Congressman Mark Udall from Colorado's Fighting 2^nd is an undeclared superdelegate. He's also running to give us two (D) Senators against a typically corrupt and shiftless Republicon named Bob Schaffer, who has major ties to Jack Abramoff and makes big bucks as an oil executive here in CO.

The race has been pretty quiet, the numbers tight, and Udall has been holding back - a bit too much for my tastes.

But Hillary's "with us or against us" challenge on this idiotic gas tax holiday forced Mark to make a statement. And both the Rocky Mountain News and the Denver Post covered it:

Rep Mark Udall in Colorado, an undeclared super delegate and one of the Democrats' strong candidates for a new senate seat, sure sounds like he is on Barack's side on the gas tax issue and a lot else!  I hope Hillary is not counting on picking up this super's vote!

Here's the link:  http://www.markudall.com/...

Read and enjoy.

AK-Sen: Trapper John wrote a beautiful piece yesterday on Democratic Senator Daniel Inouye's decision to host a fundraiser for scandal-plagued Republican Sen. Ted Stevens. As he says, Inouye is a true American hero and a Democratic institution, which makes this all the more disappointing.

Naturally, Stevens himself is just getting in even more trouble, as mcjoan writes.

On the web: Mark Begich for U.S. Senate.

KY-Sen: The latest polling for the Democratic Senate primary in Kentucky shows a significant uptick for businessman Greg Fischer, but he still trails fellow wealthy person and two-time gubernatorial candidate Bruce Lunsford by a significant margin.

SurveyUSA. 4/26-4/28. Likely voters. MoE 4.2%. 4/12-4/14 in parentheses.

There are four other candidates in the race, all receiving less than 5% of the vote, and 18% undecided. Fischer has made good progress, but with less than three weeks to go until the primary, he's running out of chances.

The Hill has an article about the race, casting Fischer as the grassroots outsider in the race (the previous netroots favorite, Andrew Horne, dropped out of the race and endorsed Lunsford).

Fischer has largely assumed the mantle of the alternative, netroots candidate since retired Marine Lt. Col. Andrew Horne (D) withdrew from the race and, to the surprise of many, backed Lunsford.

A smattering of unions that opposed Lunsford in past elections have also jumped on board — a testament to Lunsford’s newfound institutional support in the Democratic Party. The state’s largest labor coalition, Change to Win Kentucky, campaigned against Lunsford in the 2007 governor’s race even though it hadn’t endorsed any of his opponents.

"I clearly have had the most experience running a statewide race, I clearly have the support of the DSCC [Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee], and I clearly have the most resources to take on Mitch McConnell," Lunsford said. "If the Democrats’ goal is to beat McConnell, I’m the guy who can do it."

Perhaps, but both candidates will need to raise more than they have to compete against McConnell, as the Kentucky money king is sitting on a war chest of nearly $8 million. They've done fairly well so far, but the McConnell campaign is richer than Croesus.

KS-Sen: We noted former U.S. Rep. Jim Slattery's strong fundraising last week, as he raised nearly $300,000 in just 12 days before his first filing. As a result, CQ Politics has changed their rating of this race to "Republican Favored", indicating their belief that this could become a competitive race. It's still Kansas, a state where no Democrat has won a Senate race since the '30s, but nevertheless, it's certainly nice to have a credible candidate in the race.

OK-Sen: Democratic candidate Andrew Rice, who has been no slouch in the fundraising game himself, liveblogged here yesterday, predominantly discussing issues related to alternative energy. Check it out!

GA-Sen: Former Democratic state legislator Jim Martin, the 2006 candidate for lieutenant governor, entered the race in March and quickly established himself as a serious contender for the nomination, raising $347,000 in just 12 days. Martin is probably the current frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, which has spurred the ire of some of the other contenders:

Yet Martin’s emergence as the candidate of the party establishment is not going over well with the contenders who earlier had staked their claims on the Democratic Senate nomination. Former Atlanta television reporter Dale Cardwell, one of Martin’s competitors for the July 15 Senate primary, lashed out with a YouTube video posted Sunday in which he dubbed Martin a "Convenientcrat" who was "pushed into this race" by Democratic officials — after first communicating to Cardwell in a conversation that he wouldn’t run for Senate.

"I think a handful of party insiders got nervous and decided to put a ringer in the race," Cardwell told CQ Politics Tuesday.

Personally, I would submit that Martin is the first credible candidate to enter the race against Sen. Saxby Chambliss, as evidenced by his fundraising and support (he enjoys the endorsement of former Governor Roy Barnes, among others).

CO-Sen: An independent group has put out this ad attacking Republican candidate Bob Schaffer for his Abramoff-sponsored trips to the Marianas:

Race tracker wiki: AK-Sen KS-Sen CO-Sen KY-Sen OK-Sen GA-Sen

The Mountain West has huge growth potential for the Democratic Party, which is why the DNCC is in Denver this year. Colorado is leading the way and is definitely a winnable state ... with the right candidate at the top of the ticket.

Rasmussen. 4/16. Likely voters. MoE 4.5% (3/17 results)

Obama makes Colorado competitive, Clinton kills it for us. And that's not just relevant at the top of the ticket. We have a top-tier Senate race in the state, and you better believe Mark Udall is better off with Obama at the top of the ticket than having to make up a 14-point Clinton deficit. Throw in CO-04, which is already on the DCCC's target list, and once again, it's clear why having Obama at the top of the ticket is so helpful to the Democratic Party not just at the presidential level, but down below it as well.

Same goes for another Red state we can flip with the right candidate (that "right" candidate being Obama): North Carolina:

Rasmussen. 4/10. Likely voters. MoE 4.5% (3/20 results)

Clinton might make this one competitive, but it'd be tough. Obama immediately makes this a top-tier pickup opportunity in a state that McCain can ill-afford to defend. We also have a potentially hot Senate race and at least one solid House pickup opportunity (NC-08), both of which would benefit from 1) having the state be a presidential battleground, and 2) having a competitive candidate at the top of the ticket.

What about those "big states" that Clinton thinks only she can win? How about California?

Rasmussen. 4/16. Likely voters. MoE 4.5% (3/12 results)

Not that either Democrat would lose California to McCain (even in the best-case scenario, he wouldn't have the money to contest it), but funny how Obama runs stronger than Clinton in the Golden State. And even those two points will matter to candidates like Charlie Brown in CA-04 fighting to eeke out tight victories in tough districts. Indeed, Brown only lost by three points in 2006.

What about the purple states, like Minnesota?

SurveyUSA. 4/11-13. Likely voters. MoE 4.3% (3/14-16 results)

Minnesota won't be a state we can take for granted this fall. It will be a tough one for either Obama or Clinton, but it's clear that Obama fares better. And remember, this is all post-"Wright" and all that other nonsense that has supposedly crushed Obama time and time again. Same goes with Wisconsin, Iowa, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington:

SurveyUSA. 4/14-17. Likely voters. MoE 4% (3/14-16 results)

Check out that Obama surge -- it was also post-"Wright", post-"Bitter", post all that bull. Yet after all that crap, they've decided they still like Obama and have now given him a comfortable margin in the must-win Democratic state. Clinton? She makes it a nail biter.

Obama even makes a difference in the "blowout" states, like McCain's home of Arizona.

Rasmussen. 4/15. Likely voters. MoE 4.5% (No trend lines)

"But", say the Clinton apologists, "what does it matter if we lose by 28 points or just 20? A loss is a loss!" It matters to the two House Democratic freshman running tough reelection campaigns this year (Mitchell in AZ-05 and Giffords in AZ-08). It matters to the Democrats running in our two targeted races in AZ-01 (Renzi's old seat) and AZ-03 (Shadegg's seat). The smaller the margin at the top of the ticket, the fewer ticket splitters they need to win their races.

Really, I can go through polls all day (and likely will over the coming two weeks), showing how in most states Obama runs stronger and has greater coattail potential than Clinton. I'm even ignoring pre-"Bitter" polls to ensure the numbers aren't just fresh, but include all of Obama's baggage. Yet as we'll see in the vast majority of cases (the biggest exception being Florida, though there are several others), Obama does far better.

What about the daily national tracking polls? In Rasmussen's latest, Obama trails McCain by 3, Clinton trails McCain by 6. Advantage Obama. Gallup has one of those tracking polls as well, and they have Obama and McCain tied at 45, while Clinton trails McCain by (a statistically insignificant) 1 point.

So remind me again how is Clinton "more electable" against McCain than Obama?

She's lost more contests to Obama than she's won. She's raised less money than he has. She fares poorer in the polling against McCain than he does. She trails in the popular vote.

And somehow, despite the fact she runs behind Obama in the general, the supers are supposed to overturn the will of the primary electorate and spur intra-party civil war on her behalf? Is she really that narcissistic?

Apparently so.

Race tracker wiki: CO-Sen

"In five days, I did not observe a forced abortion or meet anybody who had any knowledge of them," he said, adding that no subsequent examples were ever brought to him.

So goes the report at today's TPM here:
what forced abortions?

Yet another hippo-crite mascarading as a Conservative Family Values candidate.

He took a vacation to the Marianas with Black Jack Abramof, seeing wonderful factories, filled with happy smiling people. Except without that sappy song.

If you thought 2006 was a good year for us when we picked up six seats, 2008 looks a GREAT DEAL better.  It's been quite a long time since we've gone into an election cycle where the Repubs have, for the most part, written off FOUR Senate seats seven months before the election!

DSCC chairman Chuck Schumer stated that his committee will contest up to seventeen races in 2008.  With our major financial advantages right now, there is a good change we can win at least six, and maybe up to nine races, which would put us at the magic 60 mark.

Anyway, here are my rankings:

Hotline has a major round-up of Senate fundraising numbers; Senate Guru reformatted much of the information to be a little more readable, and has some thoughts.

I see lots of good news here. Democrats may be playing even less defense than expected. Only three Democratic incumbents -- Landrieu, Durbin, and Kerry -- have Republican challengers with more than $70k cash on hand, and Durbin and Kerry are safe nonetheless. That leaves a lot of room for Democrats to focus on open seats and taking out Republican incumbents.

And several of those Republican incumbents should be sweating the money situation. Al Franken outraised Norm Coleman ($2.2 million to $2.1 million), and Jeanne Shaheen outraised John Sununu ($1.2 million to $1 million); both Franken and Shaheen trail in the cash on hand department, but continued solid fundraising (and good polls in Minnesota and great ones in New Hampshire) is pretty damn sweet. Next door to New Hampshire, Maine's Tom Allen trails Susan Collins but has an impressive $2.6 million cash on hand.

In the battle for New Mexico and Colorado's open seats, the Udalls are kicking ass. New Mexico's Tom raised more than Republicans Wilson and Pearce combined, and holds a similar cash on hand advantage. Colorado's Mark outraised sweatshop-promoter Schaffer ($1.5 million to $1 million) and has nearly double the cash on hand.

Mark Warner continues to pull in ridiculous money ($2.5 million) on the way to joining Jim Webb in Virginia's senate delegation.

Unfortunately, in Oregon Merkley and Novick are underperforming financially, just as they've been showing other signs of weakness. And Texan Rick Noriega's totals (both money raised this quarter and cash on hand) weren't where they should be, though Burnt Orange Report points out that his fundraising picked up substantially in the latter part of the quarter, once it was clear he was the nominee.

But back on the up side, Andrew Rice pulled in an extremely nice-for-Oklahoma $431k. Oklahoma will remain a long, long shot, but Rice could outperform expectations -- that would be some serious map-expansion. Add in races like Alaska and Mississippi, where Democrats Mark Begich and Ronnie Musgrove may trail their opponents in fundraising but are polling well, and it continues to look like a great year for Democrats.

For context and rankings on these races and more, see brownsox' State of the Senate: April.

Race tracker wiki: MN-Sen NH-Sen OK-Sen OR-Sen NM-Sen CO-Sen VA-Sen

Bob Schaffer was always one of Jack Abramoff’s reliable goons—always willing to do the dirty work for Jack and the Republican Party’s Chinese Patrons operating out of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, a US Territory in the Western Pacific just 40 miles North of Guam.

Tom DeLay, Jack Abramoff and the Tan Family could always count on Bob Schaffer to carry their water.

It seems that they still can.

Last week,  Bob Schaffer said a crazy thing to the Denver Post:

He pointed to the Northern Mariana Islands, a U.S. protectorate that imports tens of thousands of foreign textile workers, as a successful model for a guest-worker program that could be adapted nationally. [snip]

... he said of the islands' program. "I think members of Congress ought to be looking at that model and be considering it as a possible basis for a nationwide program."

Wow, this is truly a man without a moral compass.

Since that remark Schaffer has been getting a lot of attention for his Abramoff connections.

Tonight it just got worse for Bob.

To the Jump...

Virtual slavery, beatings, forced prostitution (including child prostitution), forced abortions - these are all well known practices at the Saipan sweatshops that GOP senatorial candidate Bob Schaffer recently held up as a "model."

In 2006, Bill Moyers produced the television program "Capitol Crimes," a merciless look at the legalized bribery (lobbying) that had taken over U.S. Congress. He took a close look at the efforts by now-jailed superlobbyist Jack Abramoff and disgraced GOP house speaker Tom Delay to protect the owners of those sweatshops. Because the island is a U.S. Protectorate, the products coming out of those labor camps bore the "made in the USA" label, but U.S. law did not protect the workers there, and the GOP leadership wanted to make sure it stayed that way.

Former CO-04 Congressman Bob Schaffer is running for the Senate seat being vacated by Wayne Allard.  CO-02 Congressman Mark Udall is his opponent.  For a good summary of these developments see SquareState.net or these diaries here and here.

The Rocky Mountain News has a followup where Schaffer actually speaks for the first time.  That sure took a while.

A welcoming committee wanted to take Schaffer to his hotel, he said, but he prevailed. He said he found women working in a "sweatshop," and demanded leaders of the Northern Mariana Islands investigate.

"I was told that shortly after I left (the Marianas) that the factory was shut down," he said Friday, stressing he never verified the information.

It will come as news to readers of the Denver Post, but it turns out that the paper is just one more cog in that great liberal media wheel. At least, Bob Schaffer thinks so. See, the paper has been committing journalism, and informing Colorado citizens that their former Congressman and would-be Senator has some not so savory ties to Jack Abramoff. Not to mention that he thinks that the Mariana Islands provide just a peachy model for an immigration policy for the U.S., never mind the forced labor, rape, and other humanitarian abuses.

Because the real victim in all of this is, yes, you guessed it, Bob Schaffer, the innocent victim of a vicious newspaper.

Asked during a press conference following Cheney's visit about Denver Post reports that link him to an effort by jailed lobbyist Jack Abramoff to quash labor reform in the Mariana Islands in 1999, Schaffer was visibly angry.

"I am really disgusted with the tone and tenor and direction of The Denver Post stories. I have had no contact with the individuals in the story, particularly Jack Abramoff," Schaffer said. "It's a matter of fiction. That's all I'm going to say about it."

Schaffer went to the Northern Mariana Islands as part of a trip partially arranged by Abramoff's firm. He visited textile factories which were the target of a class-action lawsuit alleging abuses of workers. Abramoff had been hired by factory owners and island officials to stave off attempts at reform.

In a recent interview with the Post, Schaffer cited the island's guest-worker program as a "model" that could be followed in overhauling U.S. immigration policy.

Schaffer campaign manager Dick Wadhams said today there is room for a legitimate discussion on that point. The U.S. Department of Labor cited the factories for more than 1,000 safety violations in the late 1990s.

Ah, Dick Wadhams. The man who helped George Allen through his "macaca" moment by insisting that the racist slur wasn't a racist slur but just another word for "mohawk" and referred only to a haircut. Yeah. Here's what Dick Wadhams has to say about his new boss's, um, challenge:

"We do look forward to when Boulder liberal Udall has Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to Colorado for Boulder liberal Udall to defend Sen. Reid's involvement with Abramoff," he said.

Yeah, that'll work. That'll stop them from investigating Schaffer's Abramoff ties.

Race tracker wiki: CO-Sen

From the diaries. This is a hugely significant development in one of our top tier Senate races. mcjoan

Two days ago, questions surfaced about the relationship between Colorado Senate candidate Bob Schaffer and convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff's storied efforts to stall human rights and immigration reforms in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, a US territory.

Today, the Denver Post's homework is complete, and it's utterly devastating:

Just before boarding a plane to the Mariana Islands in 1999, then-Congressman Bob Schaffer announced he was embarking on a fact-finding mission to get to the bottom of repeated allegations of labor abuse in the American protectorate.

"I plan to walk right into those factories and living quarters to see for myself what conditions exist," Schaffer said in a news release in August of that year.

What he didn't say was that the trip was partly arranged by the firm of now-jailed lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who represented textile factory owners fighting congressional efforts to reform labor and immigration laws on the islands and who was being handsomely paid to keep the islands' cherished exemptions.

Schaffer and his wife stayed for free at a palm-studded beach resort and, besides factories, also toured historical sites and met with clients of Preston-

Gates, Abramoff's firm, according to a copy of the trip's agenda archived in Schaffer's congressional papers.

He left believing that allegations of widespread abuse were largely unfounded -- blaming them on Big Labor's efforts to shut down a booming textile industry allowed to use the "Made in USA" label but dependent on tens of thousands of imported workers.

In a recent interview with The Denver Post, the Republican candidate for Colorado's open Senate seat described the protectorate's guest-worker program as a "model" lawmakers could use as they overhaul the U.S. immigration system...

You have to read all of this--reporter Michael Riley goes on to detail the horrific labor conditions widely reported in the Northern Marianas, Schaffer's ridiculous Abramoff-arranged vacation that never even attempted to veer from its Potemkin script, and (best of all) Dick Wadhams completely slobbering himself trying to defend the indefensible.

And there's more--we've been going through contribution records looking for ties between Schaffer and other CNMI corporate interests. I previously mentioned donations to Schaffer's Senate campaign from the pro-business governor of the territory, and here's another bit:

Two $1000 contributions to Schaffer on 3/31/1997 from Jerry Tan, brother of sweatshop owner of scandalous record Willie Tan, who hired Abramoff to lobby to preserve the "Made in the USA" status quo in CNMI. The entire Tan family, through Tan Holdings and affiliated businesses, were key figures in the CNMI/Abramoff scandal. They were assessed the largest fine ever levied by the US Dept of Labor, approximately $9,000,000, and after that they hired Jack Abramoff to protect their "interests."

Here's a .PDF of donors from Saipan's ZIP code (remember, US territory) to Schaffer.

Coming up: Greenberg Traurig, anyone?

Cross-posted at ProgressNowAction

Race tracker wiki: CO-Sen

Former CO-04 Congressman Bob Schaffer(R) is running for the senate seat being vacated by Wayne Allard.  CO-02 Congressman Mark Udall (D) is also running.  In '04 Schaffer lost the republican primary to one of the Coors boys who then lost to Ken Salazar.  Schaffer is anywhere from the 7th to the 14th conservative legislator since 1937.

In what seems like a fairly moderate position on immigration Bob Schaffer had the following to say as quoted in the DenverRockyMountainPost:

Calling America a country perfectly "capable of multitasking," Republican Senate candidate Bob Schaffer said the U.S. ought to be pursuing a guest- worker program at the same time it fortifies its borders.

Russ Feingold's Progressive Patriots Fund is holding a poll to pick the next Progressive Patriots.  One of these candidates will get a $5,000 contribution.  Voting closes at 5pm today (central).

Mark Udall, running for Senate in Colorado, is the obvious choice:

• As a member of the House, he voted against the Iraq war and against the Patriot Act, making him a great fit for the Russ Feingold "Progressive Patriot" name.
• He and his brother are key to bringing conservation and stewardship of the environment to the Senate, and come from a long family background of conservation (read that article, it's worth it).
• He's ahead in the polls but within margin of error.  With Colorado's Democratic resurgence, his chances are good, but he can use the help!

Vote!

Rasmussen. 3/17. Likely voters. MoE 4.5% (2/11 results)

Nothing to get comfortable over. This one is still tight. Let's see how the presidential ticket would impact this race:

SurveyUSA. 2/26-2/28. Likely voters. MoE 4% (No trend lines)

Obama runs +9, and Clinton runs -6.

For the Colorado Senate race, as most races across the country, it's clear that an Obama ticket would dramatically improve our down-ticket chances.

Race tracker wiki: CO-Sen

So with eight months to go, I figure it’s time for an updated look at all the 2008 Senate races.  There are 35 seats up for election because of a scenario in Wyoming and Mississippi where both seats are up, due to the passing of Craig Thomas and the resignation of Trent Lott, respectively.  Now obviously, quite a few of the races are considered "safe" for the incumbent.  So I’ll rank these in terms of tiers.  The top tier will be the races where there is a serious challenger to the incumbent (or at least the incumbent’s party, in cases of retirement), where the party holding the seat has a real shot of switching.  The second tier are races that could become top tier races, but are not at this point.  Tier III are ones where a major event would need to happen for the seat to come into play.  And the safe seats?  Well, Mike Gravel has a better shot at winning the presidency than those incumbents have of losing their races.

Follow me below the fold for all the races.  Note: Some of this may seem repetitive, with information you already know.  That’s because I originally wrote this for the Bruin Democrats, many of whom don’t follow the national races like we do.  Consider this a primer for both newcomers and political junkies alike.

Sometimes I get interesting feedback on the calls and emails that I send to my Senators and Representatives.

Considering the heated nature of the FISA fight, it is interesting to see how the legislators that voted in favor of retroactive immunity and of legalizing the government's ability to spy on its citizens justify their votes.

In this case, as is probably often the case in controversial issues, Senator Ken Salazar provides some pretty weak rationales for his vote supporting the unmodified Senate version of FISA that passed in the upper house.

Let's journey through his excuse letter and evaluate the truthiness that abounds therein below.

We have two great candidates running for Senate in the Mountain West.  The two are cousins from a great Democratic political family -- the Udalls.  Tom Udall and Mark Udall are both looking like great chances to turn two red Senate seats blue.  And these aren't Bush Dog Dems.

As I mentioned, they are from a great political family, the Udalls.  Mark (the Colorado Udall) is the sun of famed Representative Mo Udall. Mo Udall was an Arizona Congressman from 1961 to 1991.  He served from when John F Kennedy was in office to just before Bill Clinton replaced the first President George Bush.  And he did great work during his tenure on many issues -- most notably the environment.

More on the Udall family and the feature on them in Outside magazine below the fold.

Crossposted at New Mexico FBIHOP