DOCSLIB.ORG

Brief for Appellant Senator John Mccain, Representatives

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Brief for Appellant Senator John Mccain, Representatives ¢¡¤£¦¥¤§¦¨ ©¤ ¥ 6XSUHPH&RXUWRIWKH8QLWHG6WDWHV SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN, REPRESENTATIVE TAMMY BALDWIN, REPRESENTATIVE CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, AND REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN MEEHAN, Appellants, v. WISCONSIN RIGHT TO LIFE, INC., Appellee. $# % &' '&% ' % ( ( # "! ! ! ! ! ! ! &% ' % ( )( *# % ! ! !¢ ,+ -./ 01$123.4,5506 6¤4789 ROGER M. WITTEN SETH P. WAXMAN SHANE T. STANSBURY Counsel of Record WILMER CUTLER PICKERING RANDOLPH D. MOSS HALE AND DORR LLP DANIELLE SPINELLI 399 Park Avenue BRENT BICKLEY New York, NY 10022 KEVIN WHELAN (212) 230-8800 WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP PRATIK A. SHAH 1875 Pennsylvania Ave., NW WILMER CUTLER PICKERING Washington, D.C. 20006 HALE AND DORR LLP (202) 663-6000 60 State Street Boston, MA 02109 (617) 526-6000 Additional Counsel Listed On Inside Cover DONALD J. SIMON FRED WERTHEIMER SONOSKY, CHAMBERS, DEMOCRACY 21 SACHSE, ENDRESON & 1875 I Street, NW PERRY, LLC Suite 500 1425 K Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20006 Suite 600 (202) 429-2008 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 682-0240 SCOTT L. NELSON ALAN B. MORRISON PUBLIC CITIZEN LITIGATION Crown Quadrangle GROUP 559 Nathan Abbott Way 1600 20th Street, NW Stanford, CA 94305-8610 Washington, D.C. 20009 (650) 725-9648 (202) 588-1000 TREVOR POTTER BRADLEY S. PHILLIPS J. GERALD HEBERT GRANT A. DAVIS-DENNY PAUL S. RYAN MUNGER, TOLLES & CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER OLSON LLP 1640 Rhode Island Ave., NW 355 South Grand Avenue Suite 650 35th Floor Washington, D.C. 20036 Los Angeles, CA 90071 (202) 736-2200 (213) 683-9100 CHARLES G. CURTIS, JR. DAVID ANSTAETT HELLER EHRMAN LLP One East Main Street Suite 201 Madison, WI 53703 (608) 663-7460 @A"B*C<=¤<A>*<D :;<=¦>*? Whether Section 203 of the Bipartisan Campaign Re- form Act, 2 U.S.C. § 441b, which prohibits a corporation or labor union from using general treasury funds to finance “electioneering communications,” is constitutional as applied to prevent appellee from using general treasury funds to fi- nance three advertisements it sought to broadcast before the 2004 election. (i) ii BEC>*? <=>*@">*F<B*C@,G<<D? A,H In the proceeding before the three-judge district court, Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. was the plaintiff and the Fed- eral Election Commission was the original defendant. Fol- lowing this Court’s remand to the district court in Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. v. FEC, 546 U.S. 410 (2006), Senator John McCain, Representative Tammy Baldwin, Representative Christopher Shays, and Representative Martin Meehan in- tervened as defendants. 8*4,-6 0I2,1J2K780789 Page QUESTION PRESENTED ....................................................... i PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING....................................... ii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES.................................................... v OPINIONS BELOW .................................................................. 1 JURISDICTION ......................................................................... 1 STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED........................... 2 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................... 2 STATEMENT.............................................................................. 4 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ............................................... 14 ARGUMENT............................................................................. 17 I. CONGRESS HAS A COMPELLING INTEREST IN BARRING THE USE OF GENERAL CORPORATE TREASURIES TO FUND ADVERTISING THAT IS LIKELY TO INFLUENCE FEDERAL ELECTIONS, EVEN IF THE ADVERTISING ALSO ADDRESSES LEGISLATIVE ISSUES ...................... 17 A. This Court Has Long Recognized Con- gress’s Compelling Interest In Tempering The Corrosive Effect Of Aggregated Cor- porate Wealth On Federal Elections ...................... 17 B. Congress’s Compelling Interest Applies Equally To Express Advocacy And To “Is- sue Advocacy” That Is Its Functional Equivalent................................................................... 19 II. THIS COURT’S PRECEDENT DEMONSTRATES THAT SECTION 203 MAY CONSTITUTIONALLY BE APPLIED TO WRTL’S ADVERTISEMENTS ............... 21 A. The Undisputed Facts Demonstrate That WRTL’s Advertisements Functioned As Election Advocacy ..................................................... 21 (iii) iv B. WRTL Had Ample Alternative Means To Disseminate Its Message .......................................... 29 III. THE DISTRICT COURT WAS WRONG TO REFUSE TO CONSIDER THE CONTEXT OF THE ADVERTISEMENTS............................................................. 31 A. The District Court’s Approach Contra- venes This Court’s Holding In McConnell............. 32 B. A Proper Contextual Inquiry Is Adminis- trable............................................................................ 37 CONCLUSION.......................................................................... 43 v 8*4,-6 0I2,1L4M,8N,2K./ 8/ 09 G*E=¤<= Page(s) Apex Hosiery Co. v. Leader, 310 U.S. 469 (1940).................. 41 Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, 494 U.S. 652 (1990)............................................................. 17 Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969) ............................. 35 Brown v. Hartlage, 456 U.S. 45 (1982)......................... 21, 35-36 Brown v. Socialist Workers ’74 Campaign Commit- tee, 459 U.S. 87 (1982) .................................................. 38, 39 Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976)..................... 5, 6, 19, 38, 39 Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942)............ 35 FEC v. Beaumont, 539 U.S. 146 (2003) .............. 4, 6, 17, 18, 30 FEC v. Massachusetts Citizens for Life, Inc., 479 U.S. 238 (1986)....................................... 6, 17, 18, 30, 40 FEC v. National Right to Work Committee, 459 U.S. 197 (1982)......................................... 4, 5, 17, 18, 39 Heffron v. International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc., 452 U.S. 640 (1981)........................ 35 McConnell v. FEC, 251 F. Supp. 2d 176 (D.D.C. 2003)............................................................................... 33, 37 McConnell v. FEC, 540 U.S. 93 (2003)...........................passim Towne v. Eisner, 245 U.S. 418 (1918)...................................... 35 United States v. Automobile Workers, 352 U.S. 567 (1957)..................................................... 4, 5, 17 United States v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 410 U.S. 526 (1973)............................................................. 41 Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705 (1969)........................... 36 @A,= =¦>E>*;>*<=,EAD"C<H;O¦E>*? 2 U.S.C. § 431 (1974).................................................................... 5 2 U.S.C. § 434.......................................................................... 8, 29 2 U.S.C. § 437h note..................................................................... 1 2 U.S.C. § 441b ............................................................... 2, 6, 7, 29 vi 2 U.S.C. § 608 (1974).................................................................... 5 28 U.S.C. § 1253............................................................................ 1 Act of Jan. 26, 1907, ch. 420, 34 Stat. 864-865 .......................... 4 Federal Corrupt Practices Act of 1925, §§ 308, 313, 43 Stat. 1072, 1074................................................................ 4 Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, Pub. L. No. 80-101, § 304, 61 Stat. 159 ............................................ 5 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-155, 116 Stat. 81 ...........................................passim 11 C.F.R. § 114.10 ........................................................................ 6 O<H? = O¤E>*? P<Q3E>*<C? EO*= S. Rep. No. 105-167 (1998) .......................................................... 7 Judicial Nominations, Filibusters, and the Consti- tution: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights of the Senate Committee on the Judici- ary, 108th Cong., 1st Sess. (2003) .............................. 10, 23 @>*F<CE;>*F@C? > ? <= Days in Session Calendars, U.S. Senate, http:// thomas.loc.gov/home/ds/s1082.html ................................ 28 Hasen, Back on the Campaign Trail?, Legal Times Online (Feb. 12, 2007)........................................................ 32 LaFave, Substantive Criminal Law (2d ed. 2003)................ 41 Root, Addresses on Government and Citizenship (1916)...................................................................................... 4 6XSUHPH&RXUWRIWKH8QLWHG6WDWHV No. 06-970 SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN, REPRESENTATIVE TAMMY BALDWIN, REPRESENTATIVE CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, AND REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN MEEHAN, Appellants, v. WISCONSIN RIGHT TO LIFE, INC. Appellee. @B*? A? @A,=3R<O@S The opinion of the three-judge district court, Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. v. FEC, No. 04-1260, 2006 WL 3746669 (D.D.C. Dec. 21, 2006), is unreported and reprinted at JS App. 1a-39a.1 Prior opinions of the district court are also un- reported and reprinted at JS App. 47a-48a and 49a-63a. T ;C? =¦D? G>*? @A The three-judge district court entered its opinion and order on December 21, 2006. On December 28, 2006, the court issued an order stating that the December 21 order was “a final appealable order as to those issues decided in the opinion accompanying that order,” and that there was “no just reason to delay an appeal.” JS App. 40a. Appellants filed a notice of appeal on December 29, 2006. Id. at 42a-43a. This Court has jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to Sec- tion 403(a)(3) of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-155, 116 Stat. 113-114,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Meredith Mcgehee Declaration 2005 Milwaukee 1027 1545
    Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, DC 20554 In the Matter of Applications for Renewal of Station License of WTMJ-TV ) Milwaukee, WI ) BRCT20050729CYF WITI-TV ) Milwaukee, WI ) BRCT20050729DRL WISN-TV ) Milwaukee, WI ) BRCT20050801CEF WVTV ) Milwaukee, WI ) BRCT20050801BDQ WCGV-TV ) Milwaukee, WI ) BRCT20050801BBZ WVCY-TV ) Milwaukee, WI ) BRCT20050801AGS WMLW-CA ) Milwaukee, WI ) BRTTA20050801ADM WJJA-TV ) Racine, WI ) BRCT20050725ABE WWRS-TV ) Mayville, WI ) BRCT20050729DNH WPXE-TV ) Kenosha, WI ) BRCT20050729AIH WDJT-TV ) Milwaukee, WI ) BRCT20050801ADL PETITION TO DENY RENEWAL Pursuant to Section 309(d)(1) of the Communications Act, the Milwaukee Public Interest Media Coalition (MPIMC)1(CMA) respectfully submits this petition to deny renewal of the above captioned applications. As is demonstrated below, grant of this applications isp rima facie inconsistent with the public interest standard set forth in Section 309(a) of the Communications Act. Accordingly, these applications should be designated for hearing. INTRODUCTION This petition challenges the renewal of all the commercial television stations in the Milwaukee market. The basis of this challenge is that, singly and together, each of these stations has failed to meet the needs of their community of license and, therefore, that renewal of their licenses would not serve the public interest. Specifically, as documented below, these stations failed to present adequate programming relating to state and local elections during the 2004 election campaign. In the four weeks prior to the election, less than 1% of newscast time was devoted to state level elections, about 2% to ballot issues and about 1% to other local elections. The current policies relating to license renewals were adopted in 1984.
    [Show full text]
  • United State District Court for the District of Columbia
    UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) WISCONSIN RIGHT TO LIFE, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) Civil No. 04-1260 (DBS, RWR, RJL) ) ) v. ) THREE-JUDGE COURT ) ) ) FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________) MEMORANDUM OF AMICI SENATOR JOHN McCAIN, REPRESENTATIVE CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN MEEHAN, DEMOCRACY 21, THE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER, AND THE CENTER FOR RESPONSIVE POLITICS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Trevor Potter (Bar No. 413778) Donald J. Simon (Bar No. 256388) J. Gerald Hebert (Bar No. 447676) SONOSKY, CHAMBERS, SACHSE Paul S. Ryan ENDRESON & PERRY, LLP CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER 1425 K STREET, N.W. 1640 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W. Suite 600 Suite 650 Washington, D.C. 20005 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 682-0240 (202) 736-2200 Counsel for Democracy 21 Counsel for the Campaign Legal Center and individual amici Lawrence Noble Fred Wertheimer (Bar No. 154211) CENTER FOR RESPONSIVE Alexandria T.V. Edsall (Bar No. 453518) POLITICS DEMOCRACY 21 1101 14th Street, N.W. 1825 I Street, N.W. Suite 1030 Suite 400 Washington, D.C. 20005 Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 857-0044 (202) 429-2008 Counsel for Center for Responsive Politics Counsel for Democracy 21 and individual amici TABLE OF CONTENTS Page(s) Local Civil Rule 7.1 Certificate………………………………………………………….… iv Table of Authorities………………………………………………………………………v-vii I. Interests of the Amici…………………………………………………………….…. 3 II. Factual Background………………………………………………………………… 4 III. Summary of Argument……………………………………………………………...12 IV. Argument ……………………….…………………………………………………. 13 A. Plaintiff Cannot Demonstrate a Substantial Likelihood of Success On the Merits ……………………………………………………………… 13 1. The Supreme Court in McConnell upheld the constitutionality of BCRA’s “bright line” test for regulating all “electioneering communications.” …………………………………………….……13 a.
    [Show full text]
  • Democratic Party of Wisconsin on August 7,2003
    ‘I c ai. DEMOCRATICPARTY OF WISCONSIN I 222 W. Washington he., Suite 150, Madison, WI 53703 www.wisdems.org Phone: (608) 255-5172 Fax: (608) 255-8919 April 19,2004 ry 0 0c b W 30 Lawrence Norton rv General Counsel, Federal Election Commission CT 999 E Street I b Washington, D.C. 20463 ,, Dear Mr. Norton, I am writing to request an investigation into the campaign activities of Wisconsin State Senator Robert Welch, an announced candidate for the United States Senate. Sen. Welch has repeatedly spent hdsfiom his nonfederal campmgn account for the purpose of benefiting his federal campaign, in violation of federal law. These new violations are in addition to the violation that was the subject of a previous complaint filed by the Democratic Party of Wisconsin on August 7,2003. In that instance, Sen. Welch also improperly used nonfederal campaign funds to benefit his federal campaign, purchasing radio advertisements outside his state Senate district shortly before he filed his FEC Statement of Candidacy for the United States Senate. See FEC Matter Under Review 5387. Sen. Welch’s actions are a clear violation of the Federal Election Campaip. Act (“FECA or “the Act”), as amended by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, specifically the provisions of the Act that govern the use of non-federal or “soft)’money in federal campaigns. The following provisions of FECA are at issue in this complaint: 2 U.S.C. 0 441i(e)(l) states that a candidate for Federal office “shall not- (A). .. spend funds in connection with an election for Federal office .
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Orientalism and Islamophobia: 9/11, Anti-Arab Racism, and the Mythos of National Pride
    Beyond Orientalism and Islamophobia: 9/11, Anti-Arab Racism, and the Mythos of National Pride Steven George Salaita CR: The New Centennial Review, Volume 6, Number 2, Fall 2006, pp. 245-266 (Article) Published by Michigan State University Press DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/ncr.2007.0011 For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/209750 Access provided by University Of New Mexico (30 Apr 2017 19:05 GMT) Beyond Orientalism and Islamophobia 9/11, Anti-Arab Racism, and the Mythos of National Pride S TEVEN S ALAITA Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg Since 9/11, Arab Americans have evolved from what Nadine Naber once described as an invisible group in the United States into a highly visible community that either directly or indirectly affects the United States’ so-called culture wars, foreign policy, presidential elections, and legislative tradition. Although diverse religiously, culturally, geographically, economi- cally, and politically, Arab Americans generally have been homogenized in various American discourses as an unstable Southern/Third World (i.e., for- eign) presence. In this article, I will summarize the evolution of the Arab image in American media since Ronald Stockton’s seminal 1994 analysis, with emphasis on the role of 9/11, and advance the usage of the term anti- Arab racism as a more accurate replacement for the traditional descriptors Orientalism and Islamophobia in relation to the negative portrayal of Arabs in the United States. Although much needs to be said about the complexities inherent in constructing images (sometimes positive but usually negative) of the Arab, I will remain limited here to a discussion of how media images inform definitional imperatives and how, in turn, those definitional imper- atives inform the dissemination of media images.
    [Show full text]
  • Elections 10
    Elections 10 Elections in Wisconsin: September 2008 through June 2009 elections, including U.S. Congress, presidential preference primary, presidential, legislative, and judicial statistics Flowing Barchan Sand Dunes on Mars (HiRSI, MRO, LPL (University of Arizona), NASA) 884 WISCONSIN BLUE BOOK 2009 – 2010 ELECTIONS IN WISCONSIN I. The Wisconsin Electorate History of the Suffrage. When Wisconsin became a state in 1848, suffrage (the right to vote) was restricted to white or Indian males who were citizens of the United States or white male im- migrants in the process of being naturalized. To be eligible to vote, these men had to be at least 21 years of age and Wisconsin residents for at least one year preceding the election. Wisconsin extended suffrage to male “colored persons” in a constitutional referendum held in November 1849. In 1908, the Wisconsin Constitution was amended to require that voters had to be citizens of the United States. Women’s suffrage came with the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1920. (Wisconsin was one of the first states in the nation to ratify this amendment, on June 10, 1919.) The most recent major suffrage change was to lower the voting age from 21 to 18 years of age. This was accomplished by the 26th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which was ratified by the states in July 1971. Size of the Electorate. Based on information from the Department of Administration, it is estimated that in November 2008 there were about 4,331,000 potential voters 18 years of age and older. An estimated 69% of eligible voters cast 2,983,417 ballots in the 2008 presidential election.
    [Show full text]
  • Wisconsin — United States Senate
    2004 GENERAL ELECTION -- Vote November 2 Wisconsin — United States Senate Republican—Challenger Democrat — Incumbent Tim Michels Russ Feingold Age: 42 (8/17/1962) Age: 51 (3/2/1953) Political experience: None Political experience: Completing 2nd term Background: B.A., St. Norbert College, in U.S. Senate (1993-present); State Senate, 1984; M.B.A., University of Chicago, 1997; 1983-92 M.P.A., Illinois Institute of Technology, 1997; Background: B.A., Univ. of Wisconsin, 12 years of active duty service in the U.S. 1975; Oxford Univ., 1977; J.D., Harvard Army; Former commander of the Army’s elite Univ., 1979; Attorney; Jewish Honor Guard; Construction company owner; Catholic Web: www.russfeingold.org (campaign) and Web: www.michelsforsenate.com feingold.senate.gov (official) Campaign Office: 262-522-3792 Campaign Office: 608-831-7877 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] “I am 100% pro-life and I will work to defend the lives Abortion “I support the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. of those who cannot defend themselves.” Wade to uphold a woman’s reproductive freedom.” “As your Senator, I will stop tax dollars from going to Voted against the ban on partial birth abortions in organizations and foreign countries that promote 2003 and the Unborn Victims of Violence Act in abortion.” 2004. Opposes stem cell research using human embryos. Cloning Supports stem cell research using human embryos. “I believe the best education comes from the home, is Education “I have been a leader in reducing class sizes so enhanced at school and provides equal opportunity for that all of our schoolchildren receive the attention all children.” “I believe the federal government should they need.
    [Show full text]
  • What Next? WPRI’S Plan for Progress by George Lightbourn
    OVEMBER 2010 OVEMBER WI N WISCONSIN INTEREST Swept away! CHARLES SYKES, JOHN NICHOLS, PATRICK MCILHERAN AND STEPHEN HAYES ANALYZE THE BIG GOP WIN What next? WPRI’s plan for progress BY GEORGE LIGHTBOURN EXCLUSIVE: Christian Schneider reports the inside story of the Johnson upset Editor > CHARLES J. SYKES Now what? WI WISCONSIN INTEREST This is what a revolution looks like. no divided government in Wisconsin, and for In November, notes progressive pundit John conservatives, no excuses. They own it. Nichols, Wisconsin Democrats suffered “the So welcome to Madison. Now what? worst defeat of any state party in the nation.” In our cover story, George Lightbourn Publisher: Voters issued pink slips with abandon: This (president of our publisher, the Wisconsin Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, Inc. was the only state where Democrats lost the Policy Research Institute, and a former state governorship, a Senate seat and both houses secretary of administration) offers a memo Editor: Charles J. Sykes of the state Legislature. Not since 1938 have “on how to restore Wisconsin’s greatness.” Republicans gained this many seats in the Drawing upon the institute’s Refocus Wisconsin Managing Editor: Marc Eisen Assembly. And, as icing on the cake, the state project, Lightbourn lays out a roadmap for Art Direction: GOP also captured two new seats in the U.S. Gov.-elect Scott Walker and the GOP majority. Stephan & Brady, Inc. House. Also in this issue: Christian Schneider Contributors: Wisconsin politics has been turned upside provides an exclusive behind-the-scenes view Richard Esenberg down. Before Nov. 2, Democrats controlled of the extraordinary campaign that propelled Stephen F.
    [Show full text]
  • The Strength of Weekly Ties: Relations of Material and Symbolic Exchange in the Conservative Movement
    The Strength of Weekly Ties: Relations of Material and Symbolic Exchange in the Conservative Movement THOMAS MEDVETZ The current Republican ascendancy in American government has generated con- siderable scholarly interest in the conservative movement. Through an ethno- graphic study of the widely publicized but seldom-observed “Wednesday meeting” of conservative activists, this article inquires into the bases of the conservative movement’s internal cohesion and successful management of alliances with state officials. I argue that the meeting functions as both an instrument of material power and a ritual of symbolic maintenance by establishing relations of reciprocal exchange and sustaining a moral community of conservative activists and their allies. More broadly, the article examines the mutual conditioning and genetic link- age of two dimensions of social reality: relations of force and relations of meaning. Keywords: conservative movement; right-wing activism; social movements; Grover Norquist; Pierre Bourdieu INTRODUCTION In February 2005, the Republican strategist Karl Rove declared conservatism to be “the dominant political creed in America.”1 If the recent electoral successes of Rove’s party are any indication, he was not indulging in mere hyperbole.2 Even This research was supported by awards from the Social Science Research Council’s Fellowship Program on Philanthropy and the Nonprofit Sector; the Phi Beta Kappa Society, Alpha Chapter; and the University of California, Berkeley Graduate Division. The author is grateful to Jerome Karabel, Fred Block, Gil Eyal, Loïc Wacquant, Stephanie Mudge, John Noakes, Sandra Levitsky, Malcolm Fairbrother, Benjamin Moodie, Jeff Sallaz, and the Editorial Board of Politics & Society for their helpful comments. POLITICS & SOCIETY, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • 2004 Senate Races
    2004 SENATE RACES 34 Senate Races 19 Democrat-held Seats – 15 Republican-held Seats 8 Open Seats (CO, FL, GA, IL, LA, NC, OK, SC) – 5 currently Democrat-held, 3 Republican-held Current Senate Breakdown: 51 Republicans, 48 Democrats, 1 Independent STATE PARTY NOW DEMOCRAT REPUBLICAN AL R Wayne Sowell Richard Shelby AK R Tony Knowles Lisa Murkowski AR D Blanche Lincoln Jim Holt AZ R Stuart Starky John McCain CA D Barbara Boxer Bill Jones CO R Ken Salazar Pete Coors CT D Chris Dodd Jack Orchulli FL D Betty Castor Mel Martinez GA D Denise Majette Johnny Isakson HI D Daniel Inouye Cam Cavasso ID R None Mike Crapo IL R Barack Obama Alan Keyes IN D Evan Bayh Marvin Scott IA R Arthur Small Charles Grassley KS R Robert Conroy Sam Brownback KY R Daniel Mongiardo Jim Bunning LA D Primary Date 11/2/04 MD D Barbara Mikulski E.J Pipkin MO R Nancy Farmer Kit Bond NV D Harry Reid Richard Ziser NH R Doris Haddock Judd Gregg NY D Charles Schumer Howard Mills NC D Erskine Bowles Richard Burr ND D Byron Dorgan Michael Liffrig OH R George Voinovich Eric Fingerhut OK R Brad Carson Tom Coburn OR D Ron Wyden Al King PA R Arlen Specter Joe Hoeffel SC D Inez Tenenbaum Jim DeMint SD D Tom Daschle John Thune UT R Paul Van Dam Bob Bennett VT D Patrick Leahy Jack McMullen WA D Patty Murray George Nethercutt WI D Russ Feingold Tim Michels 2004 SENATE RACES 34 Senate Races 19 Democrat-held Seats – 15 Republican-held Seats 8 Open Seats (CO, FL, GA, IL, LA, NC, OK, SC) – 5 currently Democrat-held, 3 Republican-held Current Senate Breakdown: 51 Republicans, 48 Democrats, 1 Independent DEMOCRATIC HELD SEATS – 19 REPUBLICAN HELD SEATS – 15 7 “OPEN” SEATS – DEPARTING U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Remarks in Wausau, Wisconsin October 7, 2004
    2276 Oct. 7 / Administration of George W. Bush, 2004 threats in the world, the intelligence on what I know: She is a strong, compassionate, which the President and Members of Con- great First Lady for this country. gress base their decisions must be better, and I was proud of the job my Vice President it will be. I look forward to the intelligence did the other night. reform commission’s recommendations, and I appreciate Tommy Thompson. He’s a we will act on them to improve our intel- great leader. He’s in my Cabinet, as you re- ligence, especially our intelligence about call. And I appreciate you training him so weapons of mass destruction. well. Thank you all very much. I’m glad to be here on the stage with the next United States Senator from Wisconsin, NOTE: The President spoke at 1:24 p.m. on the South Grounds at the White House. In his re- Tim Michels. You got a good one in Tim, marks, he referred to Charles Duelfer, Special Ad- and I hope you put him in office. It’s impor- visor to the Director of Central Intelligence; tant. And make no mistake about it, with your David Kay, former CIA Special Advisor for Strat- help, he’s going to win. egy Regarding Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruc- I want to thank Jack Voight, who is the tion Programs; and former President Saddam State treasurer. I want to thank the assembly Hussein of Iraq. He also referred to the Commis- speaker, John Gard, who is with us, Scott sion on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United Walker is over here from Milwaukee County.
    [Show full text]
  • Gubernatorial Grit What Will It Take to Win? Mark Neumann Vs
    The high cost of MATC’s sweet Wisconsin’s labor contracts long, painful AN INVESTIGATIVE REPORT BY MIKE NICHOLS economic JULY 2009 JULY slide Bob Ziegelbauer: BY THOMAS HEFTY AND WI JOHN TORINUS JR. lonely reformer WISCONSIN INTEREST BY SUNNY SCHUBERT Gubernatorial Grit What will it take to win? MARK NEUMANN VS. SCOTT WALKER New columnist Richard Esenberg debuts WPRI > MISSION WI WISCONSIN INTEREST The Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, Inc., established in 1987, is a nonpartisan, not-for-profit institute working to engage and energize Wisconsinites and others in discussions Publisher: and timely action on key public policy issues critical to the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, Inc. state’s future, its growth and prosperity. The institute’s Editor: research and public education activities are directed to Charles J. Sykes Art Direction: identify and promote public policies in Wisconsin that are Stephan & Brady, Inc. fair, accountable and cost effective. Contributors: David Blaska Through original research and analysis and through public David Dodenhoff Marc Eisen opinion polling, the institute’s work will focus on such Richard Esenberg issue arenas as state and local government tax policy and Stephen F. Hayes Thomas Hefty spending and related program accountability, consequences Deb Jordahl Kenneth R. Lamke and effectiveness. It will also focus on health care policy and Mike Nichols service delivery; education; transportation and economic Christian Schneider Sunny Schubert development; welfare and social services; and other issues Charles J. Sykes John Torinus Jr. currently or likely to significantly impact the quality of life James Wigderson and future of the state. Board of Directors: CHAIRMAN: The institute is guided by a belief that competitive free James Klauser markets, limited government, private initiative, and personal David Baumgarten Catherine C.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Senatorial Campaigns and Legislative Promise-Keeping on LGBTQ and Women’S Issues
    U.S. SENATORIAL CAMPAIGNS AND LEGISLATIVE PROMISE-KEEPING ON LGBTQ AND WOMEN’S ISSUES A dissertation presented by Jaclyn Northrup to The Department of Political Science In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the field of Political Science Northeastern University Boston, Massachusetts March 2020 U.S. SENATORIAL CAMPAIGNS AND LEGISLATIVE PROMISE-KEEPING ON LGBTQ AND WOMEN’S ISSUES A dissertation presented by Jaclyn Northrup ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science in the College of Social Sciences and Humanities of Northeastern University March 2020 1 Abstract U.S. Senatorial Campaigns and Legislative Promise-keeping on LGBTQ and Women’s Issues In The Legislative Legacy of Congressional Campaigns (2011), Tracy Sulkin found that legislators largely kept the broad promises they made on important issues in their campaigns, with some variation across issues and rhetorical features. Does this finding hold for all types of issues? I assess the promises candidates for U.S. Senate made on their websites regarding women’s issues and LGBTQ issues, as they framed them, including issues of abortion, other women’s health issues, anti-violence efforts, workplace issues, marriage equality, discrimination, and more. I then compared those promises to the legislative actions they took in the following term to determine whether promises were kept. The focus on less prominent issues calls for a shift in methods, drawing from an inclusive campaign product—websites, rather than one limited by cost—television ads. Using landmark legislation on these topics, five congressional sessions (109th-113th, 2005-2014) were chosen for examination, representing a variety of political climates.
    [Show full text]