A special greeting to Dodd supporters: Welcome to the NFL.
Chris Dodd has been hailed as a tremendous leader and everyone else trembling chihuahuas coasting in his wake.
Well, Chris Dodd showed a different kind of leadership today. While he was banging out emails on telecom immunity, he skipped two very close votes on important subjects.
And he referenced a rightwing frame in jabbing John Edwards.
Dodd's bad day below.
Yesterday, Chris Dodd released an ad that tried to humorously show him as a man of the people, while touting his experience.
You can view the ad at the Dodd campaign website below.
http://action.chrisdodd.com/...
Not the best ad. Nor the worst. Until this part:
"How much are these haircuts?"
That's about as subtle as Bill Richardson's 'blow-dried' line in the debates.
That is low stuff. Folks on the Netroots spent tons of times fighting the rightwing frame on that, and Dodd validates it to try to take away some votes from John Edwards.
Now, people have been acting like Chris Dodd has been leading this FISA fight because he is a man of unparalleled leadership and principle.
Want another explanation?
His campaign is verging on bankruptcy.
The numbers please . . .
Dodd raised $1,050,811 last quarter and spent $4,384,580.
Dodd has $2.4M on hand. At his rate, his campaign would be completely broke by Thanksgiving.
Why the poor cash flow?
Dodd raised $647,095 from max donors (<300 people) and $345,900 of it from folks giving $1000-$2299. </p>
Dodd only raised $113K from small-dollar donors in the quarter, an incredibly pitiful showing. He was relying moreso than any other candidate on rich people funding his campaign. And when that well went dry, he was parched and desperately needed to boost his small donors total.
Then presto he comes up with a leadership on a Netroots issue.
I'm sure it was a coincidence.
Well, maybe not.
After all, in 1998 Chris Dodd was awarded the prestigious Golden Leash award
About the Golden Leash:
The Golden Leash is a symbol of the ties between special interest money and elected officials. It is awarded to Members of Congress who demonstrate egregious conduct in the quid pro quo practice of dollar democracy.
This award serves as a reminder of Senator Dodd’s acceptance of $910,304 in campaign cash from January 1993 to December 1997 from the Securities, Investment, Accounting and High-Tech Computer industries, and in turn, using his position as ranking Democrat on the Securities Subcommittee of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee to promote special favors for his "cash constituents" at the expense of his real constituents back home, and the American people.
More on Chris Dodd's pay-for-play:
Dodd has been handsomely rewarded with $910,304 from the securities, investment, accounting and high-tech computer industries since 1993. Meanwhile, there is no Senate Democrat who has done more for Wall Street and these related industries at the expense of consumers from his position as ranking Democrat on the Securities Subcommittee of the Senate Banking, Housing
As examples of Dodd's generosity toward his major campaign financiers, Public Campaign's report cites the following examples: Dodd was an original cosponsor of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and he helped to organize the Senate's override of President Clinton's veto. It ultimately became law in 1995. While the industry said the law would cut down on frivolous securities lawsuits, many say the new law would make it easier to commit securities fraud on unsuspecting investors and more difficult for the victims of fraud to recover their losses.
The National Securities Market Improvement Act, another bill that Dodd fought earnestly for, was supposed to provide oversight of the mutual fund and securities industry. While it contained some good consumer provisions, it ultimately weakened oversight that would have protected investors. And, in October of last year, Dodd lined up as a cosponsor of the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act, an extension of the earlier securities litigation legislation. The bill was strongly supported by The Uniform Standards Coalition, an ad-hoc group of securities, accounting and high-tech computer firms. Even trial lawyers who opposed such securities litigation legislation, and heavy givers in their own right, especially to Democrats, could not compete with the industry's donations or lobbying efforts.
Rather than beef up consumer protections and enforcement for investors – at a time when more people are investing in stocks and mutual funds for their retirements – Congress is busy protecting Wall Street, with help from Senator Dodd. The Investment Company Institute, the main trade association for the mutual fund industry, reports that Americans currently have more than $1 trillion earmarked for their retirements invested in mutual funds. Most investors lack a basic understanding of financial terms and how investments work. Meanwhile, securities fraud is on the rise.
Of the $910,304 in campaign contributions that Senator Dodd received between January 1993 and December 1997, Wall Street and other investment firms came in as the heavy hitters, with firms like Goldman, Sachs & Co., Morgan Stanley, Salomon Brothers and others donating $523,551 in PAC and individual contributions. The accounting industry – perhaps the biggest winners in the 1995 securities litigation reform law – donated $345,903 in PAC and individual contributions. This includes such giants as Price Waterhouse, Ernst & Young and Coopers & Lybrand, among others. Deloitte & Touche's contributions to Senator Dodd increased nearly five-fold from 1995 to1996 soon after Congress passed the reform law the industry championed. The computer industry – a fairly new player in the campaign contribution field – ponied up $40,850 in contributions.
As far as his leadership today, he was in Iowa while everyone else was voting on two pieces of legislation:
The first was the nomination of a truly horrendous judge to the a lifetime spot on a Federal Appeals court,
Leslie Southwick
Two cases in particular underscore our concerns about civil rights:
In 1998, while on the Mississippi Court of Appeals, Southwick joined a ruling in an employment case that upheld the reinstatement, without any punishment whatsoever, of a white state employee who was fired for calling an African American co-worker a "good ole nigger." The court's decision effectively ratified a hearing officer's opinion that the slur was only "somewhat derogatory" and "was in effect calling the individual a 'teacher's pet.'" The Mississippi Supreme Court unanimously reversed the decision.
In 2001, Southwick joined a ruling that upheld a chancellor's decision to take an eight-year-old girl away from her mother and award custody to the father, who had never married the mother, largely because the mother was living with another woman in a "lesbian home." Southwick went even further by joining a gratuitously anti-gay concurrence which extolled Mississippi's right under "the principles of Federalism" to treat "homosexual persons" as second-class citizens. The concurrence suggested that sexual orientation is a choice and stated that an adult is not "relieved of the consequences of his or her choice" -- e.g., losing custody of one's child.
The vote was 62-35 to invoke cloture (Kennedy, Boxer, Dodd not voting). Five votes short of killing it. The actual vote to confirm was 59-38. If every Democrat who voted against her plus the three absentees had voted against cloture, the nomination would be dead. Thank you, Senator Dodd. Also, a big shout-out to Harry Reid for allowing this vote to go forward when the Democrats were short-handed.
The second vote that Senator Dodd didn't cast was the Dream Act. From the New York Times:
the bill] focuses now on a narrow sliver of a worthy group: children who entered the country before age 16, lived here continuously for at least five years and can show good moral character and a high school diploma... If they completed at least two years of college or military service, they would be eligible for legalization... These young people — their numbers are estimated at anywhere from a million to fewer than 100,000 — are in many ways fully American, but their immigration status puts a lock on their potential right after high school. They face the prospect of living in the shadows as their parents do, fearing deportation to countries they do not know, yearning to educate themselves in a country that ignores their aspirations.
This vote was 52-44. There were four no-shows (including McCain. There were more than enough Democrats to overcome the 3/5 barrier. Chris Dodd wasn't one of them.
Chris Dodd has been getting a lot of glowing press with people proclaiming him the only true leader in the field.
Well, if people really mean that, he has to be held accountable and get the same close scrutiny that everyone else gets.
And since no one else in the blogosphere thinks Chris Dodd is serious enough to merit scrutiny, this is well overdue.