Apparently someone forgot to tell Rob Wittman that it isn’t ok to use taxpayer dollars to prepare, publish and mail his political campaign materials. The “franking privilege” allow members of Congress to send “official mail,” under their signature, without postage – although this sort of mail is not free as it is paid for by annual tax-funded appropriations. As Rob is no doubt aware, political campaign mailers do not fall under what is allowable as “official mail.”

Additionally, congressmen are prohibited (Section 3210 (a)(6)(A), Title 39 U.S.C.) from sending out any mass mailings during the 90-days preceding the date of an election – be it primary or general. A mass mailing is defined as “an unsolicited mailing of 500 or more pieces of substantially identical content – whether mailed singly or in bulk – over the course of a legislative year.”

Since the 90-day blackout period begun, Rob has not shied away from using taxpayer funds to send out what are clearly campaign mailers. Kandy Hilliard, Chair of the Stafford Democratic Committee, issued a press release this morning that accused him of misusing taxpayer funds for campaign expenses and called for a formal investigation to be launched.

Stafford Democratic Committee Chair Kandy Hilliard to File Complaint Against Rep. Rob Wittman Cites Misuse of Taxpayer Funds for Campaign Expenses

Congressman Rob Wittman is using our tax dollars to fund his re-election campaign. By using tax money to print and mail political campaign materials, Congressman Wittman is abusing the method that Members of Congress use to keep in touch with constituents.

This method, called the “franking privilege” allows congressmen to mail their official documents for free. The rules for use of this privilege are governed by the Committee on House Administration’s Franking Commission. To safeguard the interests of the public and to ensure that taxpayers are not underwriting campaign expenses, the Franking Commission has a “blackout period” of 90 days before an election. The “black out period” for this election started August 2, 2010. Yet Mr. Wittman continues to send campaign mailers using the Congressional Frank well beyond this date.

In the last three weeks, I have received two franked postcards from Mr. Wittman that directly respond to issues that have been raised by the Krystal Ball campaign. In mid-September, Mr. Wittman sent out another direct mail piece, a four-color, glossy 8×11 foldout, touting Mr. Wittman’s political activities. Ironically, this piece includes the quotes “Government spending is out of control. It’s time to restore fiscal responsibility in Washington.” (These mailers are attached to this release.)

People throughout the First District have also shared with me that they have also received these taxpayer funded campaign mailers from Rob Wittman.

Today I am announcing that I will file a formal complaint with the House Franking Commission. In addition to this complaint, I will request that this misuse of public funds for Rob Wittman’s re-election campaign be thoroughly investigated and that appropriate measures are taken to prevent any further misuse of tax payer’s hard-earned money. Furthermore, Congressman Wittman should return all the taxpayer money that he used for his reelection campaign.

It’s the height of arrogance when an incumbent politician abuses our tax money to pay for his campaign expenses. What Congressman Wittman is doing is just plain wrong and it must stop.

Rob’s opponent, Krystal Ball, has continuously raised the fact, throughout the campaign, that he does a lot of talking about “the [Chesapeake ] Bay, and how important it is and how we have to clean it up, and then he turns around and votes against the Clean Estuaries Act.” As recently as one week ago, Rob sent out a taxpayer-funded postcard in response to her claims, which followed a very similar taxpayer-funded postcard sent out the prior week by his office. So not only is Rob using taxpayer dollars to fund his campaign mailers, he also appears to be in clear violation of the 90-day blackout period on sending mass unsolicited mailings.

Along with this most recent mailing, Rob also sent out another direct mail piece in mid-September that highlighted his political activities and was clearly meant to advertise his candidacy. From what I’ve been able to gather, it leaves little doubt that this is meant to support his re-election campaign and also appears to be clearly in violation of the 90-day blackout period on unsolicited mass mailings.

The explicit limitations placed on the congressional “franking privilege” are meant to not only protect taxpayers, but also to ensure an equal playing field in an election year. Rob should issue an apology and immediately return all taxpayer funds that he has used in his re-election bid.

I understand that Rob is a career politician who believes that the rules don’t apply equally to him and who now relies on our tax dollars as his primary source of income, thus, epitomizing what is wrong with the culture in Washington today; however, this is not a valid excuse for his behavior.

Einstein stated that the definition of insanity is “doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” Clearly, folks looking for a change in Washington would be “insane” to send him back. Rather, it’s time to send Rob packing.

What we need is a new mindset. One where the rules apply again, ethical lines are clearly respected, and members, regardless of party, can work together as colleagues to solve the big problems we are facing together. We need to look to the next generation of leaders who can cast aside decades of gridlock and an “us vs. them” attitude. In the upcoming election, Krystal Ball is clearly that candidate!

I’d say that the Wittman campaign is feeling quite threatened these days by Krystal Ball’s (D-VA-1^st CD) candidacy that they felt that they needed to dismiss her as a candidate through an extremely sexist comment.

Great job by the Farm Team on calling them out!

Wittman for Congress makes sexist remarks about
female opponent, Krystal Ball

Recently, a spokesperson for Congressman Rob Wittman of the 1st District of Virginia made a controversial statement about his opponent, Krystal Ball. In referring to Mrs. Ball, the Wittman campaign described her as “cute” stating, “As cute as our opponent may think she is…”

Today, Susan Platt, a founding member of The Farm Team said, “It is regrettable that Rob Wittman’s campaign feels it is acceptable to degrade the Democratic Nominee for Congress for the First Congressional, who happens to be a woman, in such a manner.”

Platt continued, “Krystal is running a smart, issue-oriented campaign and should be treated with respect.  Not only is it disrespectful to Mrs. Ball, but to the many other women across Virginia who expect more from their elected officials.  We hold our leaders to a higher standard.  That’s why we’re supporting Krystal Ball for Congress.”

The comments were in response to a recent online video, www.ontheroadwithrob.com, where Congressman Rob Wittman is challenged on his voting record and his lack of accessibility to his constituents in the 1st district of VA.

The Farm Team is a grassroots organization established in 2008 to recruit, develop, and elect women to public office.  More information about the organization can be found at www.farmteam.org.

I think it is time for Wittman to send his folks to sensitivity training, since he obviously doesn’t intend to send them to work (see aforementioned video in press release).

That’s what constituents in the 1^st District of Virginia are wondering. It’s no wonder that his constituents have no idea who or where he is, since he has no legislative accomplishments to speak of and instead spends his time hobnobbing at GOP fundraisers and hanging out with his pal Eric Cantor (see Lap Dog article).

It’s no wonder that Rob Wittman (R-VA) doesn’t want to face his constituents when he has consistently voted against their interests. You can check out his record here. Here are a few of his highlights lowlights:

With healthcare costs continuing to rise and with seniors taking a big hit in this economy, Congressman Rob Wittman undermined Medicare so that private corporations could make more money.

Congressman Wittman voted for a plan that would have gutted Medicare, forcing seniors to buy higher cost insurance directly from big insurance companies and pay thousands of dollars in additional out of pocket costs each year for health care (HJR85, 2009).

[…]

Those who are sent overseas to defend our nation deserve a Representative in Congress that will stand with them when they return home. But when given the chance, Congressman Rob Wittman repeatedly voted against our veterans and men and women in uniform (HR1105, 2009; HCR85, 2009; HR2642, 2008; HCR312, 2008).

He voted to cut education and job assistance programs for our soldiers returning home from overseas (HR2642, 2008).

[…]

Congressman Rob Wittman has taken tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from big banking interests (www.fec.gov). But when it came time to protect Virginia families facing foreclosure, Congressmen Wittman sided with those same companies by voting against a plan to provide assistance to those at risk of losing their home (HR1106, 2009).

Wittman claims that he is an effective leader and I tend to agree. He is effectively BAD!

According to Roll Call Magazine, Wittman was ranked last in effectiveness of ALL Congressmen in Virginia. And out of the 435 members of Congress was ranked 432nd in his ability to pass legislation that benefited his constituents.

What about this session of Congress? Has he improved? Wittman was rated a follower by Govtrack.us. Less than 1% of the bills Wittman has Co-Sponsored have become law. This puts him in the bottom 10% of all members.

Could you imagine if he actually performed this well in private industry? Something tells me he would have been sent packing a long time ago. I say we send Wittman a pink slip and hire Krystal Ball (D-VA) come November!

Democrats helped Krystal Ball (D-Fredericksburg) shed the presumptive nominee label by selecting her to be the official democratic nominee from Virginia’s 1^st Congressional District at a convention this past Saturday.

Ball wasted little time in drawing a sharp contrast between her and Congressman Rob Wittman (R-Montross).

When we passed Social Security they threatened to repeal it, when we passed Medicare they threatened to repeal it and now, now that we have passed health care reform they are threatening to repeal it. Well I have one message for Eric Cantor and John Boehner and to Rob Wittman. Let me say this clearly. I don’t care what your buddies in the health insurance lobby want we are not going backwards!

So what are Wittman’s legislative priorities? You’ll have to ask Eric Cantor (R-VA-7^th).

As long as we have politicians like Rob Wittman, nothing is going to change. You know Rob Wittman. He has been our Congressman for three years now. And in that three years he’s basically learned one thing, which is how to vote the way Eric Cantor tells him to.

You see Wittman is nothing more than a lap dog for Cantor. As I’ve previously written, Wittman has done Cantor’s bidding 1657 times or 93 percent of time. Folks in Virginia’s 1^st district deserve some real representation and not a lap dog!

Ball also notes that while folks in the 1^st district are being left behind, Wittman is taking good care of his friends on Wall Street.  While Wittman votes against extending unemployment insurance, he fights to preserve Wall Street executive bonuses. It’s called “No Banker Left Behind!”

Worse yet, while Wittman fights for Wall Street over Main Street, he also continues to pay lip service to our veterans and the environment. Priorities Rob, priorities!

Rob Wittman is the worst kind of politician. He is the kind of politician who talks about veterans and then votes against Sen. Webb’s 21st century GI bill. He is the type of politician, who talks about the [Chesapeake] Bay, and how important it is and how we have to clean it up, and then he turns around and votes against the Clean Estuaries Act. Rob Wittman takes his orders from credit cards companies, health insurance companies and banks. But you know what, those guys already have enough members of congress fighting for them. We need a fighter for the 1^st district of Virginia!

Ball concluded things best by saying that voters have a clear choice come November.

They can choose between tax cuts for the few and balancing the budget for everyone, between preserving the middle class and preserving Wall Street executive bonuses, between leaders who are willing to stand up for what’s right and those who only stand for their own re-election.

It’s time to fire wrong way Rob and hire a full-time representative who stands up for Main Street over Wall Street, who does more than provide lip service to our veterans and environment and who doesn’t take orders from credit card companies, health insurance companies or banks, but the American people. That person is clearly Krystal Ball!

In a big announcement this morning, Starbucks has introduced two new beverage sizes to its U.S. stores: the Plenta and the Micra.

Hugh Mungis, Starbucks VP of Volume issued the following statement:

Whether customers are looking for a large or small size, the Plenta and the Micra satisfy all U.S. and Canada customers’ needs for more and less coffee. Our size selection is now plentiful.

Republicans have responded by saying “Hell No, You Can’t” and blasting this as a direct result of the recently signed health care reform (HCR) legislation.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) also blasted the new Plenta size as an “attempt by Democrats to kill Grandma and Grandpa.” He also noted that this new size would cause health care costs to “skyrocket.”

Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Michael Steele was most concerned about the Micra size. He worries that children will become “hooked” on Starbucks’ caffeinated beverages and that the HCR provision that allowed for this was nothing more than a “giveaway” to Democrats liberal friends (e.g. Starbucks). He argued that with all of the problems we are facing, there is certainly a “better way to spend money.”

Rep. Rob  Wittman (R-Montross) of Virginia’s First Congressional District  was most concerned on the environmental impact of the Plenta-sized cup. Having attained no significant legislative accomplishments, since being elected in 2007, and having the notoriety of being ranked as of one of the 10 least effective members of Congress, Wittman has decided to change his image and take a stand on this “travesty” by Democrats.

He will introduce a bill tomorrow that will mandate that the Plenta-sized cup be recycled and reused for other purposes. He suggests that the Plenta-sized cup could be used as a popcorn receptacle, rain hat, perennial planter, lampshade, yoga block, milk dish for kittens, soft boiled egg cup or a paper clip holder.

Tea Party folks are also outraged that these new sizes will only be available for coffee-based beverages and not tea. They argue that this is a “huge” waste of taxpayer funds, especially when they receive no direct benefit from the legislation. They have threatened to board any Starbucks truck carrying these new sizes and “destroy the cups.”

Republicans plan to campaign heavily on this issue in the fall and believe that it will resonate with voters, allowing them to win back control of Congress.

It’s past time that Virginia’s First Congressional District had some real representation that is accountable to district constituents and not party bosses such as Eric Cantor (R-VA). Since December 13, 2007, Rob Wittman (R-VA) has made sure that the 7^th Congressional District gets two representatives and the 1^st gets none.

Wittman has pretty much done Cantor’s bidding, resembling more of a lap dog and not an elected representative from Virginia’s First Congressional District.

A lap dog is defined as “one eager to do another’s bidding, especially in order to maintain a position of privilege or favor.” Sounds like Wittman to me.

Let’s compare Wittman and Cantor’s voting records:

Rob Wittman and Eric Cantor have voted together 1657 times on roll call votes since January, 2007 in votes where neither abstained, representing a voting similarity of 93%.

So, Wittman has done Cantor’s bidding 1657 times or 93% of the time. One thing should be clear: Wittman is working for Cantor and not his constituents. We need and deserve our own congressman!

I, for one, am sick and tired of having no representation. If you’re sick and tired too, Krystal Ball (D-Fredericksburg) is ready and more then able to serve! We don’t need a lap dog, but a congressman!

Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Montross) has once again decided to side with the fringe of his party and vote “no” on the health care reform bill. This should be news to no one, since Wittman has continuously voted in lockstep with his party – the party of “no.” What should surprise everyone is Wittman’s complete lack of understanding of the bill itself and his continued dishonesty – well maybe not his dishonesty.

This past Tuesday, Wittman took the House floor and had the following to say:

I am hearing loud and clear from people of America’s first district in Vir-ginia that this health care bill before us will not reduce costs, will not increase access…

Wittman reiterated this again yesterday, via Twitter:

Wittman has clearly chosen to adopt the talking points of the fringe of his party, no surprise here, and refuses to have an honest discussion with his constituents. This bill will increase access for all, including providing access to 32 million uninsured Americans.

I too am very concerned with spending and the deficit, which is exactly why I support the comprehensive health care reform bill passed by the Senate and the accompanying reconciliation bill.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the official scorekeepers of legislation, have clearly stated that the

combination of these two pieces of legislation would reduce federal deficits by an estimated $138 billion over the 2010-2019 period.

And they added that passing these bills would

reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law – with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range around one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP).

On Friday at George Mason University, President Obama added the following:

So you’ve got — you’ve got a whole bunch of opponents of this bill saying, well, we can’t afford this; we’re fiscal conservatives.  These are the same guys who passed that prescription drug bill without paying for it, adding over $1 trillion to our deficit — “Oh, we can’t afford this.”  But this bill, according to the Congressional Budget Office — which is the referee, the scorekeeper for how much things cost — says we’ll save us $1 trillion. Not only can we afford to do this, we can’t afford not to do this.

So let’s get this straight. We are talking about reducing the deficit by at least $1 trillion over the next 20-years, if health care reform is passed. Many would argue that this is a conservative estimate. The CBO has estimated that the GDP would be around $22.5 trillion in 2020. If you estimate 4 percent growth per year in GDP in the second 10-years and use the CBO estimate of a one-half percent deficit reduction during that timeframe, you would actually be reducing the deficit by $1.4 trillion. No matter how you look at things, one thing should be clear: there is no disputing that this health care bill reduces the deficit.

If Wittman is a true “fiscal conservative,” as the President explains, how could he vote against a bill that clearly addresses the concerns of his constituents?  The truth is that he is more concerned with appealing to the fringe of his party than what is in the best interests of his constituents. Clearly reducing the deficit and providing affordable coverage to individuals (including the currently uninsured) and small businesses is bad policy?!

The only thing that is bad policy is allowing Wittman to remain in Congress. The good thing for folks in the First District is that we have an excellent choice to replace him this year in Krystal Ball (D-Fredericksburg).

Why not? Republicans voted for her in droves last November, which throws Kool-Aid water on Virginia Virtucon‘s claim that she only appeals to the conspiracy theory crowd. She won Caroline and King George County, and only lost Northumberland County (site of her now famous “Bullet Box” speech) by a single vote!

In a letter to Allen Webb discussing her decision, Catherine Crabill begins:

I have started collecting signatures to run against Rob Wittman for the Republican Nomination. I was asked by three different people to consider it and I said I would have to seek the Lord’s Will about it. The Lord has sent His confirmation with many signs and wonders, so I have the peace I needed to pursue it. Why? You might ask. The primary reason is Wittman’s complete lack of character, leadership, and willingness to stand up and fight for our nation. His go-along-to-get-along position within the Republican party is evidenced by what he did to me last year.

Three people? Wow! That was the easiest “draft” movement in American political history. Catherine, consider me #4.

As we approach the first set of caucuses in Virginia’s First Congressional District, to determine the democratic nominee, Krystal Ball continues to rack up key endorsements. Today’s press release:

FREDERICKSBURG, VA. – As the nominating process to select the Democratic candidate for Virginia’s first Congressional District kicks off, key Democratic constituency groups are making it known who they think will be best prepared to take on Rob Wittman in November’s election.

Today, Krystal Ball for Congress has announced the support of three additional organizations: AFSCME, the Farm Team, and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC).

Adam Green of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) said, “We are very impressed by Krystal, her positions, her willingness to fight, and the Krystal Ball campaign operation.”

“I’ve been so impressed with the Progressive Change Campaign Committee’s commitment to issues that are important to Democrats, especially their support of a strong public option,” said Ball. “Their support, along with that of AFSCME and the Farm Team, give us a sense of momentum going into this nominating process.”

AFSCME is the largest public employee and health care workers union in the United States.

The Farm Team (via their website) added the following about their endorsement of Krystal:

Not only does she represent “a fresh face” but believes passionately on changing the way business is done in Washington. She will work to get beyond partisanship and for the best interest of Virginians to keep our state the best place to run a business and raise a family.

Krystal continues to build up momentum in the race for the democratic nomination in Virginia’s First Congressional District. As we’ve said before, she is clearly the best candidate to take on Rob Wittman come November.

Over the next week or so, I will be comparing the positions of Krystal Ball and Scott Robinson on a myriad of important issues. Krystal and Scott are both seeking the democratic nomination in the First Congressional District this year and they both appeared at a candidate forum hosted by the Stafford Democratic Committee this past Saturday.

The first issue that we will delve into is the environment. Both candidates were asked to talk about their environmental priorities and whether they support Cap and Trade.

Both candidates agreed that the preservation and protection of the Chesapeake Bay should be a top environmental priority; however, as opposed to Scott, Krystal displayed a much more thorough understanding of the issue at hand. At times it seems that Scott was just memorizing things and simply trying to recite them from memory. Not once did he mention anything about the effect climate change is actually having on the bay.

Krystal strongly believes that the

current regulatory regime for controlling nonpoint source pollution is just broken. We’ve got to fix it, we’ve got to get the EPA more involved in controlling nonpoint source pollution.

She also understands that in order to get the bay under control that we need to directly address, and in Wittman’s case acknowledge, the effects that climate change is having on the bay. Krystal goes on to say that

we can do everything right with the bay in terms of controlling pollution and it would all be for not, if we do not get climate change under control. It contributes to the algae blooms that create the dead zones that cause all the problems.

Krystal goes on to explain that

We are home to the second most vulnerable coastline to climate change. Second, only to New Orleans. So, this is an area that will quite frankly be under water, if we don’t get this under control. And Rob Wittman has voted time and time again against renewable energy. He voted against Cap and Trade. We’ve got to get serious about controlling climate change or else the bay is in big trouble.

Krystal also spent quite a bit of time advocating for renewable energy. She noted the huge potential of wind power off the coast of Norfolk. It has some of the highest sustained winds in the country and the shallow depth makes it very cost effective. She also noted the potential for solar power throughout the district.

The candidates differed substantially on Cap and Trade. Scott does not support it and Krystal does. Scott didn’t offer any reasons on why he opposed it.

Krystal on her support for Cap and Trade:

it is exactly the sort of market-based energy reform that, again, a responsible Republican should support. It uses market mechanisms to set the price, so it is as little government intervention as possible. And it is a policy that has been proven to work. Helped us to reduce acid rain under the Clean Air Act, so we know that it works.

Another issue that arose was nuclear power. Scott is a big supporter of nuclear power plants and Krystal is not ideologically opposed to it.  Krystal thinks that wind and solar power are better ways to go. Her big issues with nuclear power plants are how to deal with the waste that they generate and the incredible construction costs to build one. Krystal noted that

construction costs on nuclear plants have gone up from an estimated $3 billion per plant 5 years ago to now an estimated $9 billion dollars.

She brought everyone’s attention to the fact that the President has decided to commit taxpayer dollars to backing loans for nuclear power plants, which she strongly opposes.  She explains that the reason why the government had to get involved

was because no one in the market thought that this was a good deal. 50% of nuclear power plants do not make good on their loans.

It simply does not make fiscal sense and unnecessarily puts taxpayer dollars at risk.

Perhaps the biggest bombshell (perhaps quite literally) was Scott’s explanation on what he would do with the nuclear waste generated. He seemed to imply that nuclear waste would not be an issue with breeder reactors, something he strongly supports. When I first heard that I was speechless and it further reinforced the fact that he doesn’t do his homework.

The one advantage of a breeder reactor is a limitless supply of fuel; however, the disadvantages seriously outweigh any benefit. The waste produced by the breeder reactor must still be reprocessed, so that the ²³⁹Pu byproduct can be filtered out and reused by the reactor as fuel. ²³⁹Pu is also incredibly dangerous. It is so dangerous that the nuclear industry puts limits on how much of it an individual can handle over a lifetime. The fuel that this reactor uses and produces can also be used in a nuclear bomb. The security concerns are enormous and puts this country at a huge security risk, as these reactors would be present a huge target for terrorist organizations. If all of that isn’t enough to scare you, the costs for these reactors are very high.

I’m shocked that Scott would strongly endorse using breeder reactors, especially based on his background in the military. His biography indicates that he managed policy development regarding weapons of mass destruction as his final assignment at the Pentagon. You would think that with all of his “experience” that he wouldn’t be proposing something that has the potential to endanger the security of this nation.

It is clear to me that Krystal has a way better grasp on environmental issues and, most importantly, does her homework before making policy decisions. This is just the sort of person that this district needs.

UPDATE: For an excellent further analysis of these issues, see Blue Virginia.