NEWS SUMMARY
But in our world today, C stands for so much more.
C is for Clintons of Chappaqua.
C is for Campaign for Working Families.
C is for Coalition and contretemps, which are much on the mind of the Democratic party today.
C is for child tax credit.
C is for Cabinet confidants compiling cash.
C is for cash of John Kerry. (And NOT, it seems, for catsup money.)
C is for containment of costs, for prescription and generic drugs.
C is for "cracking down" on "crippling costs."
C for is for Congressman Chabot, who led the fight for the passage of the partial birth abortion ban in the House.LINK
C is for Chatty, Mister.
C is for Council (on Foreign Relations), where Richard Haass is headed. LINK
C is for Cheney, who killed at the Radio and Television Correspondents Dinner, and also gets a front-page Washington Post story drawing him into the WMD controversy.
C is for Cho, who killed at the same dinner.
C is also for curfew, which we didn't all have last night, but that is NOT why The Note is late.
Instead, as the list above makes clear, there is a lot out there today. Some of our short-handing will make perfect, immediate sense to you, but some (like that awesome Mister Chatty thing) are going to require you reading for more below.
The biggest event of this Chapter is day two of the Campaign for America's Future conference at the Omni Shoreham.
Liberal Democrats are uniting this week to try to convince the field of presidential candidates to reject a political platform they label as "Republican-lite" and to push harder to energize progressive voters.
Scheduled to appear, not surprisingly, are candidates who want the progressive imprimatur, at least unofficially: Senator John Edwards, Governor Howard Dean, Senator John Kerry, Ambassador Carol Moseley Braun, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, Congressman Richard Gephardt, and Reverend Al Sharpton.
Organizers hope the event will bring together strands of the left-wing of the Democratic Party that often disagree about campaign tactics and political methods, not to mention about priorities and legislative policy.
It's a tall order, but many of these Democrats believe it to be crucial in order for the party to be successful in the future. They want political projects coordinated and get-out-the-vote efforts expanded.
Their main target, aside from the Bush Administration's "right wing agenda," are centrists in the party who are perceived as being too pro-business and pro-free market for a party whose core values are Rooseveltian.
A background memo for reporters says the CFA crowd will "audition" the presidential candidates to see who most propitiously engages the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party."
There will be a lot of big-foot reporters in the room too, conducting the latest phase of THEIR auditions.
There will be lots of DLC-bashing in of the wake of that centrist group's criticism of Mr. Dean and Congressman Dick Gephardt for being too liberal.
The Washington Times ' Lambro dives into the lion's den: "More than a thousand activists gathered at the Omni Shoreham hotel to cheer and applaud a slate of speakers who accused the Bush administration of cutting taxes for the rich, weakening the economy, increasing unemployment, and undercutting Social Security, Medicare and dozens of other social-welfare programs." LINK
The Republican National Committee couldn't resist the opportunity. One of their research memos went out yesterday with the heading "WHOSE PARTY IS IT ANYWAY? Democrats Battle Each Other For Heart And Soul Of Party."
Oh, C is also for campaign, and tonight are the Webby Awards. We'll let you know tomorrow whether you and your support allowed us to move our shared cause forward together, into the future, for our children and grandchildren.
We are still in our tuxedos from last night, but just try tying a bow tie on a squirming, over-excited Googling monkey … ..
Of course, a little news on W. 43rd Street might prove to be a distraction from all of this … ..
The Clintons of Chappaqua:
To paraphrase Jesus (or maybe it was John and Paul and Ringo): the Clintons we will have always.
It's another news cycle filled with everything you ever wanted to know (and some stuff you don't) about that fun couple from, well, Arkansas.
We'll tromp through it all, but, frankly, if you have time to read only two things about this important topic, may we suggest:
A. The Note's exclusive interview with Barbara Walters about her Sunday exclusive interview?
and
B. Adam Nagourney and Ray Hernandez in the New York Times with a major tour de force on Everything Clinton?
First, our interview.
ABC News' Barbara Walters took some time to talk with The Note this morning about her big get. Ms. Walters' interview with Hillary Rodham Clinton will air this Sunday at 7pm Eastern and after the basketball game for you West Coast folks.
Ms. Walters told us that she conducted the interviews in several different locations.
"The major one was done this past Monday in the home that she shares with the former president in Chappaqua. First time cameras have been allowed inside in the family room. The house is lovely. Large, very cheerful, beautifully done, no hand me down furniture in this house. It has shades of peach and yellow. A great kitchen. It's a very beautiful house and she loves it. She tries to go there every weekend. The president was there when our cameras arrived"
You might be wondering if FPOTUS was hanging around off camera as the interview was being conducted. Well, wonder no more.
Ms. Walters tells The Note that she didn't get to see Mr. Clinton at the time, but ran into him later in the week and he told her that when he was chased out of the house he went to the public library and a restaurant in Chappaqua until the interview was over.
"This book is not about Monica. It also is about the years as the Governor's wife and what an odd duck she was at the beginning. She talks about her look and lack of Southern accent and problems adjusting there even though she grew to love it there and made good friends. It goes through the White House years, Vince Foster's suicide, the health care debate, and more. This book is a lot about her feelings."
"We went back to Park Ridge to the house she grew up in where her father was a big Republican and where she herself worked for Goldwater. We spent some time in the town there talking about her childhood and Wellesley and the Life magazine commencement speech and meeting Bill Clinton."
The Note: She is a pretty practiced public official. Is she ever emotional or passionate in the interview?
BW: "She talks about the early days passionately. She knew these questions were going to be asked. She talks about how she feels in very poignant terms and does not deny that it was a long long struggle and she wasn't really sure this marriage was going to last. She says 'I didn't know that we were going to make it.'"
The Note: Will Sunday night's ever be the same again?
BW: "At 8:02 pm everything will be the same again."
The New York Times story on the couple is a total must-read, and not just because the reporters were able to get the phrase "by design or not" into the story twice, which is a computer macro that any self-respecting reporter covering the Clintons better have pre-programmed. LINK
The challenge of trying to figure out how to tell you about this Times story is not unlike the challenge the reporters faced in trying to tell their readers about the Clintons' story, so, since The Note is already, uhm, going to be long today, let's frame things with the perfect lyrics from the perfect song from the perfect movie:
Where do I begin
To tell the story of how great a love can be
The sweet love story that is older than the sea,
The simple truth about love she brings to me
Where do I start?
Okay, start with this: the Times boys got a phone interview with the current Senator, but they couldn't snag the former President. (Note Note: how many news organizations know where Bill Clinton is today, and have a plan for getting his [on-camera] reaction to all this? Or to the 43rd Street news for that matter … .)
The macro thesis of the piece is that between her book and presidential aspirations, and his stepped up politicking, something is going on — perhaps:
"The extent to which these two campaigns by the Clintons are being coordinated is a matter of conjecture among the couple's friends — as was the question of whether there might be a quiet competition going on between these two Democrats for a piece of the public stage."
The on-the-record Carville and Ickes are priceless, as is this background one from — well, who knows??!! (But we have two guesses … .)
""I think he feels that it's her turn and that she needs space to operate,' a friend of Mr. Clinton's said. 'This guy was president for eight years and she was a supportive spouse. So he's kind of already gotten his gold watch for public service.'"
Finally, Nagourney and Hernandez get all Gerthy in interviewing restaurateurs and shop owners about whether the Clintons hang out together or not, and their published reportage leans towards the "not."
In conclusion, (the "finally" and "in conclusion" a purposeful homage to Bill Clinton's public speeches), this kicker:
"In the interview, Mrs. Clinton declined to say how much involvement Mr. Clinton had in preparing the manuscript, or whether he had even read it."
"'He and I always talk about everything,' she said. 'I'm not going to comment on the process. Anyone who knows us knows that we work together on everything.'"
"Asked if Mr. Clinton would now join her on the promotional tour for the book, Mrs. Clinton burst out laughing. That was one question, Mrs. Clinton said, that she had not considered."
The Boston Herald's Andrew Miga assesses Hillary Clinton's "tell-all book about her days in the scandal-plagued White House" as a possible indicator of her "presidential ambitions." LINK
Miga offers up a little GOP insight via Greg Mueller: "'This is all about the remaking, the repackaging of Hillary Clinton … It's all part of a plan for her to run for the White House in 2008.'''
And he has Democrats expressing surprise at her candor via Paul Begala: "'Hillary is an intensely private person … This could not have been easy for her — to go through it all again … This allows her to close that chapter of her life … I suspect it will be her definitive answer to all the questions. She is remarkably blunt. It probably is cathartic.'" (Nice use of two key C words, Paul.)
Miga runs through Clinton's popularity with Democrats; the frequency with which her name pops up when appraising the 2004 and 2008 fields; her recent centrist Senate course (yes, yes, angry gay rights groups, blah, blah, Lindsey Graham); and her chit-building through national fundraisers and PAC activity.
The New York Post 's Liz Smith also writes "Republicans, however, insist something's cooking with Mrs. Clinton. Friends and enemies seem to think a run for the presidency is a definite in her future," while quoting Interviewer Extraordinaire Barbara Walters on the beauty of the peach-and-yellow, perfectly-kitchened Chappaqua home. LINK
The New York Times ' David Kirkpatrick offers a brief game of leak-scramble. LINK
The New York Post 's Andy Geller and Vince Morris continue the countdown to Hillary Hour by citing the clips shown last night on "World News Tonight" and listing some of the memoirs' "stunningly candid" moments. LINK
The New York Post 's Keith J. Kelly continues the countdown to a possible Simon & Schuster lawsuit against the AP's alleged embargo violation, with a little Time-balking thrown in. LINK
The New York Daily News' Joel Siegel presents "Living History" as a laundry-airing, air-cleaning, clean-slating, image softening effort by Senator Clinton to move onward and, of course, upward (hissing whisper: the presidency). LINK
Siegel quotes the author herself about the absence of political calculation, which "'really didn't enter into it;'" the separation of life and (New York) State; and the challenges of writing a public memoir as a "'private person.'"
Siegel also includes some hostility from Nelson Warfield: "[Clinton] thrives on being a victim;'" some political advice from Hank Sheinkopf: "'The first rule of politics is to get rid of the questions that linger;'" and a parsable quote from Mandy Grunwald: "'How can you tell the story of impeachment without Lewinsky? Imagine if she had written this book and left it out.'"
The New York Daily News staked out Monica Lewinsky for a quickie review, to no avail. LINK
The Washington Post 's Lloyd Grove suggests Hillary Clinton could hardly breathe for nigh two whole days, citing Peter Baker's book which has David Kendall breaking the bad Lewinsky news the night of August 13 rather than hubby Bill two days later. LINK
Baker promises "'more than one authoritative source'" to back up his version, while David Kendall last night told the Post : "'Actually, I did not inform her of the Lewinsky matter. I believe the account in her book is accurate.'" (and a teeny quirk of the eyebrows to the words "actually" and "believe").
Lloyd also points out a New York Times story headlined "President Weighs Admitting He Had Sexual Contacts" which ran the day after Kendall's visit and the day before the presidential confession described in the memoir.
In addition, there are discrepancies between "Living History" and the Blumenthal book about the degree of the Martha's Vineyard chill that August.
Philippe Reines' response should make the folks at Simon & Schuster happy: "'This is a ridiculous attack. When people have the opportunity to read the full book, they will understand how she felt and what she experienced.'"
We'll just let the whole She Wrote, They Wrote squabble play itself out.
The AP's Woodward and McDonough have more excerpts from the big book, saying that Senator Clinton "shows her softer side in her new book, taking some responsibility for 'botching' health care reform and not being sensitive enough to people who thought she should be a traditional first lady." LINK
"But the New York senator does not apologize for the causes she felt passionate about."
The New York Sun's Timothy Stark's asks the punditocracy about the political ramifications of Hillary's revelations in the upcoming book. And when Hank Sheinkopf and Peggy Noonan agree, The Note pays attention. LINK
"Smarter to address all of this now, many Clinton watchers said, than later."
"'When she runs for president and people ask uncomfortable questions she can reply, 'Oh that's old news, that's in my book,' said Peggy Noonan, the author of 'The Case Against Hillary Clinton.'"
"'She is doing her best to create her own identity, both as Hillary Clinton and as a U.S. senator from New York. She's no longer a side show in a great national drama. She's creating her own place in the drama,' said a New York Democratic political consultant, Hank Sheinkopf. 'It absolutely helps her down the line if she runs.The time to create an image is not the day before you run, but a long time before.'"
USA Today has a second-day story: LINK
Meanwhile, the normal flood of press releases, media availabilities, and conference calls from Senator Clinton's office on a variety of topics proceeds apace. We particularly liked this subject line: "RELEASE: SENATOR CLINTON INTRODUCES LEGISLATION TO COMBAT LISTERIA CONTAMINATION."
Jake Tapper writes about Bill Clinton's post presidential lifestyle in the second issue of Radar magazine set to hit newsstands next week. Mr. Tapper sets the scene for his piece entitled "Free Willy" with a description of the FPOTUS taking the stage at a Gotham magazine party at Cipriani.
"'It was kind of sad,' recalls one partygoer. 'You got the feeling Clinton doesn't have much to do these days.'
"The next day the news of the former president's appearance was all over town. The consensus was that after 24 months of civilian life the former president had opted to be a boldface name rather than a statesman, a figure more appropriate to US Weekly than to U.S. News."
"Clinton spent most of his campaign and presidency dancing on the line between party boy and savvy politician, hopping from wonkery to Arsenio and back again."
"But though he often threatened to step over the line and join the glitterati forever, his title and accomplishments elevated him above the morass. Now, as he tries to navigate civilian life, it remains to be seen whether he can rehabilitate his tarnished legacy through a campaign of serious, ambitious works while remaining the life of the party."
"In written responses to Radar, Clinton seems to imply that such a balancing act is not only possible but is his right. 'I like having my life back,' he wrote, in the strangely stilted language of a chamber of commerce press release. 'Living in the White House was a special opportunity, and I miss the people and the work there. But I always knew it was going to be eight years, at most.' So now he's trying to 'build a life as a private citizen rooted in public service,' which includes 'the normal life of browsing in a bookstore or having a cup of coffee with friends or
Big Casino budget politics:
The child tax credit and Medicare reform both are hanging in the balance.
The New York Times ' David Firestone says this about an Iowa senator's ideas: "Senate Republicans say they hope that by including Mr. Grassley's provisions in a combination bill, the House might be persuaded to go along. House officials say they will not be surprised if the House tries to add new tax cuts to any bill that comes over from the Senate." LINK
Calling the current political milieu a "dry season," the Washington Post 's Dana Milbank justifies his paper's Wednesday playing down of the Tuesday DeLay remarks with this bit of flimflammery: "The dispute … mushroomed into a high-profile political tussle after House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) was reported to be ruling out consideration of the package. In fact, DeLay had not made such a broad statement, but Democrats responded with outrage." LINK
Milbank goes on to say (and make sure you read the last sentence of this closely): "The latest Grassley proposal — devised under the assumptions that Senate Democrats had sufficient clout to block his larger proposal and that House Republicans were poised to block the smaller Lincoln proposal — would have a net cost of $5 billion, with the rest of the cost paid by increased user fees charged by the government. Senior Republican Senate aides said they expected the White House would support the proposal and that House GOP leaders would tolerate it."
And, finally, Milbank has political analyst and House Majority Whip Roy Blunt saying "Republicans do not fear a backlash, as long as the public understands that it is families who don't pay taxes who are losing out on the credit. 'This is a tax credit, not a . . . number-of-children benefit program,' he said."
Again, Absolut Ari.
A Children's Defense Fund study to be released today concludes that many military families won't qualify for the current child tax credit. LINK
On the Senate's search for a Medicare deal — the week's other major Big Casino matter — Robert Pear gets a courageous Administration person to go on background to say something bold:
"The Bush administration welcomed today's developments on an issue sure to loom large in next year's elections. 'We are encouraged that bipartisan progress is being made,' a White House official said."
We are sending David Rogers into time out.
The guy is normally Mr. Accessible Prose, but today, on A4 of the Wall Street Journal , he introduces something called "risk corridors" as part of the Medicare plan that sounds like Ira Magaziner on too much Orange Slice to us.
Beyond that, here's what Roger's story on the current state of play says:
"While risk corridors are something only actuaries get excited about, the political stakes are huge for Republicans, who must convince Democrats that their private-market options will be effective in providing the drug benefit long promised by both parties."
"With a nod from Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R., Tenn.), Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley is pressing hard for a working agreement with his panel's senior Democrat, Montana Senator Max Baucus. In expectation of a deal — which could come as early as Thursday — the Iowa Republican's panel announced a final hearing Friday on Medicare changes before taking up the bill next week."
"By embracing a more centrist approach than the White House first wanted, Mr. Grassley already has defused the political situation enough that a Democratic filibuster now seems less likely. But it is still crucial that he have a credible benefit and system for coverage … ."
"Much depends still on the benefit itself and whether enough senior citizens participate to make all the risk calculations viable. To keep down costs, the draft bill anticipates a $275 deductible, far higher than the Democrats prefer. The benefit would cover 50% of drug costs to $3,450 a year; then there is a gap in coverage until an individual has paid $3,700 out of pocket."
"What is clear is that a new 'standalone' drug benefit will be more extensive than the White House first wanted for the current Medicare program, in which the government reimburses doctors and hospitals. President Bush hoped to use a drug benefit to draw seniors fully away from this government-run system and into private preferred-provider organizations."
"Instead, Congress seems to be moving toward a standalone drug-insurance plan, to be provided by private companies but available to seniors who remain in traditional Medicare. Drug benefits would be part of the new PPO option, too, but to the extent there is less differential, there is less incentive for the elderly to move."
National security politics:
There is still a sense among journalists and Democrats that the pre-war intelligence story might blow wide open, and there are four major stories leaning into all that today.
So far down on the front-page it nearly slipped inside, the Washington Post 's powerful Pincus and Priest shoot off this rocket:
"Vice President Cheney and his most senior aide (Scooter Libby) made multiple trips to the CIA over the past year to question analysts studying Iraq's weapons programs and alleged links to al Qaeda, creating an environment in which some analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration's policy objectives, according to senior intelligence officials." LINK
There's some he said/he said in this one, but it will be widely read at Langley and at the White House.
Cheney mind-melder Eric Schmitt of the New York Times turns his attention elsewhere: "The Pentagon's top policy adviser held an unusual briefing today to rebut accusations that senior civilian policy makers had politicized intelligence to fit their hawkish views on Iraq and to justify war on Saddam Hussein … ." LINK
The official is Douglas Feith, the under secretary of defense for policy, and some of Schmitt's sources are unhappy:
"After Mr. Feith's nearly hour-long briefing, some defense officials familiar with classified intelligence assessments on Iraq, its ties to terrorists and what the govern ment charged were its weapons of mass destruction programs, said they were baffled or angered by his remarks."
"One senior official, who said he was skeptical of Mr. Feith's account, was too angry to answer immediately. Another official said simply, 'There was a lot of doublespeak out there.'"
(Note Note: our sources, just to be clear, are regularly too angry to answer, and not just "immediately.")
The Wall Street Journal 's Cloud has a more general take on all this stuff:
"In a classified report last fall, the Central Intelligence Agency concluded that Iraq appeared to have resumed work on obtaining nuclear weapons — a finding that President Bush began trumpeting."
"But one important fact was kept secret: Some State and Energy department analysts dissented, arguing there wasn't enough evidence to support that conclusion. "Whole agencies … were in disagreement" with the October report, says Greg Thielmann, an intelligence official at the State Department who was responsible for Iraq until retiring last fall … ."
" … (T)here is no sign the issue is going away. Several congressional committees have announced inquiries into U.S. intelligence on Iraq. The CIA itself has brought back several former analysts to compare prewar intelligence reports with whatever is found in Iraq to assess whether there were flaws. Democratic presidential candidate Bob Graham said Wednesday that President Bush should be held accountable if intelligence was exaggerated. 'It would raise serious questions about the political leadership that engaged in that manipulation and the misleading of the American people,' said Mr. Graham, former chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence."
"In many ways, the debate over U.S. intelligence and the administration's rationale for the war is merely an extension of the debate over the war itself," writes the Los Angeles Times' M.Z. Barabak:
"As the search for weapons of mass destruction continues in Iraq, some Democratic presidential hopefuls believe the hunt has already turned up something of value: an issue to use against President Bush." LINK
"Even candidates who supported the war, and find themselves in a somewhat more awkward position, are raising questions about the administration's credibility and whether, wittingly or not, Bush misled Americans about the reason to go to war."
ABC 2004: The Invisible Primary:
Techie David Von Drehle curtain raises the Take Back America conference with a profile of MoveOn.org's Wes Boyd (who showed no signs whatsoever of stress about the Webbys). LINK
DVD's larger theme relates to the "liberals versus the DLC" debate.
The Union Leader's John DiStaso's Granite Status column has its usual plethora of information. LINK
DiStaso writes, "Doctors and insurance companies often don't mix. But they will join forces today at 11 a.m. to ask the 2004 Democratic Presidential candidates to talk about 'the growing medical malpractice litigation crisis in New Hampshire and across the country.'"
DiStaso also has some scheduling reports:
"The steady stream of George W. Bush surrogates continues on June 17, when White House Chief of Staff Andy Card speaks to — and receives an award from — the Daniel Webster Council of the Boy Scouts of America at the Center of New Hampshire in Manchester."
Senator Graham "will keynote the Manchester Democrats' Flag Day breakfast on June 14 at 9 a.m. at the Tower Cafe."
DiStaso also reports on some Gephardt and Lieberman Granite-solid endorsements, so, as always, check it out.
The Wall Street Journal editorial board "can hardly believe" that it's on the same side as Senators Clinton and Schumer about ethanol subsidies. Their piece has plenty of darts for Senator Frist, corn farmers, and Senator Lieberman.
The AP's H. Josef Hebert gives the latest on the ethanol free-for-all. LINK
"Oil companies have no love for ethanol, a fuel made of corn, yet they have signed on to a proposal that will see more of it replace gasoline."
KERRY
The intersection of campaign finance law and primary politics is always crowded with roadblocks, vehicles, and traffic lights.
If we were writing a lead to describe the latest coverage of Senator Kerry's financial situation, we might struggle mightily to exploit a metaphor just like that.
(We prefer Glen Johnson's Boston Globe lead, actually: "While Senator John F. Kerry's presidential candidacy has benefited from the perception he can tap his wife's multimillion-dollar fortune to finance his campaign, in reality federal election law restricts the amount of her money that is available to him.")
Most of the money fueling that perception has been tied up in income and assets generated by and controlled largely by his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry.
That includes dozens of investments, and several very large Heinz Foundation trusts. And maybe, at least three large homes.
Most of that has never been on the table. (And the Kerry campaign is on the record as having said that Teresa Kerry's money is Teresa Kerry's money and can't be used for the campaign.).
Campaign finance regulations are somewhat clear: if Kerry owns something outright, it's his to use. If he shares something with someone else, he needs to enumerate precisely what part of it is his and how he'd be able to put it to use, legally.
If he accepts a federal match, he can only add $50,000 from his own accounts. Either he takes the match and doesn't use his own money, or he rejects the match, and does. (No match = no caps = Kerry can spend as much as he'd like state by state and nationally.).
According to the Senator's latest financial disclosure forms, he held at least $1 million in assets and income. He hasn't released his most recent income tax returns, so we're not sure whether that constitutes the entirety of his income and income-generating possessions. It probably doesn't.
Mrs. Kerry has assets in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Some as yet undisclosed portion of her possessions are jointly held with the Senator. What's jointly held can be used, subject to some rules, even though most money vehicles aren't neatly delineated.
The FEC does say that joint bank accounts are fair game, even if the accounts aren't subdivided into his and hers.
Kerry himself could have assets, like, say, an Elvis stamp collection, that's worth several million dollars. He could sell those, collect the money, and use it. The same thing with, say, a collection of antique rifles.
So his total assets may, in fact, reach a point where he'd have enough, along with whatever he's been able to raise, to refuse the federal match. (Two Kerry campaign officials did not rule out that possibility this morning.).
The competition highly doubts it:
"Can't wait for the Louisburg Square garage sale. I can see it now — poking around dusty paintings, coin collections and antique cars — as Heinz Kerrys try to pull together enough money," says a senior campaign aide to a rival.
Kept alive, although perhaps on a ventilator, are Kerry's presidential opponents' senses of unease and irritation. They ask: Kerry himself must know how much money he'd be able to use on his own. Why not disclose it and give up the charade?
Anyway, the AP's Theimer started the ball rolling with her story yesterday, which was written in a way suggesting the campaign only recently arrived at the conclusion regarding "her" money.
"John Kerry's campaign says the Massachusetts senator cannot legally use any of his wife's multimillion-dollar Heinz investment holdings for his presidential race, taking away a vast pool of cash some Democrats hoped would help challenge President Bush's record fund raising."
"Under federal campaign law, assets solely under the control of Heinz Kerry, including those reported on Kerry's recent Senate disclosure form, cannot be used for the Democrat's presidential campaign, campaign spokesman Robert Gibbs said Wednesday." LINK
"Bush is expected to raise a record $200 million or more for his re-election bid. Kerry raised about $7 million from January through March, the most recent period for which figures are available."
"Kerry reported investments valued at about $700,000 to $2.4 million. Two of his advisers, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, said Kerry has several million dollars of his own money he could tap for his race."
"The Massachusetts senator is mum about what assets he hasn't reported. He has not yet disclosed income tax returns traditionally released to the public by most presidential candidates. Kerry hopes to release the returns at some point, Gibbs said."
"In the past, when asked whether Kerry would tap the Heinz fortune for the race, the campaign has said it might if the couple faced personal attacks. Gibbs said the campaign's interpretation of the law precluding Kerry from using his wife's money was reached some time ago."
"Campaign experts said the decision not to tap his wife's fortune should erase any perception, particularly among donors, that the vast personal fortune makes Kerry a more attractive Democratic rival to the well-funded Bush."
Question: can the wife "give" her money to the husband? In other words, can she pony up whatever million she has and simply transfer it to his campaign account?
Answer: family members can't contribute more than anyone else. (That's $2,000 per election.) So probably not, unless she had a pre-primary cycle habit of habitually giving her husband several million dollars worth of gifts.
Question: could Mrs. Heinz Kerry independently fund advertisements? In other words, can she decide to produce and pay for ads which extol the virtues of her husband?
Answer: Basically, no.
As the AP's Theimer writes: "Heinz Kerry cannot transfer assets to Kerry to influence a federal election."
And/but as the Globe's Johnson points out, she could theoretically use the money to run bland, generic issue ads that don't mention or refer to Kerry or anyone else. LINK
It's possible that she could give money to a third party, but the same restrictions would apply.
This is something that will be, as the Globe's Johnson suggests, clarified by the U.S. Supreme Court when it rules on the constitutionality of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act.
Lest we add a sentence about the political implications (we are, after all the Political Unit): would the Kerry campaign really want attention focused on Kerry's wife and her money funding ads in the middle of a boxing match this fall or next?
Johnson fills in more detail about the Kerry-Heinz fortune:
"Heinz Kerry had four significant properties prior to her marriage to Kerry in 1995: an estate outside Pittsburgh, a townhouse in Washington's Georgetown section, and vacation homes on Nantucket and in Ketchum, Idaho. When they married, Heinz Kerry and her husband jointly bought a townhouse on Beacon Hill's tony Louisburg Square. That home is now thought to be worth $7 million."
And he adds some context:
"The issue of Kerry's access to his wife's wealth resurfaced yesterday when the Associated Press reported that Kerry's campaign had concluded that federal election law barred him from tapping any of his wife's assets for his campaign."
"Kerry's aides sought to play down the story, saying it merely restated an accurate reading of federal election law."
'''It is not a legal or factual revelation that John Kerry cannot use her money,' said campaign manager Jim Jordan. 'It is black-letter law that one cannot get around that for a candidate to spend personal funds, they have to be under his control or under his joint control with his spouse.'''
"In a May 19 article in The Los Angeles Times, Gerald McEntee, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, was described as repeatedly returning to Kerry's electability against President Bush, citing Kerry's military service in the Vietnam War, his campaign organization, 'and his ability to tap the personal fortune of his wife, Teresa Heinz.'''
"During his 1996 reelection campaign against Massachusetts Governor William F. Weld, Kerry used his interest in the couple's joint assets as collateral for loans to pay for a last-minute campaigning advertising."
The AP's round-up squad of Pickler, Matthews, and Hananel report that Senator Kerry "called President Bush 'arrogant' in his dealings with foreign nations and multilateral institutions such as the United Nations." LINK
The Boston Globe reports that Senator Kerry picked up an endorsement from Manhattan's borough president, C. Virginia Fields, "a leading black politician in the city;" the Globe points out that Fields chose to endorse Kerry rather than "the Rev. Al Sharpton, an African-American activist who lives in Manhattan." LINK
A quote from Fields on Kerry: '''He understands, respects, and supports the struggle for civil rights, for women's rights, for equality and social justice in education, employment, housing, health care, and so much more.'''
EDWARDS
John Wagner does some curtain raising on Senator Edwards Campaign for America's Future appearance in today's Raleigh News & Observer. LINK
"U.S. Senator John Edwards today will propose cracking down on pharmaceutical industry advertising and pricing policies in an attempt to curb the 'crippling costs' of prescription drugs for consumers."
"The measures, which Edwards will make public at a gathering of liberal activists in Washington, mark his formal entrance into a health-care debate among the Democrats' 2004 White House contenders. In recent weeks, others in the nine-member field have laid out detailed plans, largely focused on expanding access to insurance. Edwards is planning a broader address on the subject next month but today will focus on cost control, part of the problem that has not been emphasized by others in the field, aides said."
"'This is an issue that will define our commitments as a country: whether we put consumers or corporate interests first,' Edwards says in remarks prepared for delivery to the Campaign for America's Future."
Wagner goes on to report that Edwards' plan includes disclosure requirements on advertising by drug companies as well as rebate agreements that drug manufacturers have entered into with pharmacy benefits managers.
The Washington Post 's wonkish Amy Goldstein was allowed to curtain-raise the thing too. LINK
Jim Morrill of The Charlotte Observer also got a peek LINK
The AP's Nedra Pickler writes it up also. LINK
Pickler Notes: "Edwards' aides have said his plans won't be nearly as large or as costly as those introduced by some of his opponents for the Democratic nomination."
Mr. Wagner also transcribes the endorsements of New York City Councilman Bill ("I'm so happy not to be working for Hillary today!") de Blasio and former Tennessee Congressman Bob Clement. Senator Edwards is set to make his first campaign trip to Al Gore's home state next Thursday, reports Wagner.
LINK
NEW HAMPSHIRE
The American Association of Health Plans won't stand by while the SEIU attempts to dominate the New Hampshire presidential health care debate.
The following doctors: Peter Forssell, the president of the New Hampshire medical society; David Charlesworth, a Manchester surgeun, Krishna A. Das, an OBGYN, and Gary Woods, an orthopedic surgeon, will join AAHP's Karen Ignani in unveling a new med-mal reform billboard to be displayed in downtown Manchester.
It plays off the "litigation lottery" theme.
The DLC's Al From will join Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell on Friday to announce plans for the DLC's summer "National Conversation."
Speaking of:
St. Anselm Solomon Dante Scala accuses From and the DLC's Bruce Reed of doing "some myth-making (or, perhaps more to the point, wishful thinking) of their own" in their claim that more independents than Democrats may vote in the 2004 Dem. presidential primary. LINK
"'Undeclared,' or independent, voters do indeed outnumber Republicans and Democrats on New Hampshire 's registration lists. Curiously, though, From and Reed depend on exit polls (and voters' sometimes hazy memories of their party affiliation) to arrive at their estimate of how many undeclared voters cast ballots in the 2000 primary, rather than using the exact number of undeclared voters, as compiled by the Secretary of State's office. LINK
from figures provided by town and city clerks. The actual number of undeclared voters who cast ballots in the 2000 primaries was 111,013 — some 44,000 below the DLC duo's estimate, which erroneously inflated undeclared turnout by 40 percent."
"As a result, From and Reed also underestimate the number of 2000 presidential primary voters who were registered with one party or another, and overestimate the relative power of independents. Since the Secretary of State's office also tallied the actual number of undeclared voters who took a Democratic or Republican ballot, we can determine the exact number of registered Democrats and registered Republicans who cast ballots in the 2000 primary, by subtracting the undeclareds from the total number of ballots cast in each party's primary. The results are as follows:"
"o Registered Republican voters = 239,523 — 68,492 = 171,031"
"o Registered Democratic voters = 156,862 — 42,521 = 114,341"
"o Undeclared voters = 68,492 (casting GOP ballots) + 42,521 (Dem ballots) = 111,013"
"In actuality, undeclareds had the smallest turnout of the three major groups of voters (not the largest, as From and Reed estimate) and the lowest turnout rate as well … "
As with everything Scalian, you gotta read the whole thing.
Back to you, Al and Bruce.
Meanwhile, the Democratic Leadership Council (which has achieved Ashcroftian emnity status for many liberals) used their daily e-mail to address the the Campaign For America's Future folks:
"We agree with you that congressional Democrats failed in the 2002 midterms to lay out a clear vision for the country. In our view, they ignored the dominant issue of security, and tried to change the subject to a laundry list of old, tired, unconvincing promises that turned off the very voters we need to win. Our party's nominee cannot afford to make the same mistake in 2004, by setting forth an old, tired vision — or by ignoring the country's legitimate, immediate concerns about the need to make
America safe."
"That's why we will continue to send out warning signals that the party needs to face some enduring problems about how Americans perceive us. We cannot regain the White House if we raise new doubts in Americans' minds about Democrats, or if we deepen, rather than rebut, the lingering doubt that Karl Rove and company
exploited in the midterm elections: that too many Americans don't much trust us to protect them against terrorists and other threats to our national security. We're not convinced that your panel on "Next Stages for the Peace Movement" will reassure the country on this count. We will continue to speak out for an
assertive, principled American role in the world, and bold, smart measures to make America safer at home."
DEAN
In advance of a National Press Club speech today, Governor Howard Dean talked health care costs in a conference call yesterday:
"We need to allow statewide latitude in controlling drug costs."
"We need to remove restrictions from importation of drugs from other countries."
"We need to require pharmaceutical manufactures to disclose the purpose and nature of any gift, fees, subsidies … that those companies pay to doctors to get them to prescribe their productions."
Finally, he proposed experiments in "value based purchasing," setting performance goals and providers to achieve certain goals related to patient care and cost containment. He admitted it was "provocative."
Dean said he'd convene a conference on health care as soon as he became president. But it wouldn't be "political fluff." He hopes it would result in some real solutions.
Speaking of Dean, we've learned (from an invitee) that he'll attend a fundraiser tonight at the Georgetown home of Mrs. Ellen Charles.
Gremlins invaded Vermont!
ABC News has learned that an errant clip by a telephone company repairperson cut outgoing phone service to Governor Dean's Vermont headquarters yesterday.
Spokeswoman Dorie Clark says that e-mail was down for several hours but back up as of last night.
A wag with ties to the Dean campaign says that the electronic imbroglio forced staffers to a nearby Kinko's to get their work done.
The AP's Pickler writes that Governor Dean "will begin making 'house calls' at homes, hospitals and workplaces to sell his health care plan." LINK
SHARPTON
The AP round-up squad reports that Reverend Sharpton declared Wednesday he has no intention of running as a third-party candidate. LINK
On CNN's Crossfire, Sharpton also "rejected suggestions that he's not getting enough respect from his party or that Democratic leaders are snubbing him because of his race."
LIEBERMAN
In light of news reports last week that the Bush Administration may have suppressed a Treasury department economic analysis that showed more sever long-term budget liabilities than previously thought, Senator Lieberman fired off a letter on Wednesday to Secretary Snow requesting that he release that analysis to the public.
In his letter, Lieberman wrote, "I believe the public we serve is owed a full accounting — both of the facts surrounding the suppression of this study, and of what it says about our fiscal stability and the administration's fiscal policy. Therefore, I am requesting a formal explanation for why this important study was edited out of the Fiscal Year 2004 Budget and kept from public view at a time when the administration was securing enactment of the tax cut."
The New Republic angered Senator Lieberman's campaign by claiming the release of a Lieberman-backed report on the semiconductor industry coincided with neatly with Lieberman's having accepted money and endorsements from the high tech crowd.
Responds Lieberman's Dan Gerstein: "[W]e had been working on a report on the decline of the U.S. semiconductor industry for several months. In fact, after doing some checking, I confirmed that we first started investigating this trend in October of last year--three full months before Joe Lieberman declared his candidacy for president."
"We also made clear that our office first discussed releasing this report in early May--four weeks before Senator Lieberman's recent visit to Silicon Valley and the announcement of the high-tech endorsements he received there. We would have released the report at that time, except that we chose to wait for another Senate office to decide whether to join us in endorsing the report (they ended up declining). "
Senator Lieberman tries to placate anxious Jews by urging them to have faith in America. LINK
GRAHAM
The AP's Beth Fouhy reports that Senator Graham "said Wednesday that President Bush would be held accountable if evidence shows intelligence on Iraq's weapons program was intentionally manipulated to justify war." LINK
Some days, we confess, we aren't sure we understand Bill Safire's column, but today he APPEARS to take a shot at Bob Graham on the diary matter. LINK
MOSELEY BRAUN
The Associated Press reports that Ambassador Moseley Braun "said she will decide whether to stay in the race in September, but at this point she intends to pursue the nomination with a campaign strategy that may bypass New Hampshire, the first primary state." LINK
KUCINICH
Roll Call 's Josh Kurtz profiles Kucinich message man, Jeff Cohen.
"Working primarily from his home in upstate New York, Cohen has been trying to cobble together a media operation befitting the renegade campaign the four-term Congressman is waging. It isn't easy."
"'This is probably the most decentralized campaign I've ever seen,' Cohen said."
"But while most presidential candidates seek out seasoned political spinners who revel in the give and take with cynical inside-the-Beltway reporters, Kucinich has turned to a media adviser who takes his inspiration from the street protests that disrupted the World Trade Organization conference in Seattle in 1999."
"'We're just trying to figure out a movement campaign,' Cohen said. 'A grassroots campaign. An Internet campaign.'"
"The major media have largely ignored Kucinich so far, or treated him like a hopeless eccentric. Cohen said the media ignore reality."
Legislative Agenda:
The House passed a ban on partial birth abortions last night, and in doing so "rekindled a powerful political issue that has energized core voters in both the Republican and Democratic parties," writes Knight Ridder's James Kuhnhenn. LINK
The AP's Jim Abrams writes that the ban could "set the stage for a Supreme Court decision that could affect the future of abortion rights." LINK
The AP also provides the vote tally. LINK
Knight Ridder's Frank Davies writes up the Continuity of Government Commission's report that recommends a constitutional amendment to ensure the uninterrupted operation of the House. LINK
Economy
The WSJ has a story about more evidence that increasing worker productivity is hampering job creation.
House Of Labor:
The Washington Post 's Tom Edsall writes a must-read about Steve Rosenthal's Partnership for America's Families, and casts the battle as pitting Rosenthal against AFSCME's McEntee, as others have. LINK
But what makes Tom's piece terrific is his clever tying of this dissension to the larger attempt to create the umbrella alliance — something those 72 Hour folks think about ALL THE TIME.
"A fractured trade union movement could, in turn, severely hamper the incipient effort to create an alliance of liberal groups eager to defeat Bush. Labor and Rosenthal's partnership group are viewed as key pillars in the effort, which also includes the Sierra Club, NARAL Pro-Choice America, the NAACP, the Human Rights Campaign, the League of Conservation Voters and EMILY's List."
Edsall quotes Harold Ickes and Gina Glantz who say very colorful things in the can't-we-all-just-get-along vein, and (and we hate taking sides in something like this, but c'mon), Rosenthal actually seems to have to prove his bona fides in terms of caring about the advancement and place at the table for minorities.
He gets the Donna Brazile seal of approval, which is presumably good enough for most.
The AP's Leigh Strope reports, "House Republican leaders yanked an overtime pay bill from Thursday's schedule after failing to find enough votes for passage, a rare win for labor unions in a Congress controlled by the GOP." LINK
"Wednesday's move followed a massive lobbying effort by organized labor that targeted moderate House Republicans."
Bush-Cheney Re-Elect:
In his press gaggle aboard Air Force One, President Bush took the opportunity to describe his diplomatic style while summiting with Prime Ministers Sharon and Abbas. Dr. Rice chimed in with her own assessment of the president's style calling it "direct." But the president put it in a different light.
"I didn't need, for example, to be Mr. Chatty. You know, kind of, hey, fellows. (Laughter.) There was a natural tendency to want to talk about common matters and common desires."
Has Mr. Bush ever needed to play the role of Mr. Chatty?
Or perhaps this was a sign that the president is on a mission to bring back the little mister and miss books of The Note's childhood. We can only hope.
Bloomberg (the news organization, not the mayor) reports, "U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow will be the main draw next week at a $10,000-a-table fundraiser for Republicans, stepping into a political role that brought criticism to predecessors including Robert Rubin." LINK
"Snow, fresh from helping President George W. Bush win a $330 billion tax cut, will speak at a Virginia Republican dinner June 13 in Richmond. Tickets to hear the former chairman of hometown- based railroad CSX Corp. range from $75 for a 'Passenger' ticket to $10,000 for a 'Conductor's Circle' table of 10."
"The Treasury is taking steps to insulate Snow from the criticism that befell Rubin, who as secretary under President Bill Clinton was featured at a 1996 White House coffee gathering organized by the Democratic National Committee. Such situations can create landmines, analysts said."
The Observer's Josh Benson got a hold of the invitation to President Bush's June 23rd New York fundraiser and added up all the tiers to find out what it all means for the Bush-Cheney '04 bottom line. LINK
"The Observer calculated the sum-around $5.8 million-from an invitation to the event, which lists supporters according to the amount they are committed to raise. Even if some of the commitments are not completely fulfilled, the sheer size of the donor list indicates the likelihood of a record-breaking haul."
"The money is being generated by a Roll Call of top leaders in the finance, insurance, law and construction industries, all of whom will have used their powerful networks of friends and colleagues to 'bundle' small donations into much larger total contributions. Some of them, like Jets owner Robert (Woody) Johnson and insurance magnate Maurice (Hank) Greenberg, were key participants in Mr. Bush's fund-raising efforts in 2000. Others, like Lehman Brothers chief executive and major Democratic donor Richard Fuld, are first-time backers who now want to play a role in the re-election effort."
The Los Angeles Times' Ron Brownstein concludes that "Bush's push for concessions from Israel as part of the peace process raises red flags among pro-Israel evangelical Christians — a core element of his political coalition — and conservative Jews who have liked the president's staunch support for Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon." LINK
PoliticsNH.com's James W. Pindell writes, "A dozen or so of this area's most devoted Republican activists sat at desks at the New Hampshire Technical Institute here learning in PowerPoint presentations how their political party will defeat Democrats in 2004 elections some 16 months away and what role they will play." LINK
"By the end of the summer the same scene will have occurred in 10 different places around the state in what may become one of the most ambitious efforts yet to build support at the grassroots by a single political party."
Politics:
The New York Times ' Kit Seelye follows (with credit) The Hill story on John Podesta's (temporarily named) American Majority Institute. Another one for the 72 Hour crowd. LINK
When we saw this headline in the Washington Times : "Hill cool to Clinton's president-term idea," we thought it was a story about 42's wife and her new book. Alas, the Times is not the New York Post , and hasn't yet resorted to shortening HRC to "Hill." LINK
Chris Cillizza's take on Demzilla in today's Roll Call in a story that the DeShong press shop will be none too pleased to read.
"An ambitious project envisioned as a centralized voter contact and fundraising tool for the Democratic Party has drawn criticism from a variety of interest groups and sparked new complaints about operations at the Democratic National Committee."
"The huge database, containing an estimated 150 million voters and known within the party as 'Demzilla,' has become a sore spot for some state parties and interest groups who say they were not adequately consulted during its development."
"Questions have also arisen in the consultant community and on the staff level about the system's cost and its ability to produce accurate voter contact information in a timely fashion."
"'Demzilla is an idea that on paper makes a lot of sense,' said one Democratic consultant. 'The problem is that they took the idea and let the technology run ahead of their relationships with the people who had to participate in it.'"
"Deborah DeShong, communications director for the DNC, insisted that 'we are very encouraged' by the response so far to the program."
"In order for the database to perform effectively, argued one party consultant, the DNC must acquire up-to-date voter files from each state party as well as a variety of interest groups."
"That acquisition process is based on a trust agreement that, for the most part, does not exist between those groups and the DNC, said the consultant."
"'It takes a tremendous amount of trust from state parties, committees and groups to get the buy-in needed,' said one Democratic activist, who noted that organizations are concerned the DNC will take the lists they provide and harvest them for its own fundraising purposes, draining donors who might otherwise give to their state committees."
"'No one trusts the DNC to not steal stuff from their lists,' the activist added."
"Another Democratic consultant made it more personal: 'There is an inherent distrust between state parties and the [DNC] and some real distrust between the states and the party chairman.'"
The Washington Post 's brilliant Juliet Eilperin scratches 1% of the surface in her look at the "lobbying war" over Internet gambling, but hints at the other 99% via her kicker quote: "Rep. Jim Leach (R-Iowa), who wrote his own version of an Internet gambling bill, said he is not surprised by the heavy lobbying. 'America's gambling industry is very powerful and a behind-the-scenes player with a large role in American politics,' he said."
The Franks (Wolf and Fahrenkopf) couldn't have said it better themselves.
Governor Pataki will make an appearance on the John Walsh show (that's the show where the host focuses on crime issues, not on psychic connections, which would be John Edward's program--yes, apostrophe-s). LINK
The Note may have to place a bet on Funny Cide, who, according to the New York Daily News' Rush and Malloy, will be eyeballed at Belmont by the likes of Governor Pataki, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Mayor Bloomberg, Tommy Thompson, and Senators Schumer, Cochran, Landrieu and Shelby, along with celebrities big (Steven Speilberg) and small (James Wilke Broderick). LINK
The New York Daily News' Michael Saul writes about Mayor Bloomberg and the $90.2 million restored to the city, a big enough restitution to bump Stewart and Clinton to a strip along the top. LINK
The Washington Post 's Roxanne Roberts sums up the Radio & Television Correspondents' Association dinner, grimly Noting the impending FCC changes; quoting the merry Veep; failing to include the bio of well-received comedian Henry Cho; listing a few attendees (Rumsfeld, Evans, Wolfowitz, Sharpton, King, Ailes, McIntyre); congratulating Lisa Myers; and observing the establishment of the David Bloom award. LINK
The Charlotte Observer's Tim Funk reports North Carolina's junior senator is set to make her first big speech on the Senate floor today. LINK
"Senator Elizabeth Dole, who has kept a low profile in her first five months in office, plans to rise on the Senate floor this morning to deliver what she's calling her maiden speech."
"Her subject: Hunger."
Speaking of Senator Dole, it now appears abundantly clear to us that the Washington PR firm of Porter Novelli does not plan to quit hiring until all of The Note's favorite people work there.
The Washington Post 's encyclopedic Judy Sarasohn Notes that supergal Kathleen Harrington is moving her shingle over there, within the shadow of the ABC News' Washington bureau. LINK
Speaking of Liz Smith and Clinton (as we often do), Ms. Smith awards the spiffy, refined, uncombed-over David Broder "first prize for neatness and facing reality" after watching the pundits debate the prospect of a New York Mayor Clinton on the apparently unflatteringly-shot "Meet" last Sunday. LINK
BCRA
Expect the world: the New York Times ' Linda Greenhouse has a sophisticated, accessible explanation of the SCOTUS game of chicken (or is it hide-and-seek?) that he parties are playing. LINK
Judicial Confirmation Battles:
We love Mr. Stevenson's quote in the New York Times story about Robert Caro's letter opposing Republican efforts to change the ability to filibuster nominations:
"'He is a fine writer and a fine historian, but I will bet that if he was nominated for a judgeship and being filibustered, his views would be different,' Bob Stevenson, a spokesman for Dr. Frist, said." LINK
Al Hunt "got" the Caro letter too, but likes his take more than Stevenson does.
Bush Administration strategy/personality:
The Wall Street Journal 's David Wessel takes Secretary Snow to the woodshed on the dollar. (And were we the only ones who didn't know that Peter Fisher is leaving?)
Sure, her Notebooks aren't as meticulous as Mark Knoller's, but ABC News' Katy Textor has been one of the best reporters on the White House beat since Gordon Johndroe backed his U-Haul up to the OEOB.
Ms. Textor is giving up the honor of sitting in a the stir-crazy-inducing booth at the rear of the White House press area in order to do two fabulous things: move to New York and start a life with someone she loves.
Illustrating her keen eye for the Notable, Textor's final White House Note today included this: "After the president's speech soldiers who caught sight of Ari Fleischer were anxious to get their picture taken with the White House short timer. The clamoring for Ari photos left an unknown Karl Rove to serve as official photographer as soldier after solder passed Rove their disposable cameras."
