly a career.

Jason Altmire says No

Jason Altmire Press Release

Jason Altmire has been pretty consistent that the changes need to be bigger than just the financing as he says in his third paragraph:

""Simply moving money around within the existing system, rather than enacting real delivery system reform, might change who pays the bill, but it does not improve the quality of care or reduce costs for families, small businesses, or the federal government. It creates a system of winners and losers, rather than reforming the system in a way that lets everyone win."

I think that he didn't make a strong enough push to get his concerns into the bill until late in the game.  Maybe he was working behind the scenes, but it is not apparent to most of us.  The changes go well beyond what most people would have been comfortable with anyway.  This isn't just the public option, but changing the entire fee for service process that this health care bill will not change.

Congressman Dennis Kucinich had a similar decision to make that the bill didn't go far enough.  Unlike Congressman Altmire, he reasoned that something is better than nothing.  On the other hand, people weren't standing outside Kucinich's office with pitchforks either.

Politically, it will do him more harm than good unless he can do some serious damage control with his supporters.  He is going to lose many more supporters than he will gain.  How many of the tea partiers protesting outside his office would vote for him under any circumstances?  Probably not many.

His opponent will likely be Mary Beth Buchanan who seems to me to be eerily similar to Melissa Hart.  It certainly helps that the Republicans seem determined to put up candidates that turn off most of the voters.

Be careful of what you wish for...

A lot of progressives are up in arms over conservative and moderate Democrats that not on board for health care.  My own Congressman, Jason Altmire, voted against it and has taken a lot of heat for it and his vote on cap and trade.

I can respect his reasons (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09324/1014854-109.stm), however, I do think it was dishonorable to vote for the Stupak amendment and then against the health care.  He should have either voted for both or against both.

There has been talk about running progressive candidates against Altmire and other conservative Democrats.  The problem is the makeup of my district, and other districts like it.  John McCain won this district by a large margin.  Even if a progressive candidate beats Altmire in the primary, he or she will get crushed in the general election.  Do we really want the second coming of Melissa Hart just to prove a point?

As an example, just take a look at New York's 23rd district.  The Republican nominee was forced out and replaced by a right-wing nut job.  The Democrat won handily which should be a lesson for both Democrats and Republicans.

I would be very worried about the same thing happening in my district.  You replace a conservative with what the people here would consider to be a "left-wing nut job" and he or she will get crushed.

Like it or not, Jason Altmire won by being a conservative and he has not deviated from that during his two terms in office.

Progressives may not like it, but just be careful of what you wish for.

Country First

"Country First" was John McCain's catch phrase, but his actions didn't match it. Barack Obama's message really was "Country First", and it needs to be how he runs his presidency. President-elect Obama and the rest of the Democratic Party need to take "County First" to heart when they govern if they want to be successful.

I hope the Democrats learn the lessons from 6-8 years ago when the Republicans held the Presidency and both houses of Congress like the Democrats are about to. The Republicans were drunk with power. Do you remember "You are either with me or with the terrorists" when anyone questioned just about anything George Bush did? How about Bush's "I have political capital and I intend to spend it" comment after his re-election? They were "Party First," and didn't care what anyone thought about it.

My own Congressman, Jason Altmire, is a great example of what a "Country First" and "Western Pennsylvania First" term in office can get you politically. It got him a comfortable win against Melissa Hart. She had nothing real to attack him on while she still had her "Party First" record from her time in office hanging around her neck. I hope he continues to represent our views and continue his "Country First" governance in his second and subsequent terms in office.

Governing "Country First" is kind of like something I learned from my father. When you focus on the customers and the people that work for you, your career can take care of itself. It is much easier having your customers and employees push you up the corporate ladder rather than you having to climb it yourself. I have found this to be true throughout my professional career.

If the Democrats take Barack Obama's "Country First" message to heart and focus on their customers, the American people, the country, the world and the Democratic Party will go a long way.