Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood

Save Our Ship

2012-01-23T09:16:00.006-05:00

Earlier this month, the world watched in horror as the Costa Concordia cruise ship veered off course and capsized after hitting a rock. The multimillion-dollar ship was huge and impressive; no one had thought to question its safety before the accident. The captain, who had absolute control, chose to ignore reality.

With Steve Israel at the helm this cycle, the DCCC's resemblance to the Costa Concordia is getting stronger by the minute.

A quick glance at the Red to Blue 2012 list shows that the D-Trip is once again tying its own shoelaces together, ignoring viable candidates who stand up for their beliefs.

Down With Tyranny talked with Joshua Grossman at Progressive Kick, who defines "swing district" in a very different way: as "an assessment of the district itself, not the strength of the incumbent in the district." Grossman pointed out that only 154 seats have been rated as Strong Dem -- well short of the 218 seats needed for a majority.

Progressive Kick included MI-08's own Lance Enderle in its list of swing districts to watch:

Other excellent targets on the list include Charlie Upton (MI-6), Mike Rogers (MI-8) and Frank Guinta (NH-1), being challenged by, respectively, progressives John Waltz, Lance Enderle and Carol Shea-Porter, independent-minded grassroots Democrats whom Steve Israel fears.

Keep MI-08 from running aground in 2012 -- steer us away from those treacherous Rogers reefs and support Lance Enderle.

Job Killer on the Loose!

2010-09-28T08:18:00.005-04:00

Mike Rogers really enjoys talking about "defending" small business from the "job-killing" actions taken by the oogey-boogey Democrats:

"Health Bill's Taxes, Regulations [sic] Kills Jobs"
"EPA 'Cap and Trade' Regulations are Job-Killers"
"Job Killer Health Bill By-the-Numbers"
and, of course, the tanning tax that "kills jobs, hurts women and college students."

Leaving aside the healthy dose of hyperbole -- and the fact that Michigan has lost roughly 860,000 jobs since Mr. Rogers first went to Washington in 2000 -- you'd think that he would be willing to support a bill that supports small business.

Well, you'd be wrong.

Mr. Rogers voted AGAINST the Small Business Lending Funding Act of 2010 (H.R. 539).

The House concurred in the Senate amendment to H.R. 5297, to create the Small Business Lending Fund Program to direct the Secretary of the Treasury to make capital investments in eligible institutions in order to increase the availability of credit for small businesses and to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax incentives for small business job creation, by a yea-and-nay vote of 237 yeas to 187 nays, Roll No. 539. [emphasis added]

While it's a safe bet that Mr. Rogers will come up with some emotion-filled excuse for saying no, the fact is that America's small businesses in a tough situation.

At a Federal Reserve meeting in July 2010, Fed Governor Elizabeth A. Duke discussed the importance of support for small business in a larger context:

Finding solutions to small business financing issues is not only an important component of the economic recovery, it is also important to the restoration of communities that have been hard-hit by foreclosures and job losses.

In other words, when small businesses get a little help with financing, they can hire more people.

When you see Mr. Rogers,* be sure to ask him why he voted against small business owners and private sector job creation.

*Just kidding! You won't be seeing Mr. Rogers in the district this fall unless you pay for the privilege. He's too busy to talk to actual voters... or his opponent, Lance Enderle.

Do's and Don'ts

2010-09-21T07:26:00.002-04:00

As we get closer to election time (six weeks from today!), it's worth remembering what Mr. Rogers has -- and hasn't -- been doing in Washington.

On the "Do" side, Mike Rogers has been:

enjoying breakfast, lunch, happy hours and 80s nights,
working hard to help GOP incumbents keep their jobs,
hosting a "safer, friendlier and more balanced" video game night,
writing nice letters to Tom Izzo,
appearing on TeeVee multiple times, and
standing up for the tanning salon industry.

On the "Don't" side, Mike Rogers said no to

extending unemployment benefits,
children's health insurance (for the fifth time),
the stimulus bill (after he added $17.6 million to it),
increasing available credit for small businesses, and
allowing the FDA to restrict tobacco sales to minors.

Seems to me that Mr. Rogers has been in Washington a little too long -- after ten years, he thinks his job is to represent special interests instead of Michigan interests.

Want a representative who will actually represent us?

Vote for Lance Enderle on November 2nd.

Not So Funny

2010-08-05T16:54:00.005-04:00

The Neighborhood knows that Mr. Rogers shows up on Fox and MSNBC with great regularity. Once the camera light comes on, he starts in with the scary, drama-filled and highly conditional phrases (See Iran, evidence-based medicine, tanning salons).

Mr. Rogers' latest rant: advocating the death penalty for alleged Wikileaker Army Pfc. Bradley Manning.

That's right -- the guy who kept his mouth firmly shut when the Vice President of the United States and assorted other turd blossoms deliberately exposed the identity of a covert CIA operations officer as political payback is now baying for the blood of someone who leaked information about the not-so-great inside story of the Afghan War.

Thanks to Mr. Rogers' penchant for drama, residents of MI-08 can also see their congressman on Comedy Central.

Too bad there's nothing funny about a hyper-partisan, hypocritical representative.

Do the Write Thing

2010-07-31T20:13:00.002-04:00

The Neighborhood is pretty excited about Tuesday's primary! On August 3rd, the voters of MI-08 have a chance to make history by writing in Lance Enderle as the Democratic candidate for Congress.

Long story short, the original candidate quit in June -- too late to have his name removed from the ballot.

Lance registered to run as a write-in, because he believes that

After a long dark decade of living in "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood", the good people of Michigan's 8th District deserve much better than this.
They must have a REAL choice at the ballot box on November 2nd

Learn more at Daily Kos (please rec both posts) and Lance's website.

Donate to Lance's campaign -- he's not taking any PAC money.

Promote his Facebook page to your friends.

And definitely do the write thing on August 2nd: write in Lance Enderle!

Reflexive Response

2010-07-20T16:26:00.002-04:00

Far from being idle in DeeCee, Mr. Rogers has been busy saying "no" to some pretty common-sense bills, and his knee-jerk opposition is just, well, jerky.

Mr. Rogers voted against the Flood Insurance Reform Priorities Act, which pretty much does what it says: extends authorization for the national flood insurance program and identifies "priorities essential to reform and ongoing stable functioning of the program."

Perhaps Mr. Rogers needs a peek at FEMA's list of 2010 flood disaster declarations, which sadly is a long one, to reinforce the importance of the federal flood insurance program.

Michiganders are lucky to have escaped the severe flooding that affected nineteen states and Puerto Rico so far this year, but that doesn't mean we think more efficient federal flood insurance is a bad idea...

Mr. Rogers also voted against the Telework Improvements Act, which would

set standards for federal employees working remotely. It would require the head of each federal agency to establish and implement a policy that would allow employees to work remotely as much as possible without diminishing agency operations or performance.

My guess for his no vote: he can't understand why anyone would want to work from home instead of on Capitol Hill. (The dinners! The happy hours! The PAC money!) We all know that Mr. Rogers is none too fond of being in Michigan, since he has to pretend he likes talking with constituents.

The bottom line: Mike Rogers doesn't represent anyone but himself.

If you'd like someone to represent you for a change, write in Lance Enderle for Congress on the August 3rd primary ballot August 3rd.

We'll all be glad we did!

Rogers: tax worse than cancer and mustard gas

2010-07-02T08:42:00.000-04:00

The Rogers Newsletter, AKA the Livingston County Daily Press & Argus, carried a Mike Rogers press release today entitled “U.S. Rep. Rogers: Get your tan now” about the 10 percent tax on tanning beds that went into effect on July 1 as part of the historic health care insurance reform passed last March.

The Brighton Republican says “the 10 percent tax "kills jobs, hurts women (and) college students." Perhaps someone should tell Mr. Rogers about the harm caused by tanning beds to women and college students, as well as men and non-college students.

In fact, experts at the International Agency for Research on Cancer in Lyon, the cancer arm of the World Health Organization, “moved tanning beds and other sources of ultraviolet radiation into the top cancer risk category, deeming them as deadly as arsenic and mustard gas."

The good news is they will now have health care to treat the cancer, and people can no longer be denied health care coverage because of the pre-existing condition of cancer.

Tan-mageddon!

2010-07-02T08:20:00.002-04:00

Summer is in full swing, so Mr. Rogers has shifted his Doom'n'Gloom pronouncements from health care to tanning salons.

That's right: the new health care reform bill included a 10% tax on tanning salons, which went into effect yesterday. The tax is expected to raise $2.7 billion over the next decade.

Mr. Rogers promptly sent out a press release screaming that the tax would

"kill[s] jobs, hurt[s] women (and) college students."
"In Michigan, where we've lost more jobs than any other state and led the nation in unemployment for more than four years, this tax is another job-killing burden on small businesses," Rogers said.
"The tax targets a service provided by mostly small entrepreneurs, many of them women, and it unfairly hits working women and college students, who make up the majority of tanning customers," he added.

Awww! Mr. Rogers is sticking up for working women and college students! (Do you feel all warm and fuzzy yet?)

Funny, but Mr. Rogers didn't worry about college students when he compromised their voting rights or voted to keep big banks skimming the student loan process.

Come to think of it, he hasn't shown too much concern for workers, small business owners or women's health, either...

Mr. Rogers' drama aside, will the new tax hurt the tanning industry?

An ABC news report finds that

no one thinks a few extra dollars is going to come between diehard tanners and their bronzing. Legislators in favor of the new tax cited health concerns. The industry itself, however, couldn't be healthier.

This is just another example of Mr. Rogers' Olympic-level ability to bring the tears and sell the trauma from a piece of legislation he doesn't like.

Mike Rogers has been in Washington for ten years now -- and our state has lost nearly 800,000 jobs. The next time he starts in on the "job-killing" rant, let's ask him exactly what he's done to grow jobs in Michigan.

Want a REAL representative in 2010?

Write in Lance Enderle for Congress on August 3rd, and let the sun shine in!

Where's the Representation?

2010-06-25T08:55:00.004-04:00

It's been a busy week for Mr. Rogers!

Immediately sharing his thoughts on Gen. McChrystal's Rolling Stone interview with MSNBC and the Press & Argus, Mr. Rogers intoned

“you can’t have military commanders out there working against the policy of presidents, even if they’re wrong. “That’s my job,” the Brighton Republican and Army veteran said

Now, you may have thought that Mr. Rogers' job was to represent his constituents in Washington.

Oh, you big silly!

In addition to working against the policies of the President of the United States of America, Mr. Rogers has many serious responsibilities in DeeCee.

For example, on Wednesday he co-hosted the first Capitol Hill Family Game Night to educate families on

“how to enjoy video games and online media in ways that are safer, healthier and more balanced.”

Don't worry -- Mr. Rogers is working on lots of other crucial issues, too:

* he wrote a letter to MSU basketball coach Tom Izzo imploring him to stay in Michigan

* he continues to run his cash-raising machine with a string of foodie fundraisers

* he voted against H.R. 5175, which would

prohibit foreign influence in Federal elections, to prohibit government contractors from making expenditures with respect to such elections, and to establish additional disclosure requirements with respect to spending in such elections

* last but not least, he voted against H.R. 4213, which extended unemployment benefits and provided tax relief for individuals and businesses.

Got all that?

Michigan has led the nation in unemployment since April 2006 (as of last month, we slipped to Number 2, behind Nevada). We've lost nearly 800,000 jobs since Mr. Rogers first went off to Washington.

Given Michigan's devastated economy, why does Mr. Rogers think it's more important to work against the President, fight government transparency, screw over the unemployed and keep video games safe for families?

The bad news: this is just more proof that Mike Rogers doesn't give a rat's patootie about MI-08.

The good news: you have a choice this year!

East Lansing educator Lance Enderle has filed to be the write-in candidate for the Democratic nomination in the August 3rd primary.

Write him in, and see the difference a REAL representative can make!

Breakfast of (Fundraising) Champions

2010-06-16T09:28:00.002-04:00

A major shout-out to That's My Congress for today's post, "Mike Rogers Breakfasts With Lobbyists"

Michigan’s Mike Rogers doesn’t live like you and I do. While we get up and pour ourselves a bowl of cold cereal for breakfast, Congressman Rogers goes out to eat his breakfast. Rogers doesn’t go to just any old place for his bacon and eggs either. [skip]

An invitation sent out by the Mike Rogers re-election campaign asks individuals attending the breakfast to come with at between 500 and 1,000 dollars to give to Rogers. Political Action Committees seeking some attention from Rogers are being charged between 1,000 and 2,000 dollars.

Where I come from, we don’t charge people thousands of dollars for the privilege of sitting at our breakfast table. Of course, where I come from, no one sits on a powerful congressional committee that has influence over government regulations. Mike Rogers does have that kind of position, and it seems that he’s willing to take a good deal of money from lobbyists in order to keep his hold on power secure.

Pick a Side

2010-06-15T14:08:00.003-04:00

Here in The Neighborhood, we know that Mr. Rogers is a superduper awesome fundraiser.

Did you know that he's been working just as hard to protect American jobs?

Well, as long as the jobs belong to American Republican Representatives, anyway.

Since becoming Incumbent Retention Chair for the NRCC in 2009, Mr. Rogers has working hard to protect GOP incumbents, meeting weekly with party leaders and individual members.

[Wouldn't it be great if Mr. Rogers spent this kind of time focusing on jobs for his constituents?]

All that hard work paid off, I guess.

At a PAC briefing yesterday, Mr. Rogers was

telling attendees that the committee's work had already shielded a substantial group of members from facing any serious challenge in 2010.
"A year and a half ago, I was giving you the names of 30 members and you know what? It worked," Rogers said, according to a source familiar with his remarks. "We feel strongly at this point that only nine incumbents need your help to withstand the attacks by the DCCC and their allies."

Gee, Mr. R., that's epic!

Maybe now that you've fixed the jobs situation for Republican politicians -- not to mention Tom Izzo -- you could pay a wee bit of attention to the job situation for the people who live in your district.

Because a Million Just Isn't Enough...

2010-06-10T12:39:00.004-04:00

Mike Rogers just can't stop raising money for his campaign, even though he no longer has an opponent.

Yesterday, Mr. Rogers wined and dined (literally) at his luncheon for the telecom industry at the Sonoma Restaurant & Wine Bar.

The restaurant, where the main floor is

a bustling, upscale casual bistro inspired by the neighborhood enotecas found throughout Italy

and the second floor

Avenue Lounge is an airy, elegant, modern space, and is perfect for large cocktail parties, fundraisers, product launches, and personal events up to 125 guests.

has been named Washington's Best Wine Bar (2010) and was the runner-up for Best Charcuterie Plate (2009).

Did I mention the ticket prices for this little get-together?

Contribution Information:

$2,000 PAC Co-Host; $1,000 Individual Co-Host; $1,000 PAC; $500 Individual

It's such a relief to know that Mr. Rogers isn't slumming it.

Jobs for Michigan?

2010-05-11T16:18:00.005-04:00

A quick review of Mr. Rogers' fundraising for the first quarter of 2010 shows that he's been pretty busy: taking in just over a million dollars ($1,018,397 to be precise) and spending only $319,151.

Where did the money go? Well, $40,000 went to the Michigan Republican Party. There are also operating expenses, like website development, payroll services, e-commerce vendors, fundraising and direct-response firms... We could talk for hours about the role of money in politics, but like it or not, these types of expenses are pretty standard for a Congressional campaign.

What's not so standard? A Congressman from the state with the nation's highest unemployment rate spends quite a bit on out-of-state businesses.

Mr. Rogers has hired a Wisconsin web developer, an Illinois payroll company, a New Hampshire direct mail/telemarketer and a California software vendor to assist his re-election campaign.

It's a little hard to believe that there are no Michigan businesses providing these services.

Opposite World

2010-05-05T09:15:00.003-04:00

Mr. Rogers was in full bloviation mode this week, pontificating about the "failure" of the Obama administration to have prevented the Times Square bomber before he acted.

Thought police, anyone?

If Mr. Rogers ever bothered to talk to people in his district (other than the ones who pay for the privilege), I would love to ask him a few questions:

1.) Apparently, the 53 hours and 20 minutes that elapsed from incident to arrest in this case was not good enough for FBI Guy Mike Rogers. Remind me, Mr. Rogers, where Osama bin Laden is being held in custody? Oh, wait -- he still hasn't been captured, nearly a decade after 9/11. Hmm... you've been serving on the House Intel Committee since you first went to Washington a decade ago. Coincidence?

2.) In that MSNBC interview, you referred to a "pattern" of "successful" bombing attempts by Faizal Shahzad (Times Square Bomber) and Umar Abdulmutallab (Underwear Bomber). Why would you define as "successful" two bombers who failed to set off their bombs? No deaths or injuries resulted from their failed attempts; both men were apprehended, taken into custody and provided significant amounts of actionable intelligence after interrogation. I personally think this is outstanding; it's not clear why you are so critical of the efforts of professional law enforcement personnel.

3.) You've been railing about the dangers of a law-enforcement approach to anti-terrorism policy, wailing about the Scary Terrorists, and bailing on taking even a shred of responsibility for your decade of inaction on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. I defer to Deputy National Security Advisor John Brennan for summing up the irresponsibility of this type of behavior:

Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda. Terrorists are not 100-feet tall. Nor do they deserve the abject fear they seek to instill. They will, however, be dismantled and destroyed, by our military, our intelligence services and our law enforcement community. And the notion that America's counterterrorism professionals and America's system of justice are unable to handle these murderous miscreants is absurd.

What have you done for us lately, Mr. Rogers?

Qu'est-ce Que C'est

2010-05-03T16:07:00.004-04:00

It's not often that Mr. Rogers brings to mind a Talking Heads song, but after reading today's LSJ piece these lines from Psycho Killer sprang to mind:

You start a conversation you can't even finish it.
You're talkin' a lot, but you're not sayin' anything.

According to the LSJ, Mr. Rogers spent $172,764 on mass communications to two million contacts. This translates to being the 94th highest spender in the House, roughly in the top fifth for mass communications expenditures.

Given that there are only about 707,179 people in MI-08, you have to wonder who the other ~1.29 million folks are...

You also have to ask why he is still spending money on printed mailings, why his emails are so cookie-cutter, and how much it could possibly cost to have a telephone town hall.

It would be cheaper for Mr. Rogers to buy a plane ticket every few months and actually come home to talk -- in person -- with the people he represents.

Party On

2010-04-25T19:59:00.003-04:00

It's no wonder Mr. Rogers is so seldom home in the 8th District! He's been busy in Washington, D.C. raising money for his campaign. Thanks to all those Happy Hours, Ladies Nights and Five Guys Lunches, his campaign war chest is filling up nicely -- in the first quarter of 2010, he's taken in over $1 million in total receipts... with more than half of it coming from PACs.

Speaking of PACs, Mr. Rogers is also busy tending to his own personal PAC, the MIKE R Fund ("Majority Initiative to Keep Electing Republicans"). MIKE R Fund has helped support such Congressional luminaries as Joe "You Lie!" Wilson (R-SC) and the Republican Parties of Iowa and Louisiana.

Throw in his responsibilities as incumbent retention chair for the NRCC, and you can totally understand why Mr. Rogers can only talk to people who are willing to pay for the privilege.

UPDATE: Yesterday's Huffpost Hill also picked up the Five Guys lunch story, albeit in terms a bit less delicate than we Neighborhoodies prefer:

12:00 pm: Looking to evacuate both his guests' wallets and bowels,Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) hosts a "Five Guys Lunch" [National Republican Congressional Committee, 310 First Street SE].

The Company You Keep

2010-04-22T10:45:00.004-04:00

Remember Mark Foley? He was the GOP representative who, among other things, exchanged sexually explicit instant messages with teenage Congressional pages and later resigned amid questions about coverups by the House Republican leadership.

Mr. Foley's scandal reached the 8th Congressional District when CNN ran film of Mike Rogers accompanying Mr. Foley to the White House. Both men were involved in GOP leadership and served as deputy majority whips. Mr. Rogers' assertion that he didn't socialize with Foley was weakened when it surfaced that the two men, both prodigious money-raising guys, often co-hosted fundraisers for fellow GOP incumbents and held a fundraising event at Mr. Foley's home.

Old news, you say.

Well, it turns out that Mr. Foley re-emerged last month, attending a Palm Beach political luncheon where Mitt Romney was the guest speaker.

Mr. Romney, ginning up for a possible Presidential run in 2012, has long had a pal in Mike Rogers.

Mike, Mitt, and Mark -- keep your eye on these guys during the coming year. Their paths will no doubt continue to intersect in some interesting ways.

Prioritie$

2010-04-21T15:16:00.002-04:00

Mr. Rogers hasn't been around much lately, since he's so busy with raising record-breaking amounts of money for Republican Congressional candidates. For over a year now, he's been working on the NRCC Patriot Program and there's no question that Mr. Rogers is really, really good at raking in the moola.

So good, in fact, that even when he was home this week the only people he talked to were the ones who paid $30 to attend the Howell Chamber of Commerce program (Chamber members got a slight discount).

Aside from coffee and muffins, what did they get for $30?

They got Mike Rogers in full oogedy-boogedy mode, warning of "bad omens for small business." The health care reform bill (which Rogers voted against twice) will make employers "nervous."

Not sure where Mr. Rogers has been, other than NRCC pep rallies -- because if he was here in the 8th Congressional District he would know that according to his own Energy & Commerce Committee, 15,100 small businesses would receive tax credits to provide employee health care coverage.

Mr. Rogers was also in a tizzy over proposed bank regulatory reforms, worrying that they would "inhibit access to capital." According to a 2009 report by the Federal Reserve, small businesses were already looking at the worst credit crunch in history. Credit cards, a traditional small business tool, are no longer as helpful, since the companies have raised their rates -- and small businesses weren't included in the credit card reform legislation passed last year.

Turning his gaze to the wider world, Mr. Rogers shared his thoughts on the "pretty frightening" situation in Iran, and

He said fear of a nuclear threat only compounds the worries of small-business owners, and that the country needs a stronger stance on the issue on the worldwide stage.

Gee.

I'm willing to bet that if you went door-to-door on Main Street in Brighton or Grand River in Howell, and asked small business owners what was on their Top 10 List of Stuff to Worry About, Iran's nuclear threat wouldn't be on it. Probably not even on their Top 100 List, to be honest.

Basically, the whole breakfast was just another episode of Rogers Kabuki Theater: he strikes a heroic pose, says the same scary things about Iran, pushes the same tired health policy ideas and pretends he hasn't been hanging around Washington for the past decade. It's great value for your entertainment dollar, if you like that sort of thing.

If you would prefer a Representative who actually wants to represent you, please visit Democratic Congressional challenger Kande Ngalamulume's campaign website. You'll see what a real 8th District Congressman looks like.

The CBO says health care bill will cut the budget deficit and cover the uninsured

2010-03-19T07:47:00.000-04:00

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released its preliminary analysis on the compromise health insurance reform bill today, and it shows simply that Republicans and teabaggers have been lying for an entire year.

Here’s what the CBO says the bill does:
It cuts the deficit: It cuts the deficit by $130 billion in the first 10 years (2010 - 2019), and it cuts the deficit by $1.2 trillion in the second 10 years.

It reduces annual growth in Medicare expenditures by 1.4 percentage points per year-while improving benefits and lowering costs for seniors. It also extends Medicare's solvency by at least nine years. It expands health insurance coverage to 32 million Americans Helps guarantee that 95 percent of Americans will be covered. It is fully paid for - costs $940 billion over a decade. (Americans spend nearly $2.5 trillion each year on health care now and nearly two-thirds of the bill's cost is paid for by reducing health care costs).

More importantly, here’s what it will do for the residents of the 8th Congressional District. Despite those benefits, you can rest assure of two things: the lies from Republicans will continue, and U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers will vote against it.

+ Improve coverage for 505,000 residents with health insurance.
+ Give tax credits and other assistance to up to 150,000 families and 15,100 small businesses to help them afford coverage.
+ Improve Medicare for 90,000 beneficiaries, including closing the donut hole.
+ Extend coverage to 20,000 uninsured residents.
+ Guarantee that 8,100 residents with pre-existing conditions can obtain coverage.
+ Protect 1,700 families from bankruptcy due to unaffordable health care costs.
+ Allow 63,000 young adults to obtain coverage on their parents' insurance plans.
+ Provide millions of dollars in new funding for 10 community health centers.
+ Reduce the cost of uncompensated care for hospitals and other health care providers by $29 million annually.

Hell: Freezing Over Yet Again!

2010-02-22T07:18:00.003-05:00

Over the years,The Neighborhood has seen some pretty conservative folks call out Mike Rogers on issues of national security, fiscal responsibility and earmarks.

Well, it's happening again -- and this time, it's close to home.

Leon Drolet, leader of the Michigan Taxpayers Alliance and close pal of Mr. Perks the pig, recently posted his take on the latest Club for Growth RePork Card.

Congratulations to Congressman Pete Hoekstra (R-Holland) for earning the only 'A' grade of all 15 Michigan congress members.

Thaddeous McCotter (R-Livonia) earned a 'B+' and Vern Ehlers (R-Grand Rapids) received a 'B-'. The only other sorta passing-ish grade went to Mike Rogers (R-Howell) who received a D+.

We know that Mr. Rogers was for the earmarks before he was against them (ahem!)... nice to see that the conservatives are admitting it, too.

A Load of Crepes

2010-02-14T15:32:00.003-05:00

After years of laboring on behalf of Republican Congressional candidates (first as a record-setting RNCC Finance Chair, Deputy Majority Whip, campaign contributions from his MIKE R Fund, and most recently as NRCC Incumbent Retention Chairman), Mike Rogers finally got a little local shout-out for his efforts in maintaining and expanding the GOP presence in the House.

The Press & Argus story describes Mr. Rogers as an "enforcer" for the NRCC; he's already been dubbed "Top Cop" by Roll Call and "a powerhouse fundraiser" by Politico.

Here in the Neighborhood, we've known about his strong-arm efforts on behalf of the party for quite a while. Regular readers know that Mr. Rogers is willing to give 110% when it comes to retaining jobs for his GOP colleagues: one-on-one meetings with at-risk incumbents to develop individualized campaign goals, weekly meetings with GOP leadership, weekly meetings with NRCC directors, and keeping close tabs on Patriot Program members, right down to the level of call time, volunteer recruitment and local press.

How local, you ask? Well, Mr. Rogers has carved out time to be the headliner at next month's "Pancakes and Politics" fundraiser hosted by the Macomb County Republican Party ("Aggressive - Visible - Organized").

I can't help but wish that Mr. Rogers was willing to spend this kind of time and energy on the at-risk workers right here in his own district.

Job Losses?

2010-01-28T06:17:00.003-05:00

Mike Rogers' response to President Obama's State of the Union address?

"While Michigan families can certainly appreciate the President focusing on getting America back to work, he unfortunately continues to advance policies that will cost more jobs. His plans to create a massive new energy tax and have the government run America's health care system from Washington, D.C., are both job killers." -- Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Brighton.

Job killers? Seriously? Has Mike Rogers not noticed that his state has been hemorrhaging jobs since he was first elected a decade ago?

It's hard to see how Mr. Rogers' takeaway from the speech focused on an "energy tax" and a purported "government-run" health care system. If he had been paying attention to the President, instead of sitting on his hands and looking for John Boehner's approval, Mr. Rogers might have heard some serious bipartisan points:

Let me repeat: we cut taxes. We cut taxes for 95% of working families. We cut taxes for small businesses. We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers. We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children. We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college. As a result, millions of Americans had more to spend on gas, and food, and other necessities, all of which helped businesses keep more workers. And we haven't raised income taxes by a single dime on a single person. Not a single dime. [skip]

So tonight, I'm proposing that we take $30 billion of the money Wall Street banks have repaid and use it to help community banks give small businesses the credit they need to stay afloat. I am also proposing a new small business tax credit – one that will go to over one million small businesses who hire new workers or raise wages. While we're at it, let's also eliminate all capital gains taxes on small business investment; and provide a tax incentive for all businesses, large and small, to invest in new plants and equipment.[skip]

President Obama also spoke plainly to the Republicans.

From some on the right, I expect we'll hear a different argument – that if we just make fewer investments in our people, extend tax cuts for wealthier Americans, eliminate more regulations, and maintain the status quo on health care, our deficits will go away. The problem is, that's what we did for eight years. That's what helped lead us into this crisis. It's what helped lead to these deficits. And we cannot do it again. [skip]

if the Republican leadership is going to insist that sixty votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town, then the responsibility to govern is now yours as well. Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it's not leadership. We were sent here to serve our citizens, not our ambitions.

So how about it, Mr. Rogers? Step up and work for your country -- not just for your party.

If you can't put your politics aside for the good of the nation, then the only job loss that should make local headlines in 2010 is you own.

Hot 'n' Bothered

2010-01-05T17:13:00.002-05:00

Today's Press & Argus led with a drama-filled header: "Rogers rips health-care measures"

Oh, my.

We know that Mr. Rogers doesn't trust evidence-based medicine. He's had his fact-free rant against health care reform on Teh YooToob, while at the same time enjoying comprehensive -- not to mention convenient -- health care coverage at taxpayer's expense.

A closer look shows that Mr. Rogers has managed to have his health care tab picked up by taxpayers for most of his adult life, thanks to the U.S. Army, the FBI, the Michigan Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives. His one foray into the private sector came via his family's business, so it's unlikely that he was getting squeezed on his premiums.

Compare Mr. Rogers' situation with that of a Michigan family purchasing the cheapest available Blue Cross/Blue Shield plan. (Seriously. click that link and read the details.)

Today, Mr. Rogers continued his oogy-boogy hand-waving about the dangers of health care reform.

"I said 'Oh, my gosh, they just sentenced to death 36,000 American women,'" he said.

Rogers also said that the legislation wouldn't go into effect until 2013 -- but Congress.org outlines some of the specific changes that will occur within the next year.

Some of the most significant changes would extend existing programs and rules in order to immediately reduce the number of uninsured Americans. Others would end unpopular practices in the private insurance industry.

Adding to the pile of silly, Rogers trotted out his "ideas" for reforming health care that we've all heard before. He also wailed about the terrible impact on businesses, an argument neatly refuted this summer by that radical magazine, BusinessWeek.

With all due respect to the Livingston Press & Argus, it would be great if their reporters fact-checked a few items before publishing Mr. Rogers' rants verbatim.

Who You Gonna Call?

2009-12-16T20:23:00.007-05:00

Mike Rogers is quite upset about the recent decision to move some Guantanamo detainees to the Thomson Correctional Center in Thomson, Illinois.

How upset, you ask?

Well, perhaps Dr. Peter Venkman and his colleagues best describe Mr. Rogers' anguish.

Dr. Peter Venkman: This city is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions.
Mayor: What do you mean, "biblical"? [skip]
Dr Ray Stantz: Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling!
Dr. Egon Spengler: Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes...
Winston Zeddemore: The dead rising from the grave!
Dr. Peter Venkman: Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria.

Mr. Rogers hasn't risen to quite the same level of drama... but he's close:

Obama's decision was criticized by U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Brighton, who called it a "dangerous gamble."
"Terrorists with one mission in life, to kill Americans and destroy America, do not belong in state prisons, no matter whether it is Michigan, Kansas, Illinois or any other state," Rogers said.

Apparently Mr. Rogers has no confidence in federal law enforcement and corrections personnel.

Nor does he seem to know that, according to the U.S. Bureau of Prisons, there are already 216 international terrorists and 139 domestic terrorists housed in maximum security facilities, some of whom have been there since the 1990s. Fred Kaplan of Slate Magazine wrote about these prisoners back in the springtime, and he could have been talking about Mr. Rogers (or his heart-palpitatin' colleague Pete Hoekstra) when he wrote this:

Maybe these people don't understand what life is like in these "supermax" prisons. Take ADX Florence, the supermax in Colorado—"the Alcatraz of the Rockies"—that serves as the home to Omar Abdel-Rahman, the "blind sheikh" who organized the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; Zacarias Moussaoui, one of the Sept. 11 plotters; Richard Reid, the shoe-bomber; Theodore Kaczynski, the "Unabomber"; and Terry Nichols, who helped plan the Oklahoma City bombing, to name a few.

These are all truly dangerous people, but it's not as if they run into one another in the lunch line or the yard. There is no lunch line; there is no yard. Most of the prisoners are kept in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day. For one hour, they're taken to another concrete room, indoors, to exercise, by themselves. Their only windows face the sky, so they have no way of knowing even where they are within the prison. Phone calls to the outside world are banned. Finally, the prison is crammed with cameras and motion detectors. Compartments are separated by 1,400 remote-controlled steel doors; the place is surrounded by 12-foot-high razor-wire fences; the area between the wire and the walls is further secured by laser beams and attack dogs.

Got that?

Mr. Rogers has spent nearly a decade on the House Intel Committee; he's also a former FBI agent. You;d think that his national security expertise would outweigh his political concerns.

Unfortunately, that's not the case.

Rogers' main contribution to our nation's security? That would be his tireless efforts to predict doooooooom in front of any available microphone or tv camera. He pitched a fit about Mirandizing terrorists -- and pretty much called the Director of the FBI and General David Petraeus liars. He blamed Congress for not paying attention to Iran's nuclear buildup, conveniently forgetting that he is IN Congress and has been on the House Intel Committee since he was first elected in 2000. He got in a lather about the decision to discontinue the Eastern European missile defense shield, but he still hasn't asked those "very tough questions" he promised.

Mr. Rogers is unstinting in his efforts to get good media coverage -- but when it comes to the hard work of making sure our country is safe, he's kind of a marshmallow.

http://www.angelfire.com/movies/GodzillaTower/Documents/Marshmallow_Man.htm

Rogers continues to deny the fact that global warming is a fact on behalf of Big Oil masters

2009-12-07T10:38:00.002-05:00

After some nine years of Mike Rogers in Congress, the only thing we know for sure about the Brighton Republican is that he toes the GOP line until its no longer popular to dos so. His press release on the stolen emails from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia that critics have dubiously claimed undermine the scientific consensus on climate change is just one more example.

Rogers backed every single Bush position until the approval ratings of the worst president in U.S. history plunged like a rock, and Rogers abandoned him like a rat from a sinking ship. Now, he has sunk to the role of just criticizing and blocking every solution to the problems his party created.

His press release printed almost verbatim in the Livingston County Daily Press & Argus is parroting the rightwing lie that global warming is a hoax. “He joined fellow congressional Republicans who raised questions about leaked e-mails from the researchers.”

First, they were not “leaked e-mails” they were stolen. Global warming deniers are basically taking one word out of context among 13 years of personal emails to prove their point. They ignore all the data from other agencies, like NASA, to make their case.

For years, thousands of scientists working at climate research centers throughout the world have carefully and rigorously reached a consensus on the extent of climate change, the urgency of the problem, and the role of human activity in causing it. A few distorted e-mail exchanges do not change that consensus.

In fact, last month Gavin Schmidt, a climate scientist at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, supported that claim: "There's nothing in the e-mails that shows that global warming is a hoax. ... There's no funding by nefarious groups. There's no politics in any of these things; nobody from the [United Nations] telling people what to do. There's nothing hidden, no manipulation. It's just scientists talking about science, and they're talking relatively openly as people in private e-mails generally are freer with their thoughts than they would be in a public forum. The few quotes that are being pulled out [are out] of context. People are using language used in science and interpreting it in a completely different way."

Rogers is a very good friend of big oil, and, in fact, he voted against ending taxpayer-funded subsidies for Big Oil and creating a Strategic Energy and Renewables Reserve. Is it any surprise he is a global warming denier? The right-wing groups leading the charge in attacking the science are the same old Big Oil-backed naysayers and their allies in Congress -like Rogers- who have been attacking climate science and fighting clean energy for decades.

The U.S. Department of Defense and the Central Intelligence Agency have identified climate change as a threat to our national security and have developed specific efforts to combat climate change.

The real indicator is the results of global warming. How to you ignore or lie that away?

According to a recent article by the Associated Press, “Since 1997 climate change has worsened and accelerated – beyond some of the grimmest of warnings made back then.”
The world's oceans have risen by about an inch and a half.

Droughts and wildfires have turned more severe worldwide, from the U.S. West to Australia to the Sahel desert of North Africa. Species now in trouble because of changing climate include, not just the lumbering polar bear which has become a symbol of global warming, but also fragile butterflies, colorful frogs and entire stands of North American pine forests. Temperatures over the past 12 years are 0.4 of a degree warmer than the dozen years leading up to 1997. Even the gloomiest climate models back in the 1990s didn't forecast results quite this bad so fast.

Scientists have uncovered a large expanse of "corrosive" water in the Canadian Arctic due to carbon pollution that is putting the marine food web at risk. "Unprecedented" rainfall in the United Kingdom has led to flooding of "biblical proportions" – a predicted consequence of global warming. "Unprecedented" heat, drought, and winds are causing "catastrophic" wildfires to sweep across eastern Australia – a predicted consequence of global warming.

The 2000s are on track to be nearly 0.2°C warmer than the 1990s. And that temperature jump is especially worrisome since the 1990s were only 0.14°C warmer than the 1980s. The world’s glaciers shrink for the 18th year. According to the University of Zurich ’s World Glacier Monitoring Service report in 2006 and 2007 the world’s glaciers lost 2 meters (2000 mm) of thickness on average. They note, “The new data continues the global trend in accelerated ice loss over the past few decades.” The rate of ice loss is twice as fast as a decade ago. Greenhouse gases, which are believed to be responsible for global warming, reached record highs in the Earth’s atmosphere in 2008, according to the U.N. weather agency.

The simple fact is Global Warming is real, and a few words taken out of context from thousands of stolen emails cannot change that fact. Even if you wanted to impeach the results from the CRU at the University of East Anglia, there are plenty of other respected scientists above reproach who hold the same position reached by independent and undisputed research and data. Here are a few:

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Global warming of the climate system is unequivocal and most of the observed increase in global temperatures since the mid-20th century is due to human-induced greenhouse gas emissions.

National Academy of Sciences: Even if carbon dioxide emissions were halted today, the world would continue warming with “irreversible” effects — including rising temperatures and sea levels—that will last for a millennium.

American Association for the Advancement of Science: The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society.

U.S. Global Change Research Program: Global temperature has increased over the past 50 years. This observed increase is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases.

American Physical Society: Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth’s climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes. The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.

American Meteorological Society: Despite the uncertainties noted above, there is adequate evidence from observations and interpretations of climate simulations to conclude that the atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; that humans have significantly contributed to this change; and that further climate change will continue to have important impacts on human societies, on economies, on ecosystems, and on wildlife through the 21st century and beyond.

American Geophysical Union: The Earth’s climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century. . . . Evidence from most oceans and all continents except Antarctica shows warming attributable to human activities.

American Quaternary Association: Few credible scientists now doubt that humans have influenced the documented rise in global temperatures since the Industrial Revolution.

The national science academies of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States, Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa: It is essential that world leaders agree on the emission reductions needed to combat negative consequences of anthropogenic climate change at the UNFCCC negotiations in Copenhagen in December 2009.

A group of 18 leading scientific organizations recently sent a letter to Senators affirming that climate change is happening.

PAC Man, Part 2

2009-11-02T16:35:00.002-05:00

In case you needed more evidence that those who give big bucks are, unsurprisingly, the same ones who get big favors...

USA Today has a story on the lobbying $$ spent by FedEx and UPS, and how our own Mike Rogers has enjoyed quite a bit of that shipping cash. Seems that UPS told Lansing's Capital Region International Airport that it wanted longer runways, and they were willing to grease the wheels to get it.

Among recipients from the UPS PAC was Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich. He received $4,800 in contributions on March 19, 2007, CQ MoneyLine records show. Three days earlier, Rogers wrote a letter to House leaders seeking an earmark for Capital Regional International Airport, his local airfield.
Capital Region got $3.5 million that fiscal year for the runway extension. In 2006, Rogers got $3 million for the same project, his spokesman Sylvia Warner said.
UPS spokesman Michael Mangeot said there is no connection between Rogers' earmarks and the $45,000 in campaign contributions UPS' PAC has given Rogers since 2005 — the maximum donation allowed by law. He called the timing of the contributions in March 2007 "coincidence." (emphasis added)

Reuters followed up on the story, reporting that the Public Campaign Action Fund (PCAF) had done a bit more digging:

Public Campaign Action Fund (PCAF) has discovered that earlier that month, on March 5th, UPS lobbyist Robert Dotchin donated $500 to Rep. Rogers - the only such gift from Dotchin since Rep. Rogers began running for Congress in 2000.Public Campaign Action Fund (PCAF) has discovered that earlier that month, on March 5th, UPS lobbyist Robert Dotchin donated $500 to Rep. Rogers - the only such gift from Dotchin since Rep. Rogers began running for Congress in 2000. [skip]

PCAF found that Rep. Rogers' leadership PAC, MIKE PAC, has received $30,000 more, for a total of $75,000 from the UPS PAC, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. (emphasis added)

The next time you hear Mr. Rogers moaning about how federal money is being wasted in Livingston County, ask him if he's interested in sending some of that private-sector lobbyist money our way... it really gets results!

PAC Man

2009-10-27T14:54:00.002-04:00

CQ Politics has a story today about leadership PACs shelling out in contested Senate primary races. Leadership PACs, as you probably know, are organized by members of Congress; they enjoy higher limits on donations than do individual donors -- $10,000 per cycle, instead of $4800.

Mike Rogers has his own leadership PAC, appropriately titled MIKE R Fund (Majority Initiative to Keep Electing Republicans). This fund brought in over half a million dollars in 2008, and it is cranking along nicely for the 2010 cycle.

This year, Mr. Rogers' PAC has already shelled out for GOP House members (including Thad McCotter, Joseph Cao, and -- no lie! -- Joe Wilson), Kansan GOP Senate candidate Todd Tiahrt and the Michigan Republican Party. Also on the spending list: pricey Miami Beach hotels and D.C. tapas restaurants. Hey, raising money is hard work...

And where is all this money coming from? Unsurprisingly, the guy with over five million YouTube hits for his anti-health care reform video has raised the majority of his PAC dollars from pharmaceuticals, health products and health professionals.

It's clear that Mr. Rogers is a very gifted fund raiser. I say this without any snark-- he's really good at it! It would be nice, though, if he spent a little bit of that energy and creativity on the people in MI-08.

Patriot Games

2009-10-07T20:07:00.004-04:00

TPM is reporting that the NRCC has decided to limit its next Patriot Program group to five incumbents, down from the original 10.

Mike Rogers has energetically co-chaired the NRCC incumbent retention program and spent quite a bit of time raising $$ for the chosen Patriots.

Has he not been working hard enough? Perish the thought, according to an NRCC aide:

"The political environment has shifted, and there just aren't five more vulnerable Members who are really in need of assistance or facing a credible challenge," an NRCC aide told the paper. "That money would be better spent by directly transferring money to the committee and on assisting the large number of challenger candidates looking to oust a Democrat incumbent."

A somewhat more clear-eyed analysis came from TPM.

Another way of looking at it is this: The Republicans got cleaned out in 2006 and 2008. With the exception of some open swing seats where usually safe GOP incumbents are retiring, there's not too much left that the GOP has a serious chance of losing.

Either way, it looks as though Mr. Rogers will have some extra time on his hands. Think he'll get around to paying attention to Michigan's interests in Washington?

Very High Double Standards

2009-10-01T20:15:00.006-04:00

The Neighborhood is admittedly a small blog; we focus on one Congressional district that's spread out over bits & pieces of five different counties (not to mention three different media markets), "represented" in Washington, D.C. by Mike Rogers.

Well, the 'Hood got some national attention last week, when the story about insurance industry donations to Mr. Rogers was picked up by The Sunlight Foundation's "Local Sunlight" columnist.

OK, enough bragging.

Back here in the Mitten, the Lansing State Journal's Derek Melot has a nifty little blog post describing one of the sweet health care perks that Mr. Rogers receives courtesy of us taxpayers: The Office of the Attending Physician (OAP), a full-service health center.

Members of Congress do not pay for the individual services they receive at the OAP, nor do they submit claims through their federal employee health insurance policies. Instead, members pay a flat, annual fee of $503 for all the care they receive. The rest of the cost of their care, sources said, is subsidized by taxpayers.

Earlier this year, the Neighborhood brought you the details of Mr. Rogers' health insurance plan -- also paid for with our tax dollars -- and compared it to the costs and benefits available to a Michigan family purchasing the cheapest MI BC/BS individual plan. It would be kind of funny if it weren't so unfair.

So between paying for his premiums with pretax dollars and having a personal physician on-call in the Capitol, you have to wonder how Mr. Rogers can keep a straight face when he rants about "socialist health care." As an adult, his health insurance coverage has been provided by taxpayers (U.S. Army, the FBI, the Michigan legislature and U.S. Congress). Given his early bout with bladder cancer, it would be instructive for him to go looking for individual coverage and see just what he would be shelling out for a basic plan...

Don't Know Much About History

2009-09-29T09:21:00.003-04:00

Despite his many obligations to the NRCC -- protecting incumbent Republican members -- and his latest job serving as John Boehner's liaison to GOP governors, Mr. Rogers apparently has the time to offer up a misty-eyed, breathtakingly inaccurate version of American history.

His latest YouTube special kicks off with a quote from Benjamin Franklin (sort of),

Those who would sacrifice liberty for a little safety and security deserve neither liberty nor security.

Mr. Rogers then explains that Franklin said this "before the Constitution, before the Revolutionary War," when Franklin was "the Finance Chair of the Pennsylvania state legislature." Oh, really?

Mr. Rogers might benefit from reading the Memoirs of the Life of Benjamin Franklin for a more detailed explanation of the legal issues Franklin was discussing (including the Massachusetts Bay Colony's desire to submit a separate petition to Parliament rather than jointly petitioning with the other colonies).

Mr. Rogers' take on American history continues with a reference to the Great Depression. After rhapsodizing about the national ideal of fairness, which in RogersSpeak translates as "people who work hard and play by the rules shouldn't have to pay for other people who don't do those things," he goes on to say

We have agreed that a safety net is a good idea. So you think about it, the Great Depression, over 30% unemployment for years, the poverty level in the United States was staggering, but we didn't give up. We didn't say, "you know what, it's too hard, the federal government should do it for us." We didn't do that.

Wait, what? Has Mr. Rogers never heard of the WPA, TVA, FDR or Social Security?

Moving right along, Mr. Rogers notes

World War II, when they were rationing sugar and rubber tires, we didn't give up. And that spirit, that ember of fairness on behalf of the American people has led to the greatest nation on the face of the earth, because it's individual responsibility, it's people getting up everyday and thinking, "I can do this better, faster, quicker, the speed of business, I can take care of my family, let the government take care of something else."

Sorry, Mr. Rogers -- the "they" that organized rationing to support the war effort was, in fact, the federal government. And the American people responded to calls for shared sacrifice during wartime -- a lesson you forgot (or ignored) when you voted to support tax cuts for the wealthy during the Afghan and Iraq wars. Oh, and the U.S. government not only worked to win the war, but helped to rebuild Europe and Japan for greater postwar security and a stronger global economy.

In his peroration, Mr. Rogers links the "burning ember" of American national spirit and Bejamin Franklin with the angry ranters of the Tea Party Express. He enthuses about the GOP health care plan, which would "control costs, improve access, do all those things without the federal government stepping in." We're still waiting for a bill number, Mr. Rogers. (Plus, we'd love to know why Mr. Rogers does not consider the United States House of Representatives to be a part of the federal government...)

Now that he's an official lover of American history, party loyalist Rogers might find some modern-day resonance in this quote from Benjamin Franklin:

As in the course of the debate, some lords in the administration had observed, that it was common and easy to censure their measures, but those who did so proposed nothing better.

Nah, never mind...

Money Talks, Congress Listens

2009-09-15T20:31:00.002-04:00

Over at Open Secrets, there's a great article on insurance industry donations to House Energy & Commerce Committee members.

Committee Chair Henry Waxman told 52 insurance companies that they had to disclose their financial records, including executive pay, entertainment expenditures and, oh yes, political donations.

Here are the current members of the House Energy and Commerce to collect the most from the 52 insurers required to respond to Waxman's request, including contributions to the lawmakers' leadership PACs and candidate committees back to 1989:

Name Total

Roy Blunt (R-Mo) $204,428
John D Dingell (D-Mich) $154,600
Nathan Deal (R-Ga) $150,600
Mike Rogers (R-Mich) $109,800
Henry A Waxman (D-Calif)$106,500
Bart Stupak (D-Mich) $94,750
John Shadegg (R-Ariz) $94,250
Joe Barton (R-Texas) $84,350
Lee Terry (R-Neb) $84,300
Phil Gingrey (R-Ga) $83,770
Tim Murphy (R-Pa) $81,700
Fred Upton (R-Mich) $78,300
John M Shimkus (R-Ill) $73,750
Bart Gordon (D-Tenn) $73,550
Jim Matheson (D-Utah) $72,500

What's impressive (in a bad way) is that Mike Rogers didn't get elected until 2000 -- yet he's managed to scoop up enough insurance industry cash to come in fourth at the trough.

Pop-Up Video

2009-09-10T11:59:00.002-04:00

Remember VH-1's "Pop-Up Video" series that ran in the late 90s? As the music video was playing, little bubbles ("info nuggets") would pop up on the screen, a mix of snark and trivia.

I really wish that I could do that for Mike Rogers' latest YouTube video... but National Journal has done the next best thing:

With so many people looking to the video for their health care arguments, how true are Rogers' main points about H.R. 3200 and the debate in general?

National Journal fact-checks Rogers' statements on disenrolling individuals and cancer survival rates. They'll follow up with an interview with Rogers, to be posted next week.

Hell is, in fact, freezing over.

2009-09-08T20:29:00.002-04:00

Once again, a conservative blogger has done a great job of calling out Mr. Rogers for his, um, flexible approach to policy. Earlier this summer, The Right Stuff took him to task over his earmarking habits...

and now Debbie Schlussel has named him the Hypocrite of the Day:

U.S. Congressman Mike Rogers (R-Michigan) sent out press releases telling everyone and their mother that, yesterday, he was in Israel speaking at a conference on terrorism.

But, with blowhard Rogers – a conservative – as the keynote speaker, perhaps the “World Summit on Counter-Terrorism, ” should change its name to “World Summit on Counter-Terrorism and Phony American Congressmen Who Blew It.” Rogers needs to shut his mouth, stay Stateside, and actually do something on terrorism. Problem is, he’s all talk and ZERO action. [skip]

Ironically, Rogers’ speech was on “Where America Stands Eight Years Into Its War on Terror.” Hilarious. In no small part because of Rogers’ negligence, American stands no better–in fact, far worse–than it did eight years earlier.

Wonder if the speech was subtitled, “Do As I Say, Not As I Do.”

Amen.

Now, it's pretty likely that Ms. Schlussel and and I don't quite see eye to eye on a lot of issues, but we both agree that Mr. Rogers' brand of bull is bad for our country's security.

Excuses, excuses

2009-09-08T09:39:00.002-04:00

A neighbor sent me the link to the Channel 4/Flashpoint Roundtable video, featuring a health care discussion with Congressmen Rogers, Thad McCotter, John Dingell and John Conyers.

The show leads off with Rogers, flush from a few million hits off his YouTube video. Mr. Rogers states that "we've got a great list of ideas... the problem is that we've never been involved, we've never been invited into the negotiations at the White House, we've never been involved in negotiations in the committee..."

[Who knew that Mr. Rogers had such fragile self-esteem? Not being invited to lunch at the White House seems to have damaged him to such an extent that he almost didn't participate in his Energy & Commerce Committee's health care discussion... he pulled himself together in time to insert a logic-defying amendment that had nothing to do with lowering costs, improving quality or increasing access. Then he voted against the E&C bill.]

At that point, Mr. Conyers asks for the number of the bill that Mr. Rogers is describing.

Oops.

Here in the Neighborhood, we know that Mr. Rogers is an inspiring speaker, unafraid to let his emotional anecdotes fly free of pesky facts. Apparently, Mr. Conyers was unaware of this, and pressed his fellow legislator for details of Rogers' efforts to turn the rosy picture of GOP health care proposals into actual legislation.

Okay, so Mr. Rogers doesn't have a bill number. Or he couldn't remember it. Whatever. With the help of repetition, a few hearty assurances and a compliant host, Mr. Rogers never had to answer Mr. Conyers' question.

Enough already. Everyone needs to understand what is at stake here in the 8th Congressional District:

America’s Affordable Health Choices Act would provide significant benefits in the 8th Congressional District of Michigan: up to 15,100 small businesses could receive tax credits to provide coverage to their employees; 7,600 seniors would avoid the donut hole in Medicare Part D; 1,700 families could escape bankruptcy each year due to unaffordable health care costs; health care providers would receive payment for $53 million in uncompensated care each year; and 49,000 uninsured individuals would gain access to high-quality, affordable health insurance.

Everyone, including Mike Rogers.

Echo Chamber

2009-09-04T10:40:00.002-04:00

Just when we thought Mr. Rogers had totally bailed on talking with his constituents over the August break, we find that he only partially bailed -- he held a "tele-townhall" limited to "randomly" selected residents of the 8th Congressional District.

This isn't the first time Rogers has chosen a controlled environment to avoid tough questions.

According to the Press & Argus, Mr. Rogers told his listeners that

they will lose their private health care or Medicare benefits if proposed health-care reforms become law. [skip] Rogers said the bill would dash Medicare Advantage plans that can include prescription drug coverage, among other options.

Statements like this really can't be called anything but deliberate deception.

Rogers is using a ridiculously lawyered-up interpretation of H.R. 3200 to scare his constituents and keep his political donors happy. For a point-by-point refutation, visit FactCheck.org

Note that Mr. Rogers is awfully attached to Medicare Advantage (MA), the private plan that covers roughly 18% of Medicare beneficiaries -- yet costs taxpayers an average of 12% more than traditional Medicare. For the retirees who choose a Medicare Advantage private fee for service plan (PFFS), the cost is 19% higher.

Who thinks MA is a good idea? Probably the insurers and pharmaceutical companies which have seen their "government-sponsored medical programs" profits increase dramatically over the past few years, more than making up for losses in the employer-based insurance market.

Stop the lies, Mr. Rogers. Your district is in trouble. Choose to help your constituents

America’s Affordable Health Choices Act would provide significant benefits in the 8th Congressional District of Michigan: up to 15,100 small businesses could receive tax credits to provide coverage to their employees; 7,600 seniors would avoid the donut hole in Medicare Part D; 1,700 families could escape bankruptcy each year due to unaffordable health care costs; health care providers would receive payment for $53 million in uncompensated care each year; and 49,000 uninsured individuals would gain access to high-quality, affordable health insurance.

instead of the industries that fund your political activities.

(cross-posted at Michigan Liberal)

Fan Fiction

2009-08-28T10:03:00.002-04:00

The YouTube video of Mike Rogers' opening statement on health care has been popping up on quite a few conservative blogs lately, as posters excitedly swoon over his "common sense" stance on health care reform.

There's no question that Mr. Rogers is a persuasive speaker. He has a friendly demeanor and an ordinary-guy style; he's known for his use of heart-tugging emotional anecdotes to make a point.

The only problem? All that emotion camouflages a lot of bad information.

Mr. Rogers is openly skeptical of government's role in health care

The very innovation of who we are is what got us here, and it wasn't the federal government and it wasn't Washington, D.C.

Where is the "here" that this swell innovation has brought us? "Here" is where an American Journal of Medicine study found that 62.1% of all bankruptcies in 2007 were caused by medical problems. Three-quarters of those declaring bankruptcy for medical reasons had health insurance. Most were well-educated home owners with middle-class occupations.

Yet Mr. Rogers continues to rail against the dark results of government involvement:

They can actually go in and unenroll individuals -- unprecedented power... They can rip you off your own invididual plan. They can disenroll your whole company off a certain plan.

That sounds pretty awful... until you realize that private insurance companies already unenroll individuals and companies without their consent.

This is called rescission, and it is still legal for private insurers to unenroll members without warning.

Rescinding thousands of policyholders a year enabled California insurers to save millions of dollars. Health Net Inc., for example, figured that it avoided $35 million in medical expenses over six years. The loss of coverage left individuals awash in medical bills and without healthcare when they needed it most, and it left many hospitals and physicians with uncollectable debt. (emphasis added)

Mr. Rogers has spoken openly about being diagnosed with bladder cancer as a teenager, and firmly asserts that he wouldn't be alive today if cost-conscious bureaucrats had interfered with his treatment.

He's apparently unaware of the interference already being run by bureaucrats in the insurance industry. This year, the non-partisan Kaiser Family Foundation issued a report on the problems faced by cancer patients who are covered by private insurance.

For these patients, having private health insurance at the time of their cancer diagnosis did not protect them from high out-of-pocket costs – leaving them with large debts to cover their treatment costs and forcing some to skip or delay necessary treatments.
“The stories of people with cancer in this study and video documentary show what our earlier survey work found: that the insurance system often fails people when they need it most, when they get really sick,” said Kaiser Family Foundation President and CEO Drew Altman, Ph.D.
“Cancer patients too often find out that their insurance doesn't protect them when they need care the most,” said John R. Seffrin, Ph.D., national chief executive officer of the American Cancer Society. “High out-of-pocket costs coupled with the high cost of insurance premiums can force cancer patients to incur huge debt, and to delay or forgo life-saving treatments."

The crazy thing is that Mr. Rogers, a beneficiary of generous government health coverage for most of his life, is a staunch defender of the health care status quo.

Wonder if it has anything to do with the money he and his PAC have received from health-related industries?

Friday Funnies

2009-08-07T16:58:00.003-04:00

Quite some time ago, a Neighbor signed up for "Mike Rogers" GoogleAlerts.

Now, a vast number of men share this name; the Neighbor thought it was kind of funny to read about the New Zealand rugby club manager, the California skateboarder and the Virginia police chief (not to mention the rather famous blogger). So many guys named Mike Rogers are thoughtful, productive members of their communities.

This amusing little GoogleAlert arrived late today:

Rhino Assembly Corporation has announced that Mr. Mike Rogers has joined their team as Material Handling Manager.

Why is this amusing, you ask?

Because the Neighbor was doing too many things at once when the Google Alert came in. Glancing at the headline, she mis-read "Rhino" as "RINO" and thought it was just a PR hack's way of rewriting the story of Michigan Mike Rogers chairing the NRCC Incumbent Retention committee (yay, Patriots!).

Reading the story, it became pretty clear that it was a real story about a real materials manager at a real company... but since it's Friday, the Neighbor started musing on the joke possibilities:

The NRCC assembles candidates
Mike Rogers has been hired to handle them
The company is impressed with his handling experience
Mike Rogers hopes to contribute to their expanding market.

Best wishes to the Rhino Assembly Corporation and their new manager, not-a-politician Mike Rogers, as they run a successful business in a very tough economic climate.

Can't really say the same to the NRCC and Michigan's flip-flopping, definitely-a-politician Mike Rogers, as they play games with health care and national security.

Full of Sound and Fury, Signifying Nothing

2009-08-05T07:07:00.003-04:00

With apologies to MacBeth, Mike Rogers is doing a good job of turning national security into "a tale told by an idiot."

Stop by DailyKos for the full discussion.

Hamster Wheel

2009-08-04T08:27:00.006-04:00

Mr. Rogers has certainly earned his month-long (paid) summer vacation! He was running full-tilt on the D.C. hamster wheel, squeaking about health care, fiscal responsibility and Wall Street compensation.

A few weeks ago, Mr. Rogers wasn't sure he'd even bother offering an amendment to the health care bill in the Energy and Commerce Committee. He persevered, though, and managed to stick a snake-oil provision into the final version of the E&C bill (Hey, he doesn't use evidence to make decisions, so why should doctors?). Then he voted against the bill -- even though it would have helped families, seniors and thousands of small businesses in the 8th Congressional District.

Mr. Rogers also voted against the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2009, which requires new tax and mandatory spending to be budget-neutral.

Then, he voted against the Corporate and Financial Institution Compensation Fairness Act of 2009. This bill amends the SEC Act of 1934, giving shareholders an advisory vote on golden parachutes and other megabucks types of executive compensation, and "preventing perverse incentives in the compensation practices of financial institutions." (Don't know about you, but if I was a BoA shareholder, I'd think this was a REALLY good idea.)

Mr. Rogers is also squeaking about extending unemployment benefits. He thinks it's a good idea, but he's said that before and then voted against it.

Now that he's home for vacation, it sounds as though he's made time to see the new Harry Potter movie: when asked about the idea of transferring prisoners from Guantanamo Bay to Standish, he noted that among those prisoners are "some pretty bad actors" trained in "black arts." Who knew that Draco Malfoy would want to hang out in Arenac County?

Seriously, though, Mr. Rogers doesn't represent the people of Standish. The prison is an economic mainstay of the city, providing badly-needed jobs and tax revenue. He's shown zero interest in helping create jobs here in the 8th Congressional District, though he has spent quite a bit of time on employment security for incumbent GOP Congressmen.

Yep, Mr. Rogers is putting in some serious time on the hamster wheel. The only problem with hamster wheels? You can run as hard as you want, but you don't actually go anywhere. And you make a lot of noise in the process.

By the Numbers: Health care reform in MI-08

2009-07-29T07:51:00.002-04:00

From the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, a breakdown of why Mike Rogers needs to stop obstructing health care reform:

America’s Affordable Health Choices Act would provide significant benefits in the 8th Congressional District of Michigan: up to 15,100 small businesses could receive tax credits to provide coverage to their employees; 7,600 seniors would avoid the donut hole in Medicare Part D; 1,700 families could escape bankruptcy each year due to unaffordable health care costs; health care providers would receive payment for $53 million in uncompensated care each year; and 49,000 uninsured individuals would gain access to high-quality, affordable health insurance. Congressman Mike Rogers represents the district.

(Keep in mind that Mr. Rogers sits on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Whether he actually represents the district is a matter of some debate...)

The Committee offers similar analysis for every House member's district.

Bandwagons, Ho!

2009-07-24T14:20:00.006-04:00

After watching President Obama's press conference Wednesday evening, I had several thoughts:

I am thrilled to have a president who uses complete sentences AND logic;
the discussion was probably too complex for most people to absorb; and as a result
the final question about Professor Gates would be one of the main media takeaways.

Since the Senate has decided to hold off on a final health care vote until September, it's not much of a surprise that item #3 is getting some traction. Dissection of the President's response to the issue of racial profiling is picking up steam, with everyone from FauxNews to Daily Kos offering an opinion.

And no one loves a bandwagon more than Mr. Mike Rogers, who has weighed with this thoughtful opinion:

Among the strongest criticism of Obama was a complaint that he should know more about the case before commenting.
"It's always dangerous to comment when you don't have the facts," said Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), a former FBI agent.

Oh, really? Mr. Rogers has made rather a habit out of commenting on issues when he doesn't have the facts -- whether the topic is national security, Medicare, energy policy or S-CHIP.

Guess you have to take your press coverage where you can get it, Mr. Rogers. Sadly, no one is covering your efforts to participate in health care reform or -- oh, wait.

You're not doing anything in Washington.

Good News/Bad News

2009-07-23T07:50:00.005-04:00

The good news?

Mike Rogers is working hard to ensure that people keep good jobs with affordable health insurance. He makes time in his schedule to have weekly meetings on this issue; he even meets one-on-one with people who are worried about losing their jobs. Today, Rogers will expand his efforts to include more people.

The bad news?

The jobs he's protecting belong to sitting Republican Congressmen.

From Roll Call:

NRCC Incumbent Retention Chairman Mike Rogers (Mich.) is scheduled to present the list of Members — all of whom have reached specific fundraising and campaign goals — at the weekly GOP leadership and NRCC meeting Thursday morning.

The Patriot Program is pretty sweet -- if you are selected, Mike Rogers will direct some amazing money towards your campaign.

In all the hustle and bustle of picking new Patriots and recycling stale health care ideas, Mr. Rogers may have missed the news that Michigan's unemployment rate now tops 15% -- 15.2%, to be exact, a 7.1% increase over the previous year. We're the first state to hit this level in 25 years.

It's understandable, though -- Mr. Rogers is really busy with his chairmanship responsibilities! It's just not fair to expect him to spend time on the problems of citizens in Michigan's 8th Congressional District.

Stretching the Analogy

2009-07-18T14:31:00.003-04:00

Yesterday, Mike Rogers gave his opening statement on health care reform. At 0:54, he asks

Why would we punish the part that's working to cover the part that's not? It's like taking a queen-sized sheet and trying to put it over a king-sized bed. I will guarantee you the corners are gonna come up.

This sounds familiar... Remember his criticisms of updated CAFE standards?

I have long had concerns with the CAFE system. It is old, it is arbitrary, and it has proven time and time again that you really can't make a fat person skinny by mandating smaller pants sizes. (5/3/06)

Mr. Chairman, you know you cannot make a fat guy skinny by mandating smaller pant sizes. (4/20/05)

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), saying it would force automakers to make smaller cars, likened the effort to “trying to limit obesity by mandating smaller pants. (April 2003, p. 41)

It's good to see that Mr. Rogers has updated his ill-fitting textile analogy to avoid offending any fat guys.

Common Ground

2009-07-16T06:59:00.002-04:00

You may recall that the Neighborhood has called Mike Rogers out on his, ah, creative approach to earmarks and the budget on more than one occasion.

Well, it's not just us Neighborhood liberals who are unimpressed with Rogers' tendency to two-step. The Right Stuff takes an equally dim view of Mr. Rogers and his colleagues on their "creative" approach to the climate bill.

I guess the other ones decided to stuff their earmarks in realizing that they could have it both ways: Satisfy the constituency while voting against cap and trade. BUSTED!!! [skip]

Mike Rogers (R-MI) -- Number of Earmarks: 2 -- Total: $1,500,000
*The Consortium for Plant Biotechnical Research, Inc., St. Simon's Island, GA - Consortium for Plant Biotechnical Research -- $1,000,000
Lansing Board of Water and Light, Lansing, MI - energy-efficient drinking water system -- $500,000
The asterisk on the biotech research project indicates that Mr. Rogers was a co-sponsor.

Now, The Right Stuff will never, ever be accused of liberal tendencies (it features a countdown of "Days Left in This Socialist Administration" and quite a few posts on President Obama's "fake" birth certificate).

But it's interesting that both left and right can agree: hypocrisy isn't pretty. True conservatives dislike this earmark finagling as much as us libruls here in the Neighborhood.

Summer Slump

2009-07-15T07:06:00.004-04:00

Well, we haven't heard much about Miranda rights for terrorists lately.

The money seems to be coming in OK for Mr. Rogers' NRCC Patriot pals.

There have been a few scary threats about the impact of cap-and-trade legislation, but they're pretty much preaching to the choir. And as Mr. Rogers thunders that cooling the planet will "sink" Michigan's economy, he seems to forget that our state has lost over 600,000 jobs in the last eight years -- pretty much tracking with his tenure in Washington.

What, exactly, HAS Mr. Rogers been doing in D.C.?

The only jobs he's created are for lobbyists and incumbent Republican Congressmen.

The only health care coverage he's supported has been his own.

And the Knowlegis Power Rankings show that no one is paying much attention to his ideas and opinions:

Mike Rogers' Power Score is 16.30

* average score for the Michigan delegation? 25.9

* ranking Republican John Boehner? 56.88

His rank in the House is 214th out of 435.

Don't hold your breath for big things from Mr. Rogers in 2009.

Job Description

2009-07-07T07:05:00.002-04:00

Roll Call has dubbed Mike Rogers as the NRCC's "Top Cop," in view of his untiring efforts as Incumbent Retention Chairman for the GOP.

Here in the Neighborhood, we've heard about Mr. Rogers' work as Incumbent Retention Chair -- and we know that this is NOT the kind of job creation program needed in Michigan's 8th Congressional District. A member of the United States House of Representatives is supposed to, well, represent the voters of his or her district.

Rogers began his mission in February, when he started one-on-one meetings with more than 70 of his most vulnerable colleagues to set up individualized campaign goals. [skip]

According to a senior NRCC official, Rogers meets weekly with Boehner, Sessions and Cantor to discuss incumbent retention. [skip]

Rogers meets with NRCC Incumbent Retention Director Bob Honold several times a week. He keeps tabs on every Member’s progress, including political matters such as their call time, volunteer recruitment and local press

Hmmm. I don't recall Mr. Rogers taking the time to meet with more than 70 of the most vulnerable auto industry workers in our district, or sitting down regularly with local business owners.

Let's step back and look at the bigger picture for the first few months of this year:

January 2009:

The annual salary of House members increased to $174,000, not including COLA, health insurance or pension benefits.
Michigan lost another 69,000 jobs and led the nation in unemployment (11.6%, the worst since May 1984).

February 2009:

Mr. Rogers took time out from fighting against the stimulus package to host a meet & greet for freshman GOP members and 150 PACs.
Michigan unemployment increased to 12.0%

March 2009:

Mike Rogers hosted a $1,000-a-plate fundraiser for Joseph Cao (R-LA).
Michigan unemployment rose to 12.6%

April 2009:

Mr. Rogers decided that the tobacco industry was doing a great job and didn't need to be regulated; he also turned up his nose at national service programs.
Michigan's unemployment? Up again, to 12.9%

May 2009:

Chrysler entered bankruptcy.
The NRCC picked their ten "Patriot" candidates - vulnerable incumbents who need help with fundraising. Mr. Rogers called the fundraising competition "natural and healthy."
Michigan's unemployment rate rose to 14.1%.

June 2009:

GM filed for bankruptcy.
Mike Rogers spent his time in D.C. proposing dead-end amendments to the climate change bill and boldly supporting crucial legislation like establishing National Corvette Day and National Pet Week.
Rogers also co-hosted the first "Patriot Day" fundraiser on June 24th, where the ten House member "Patriots" raised $90,000 - $100,000 each.

It will be interesting to see Mr. Rogers' priorities during the next 15 months -- will he focus on fundraising for his Patriots, or jobs and healthcare for his constituents?

2010: Coming up fast

2009-07-06T14:06:00.002-04:00

Well, the second quarter of 2009 has closed and we're waiting to see the goodies that were deposited into Mike Rogers' war chest.

In the meantime, Mike Rogers was in great financial shape for 2010 at the end of Q1.

He reported $335,629 in donations for 2009-2010 for his campaign committee and his MIKE-R PAC (Minority Initiative to Keep Electing Republicans).

(Try to contain your surprise when you learn that Abbott Labs, Astra-Zeneca Pharmeceuticals and Pfizer are three of the top 5 contributors to MIKE-R PAC...)

Mr. Rogers had $202, 968 cash on hand.

He hasn't kept it all to himself, though -- he gave the Michigan Republicans a nice chunk of change ($40,000 worth).

Stay tuned for Mr. Rogers' Adventures in PAC-Land, Q2.

Sick and Tired

2009-07-02T08:14:00.002-04:00

Mike Rogers is a Serious Guy when it comes to health care. He warned us about those liberals who wanted to take Grandma's oxygen tank -- and her "choice" in health care coverage while they're at it.

Well, Mr. Rogers is back with a regurgitated plan for health care reform. He gets points for alliteration ("Costs," "Control," "Choices" and "Cures"), but other than that it's a tired retread of GOP slogans that do nothing to make realistic changes in health care policy.

In a breathtaking reversal (or re-reversal), Mr. Rogers now supports expanding the SCHIP program.

Important safety-net programs - like Medicaid and SCHIP - should be strengthened by expanding premium assistance programs which give low-income families new insurance options.

(You may recall that Mr. Rogers spent most of 2007/2008 fighting tooth and nail against expanding SCHIP, the program which helps working families to pay for their children's health care coverage.)

He also trots out the GOP 85/15 talking point -- that the 85% of Americans who are insured should not have to face higher costs or less choice to cover the 15% who are uninsured.

On the face of it, this sounds reasonable.

It sounds reasonable until you read the recent American Journal of Medicine study which finds that in 2007, 62% of all bankruptcies were linked to medical expenses -- and nearly 80% of the folks who filed had health insurance.

So much for choice and control.

Speaking of control, can you name the two industries which have been the top contributors to Mr. Rogers during his Congressional career? No points for guessing health care and insurance; the pharmaceutical industry is in fifth place for donations to the Rogers cash machine.

Guess we shouldn't expect too much from Mr. Rogers in this summer's health care debates.

Still Bananas Over Miranda

2009-06-29T07:56:00.009-04:00

A few weeks ago, Mike Rogers was making the right-wing news rounds with dire predictions about the dangers of Mirandizing Afghan detainees.

More recently, Mr. Rogers has been spreading the "news" in the local media, like WHMI and the Press & Argus.

"As an American citizen, it chills my blood to think that these foreign fighters from other nations who enter Afghanistan to kill our soldiers and allies are being given the same rights as American citizens accused of a crime," Rogers said in a statement.

CQ Politics' Jeff Stein was intrigued by this story of chilled blood (not to mention the chaos), so he talked with the Michigan Republican about his concerns.

Turns out that Mr. Rogers, on his most recent taxpayer-funded trip to Bagram Air Base, sat in on a meeting to which he had not been invited:

“I’m telling you, it was being implemented,” added Rogers, who slipped his minders at Bagram long enough to join a regular morning meeting of FBI, CIA, Defense Department and other U.S. agency personnel involved in interrogations.
“I saw it. I talked to people who were doing it,” he said.

(As Rhett Butler once noted, eavesdroppers often hear highly entertaining things...)

Stein interviewed some very credible people who were not going bananas over a policy which has been in place since 1998.

“Whether a person is Mirandized or not, he can remain silent,” Marion “Spike” Bowman, a former senior legal counsel to FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III , pointed out for me.
“Interestingly, with a good interrogator, most do not,” added Bowman, who was also at one time a legal adviser to the Navy’s elite counterterrorism unit, SEAL Team Six.
“A Mirandized person may be interrogated — whether he responds is a different matter,” Bowman said. “Some, in fact, related details that ratted out relatives. The Arab culture is not like ours and the ‘right to remain silent’ is not a part of their culture.”

FBI Director Robert Mueller wrote to Reps. Rogers and Wolfe (R-VA), stating that there has been "no policy change and no blanket instruction" issued for FBI agents to Mirandize detainees overseas.

For detainees held in military custody overseas, approval by the Department of Justice is required before Miranda warnings may be given. [skip]

There are cases in which FBI agents have provided Miranda warnings to persons captured and held overseas, at Bagram and elsewhere. In those cases, a determination was made that a prosecution in an Article III court may be in the interest of national security and that providing Miranda warnings (modified to take into account the overseas location of the detainee) was, therefore, desirable to maximize the likelihood that any resulting statements would be admissible at trial. In practice, Miranda warnings have been provided to Bagram detainees in only a small handful of cases out of over 4,000 individuals detained and interrogated by the FBI.

Faced with this, um, discrepancy between Mr. Rogers' allegations and statements by the Director of the FBI and senior DOJ officials, Stein asked the question that so many media types have been dodging:

I asked the former G-man if he was calling the head of the FBI a liar.

He paused.

"I don't know what Mueller's doing," he said. "There's certainly a contradiction between this and what Mueller told me."

If things are really as bad as this self-styled national security expert (and former FBI Guy) says, shouldn't he be leading a House investigation instead of playing games with nonsense amendments?

If It's On Fox, It Must Be True!

2009-06-11T07:16:00.006-04:00

The FauxNews machine is working overtime to promote Mr. Rogers' recent trip to Afghanistan.

According to Mr. R., the Obama administration is "creating chaos in the field among the CIA, FBI and military personnel" by "quietly ordering the FBI to start reading Miranda rights to suspected terrorists at U.S. military detention facilities in Afghanistan."

[It would be interesting to determine the amount of time Mr. Rogers spends "in the field" relative to "inside the gates of Bagram Air Base."]

Chaos in the field? That's a pretty serious statement.

Yet U.S. military commanders told Fox that soldiers aren't Mirandizing anyone, and a DOJ spokesman stated that

"There has been no policy change nor blanket instruction for FBI agents to Mirandize detainees overseas," he said in a statement, adding, "While there have been specific cases in which FBI agents have Mirandized suspects overseas, at both Bagram and in other situations, in order to preserve the quality of evidence obtained, there has been no overall policy change with respect to detainees."

It's worth noting that no other mainstream news source seem to be reporting this. Other than the usual suspects in the right-wing blogosphere, no one else is talking about it. Some conservative bloggers are hedging a bit:

More confirmation is needed before a general outcry takes hold

Even The Weekly Standard has held off on a hissy fit:

A lawyer who has worked on detainee issues for the U.S. government offers this rationale for the Obama administration’s approach. “If the US is mirandizing certain suspects in Afghanistan, they’re likely doing it to ensure that the treatment of the suspect and the collection of information is done in a manner that will ensure the suspect can be prosecuted in a US court at some point in the future.”

That's right, folks: evidence given under duress [i.e., torture] is inadmissible in a court of law. You can't prosecute the bad guys without evidence. Ergo, all law enforcement professionals -- from local cops to the FBI -- know that they need to play by the rules when capturing and interrogating suspects or they risk letting dirtbags walk out of the courtroom.

Approaching terrorism as a law enforcement issue instead of a military issue isn't a new idea. The United States tried and convicted Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman for the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. Abdel-Rahman was sentenced to life in prison and has been sitting in SuperMax since 1996. The British, no strangers to fighting terrorism, have successfully prosecuted such cases through their court system for years.

Mr. Rogers once again turns to the emotional anecdote in lieu of sensible policy. If he's genuinely concerned about troop safety and national security, and convinced of the facts, why isn't he shouting this from the rooftops instead of selectively whispering into friendly ears?

UPDATE: The American Prospect has a post on Gen. Petraeus' press conference, where he stated that

"This is the FBI doing what the FBI does," Petraeus replied. "These are cases where they are looking at potential criminal charges. We're comfortable with this." He denied that his soldiers and other relevant American agents are reading Miranda rights to detainees, some of whom are detained as enemy combatants, while others are high-value anti-terror targets. (A U.S. federal court recently ruled that some Bagram detainees have the same habeas rights as prisoners in Guantanamo Bay.)
While it seems that Rogers (and the Fox News correspondent) are happy to play up fears that the Obama administration is soft on terror, Petraeus' didn't seem to concerned by the DOJ practice, which the DOJ denies began with the current administration. In another portion of his speech, discussing the comprehensive strategy launched against Al Qaueda in Iraq as an indirect model counter-terror operations in Afghanistan, Petraeus noted the importance of counter-insurgency amoung detainee populations and the need for releasing certain detainees to help win over the populace, noting that by the end of his time in Baghdad the recdivism rate among released detainees was a very impressive 1 percent. [emphasis added]

General Petraeus says that his troops aren't Mirandizing detainees -- and he's not concerned about the FBI doing so. Mr. Rogers says that IS happening. Does that mean the four-star general is "soft on terror," or does that mean the congressman is ~~a manipulator~~ "misinformed"?

Your Turn, Mr. Rogers

2009-05-28T06:24:00.004-04:00

During the recent House Energy & Commerce committee debate on climate change legislation, Mike Rogers energetically offered up an amendment to tie U.S. adoption of cap-and-trade carbon policy to similar action by China and India.

His amendment would allow the U.S. to get out of the cap-and-trade plan if India and China -- two of the world's biggest sources of greenhouse gases -- did not agree to similar limits.

From Bloomberg:

The provision focusing on China and India, offered by Republican Representative Mike Rogers of Michigan, would have allowed greenhouse-gas emission limits in the U.S. only if those two countries adopted standards that were “at least as stringent.” The committee rejected the proposal on a 36-23 party-line vote.

Fred Upton also chimed in:

"If we don’t demand that they have the same kind of criteria that we do, we’re going to see those jobs go,” Upton said. “We can put a gun to China’s head” to push them to adopt pollution limits, he said."

Well, it looks as though guns won't be necessary. The lead story in today's NYT Business section?

China Is Set to Plan Strict Gas Mileage Rules

Yep, China is getting ready for standards even stricter than those proposed by President Obama, including improving fuel economy an additional 18% by 2015. On top of that,

Cars with small fuel-sipping engines are now subject to a 1 percent sales tax, while sports cars and sport utility vehicles with the largest engines are subject to a 40 percent sales tax. Stricter fuel economy standards have won support from four interest groups within the Chinese government, said a Chinese government official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the issue.

It's clear that we need to seriously address global warming. in addition, there are some pretty compelling economic reasons for the United States to lower its greenhouse gas emissions. It will reduce our dependence on foreign oil, an idea that so excited Mr. Rogers that he made an animated video. Increasing competitiveness for U.S. companies? Ditto.

While Mr. Rogers gets a point or two for actually doing some Congress-type work while he's in Washington (as opposed to enforcing the party line and hosting GOP fundraisers), it would be great if he accomplished something that would help the state of Michigan.

Just Plain Wrong

2009-05-18T09:59:00.003-04:00

As regular readers may have guessed, I disagree with Mike Rogers on a wide variety of issues. Many of these are differences of opinion on things like government transparency, civil rights, fiscal responsibility and science-based public policy.

In today's Press & Argus, though, I read a letter to the editor that transcended politics. After losing her mother to pancreatic cancer, the writer went to D.C. as a volunteer for the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network. She met with Mr. Rogers (and his health legislative assistant) to urge his support for H.R. 745, the Pancreatic Cancer Research and Education Act.

This should have been a no-brainer for Mr. Rogers, who not only loves the emotional connection of a good story but has also been active in specific health care issues. Alas, it seems as though Mr. Rogers wasn't paying attention:

After many follow up e-mails and phone calls, Congressman Rogers has not yet co-sponsored the bill, and I thought his constituents might be interested in some of the legislation he has felt compelled to co-sponsor, as listed on his Web site:
H.R. 970: Expressing support for designation of June 30 as National Corvette Day.
H.R. 142: Expressing the sense of the Congress that there should be established a National Pet Week.
H.R. 225: Congratulating Tony Dungy, a native of Jackson, for leading the Indianapolis Colts to victory in Super Bowl XLI.
H.R. 1059: Congratulating the Adrian College Bulldogs men's hockey team for winning the Midwest Collegiate Hockey Association regular-season title and postseason tournament and for having the best five-year win-loss record in Division III.
HR 325: Commending the Michigan State University Spartans men's hockey team for their victory in the 2007 NCAA championships.

H.R. 745 was introduced by RogersPal Anna Eshoo (D-CA) and has 139 co-sponsors -- both Democrats and Republicans (including fellow GOP Michiganders Candice Miller & Thad McCotter).

Mr. Rogers has worked with Ms. Eshoo on many occasions, including a bill to block a decision by the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) to control coverage of a specific drug used to treat anemia in cancer patients. To clarify, this bill was actually a Congressional Review Act joint resolution, "a rarely used mechanism for overturning executive branch regulations."

Clearly, Mr. Rogers isn't afraid to micromanage. So why no support for H.R. 745?

Is it because Mr. Rogers has avoided pretty much any sort of legislative effort this term? (He has been rather busy with GOP fundraising and party discipline, though.)

Is the bill just some pork-packed government spending spree?

Hardly.

Among other things, H.R. 745 would require the Secretary of HHS to develop an interdisciplinary committee to establish research objectives, provide a strategic research plan, and evaluate NIH research grants. The bill would also require the NIH and CDC to create a communications toolkit for patients and their families. The Congressional Research Service summary has all the specifics.

The writer's pain and sorrow -- too familiar to all of us who have lost relatives and friends to cancer -- is joined by her frustration. She traveled to Washington as a citizen advocate, a volunteer who hopes to help other families fighting this deadly disease. Her "representative" still hasn't co-sponsored the bill, deciding for whatever reason that it wasn't worth the bother... unlike National Pet Week or National Corvette Day.

Now that her letter has made the local paper, though, it will be interesting to see if Mr. Rogers changes his tune.

Attack of the Attacks!

2009-04-28T07:41:00.003-04:00

Poor Mr. Rogers.

He's been under attack -- unfair attack, no less! -- for his votes in Washington.

He's been "unfairly attacked" by the League of Conservation Voters, who disagree with his stance on carbon cap-and-trade; the "League's attack takes the low road" according to a supporter.

His press secretary primly noted that "Partisan attack ads can't change facts."

Mr. Rogers has also been "unfairly attacked" over $800,000 earmarked for a local private university.

The good news: he has plenty of ~~mouthpieces~~ friends who will leap to his defense, regardless of the facts.

An editorial in the Press & Argus argued that anyone who saw a contradiction in Mr. Rogers' insertion of $17.6 million worth of earmarks and his subsequent vote against said bill was just being silly, or partisan, or something.

The same editorial allowed the university president to "calmly explain" the need for a $475K geothermal retrofit of the school's racquetball court.* It's a fairly reasonable explanation; turns out that it isn't just for the racquetball court and the entire project is also depending on $3 million in private donations.

Funny how Mr. Rogers assumes that projects in other states haven't any reasonable explanations, and thus are worth attacking based on a headline.

*It would have been interesting for the editor to follow up on the university president's assertion that his institution is competing with "community college and state universities that are awash in public funding." I'm sure that Mary Sue Coleman (U of M), Lou Anna K. Simon (MSU), Timothy R. Meyer (OCC), Brent Knight (LCC) and their other Michigan higher ed colleagues would beg to differ with that description... Here's a breakdown of Rogers' earmarks for private and public institutions in the 8th Congressional District.

Pollution and Unemployment: OK by Mike

2009-04-23T06:47:00.003-04:00

Here in The Neighborhood, we've already noticed that Mike Rogers has been pretty vocal about his dislike of reducing greenhouse gases.

Using the GOP playbook phrase "cap and tax" to argue that cap-and-trade carbon policy will hurt Michigan's economy, he's downplayed the real gains that can come from this market-based approach to pollution reduction.

He also thinks that American manufacturers don't have the skills to step up and meet the opportunities of renewable energy technologies.

Well, we're not the only ones who are underwhelmed by Mr. Rogers' pronouncements of doom.

Starting tomorrow, the League of Conservation Voters will air ads in the Lansing area critical of Rogers' opposition to the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009.

“Reps. Blunt and Rogers have made it clear they are siding with Big Oil and saying no to millions of new jobs and no to making America a global leader on clean energy,” said League of Conservation Voters President Gene Karpinksi. “Why do they seem to have such little faith in American ingenuity and know-how?”

That's a pretty good question.

If Mr. Rogers' loyalties lie with his district (not to mention his state and his country), he'll stop his knee-jerk "no" responses and work to enact legislation that can help our nation.

If his loyalties lie with the GOP leadership, Mr. Rogers will keep on fundraising, party-building and wagging his finger at empty rooms.

We'll see what choices he makes in the weeks and months to come.

Is it the Good Russia, or the Bad One?

2009-04-20T12:46:00.003-04:00

Mr. Rogers recently returned from his ~~spring break visit~~ intelligence trip to Russia with some amazing news: they have a better business plan than we do.

"Why is it I had to go all the way to Moscow to hear a good idea on turning the economy around?" Rogers said.

Hmm. A quick Google search of "Russian economy" shows a country facing slumping oil prices, an overvalued ruble, a central bank rate of 12%, a 13.5% inflation rate, and international currency reserves that have plunged by $200 billion in just six months.

Perhaps if Mr. Rogers had spent a bit more of his time in Washington listening -- rather than reflexively saying no to protecting children from tobacco and reducing carbon emissions -- he wouldn't have had to go all the way to Moscow.

Russia didn't receive the same admiring words from Mike Rogers last month, though, when he co-signed a letter criticizing President Obama's attempts to engage Russia in preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons:

Over the last year, as you know, Russia has pursued a divisive policy to re-exert its Soviet-era sphere of influence. During this time, Russia invaded Georgia, intimidated other nations from joining NATO, and threatened to target Eastern Europe with nuclear missiles should the proposed European missile defense sites be built. Further, amidst a global economic crisis, Russia has disrupted shipments of natural gas to Europe for the second time in three years. Most recently, Russia used financial incentives to persuade Kyrgyzstan to deny the U.S. access to its Manas military base in order to support coalition operations in Afghanistan.

Does Mr. Rogers really think that this is a country we should emulate?

Whoa there, Washington Waste Watcher Guy!

2009-04-16T07:16:00.002-04:00

Mr. Rogers is Concerned About Waste.

He was in Lansing yesterday for the MI tea party festivities.

He's set up a "Washington Waste Watch" website to track how tax dollars are being spent, and issued this statement:

“Republicans and Democrats have spent recklessly in the past, but now the problem is worse than ever,” Rogerssaid. “The federal deficit has ballooned to more than a trillion dollars. It is irresponsible and will ensure that our children and grandchildren have a huge debt to pay to countries like China.”
Rogers, who also will address a Lansing “Tea Party” today organized to protest out-of-control spending and taxation, highlighted the long history of poor spending decisions made in Washington. “For too long, we have watched as our money was wasted on bridges to nowhere, a hippie museum in New York, or an indoor rainforest in Iowa,” Rogers said. “We need an open, honest debate about how much money Washington should take in taxes, how much money Washington should borrow in our name and just how that money will be spent.”

Sounds good... except for a few picky details:

1.) "Republicans and Democrats have spent recklessly in the past."

Mr. Rogers is now serving his fifth term in Washington -- so that pretty much disqualifies him from using the passive voice and the third person, as if he had nothing to do with it.

2.) "For too long, we have watched as our money has been wasted on bridges to nowhere"

Mr. Rogers is welcome to mock other representatives' requests for "hippie museums" as long as he remembers that he personally asked for $17.6 million worth of earmarks -- including "wood utilization research" and $475,750 for a private university's recreation center.

On his website, Mr. Rogers conveniently ignores his own earmark requests, and instead singles out a $550,000 project in Pawtucket, RI as an example of silly spending. Unsurprisingly, Mr. Rogers chose to steal a headline without reading the rest of the article. What did he miss in his froth of indignation?

Michael Cassidy, the city planning director, said the money is for shovel-ready projects and the city is ready to go on both the skateboarding park and work on the athletic courts. A bid request has been issued seeking a contractor for the site, which takes in the three recreational projects, at Division and North Bend streets.
Cassidy said the stimulus will allow Pawtucket to forge ahead with more work than expected over the summer, giving jobs to construction workers. He estimated 30 to 40 workers on the projects, which includes subcontractors the contractor hires. He predicted a ripple effect: those working on the projects will buy lunch at local eateries and have their cars repaired at local service stations, and the contractor will buy materials, from lumber to basketball nets and fencing.
Ronald L. Wunschel, the city’s finance director, said people have sought for years to have a safe skateboard park so that young people don’t skate on other public property.
It will be an outdoor park, so it can’t be used in bad weather, Cassidy said. It won’t require staffing because the design –– size of ramps, etc. –– meets standards set by the insurer, the Rhode Island Interlocal Trust. The major work is expected to start when school ends and finish around Labor Day.

Hmmm. Doesn't sound quite so wild-eyed anymore, does it?

3.) "The Federal deficit has ballooned to over a trillion dollars"

Yes, it certainly has. I don't know anyone who is happy with this, Republican or Democrat. But while Mr. Rogers has fun stomping his feet and hanging out with the Obama-hating Teabag gang, he'd do well to remember what has happened in Washington since he was first elected in 2000:

And here is a report from the Bureau of Public Debt of the annual federal debt outstanding at the end of the last 8 federal fiscal years:
09/30/2008    $10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007    $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006    $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005    $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004    $7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003    $6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002    $6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001    $5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000    $5,674,178,209,886.86

Hale Stewart sums it up nicely:

Republican/conservative rank and file are protesting because they are out of power and their leadership is terrible. But they aren't protesting spending; they are protesting the Democratic Party's governance. And that is fine. But please, don't tell me it's about spending or debt. If that were the case, you guys should have taken to the streets years ago.

Celebrities in Lansing!

2009-04-15T17:05:00.002-04:00

The Washington Indpendent has a great article on today's Michigan "Tea Party." It was a happening place -- not only was Joe the Plumber there, but Representative Rogers was, too! Lots of photos, as well. Enjoy.

Tobacco Road

2009-04-13T07:25:00.003-04:00

Tobacco is bad for you. In 2009, there shouldn't be any debate about this statement -- but some Michigan lawmakers are taking issue with it.

Earlier this month, the U.S. House passed the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (H.R. 1256). This bill gives the Food and Drug Administration regulatory authority over tobacco and tobacco products. In plain English:

The bill doesn't give the FDA power to ban existing tobacco products but gives the agency power to restrict sales on safety grounds. The FDA also would be able to stop companies from touting their brands as "low tar" and "mild" and restrict advertising to plain black-and-white ads. Health advocates say advertising restrictions are a key tool to keeping tobacco products away from children and young adults.

Supporters of H.R. 1256 included the American Lung Association, the American Heart Association, the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, and the American Cancer Society.

No prize for guessing how Mike Rogers voted... he was one of the 112 members who thought the FDA had no business regulating tobacco.

Not only did Mr. Rogers vote against it, but he threw in four separate amendments to try and block it. All of them failed, largely because they were silly: the FDA couldn't regulate tobacco until the until the Secretary of HHS certifies that the FDA had "approved or disapproved" "all of the heart disease drugs... for the therapy of those in need," as well as "all pediatric cancer, breast cancer, colorectal cancer, and human papilloma virus drugs."

All drugs? For someone who receives quite a lot of funding from the pharmaceutical industry, Mr. Rogers should know that there isn't an endpoint for drug development. There's always something in the pipeline; to say that "all" drugs must be approved or disapproved before allowing the FDA to do something sounds remarkably like Cinderella's stepmother -- setting an impossible list of chores as a condition of going to the ball.

When his "all or nothing" approach didn't work, Mr. Rogers tried the "fiscally responsible" gambit. He tossed in an amendment that would require the FDA to fund tobacco regulation exclusively from user fees, rather than "overburdening" the FDA's general fund. Sounds reasonable, until you learn that the bill uses general fund monies for only the first six months, then it rolls over to user fee funding. in addition, the money borrowed from the general fund would be paid back from money collected in user fees.

A Lansing State Journal editorial makes an important point:

This isn't about partisanship. Michigan Republicans Vern Ehlers and Dave Camp said yes in the final vote on the FDA bill... [skip] And Mike Rogers could have backed the FDA bill as a step in the right direction, once it was clear his own alternative would not pass.

Cigarette smoking is responsible for roughly 1 out of every 5 deaths in the U.S. each year. Here in Michigan, 21% of adults are smokers -- higher than the national average (19%). Michigan women are more likely to smoke than the average woman; Michigan's cancer rates for both men and women are also higher than the national rate.

The picture is even more grim for Michigan's kids. Our state is ranked 47th out of 50 in protecting children from tobacco. 18% of our high school students smoke. Smoking-related health care costs Michigan $3.4 billion each year. And the tobacco industry is spending $415.9 million in marketing right here in Michigan.

Why would any responsible adult think that all this was worth protecting?

Government Gone Wild

2009-04-07T07:03:00.005-04:00

That's House minority leader John Boehner's assessment of the state of the nation, anyway. He issued a statement to FOX News' FOX Forum blog with the following comments:

As Americans become more incensed with government run amok in Washington, they are becoming more eager for a credible, energized alternative.

Hmm. Is that why President Obama has a +4 to +8 approval index rating?

Michigan's own Mike Rogers has been tapped to lead the "GOP State Solutions" project with Devine Nunes (R-CA), in which

House Republicans will work with reform-minded GOP governors and state legislators to fight Washington bureaucracy and inefficiency.

[Irony alert: ten-term Congressman Boehner is enlisting representatives like Mike Rogers (now in his fifth term and former deputy whip), Roy Blunt (former GOP Whip; in the House since 1997), Eric Cantor (Republican Whip and five-term member), and Mike Pence (first elected in 2000 and former chair of the Republican Study Committee) to fight "Washington bureaucracy and inefficiency."]

Reform-minded GOP governors may not like bureaucracy or inefficiency (really, who does?) but they sure do appreciate the hundreds of millions that will be coming their way...

Conservative Republican governors like Bobby Jindal (Louisiana), Rick Perry (Texas) and Jim Gibbons (Nevada) woke up, smelled the economic coffee and took funds that they had previously refused. Even SC Governor Mark Sanford -- the last GOP holdout against the stimulus package -- met the deadline to accept federal dollars.

Democrats have controlled the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives for three months now, and from their actions, a discomforting narrative has emerged.

Disregard the comparative time frames (three months vs. eight years). The really discomforting narrative for GOP leaders is Rasmussen's latest generic congressional ballot showing Dems with a fairly consistent lead.

With the exception of two weeks ago, Democratic support has been between 40% and 42% in every weekly generic ballot poll conducted in 2009. Also, with the exception of two weeks ago, Republican support has been in the 37% to 39% every week since the beginning of February.

Sorry, Mr. Boehner. Your party controlled the White House and Congress for the better part of a decade, deregulated the financial industry and flipped the economy from a surplus to a record-breaking deficit -- the public isn't buying your new story of credibility and reform.

A Feather in His Cap

2009-04-03T07:50:00.002-04:00

Congress has been racing to wrap things up before Easter recess... apparently, chocolate bunnies are a powerful bipartisan motivator.

The $3 trillion+ budget passed both houses in a party-line vote and moved on to conference committee. The vote tallies came as no suprise, and Republican House members knew that they ran zero risk in voting against it. In a vain attempt to be relevant, though, House Majority leader Boehner came up with an alternative budget (optimistically titled, The Road to Recovery) which was roundly mocked for both its lack of numbers and its quaint faith in tax cuts. It died a quiet death, not even getting much respect from its own party. In an interesting aside, Glenn Thrush noted that:

Defectors: About twice as many Republicans (38 or 20 percent of their conference) voted against the GOP alternative budget -- than Democrats (20 or 8 percent) who nixed their party's spending plan

With no traction on the budget, Republican reps have turned their energies to grumbling about the Waxman-Markey climate change legislation proposal.

Cap and trade of carbon dioxide emissions is a major component of the proposal. In a nutshell, this is a market-based way to control pollution. A cap (maximum limit) is set for emissions, then sources (manufacturers, utilities, etc.) are given a specific emissions allowance. Each source can design its own plan to stay within its specific allowance, such as investing in better pollution controls and increasing efficiency. Sources that don't "spend" their entire allowance can sell the extra to other less-efficient sources. The EPA lists the benefits of this approach:

Strict limits on emissions yielding dramatic pollution reductions;
High levels of compliance, transparency, and complete accountability;
Regulatory certainty and flexibility for sources;
Incentives for early pollution reduction and innovations in control technologies;
Compatibility with state and local programs;
Significant, widespread, and guaranteed human health and environmental benefits;
Efficient use of government resources, and
More benefits at less cost.

This isn't just some pointy-headed academic theory -- cap and trade has successfully reduced levels of several types of pollutants for over a decade.

Meme alert: Mike Rogers has decided to get cranky about cap-and-trade, or as he prefers to call it, "cap and tax."

Always fond of the fact-free policy statement, Mr. Rogers has been sounding the alarm about carbon cap and trade. He's been busy warning that it will "devastate jobs in manufacturing states like Michigan" and be "economic suicide." [Note to Mr. Rogers: Michigan has lost 600,000 auto jobs over the last 8 years, when carbon cap-and-trade was nowhere in sight.]

If you're up for it, there's even a Mike Rogers video with his oh-so-gloomy predictions and misleading "statistics"... just keep in mind that consumers already pay every time "they put food in the refrigerator to keep it cold" or "turn on the computer to help kids with their homework." What's wrong with providing the same electrical capacity with less pollution? And wouldn't this market-based solution to reduce greenhouse gases actually promote clean energy job growth? Funny, but Mr. Rogers used to think that was a good idea. He even included it in his super-duper Energy Independence cartoon.

Word in the Neighborhood is that Mr. Rogers will hold a joint "town hall" style meeting with State Reps. Bill Rogers and Cindy Denby during Easter recess. If this actually happens, we'll be sure to ask Mike Rogers about his change of heart on clean energy policy and job growth.

Service to Country

2009-04-02T06:50:00.002-04:00

Things aren't looking too rosy out there these days. With the size (and number) of problems facing our country, it can be hard for an individual to feel as though she can make a difference.

Well, a good idea popped up on Capitol Hill recently: the Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act -- and unlike the bank bailout, it will cost taxpayers just $3 per person in 2010 and result in practical benefits for communities across America.

The GIVE Act (H.R.1388), known as the Serve America Act (S 227) in the Senate, will expand AmeriCorps and other national service programs from 75,000 positions to 250,000 participants over the next eight years. Currently focused on college-age volunteers, opportunities would include veterans and Americans over 55, as well as middle and high school students. A Congressional Research Service summary of the bill is here.

The bills passed in both the House (321 - 105)and the Senate (79-19) with overwhelming bipartisan support. Twenty-two Republican Senators, including conservatives like Kit Bond, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Orrin Hatch and Judd Gregg, lent their support. In the House, every member of the Michigan Republican delegation -- with the exception of Pete Hoekstra -- supported the bill.

On Tuesday, the House passed a motion to concur in the Senate amendments to the bill (275-149). The majority of the Michigan delegation (12 -3) voted in favor, including GOP Reps. Camp, Ehlers, Miller and Upton.

In an unsurprising about-face, Mike Rogers and Thad McCotter decided that they enjoy being the Party of No, and flip-flopped to join Pete Hoekstra in voting against the final version of the bill. As with the budget, Mr. Rogers was for it before he was against it...

Reasonable people may wonder why a bill that has passed muster with Sens. Hatch and Gregg isn't good enough for Mr. Rogers.

Here's a prediction: when questioned on this vote, Rogers & Co. will parrot the scare-mongering phrases of Michele Malkin, Glenn Beck et al:

"It could force a mandatory national service requirement on all young Americans!"

No. The bill dropped a provision, which was then written as a stand-alone bill (HR 1444), to establish a Congressional Commission on Civil Service. The Commission would address twelve specific topics, two of which apparently bunch conservative panties:

(5) The effect on the Nation, on those who serve, and on the families of those who serve, if all individuals in the United States were expected to perform national service or were required to perform a certain amount of national service.

(6) Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.

Studying possible outcomes provides information about pros and cons of a plan. It doesn't mean that the plan will be implemented. In fact, a cynic would point out that study committees are usually where ideas go to die...

This will let Obama push his radical agenda by forcing kids into liberal political activity!

No. The final House version included an amendment by Rep. Miller which

prohibits organizations from attempting to influence legislation; organize or engage in protests, petitions, boycotts, or strikes; and assist, promote, or deter union organizing.

You may hear some whining that an amendment by Sen. David Vitter to prohibit ACORN and any ACORN-affiliated organizations from receiving GIVE funds was tabled. Well, the Miller amendment covers ACORN and actually expands Vitter's intent by prohibiting a wider range of political activity.

There will be uniforms! Like brownshirts!

This is just too silly for comment, so here's a picture to put it in perspective. Scared yet?

Bottom line: Mr. Rogers would rather spout off about cap-and-trade policy than work on practical approaches to tough issues like unemployment, rising college costs, resources for veterans and seniors, and service to country.

Summer's Coming: Time for Flip-Flops!

2009-03-27T10:47:00.003-04:00

Today's Free Press ran an opinion piece by Mike Rogers titled "Obama budget hurts Michigan." In it, he trots out GOP budget talking points* (Cap & trade = bad! Taxes = bad!) and opines that the budget is "one more kick in the gut" for Michigan.

It was somewhat surprising to read this. First off, President Obama didn't put $17.6 million worth of earmarks for the 8th CD in the bill -- Mike Rogers did. Nor did the President join with other Michigan representatives and Senators to request funding for over $200 million in earmarks for our state. Again, it's Mr. Rogers' name on those items.

What made Mr. Rogers change his tune? Does he really think that Michigan State University will waste the biotech, agricultural and alternative fuels research funding he requested? Did he decide that improving public transit and water treatment plants isn't worthwhile? Are Oakland Community College, Lansing Community College and other higher ed institutions not worth the effort now?

Here in Livingston County, we'll receive $1.4 million in earmarked funds. The local paper lauded Mr. Rogers for "bringing home the bacon" and the Road Commissioner suggested that this was "just another reason to hug Mike Rogers when you see him." The money will go to badly-needed area road and bridge projects, as well as a local university. Does Mr. Rogers now think this is a bad idea?

After requesting all these earmarks, Rep. Rogers has the intestinal fortitude to turn around and describe the budget as "job-killing." If he really thinks that our state would be better off without over $200 million in funding for transportation, infrastructure, education, health care and law enforcement -- not to mention the jobs that will result from these projects -- why did he bother putting those earmarks into the budget in the first place?

Since first going to Washington in 2001, it's clear that Mr. Rogers is quite fluent in Beltway double-talk. Seriously, who -- other than a Washington insider -- could pull off this impressive quadruple flip-flop:

* personally inserting millions worth of earmarks into the budget (flip),

* voting against the budget (flop),

* taking credit for bringing home the bacon(flip),

* then criticizing the budget (flop).

Yay, Mr. Rogers! You really stuck that landing -- and the voters.

* Visit FiveThirtyEight for a very funny take on the GOP budget graphic

Much Ado! Or, Adventures in Blogging

2009-03-26T06:40:00.005-04:00

Yesterday, I posted a piece from Politico's Huddle about Rep. Mike Rogers claiming D.C. residency for tax purposes. Politico is a respected, mainstream Washington site with solid content.

I cross-posted at LivingBlue & asked Michigan Liberal to post as well. So far, so good. Then, having a life outside the keyboard, I toddled off to do other things for the day.

This is where it turned into an episode from I Love Lucy.

Turns out that the Politico reporter got it wrong. It was in fact Alabama Rep. Mike Rogers, not Michigan Rep. Mike Rogers, claiming the tax deduction. Though the reporter changed the on-line post later that morning, he didn't note that it was a correction or notify his email subscribers.

That's when the phone calls started. And the emails. (Remember that part about "having a life outside the keyboard"? Silly me!)

After updating the post here with a correction, I provided our local reporter and other area blogs with the original Huddle e-mail citing Michigan Mike. I also emailed the Politico reporter to ask why he didn't note it as a correction -- since I was certainly having to do that -- and learned that he would run one the next day. To cap off the weirdness, another Washington blog reported that Alabama Mike had not, in fact, requested a tax deduction from the District of Columbia!

As promised, reporter Martin Kady II of Politico's Huddle ran the correction this morning:

CORRECTION FROM WEDNESDAY HUDDLE: An item in yesterday’s Huddle titled “Improper Tax Break” named the wrong Rep. Mike Rogers. We fixed it online, but want to make sure our e-mail subscribers know it should have been Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.). Further, the office of the Alabama Mike Rogers followed up to say that Rogers did not seek a D.C. homestead deduction and was not aware he was receiving that tax break, and he has documents from the city’s tax office that show he never applied for this deduction.

Meme alert: today, the local paper ran a story about the story about the story.

A few takeaways from yesterday's kerfuffle:

1.) Information moves across the internet with impressive speed. Writers -- whether bloggers or full-time reporters -- have a responsibility to correct errors of fact as soon as possible. Since I began blogging for this and other sites in December of 2006, I have provided links to original sources for my posts. If I find that a source is in error, it's noted promptly. If the error is mine, that gets noted, too.

2.) Blogging isn't inherently bad (sorry, Susan). As in journalism, there is a wide range of content: no one equates the Wall Street Journal with the New York Post, and no one is confusing Gawker with The Economist. Likewise, the public knows that the Boston Globe and the Detroit News will offer differing analyses of the same event.

Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood is a political blog. While readers may not agree with the opinions expressed here, it's important to remember that those opinions are based on real world sources: voting records, interviews, news coverage and public statements. Neighborhood contributors blog responsibly and we intend to continue doing so.

Join the conversation and let us know what you think!

Home Safe?

2009-03-25T08:32:00.004-04:00

UPDATE 2: The Huddle correction was published this morning.

UPDATE: The Huddle gang stated in error that Mike Rogers of Michigan was double-dipping his tax exemptions -- it was in fact Mike Rogers of Alabama. The clip below was taken from the Huddle blast email sent at 8:00 this morning. Click the link & scroll down to the story for the original post... Apologies for the confusion.

Here in the Neighborhood, we've wondered (more than once) where exactly Mr. Rogers thinks he's from. We kind of get the feeling that he prefers being in Washington, fundraising for the national Republican party to being in Michigan's 8th Congressional District and actually having to talk with those annoying voters.

The story in this morning's Politico Huddle comes as no surprise, then. According to a breaking story in Roll Call, it looks like some GOP members of Congress are playing games with residency and tax deductions. Guess who's on the list?

IMPROPER TAX BREAK: Four Republican members of Congress are trying to have it both ways with home state residence and a DC homestead tax break. Roll Call's Jennifer Yachnin breaks news with her investigation: 'Despite maintaining residency in their home states, a handful of House lawmakers appear to be improperly receiving the Washington, D.C., homestead tax deduction, reducing their annual property tax bills by hundreds of dollars and potentially much more over the long term. A Roll Call review of District of Columbia tax records revealed at least four Members who receive the property tax benefit from among more than 80 lawmakers who own homes in neighborhoods that popular with lawmakers, including Capitol Hill.' The lawmakers: Reps. Tom Petri (R-Wisc.), Steve King (R-Iowa), Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.) and Mike Rogers (R-Mich.). [emphasis added]

Stay tuned for more on this story.

California Dreamin'

2009-03-24T06:50:00.003-04:00

Once again in the grip of his love-hate affair with the state of California, Mr. Rogers has co-sponsored a bill with Democratic Rep. Ellen Tauscher (CA-10) to direct federal dollars to encourage local van pools.

Mr. Rogers co-chairs the Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Caucus with Rep. Tauscher; they've also co-sponsored a crib safety bill.

In fact, Mr. Rogers has a pretty good track record of collaborating with California Democrats. In addition to Rep. Tauscher, he's worked with Rep. Lois Capps (CA-23) on a pain relief bill and Rep. Jane Harman (CA-36) on the Select Agent Program for bioterrorism. His super-special CalCongressPal is Rep. Anna Eshoo (CA-14): they've co-sponsored a number of bills, including coverage for cancer medication, the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), and directed the EPA to study data center efficiency.

You have to wonder, though, what Reps. Eshoo, Capps, Harman & Tauscher think when their legislative buddy comes out with gems like:

"American families ought to decide what cars they want to drive, not the state of California where extremism continues to damage the manufacture of American cars and hurt American workers."

and this:

"This reckless decision overturns an important increase in fuel efficiency and an essential improvement in vehicle safety," Rogers said. "It is further proof of why we need a real energy bill that embraces innovation and stops California politicians and judges from designing American cars and trucks."

Seems like Mr. Rogers is OK with extremist California politicians as long as they agree with him...

It's Not Personal, It's Business

2009-03-23T08:07:00.002-04:00

This classic line from The Godfather came to mind as I read a letter to the editor in today's Press & Argus titled "Unfair Attack on Rogers and Cleary."

Not entirely sure when questioning the public actions of an elected official became an "unfair attack," but accusing your questioner of a personal attack is always a handy response when the facts aren't on your side.

Just to review:

1.) Mike Rogers has been a long-term, consistent critic of earmarks. Fair enough.

But then...

2.) Mike Rogers inserted $17.6 million in earmarks into this year's Omnibus Budget Bill.

3.) Mike Rogers then proceeded to vote against the Omnibus Budget Bill.

4.) The Omnibus Budget Bill passed.

5.) Mike Rogers took full credit for a variety of projects funded by these earmarks, such as local roads, biotech research, sustainable agriculture and water treatment, among other things.

oh, but the devil is in the details:

5a.) Of the $1.4 million in earmarks for Livingston County (Mr. Rogers' home), $800,000 -- 57% of the total funds for LivCo -- is going to a local private university whose president has made significant donations to the Congressman. More than half of this is being used for a geothermal energy retrofit for the building that houses the racquetball courts, basketball courts and aerobic exercise area.

A quick brain exercise for Monday morning: imagine that a Democrat had huffed and puffed about earmarks, inserted them anyway, then voted against the bill. Now imagine that this Democrat had then taken credit for "bringing home the bacon," and ensured that a significant chunk of the cash went to a private entity headed by a major campaign contributor.

I think that the opposing party would make some major noise -- and they would be justified in doing so.

It's not personal, it's democracy.

Let's Do Lunch, Multitasker Edition

2009-03-19T17:43:00.003-04:00

There are so many challenges facing our state -- and our nation -- it can seem overwhelming.

So, you'll be glad to know that Mr. Rogers is earning his $174,000 salary! He's multitasking, taking time to eat a healthy lunch AND raising money to keep Republican bottoms in Congressional seats all at the same time:

National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Pete Sessions (Texas), NRCC Vice Chairman for Incumbent Retention Mike Rogers (Mich.) and Rep. Charles Boustany (La.) are hosting a luncheon fundraiser for freshman Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao today.
Cao is widely viewed as the most vulnerable Republican incumbent up for re- election in 2010 after he defeated then-Rep. William Jefferson (D) last year in a heavily Democratic New Orleans-based district. [skip]
The event is being held at the NRCC. Contributions are $1,000 per political action committee or $500 per individual.

Collegiality, Livingston County Style

2009-03-18T08:11:00.004-04:00

There have been quite a few articles of late discussing Mike Rogers' $1.4 million in earmarks for Livingston County.

This is the same Mike Rogers who railed against the omnibus spending bill as mortgaging "our children and grandchildren's future... Congress continues to wastefully spend their hard-earned tax dollars." You will no doubt recall that Mr. Rogers is a veteran player of the "criticize and take" game in previous budget cycles.

Leaving aside the, ah, oddity of voting against a bill into which you had stuffed $17.6 million for your district, isn't part of a representative's job to direct spending to his or her district? This is especially true when you represent a long-time donor state:

On the whole, these earmarks are sensible and useful (not to mention co-sponsored with Democrats). For example, Livingston County drivers -- regardless of party affiliation -- can agree that the Latson Road interchange is long overdue for completion. Likewise, funding for research on sustainable agriculture, biotechnology projects, public transportation and water treatment is a smart and productive use of federal dollars.

While fairly certain that I'll refrain from taking LivCo Road Commissioner Mike Crain's suggestion:

"It's just another reason to hug Mike Rogers when you see him," Craine said.

I believe the majority of Mike Rogers' earmarks will help our district in both the short term and the long term.

And yet...

... of the $1.4 million coming to Livingston County, over $800,000 of it is going to Cleary University, a private institution with branches in Livingston and Washtenaw Counties.

Take a closer look at the way Mike Rogers allocated his earmarks for higher education:

	Rogers earmarks	Enrollment (earmark $/per student)	Ranking	Public/Private
Cleary	$800,000+	1,100 students ($727.27+ )	n/a	Private
Lansing CC	$190,000	20,394 students ($9.31)	3^rd largest in MI	Public
Oakland CC	$285,000	46,579 students ($6.12)	Largest CC in MI; 14th largest in U.S.	Public

So while I'm almost used to Mr. Rogers' general double standards, this little ploy to throw major public money to a minor private institution -- at a time when community colleges are educating roughly 45% of undergraduates nation-wide -- is a new low in hypocrisy.

Nobody Expects the Rush-in Inquisition

2009-03-02T09:44:00.008-05:00

Last week, The Neighborhood considered the religious overtones of Mr. Rogers' recent pronouncements on 2010 Congressional races.

This got me thinking about leadership, orthodoxy and control.

The Spanish Inquisition (known to most of us as the basis for a classic Monty Python sketch) was a religious tribunal, established to ensure the orthodoxy of recent converts (i.e., Jews and Muslims) and prevent the advance of heresy. As time went on, the Inquisition moved into censorship and also went after freemasons, witches, gays, assorted protestants, and Catholics who questioned church doctrine. The secondary benefit of all this terror? A nice financial profit for the Inquisitors, as the fines and property seizures added up.

Fast forward to last weekend, when the Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) conference was held in D.C. It was a busy couple of days: attendees hyperventilated with Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Joe the Plumber; voted for Mitt Romney in a 2012 presidential straw poll; and cheered on a brainwashed 13-year-old. Nostalgia for conservative heroes Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater comforted those who like to pretend that the November 2008 election never occurred.

Enforcing the conservative line, much like the Inquisition enforced Catholic doctrine, conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh took RNC Chairman Michael Steele to task this week, challenging his [Steele's] right to speak for Republicans.

"So I am an entertainer and I have 20 million listeners because of my great song and dance routine," Limbaugh said. "Michael Steele, you are head of the Republican National Committee. You are not head of the Republican party. Tens of millions of conservatives and Republicans have nothing to do with the Republican National Committee...and when you call them asking for money, they hang up on you."

Yesterday, Michael Steele apologized.

“My intent was not to go after Rush – I have enormous respect for Rush Limbaugh,” Steele said in a telephone interview. “I was maybe a little bit inarticulate. … There was no attempt on my part to diminish his voice or his leadership.”

Wow. Guess we know who owns all the red state hearts & minds...

El Rushbo and the Reagan revolution dead-enders out there want to cash in on our country's troubles in a bid to reactivate their political power. They're taking advantage of all the retro-Repub excitement and dusting off the 1990s playbook. Just take a look at Bill Kristol's 1993 memo on how to sink universal health care, and note all the media coverage of Newt Gingrich, the on-again conservative darling.

Is resurrecting old GOP orthodoxy really the way to go?

Republican political strategist David Frum is one of the few conservative voices warning his party about the dangers of worshiping the past.

Conservatives live in thrall to a historical myth, and this myth may soon cost us dearly. [skip] The Goldwater myth shuts down all attempts to reform and renew our conservative message for modern times. And it offers a handy justification for nominating a 2012 presidential candidate who might otherwise seem disastrously unelectable. Altogether, the myth invites dangerous and self-destructive behavior by a party that cannot afford either.

That got me thinking about that grad school classic, Exit, Voice and Loyalty:Responses to Declines in Firms, Organizations and States by Albert O. Hirschman.

In a nutshell, Hirschman looks at how members of an organization respond when the organization begins to decline. Some choose to exit, simply leaving for another group. Others feel that there aren't better alternatives, so they stay and voice their concerns in an effort to bring the organization "back" to its earlier and better state.

When loyalty is added in, though, things get interesting. This "feeling of attachment to an organization" can keep members from exiting, and may actually prevent them from voicing their concerns. Organizations themselves can enforce loyalty and ensure the status quo by imposing high fees to enter and stiff penalties to exit. This is bolstered by member "self-deception"

that is, in fighting the realization that the organization he belongs to or the product he has bought are deteriorating or defective. He will particularly tend to repress this sort of awareness if he has invested a great deal in his purchase or membership... once deterioration is adverted to, members of an organization that requires severe initiation will fight hard to prove that they were right after all in paying that high entrance fee.

Sound like any political organizations you know?

Over the next year or so, we'll see whether the GOP chooses to evolve into a new, competitive entity -- or if it will cling even more tightly to its shrinking base and allow Rush Limbaugh to become the new Grand Inquisitor. Either way, Democrats will have a lot of interesting opportunities in 2010.

Congressman, Cardinal or Consigliere?

2009-02-26T09:40:00.008-05:00

Regular visitors to The Neighborhood know that Mr. Rogers expends most of his time & energy on party politics -- with the emphasis on party.

Since announcing his decision to skip the 2010 Governor's race, Mr. Rogers has turned his focus to fiscal planning and long-term employment projects...

... for GOP members of Congress.

In his role as a member of the NRCC leadership,

"We're going to have to make some very tough decisions,” Michigan Rep. Mike Rogers, who is heading up incumbent retention efforts for the National Republican Congressional Committee, told members, according to a person in the meeting. “We lost members who fell away from the flock."

The flock? Could it be that the GOP's troubles stem from the fact that they're confusing a political party with a religious movement?

This comment from Mr. Rogers provides another example of such confusion:

"We have very limited resources," said Mike Rogers, chairman of the NRCC's incumbent retention program, to Roll Call. “It’s not right to ask the whole Conference to help those who aren’t willing to help themselves.”

Gee, I always thought it was God helping those who help themselves...

All of this refers to the NRCC's new "Patriot" program for the 2010 elections. Any members who don't sign a contract outlining specific campaign fundraising goals will get zero assistance from the NRCC.

In explaining the new program, GOP leaders moved from the pulpit to the alley:

"If you do not participate you will not get help,” Rogers told members.

"I'm gonna sign this contract,” House Minority Leader John Boehner said in the meeting. “We all need to sign it. When Mike Rogers comes to see you, I'm coming to see you."

Sounds like they're making an offer that GOP candidates can't refuse: "Nice little campaign ya got here. Shame if something happened to it."

Don't you love the smell of doctrinal purity in the morning?

Newspeak, 2009 Style

2009-02-21T06:00:00.002-05:00

Well, it's official: Mike Rogers has announced that he will not run for Governor in 2010:

”After thinking about the impact a statewide race would have on my two young children, and the impact I can have in Washington fighting to help the auto industry, lower health-care costs and protect America’s national security, I have decided to not run for governor. I have always thought it is far more important to focus on the jobs of the people I serve, rather than on my own job.”

Coming from the man who voted against 8,000 new jobs for Livingston County, said no to helping the unemployed, has done nothing practical for the auto industry, and ignored the children of working families, this display of logic would fit perfectly in Orwell's 1984.

The Best Ammunition Against Lies is the Truth

2009-02-20T12:39:00.002-05:00

Hemingway was absolutely right when he said this, and Michigan Liberal is certainly keeping their powder dry. Today they had a post about the amazing lie-filled email Mike Rogers sent to a constituent who had asked about Rogers' no vote on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Filled with horse hockey samples about habitats for San Franciscan mice, high-speed rail lines for Las Vegas, and NEA funding, the email is a classic example of how Mike Rogers trots out the lies when he tries to excuse his actions.

He's done it with S-CHIP, to explain away his vote against children of working families.

He did it with Medicare, unemployment benefits and energy policy, too.

Just imagine what Mike Rogers would do to Michigan if he was Governor...

Misery Wants Company

2009-02-18T07:46:00.004-05:00

The stimulus package offers some badly-needed good news for the 8th Congressional District:

* an estimated 8,000 jobs

* a 33-week extension of unemployment benefits for 162,000 Michiganders

* $3 million for Livingston County roads

* Nation-wide, 70% of the tax cuts will go to the middle 60% of workers

Unfortunately, Mike Rogers thinks ideological purity is more important than helping working families in a devastated economy. He's taking potshots, whining that the stimulus "will not help families pay for one doctor visit, or one class in college, or meet the daily needs for food, shelter or transportation."

Mr. Rogers is singing right out of the GOP hymnbook. If he had bothered to actually read the bill instead of playing follow-the-Boehner, he would have discovered some interesting facts.

"Not one doctor visit?" Wrong. Some 7 million Americans who have lost their jobs will get a 65% tax credit to keep their health insurance through COBRA.

"Not one college class?" Wrong again. The stimulus package created a new $2,500 American Opportunity Tax Credit which will help nearly four million students. In addition, Pell Grants will be fully funded and the maximum award level will be increased by $500. This will help more than 7 million students afford college.

Rogers' crocodile tears continue for "food, shelter and transportation," but a quick read of the White House overview of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act shows that Mr. Rogers needs to sit down and shut up.

Ruth Marcus' column in this morning's WaPo confirms the clique mentality that is the hallmark of Republican legislators:

Instead, the vote demonstrated that everything you need to know about Congress you learned in middle school: Peer pressure works wonders. "The reaction against those of us who negotiated and endorsed the package is really harsh, to say the least, so I think that will deter others who are thinking about coming our way," Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins told me last week.

Mr. Rogers is said to be mulling a run for the Governor's seat in 2010. If that's the case, look for some impressive tap-dancing when he tries to explain why he voted against 8,000 jobs, infrastructure projects and health care for the 8th Congressional District.

Worth $174,000 Plus Benefits?

2009-02-17T07:08:00.002-05:00

Mike Rogers recently popped up on a list of about 150 Representatives who have not been serving their constituents very well.

No, it's not the House Republicans who, like a preschool class deprived of naptime, threw a collective hissy fit and voted in a bloc against the stimulus package. Well, OK -- he's on that list, too.

It's actually a bipartisan list of legislators who have, as of yesterday, not introduced a single House bill or joint resolution to the 111th Congress.

[A caveat: I'm not counting procedural H.Res or S.Res bills noting that a quorum is present or celebrating Bruce Jones' election into the Football Hall of Fame. I'm only counting actual substantive bills here.]

And we know how Mr. Rogers looooves those sort of bills, like H.R. 997 (to declare English the official language of the United States 2/11/09), and H.R. 913 (to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to strengthen mentoring programs, 2/11/09).

I have a really hard time accepting Mr. Rogers' assurances that he's working hard for us in Washington. The word "crisis" doesn't begin to describe our economic situation, but Mike Rogers chose to introduce pop-tart bills like these instead of voting for $3 million in funding for local roads, extended unemployment benefits and aid to local schools.

That same week, he also chose to host a lobbyist shakedown party as part of his efforts to retain GOP legislators.

Apparently, Mr. Rogers has a very, ah, flexible idea of what constitutes public service.

Party Time

2009-02-13T08:37:00.002-05:00

Did you know that Mr. Rogers is really busy in Washington?

You may think he's working to support the stimulus package, but no -- he's against it, even though the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has urged Congress to pass it.

Well, he's a member of the Energy & Commerce Committee -- both topics are pretty crucial right now -- so you probably assume he's focusing on that.

Sorry.

Turns out that Mr. Rogers is busy planning parties! From Roll Call:

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) is kicking off his tenure as incumbent retention chairman for the National Republican Congressional Committee by hosting a “meet and greet” Thursday night for freshman GOP Members and more than 150 political action committees, according to a source familiar with the event.

There's no question that Mr. Rogers is pretty darn talented at this fundraising stuff:

Rogers is a powerhouse fundraiser despite the bad environment, contributing more than $200,000 to 61 GOP candidates through his political action committee, $245,000 to the NRCC as a team captain for both the president’s dinner and the Battleground program, and $600,000 along with Sessions and retiring Louisiana Rep. Jim McCrery as part of the fundraising program to help Republicans running against incumbent Democrats or to fill open seats.

Regular visitors to The Neighborhood also know that

He was a record-breaking fundraiser in his 2 terms as NRCC Finance Committee chair. He's consistently raised more than the average House member in each election cycle. His PAC, the "MikeR Fund" ("Majority Initiative --Keep Electing Republicans"), was ranked 17th of 152 Republican leadership PACs in 2006. He founded CHOMP ("Challengers Helping Obtain the Majority Program") after the GOP's losses in 2006. And he's made time to raise money for (and with) all sorts of fellow Congresscritters, including disgraced Congressmen Mark Foley, Tom DeLay and Bob Ney.

So if you're worried about the skyrocketing unemployment or home foreclosures here in Michigan's 8th Congressional District, you can rest assured that Mike Rogers is working hard to address the needs and concerns of his political cronies.

Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is

2009-02-11T08:12:00.002-05:00

Back in December, Mr. Rogers loudly bemoaned the scheduled 2009 pay hike for members of Congress.

Mr. Rogers, who regularly touts the values of fiscal conservatism and personal responsibility, was noticeably quiet about his own plans to forego the raise or donate it to charity.

Guess who publicly said NO to the pay raise yesterday? (Hint: it wasn't a Republican.)

Personal fiscal responsibility came to the Hill yesterday in the person of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Rep. Pelosi formally instructed House Dems that they would have to do without their cost-of-living increases this year.

Still no word on the official GOP response...

He's Got Great Health Insurance, Too

2009-02-05T10:22:00.002-05:00

As soon as I finished this morning's post ("Hey, He's Got Job Security"), this popped up in the inbox:

From WHMI, "Rogers Splits With Michigan Delegation on S-CHIP

Rogers was one of only two Michigan Republicans to vote against the measure that extends health coverage to 4 million uninsured children.

Got that? Mr. Rogers was opposed to something that Thad McCotter supported. Vern Ehlers, Candace Miller and Fred Upton supported it, too.

Now, it's hardly a news flash that Mr. Rogers has opposed S-CHIP for quite some time. It's irritating, sure; you could even add wrong-headed and mean-spirited. What it's not is surprising.

With his recent pay raise, Mr. Rogers now makes $174,000 a year, plus he has gold-plated health care:

According to the website of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the FEHB program offers working Members of Congress, retirees, and their survivors the widest selection of health plans in the country. In addition to health insurance benefits, Members of Congress may also receive dental, vision, as well as long-term care benefits. Generally the federal government (funded by the taxpayer) pays up to 75% of the health insurance premiums, and Members of Congress cover the other 25% out of their (taxpayer-funded) salaries.
In 2008 the standard Blue Cross Blue Shield Plan, for example, costs $448.91 per month for one person.
The government pays $314.25 of that and the federal employee pays $134.66. That’s about what most Medicare beneficiaries pay for their Part B and Part D premiums. But the vast majority of seniors, of course, don’t have anywhere near the incomes to cover their health insurance premiums that Members of Congress do. [skip]
Members of Congress are allowed to allot a portion of their pay to be used to pay their premium. The allotment is made on a pre-tax basis, which means the money is not subject to federal income, Medicare or Social Security taxes, and in most cases, state and local taxes. The allotment reduces their taxable income.

This bears repeating: Mike Rogers has an annual income of $174,000. He pays about one-quarter of the cost of his health insurance coverage, and he pays it in pre-tax dollars which reduces his taxable income.

Compare this with S-CHIP here in Michigan. A family earning an annual income of $35,200 (200% of the poverty level) is eligible for the program because they make too much to qualify for Medicaid.

Now, let's look at the cheapest individual Blue Cross/Blue Shield program in Michigan: ValueBlue/PPO. A family purchasing this as their first BC/BS will shell out $360.55 a month -- $4,326.60 per year (12.3% of their gross income, and it's paid in after-tax dollars). With this plan, the family will have:

Annual deductible: $2,000

Co-pays: 30%, with an annual maximum of $2,500

Out of pocket expenses: $4,500 maximum

Office visits: Not covered

Medical emergencies - 70% covered

Pre- and post-natal care: Not covered

The average mom (or dad) can tell you in detail about all the prenatal visits to ensure a healthy pregnancy, all the pediatric well visits to keep the kids' vaccinations up to date, as well as the visits for ear infections, strep throats, stitches, broken wrists, allergies... It adds up!

But Mike Rogers still doesn't think that working parents should get any help in keeping their kids healthy.

Way to promote those family values, Mr. Rogers.

Hey, He's Got Job Security

2009-02-05T06:51:00.005-05:00

Mr. Rogers recently talked with RightMichigan about the stimulus package; the folksy interview was divided between blaming the Democrats and yearning for tax cuts. One of Mr. Rogers' complaints about the stimulus package:

Only 2.7 percent of the cost of this bill would go to tax incentives for small businesses.

Congressional Republicans looooove small business tax cuts (heck, they love all tax cuts), but do tax cuts actually work?

Martin Feldstein, was President Reagan's chief economic advisor and is president emeritus of the National Bureau of Economic Research. Mr. Feldstein has this to say about business tax cuts:

The proposed business tax cuts are also likely to do little to increase business investment and employment. The extended loss "carrybacks" are primarily lump-sum payments to selected companies. The bonus depreciation plan would do little to raise capital spending in the current environment of weak demand because the tax benefits in the early years would be recaptured later.

FactCheck.org also dissects the GOP fetish for "small business tax cuts," which includes some rather interesting Republican definitions of "small business."

A Republican committee staff member confirmed to FactCheck.org that their report is counting anybody who made even one dollar of profit from a hobby business as a “small business owner” if they reported that income on Schedule C of their federal income-tax returns.

Their method also counts as a "small business owner" any member of an investment club -- someone who put $50 a month into a pool to buy stocks with friends and then reported a few dollars of dividends and capital gains on a K-1 form from the partnership at the end of the year

And that’s not all. Also counted as “small business owners” would be:

--A corporate executive who made $500,000 in salary and bonuses, and who also had $3,000 in income from renting out his yacht.

--A TV anchorwoman making $1 million in salary and reporting $25,000 in speaking fees as Schedule C income.

--A partner in a national accounting firm who has no side business at all, but who gets a big chunk of his income as a share of the giant partnership’s profits.

It’s silly to call any of these “small business owners,” but Gillespie went even beyond what the report said. He said 80% of the tax relief went to “small businesses,” (as opposed to “owners”). Not even the Republican staff report can back that statement.

Econbrowser offers a technical look at the (not so impressive) impact of tax cuts on economic stimulus - a little dry, but worth the read.

Daniel Gross at Slate.com has a good post on the GOP's "economic know-nothingism," noting that "Today, Congressional Republicans are taking their advice from Joe the Plumber.

So the next time you hear Rogers & Co.* going on about tax cuts - especially cuts for small business -- ask him for specifics. Don't be surprised if you get emotion-based anecdotes instead.

* This applies to MI Senate majority leader Mike Bishop, too...

Strike Two

2009-01-28T06:02:00.003-05:00

Yesterday, Congress gave its final approval to the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which passed 250-177.

No prizes for guessing how Mr. Rogers voted on the bill, which reduces barriers for workers to bring lawsuits for pay discrimination. It was his second "no" on fair pay for women.

Ms. Ledbetter was a Goodyear plant employee in Alabama, who

became a champion of women’s rights and an outspoken supporter of Mr. Obama after the Supreme Court, in a 5-to-4 decision in 2007, rejected her lawsuit against Goodyear.
A jury had found that the company paid Ms. Ledbetter less than male supervisors, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Supreme Court did not deny that she had suffered discrimination, but said she should have filed her claim within 180 days of “the alleged unlawful employment practice” — the initial decision to pay her less than men.

By voting against the fair pay act, Mr. Rogers made it clear that he thinks employees should be psychic -- they should know (and act!) within six months of their initial employment if they are facing pay discrimination. Never mind that for most of us, it takes six months just to figure out how to get the tech support guys to help you.

Speaking of "fair pay," though Mr. Rogers wailed at the thought of his automatic $4,700 pay increase,

"Congressman Rogers believes there should be no raises for members of Congress as long as the nation has a deficit, and especially while Michigan families are facing pay cuts, loss of their jobs, rising costs for fuel and groceries, and an uncertain economic future," Warner said.

... there's still no word on whether Mr. Rogers will be donating this extra cash to a local charity...

Misunderestimated

2009-01-19T09:29:00.002-05:00

From today’s Press & Argus:

U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Brighton, said Bush has received a bum rap from many citizens.

“He didn’t get credit for being a nice guy a lot, but his tendencies are always to do that, I think,” Rogers said. “He didn’t get a chance to display it.”

Well! Who knew that being a nice guy magically canceled out defiling the United States Constitution, racking up a trillion-dollar deficit and starting a few wars?

I feel so much better about the past eight years, don’t you?

Consider this Palinesque display of synatx and logic as a preview of what to expect if Mr. Rogers should become Michigan's next governor...

cross-posted at Michigan Liberal

Mike Rogers: Dr. No

2009-01-14T18:27:00.008-05:00

Today, the House overwhelmingly passed the State Children's Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP), twice-vetoed by President Bush, with the comfortable margin of 289-139.

As a quick recap, S-CHIP is the joint federal/state program that helps working parents purchase affordable health insurance coverage for their children. It isn't welfare, it isn't a handout, and it isn't socialized medicine. SCHIP has been a success since its start in 1997.

Over the past two years, the Neighborhood had quite a few S-CHIP posts, given Mr. Rogers' implacable opposition to a program that has enjoyed strong bipartisan support.

Guess we can give Mr. Rogers partial credit for being consistent: he voted against it again today.

Why vote no, when 150,000 Michigan children have no health insurance? On the floor today, Mr. Rogers stated "Let's get our priorities right, let's not pit children against seniors. I would urge a strong no vote against the bill."

After four terms in Congress, you'd think Mr. Rogers would know that Medicare funding and S-CHIP funding come from two completely different sources. It's disingenuous at best to hide behind senior citizens -- especially since Mr. Rogers has hung seniors out to dry on health care more than once before.

E.J. Dionne makes the point that S-CHIP is even more crucial in today's economic climate:

It's not just that sharp increases in unemployment add to the ranks of the uninsured. State governments are hurting, too, and they are responding to revenue shortfalls by shrinking health-care programs.
According to Families USA, a group that pushes for fundamental health-care reform, states have enacted budget cuts that will leave some 275,000 people without health coverage, including 260,000 children in California. By the end of this year, if further proposed cuts go through, the number losing health coverage nationwide could rise to more than 1 million, almost half of them children. Other states have reduced benefits to those they still insure.

Bringing this closer to home, the latest KidsCount Report details the impact of record-breaking unemployment rates on Michigan's children: statewide, the poverty rate for children under 18 rose from 13.6% in 2000 to 19% in 2007.

Over the next few weeks, you'll be hearing a lot about why Mike Rogers will be a good choice for our next Governor. When you hear that, remind people that Mike Rogers doesn't think kids from working families deserve health insurance.

A (Sort of) Rousing Endorsement

2009-01-14T07:36:00.006-05:00

Today's Press & Argus editorial, "Rogers for Gov.? It's opportunity worth exploring", rehashed a recent MIRS report and gave it a little "local boy" twist.

While Rogers has served us well in Congress, perhaps he can have the greatest political impact in Michigan, which desperately needs a big turnaround. We're glad to see he's exploring the waters, because having a governor from Livingston County would obviously benefit the home folks.

After a nod to Kingsley Bingham and Edwin Winans (earlier Livingston County natives who served as Governor from 1855-1859 and 1891 -1893, respectively), the editorial ended with this somewhat restrained endorsement:

So why shouldn't Rogers put his hat into the ring? The Howell High School grad is as qualified as anyone else considering a run, and having him as governor could only be a good thing for Livingston County.

As qualified as anyone else? Really? Wow. Now there's some enthusiasm.

Take a minute and come up with an example of something Mike Rogers has done during his time in Congress that was of benefit to the people of Livingston County (much less the state of Michigan). In the past year, he voted against health care coverage for children of working families, and voted against Michigan's unemployed. As our economy has gotten worse, he's spent his time in, um, less than productive ways.

Given all that, it was heartening to read that Mike Rogers was proposing a tax credit for purchasing American-made autos:

“With the state of our economy and consumer confidence at the lowest point in years, my hope is that this bill could help give folks who need a new vehicle an incentive to go out and purchase one with tax benefits. The bill also gives incentives for lenders to loan the money to folks buying the new cars,” Rogers said.

... but then I found out that was the idea of Alabama Congressman Mike Rogers. Oops!

Over the next few weeks, The Neighborhood will take a closer look at how Mr. Rogers is "as qualified as anyone else." Stay tuned...

An Epiphany. Sort of.

2009-01-06T17:38:00.003-05:00

Happy Epiphany, dear readers! Things have been pretty quiet in The Neighborhood during the holidays, but since today is the twelfth day of Christmas, here's a little treat:

Mr. Rogers is considering a run for Governor in 2010.

A Press & Argus article cites a report from MIRS:

The Michigan Information & Research Service Inc. quoted Rogers in a recent story saying he knows he will have to raise a lot of money if he were to run for governor, but that he is confident he can raise the funds.

“I'm just not sure yet,” he told MIRS about a possible run in 2010 adding, “There's a lot I think I could offer if I run for governor in 2010 ... but I have to decide where can I make the best impact.” [skip]

An unnamed source in the MIRS report states Rogers moved the idea of running for governor to the front of his mind when a group of “big donors” asked him to run. That source put the chances at 50-50 that Rogers will declare his candidacy next month.

Time to unleash your inner pundit:

* Take a guess as to who the "big donors" might be.

* How do you think Mr. Rogers will play outside the cozy borders of the 8th Congressional District?

* Raise your hand if you'd like to see the Mike vs. Mike Steel Cage Match: AG Mike Cox's smackdown of Blue Cross/Blue Shield should trump Rogers' whiny defense of the Medicare Advantage Program and higher drug prices for seniors.

February should be an interesting month...

Picking and Choosing

2008-11-20T15:27:00.004-05:00

Back in September, Mike Rogers boasted about his success in achieving a "victory for Michigan workers."

Then for some reason, he decided it would be more fun to rail against the Wall Street bailout (to the point where a local reporter basically told him to put up or shut up). Nothing more was heard from Mr. Rogers on the auto industry, despite non-stop coverage in local and national media.

In fact, Mr. Rogers was so mum about the imploding auto industry that Judy over at LivingBlue was forced to point out that, for a guy who just finished campaigning on JOBS, he was being a little too quiet:

Now that the election is past and the hometown boy has been returned to his government job, Rogers is pretty silent about protecting the jobs of the rest of us.

Finally, a written statement was released by Rogers' office, including the pithy observation of his ~~spokeswriter~~ spokesperson Sylvia Warner that Rogers was "researching the details of the proposed package before commenting."

OK, time to compare and contrast.

Today, at 10:51 a.m., Roll Call reported that Michigan Congressman Dingell was replaced by Henry Waxman (D-CA) as chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Within hours, Rogers blasted out a press release offering his opinion on this leadership change in the other party and chatting with Livingston County radio station WHMI.

He [Rogers] says this does not bode well for Michigan or any of the thousands working in the auto industry.

Wait -- does this mean everything was swimming along just fine until Henry Waxman got the chairmanship? Henry Waxman is the reason things are tanking in Michigan? How many terms has Mike Rogers been in Washington?

Mmmmmm... smells like a big, juicy CYA effort is underway!

Stay tuned for more of Mr. Rogers' self-justifying gymnastics as our state's economy swirls down the drain.

UPDATE: Mr. Rogers has also popped up on the Livingston County Press & Argus website, with slaps at both Henry Waxman and the CEOs of the Big Three.

True Colors

2008-10-27T07:16:00.003-04:00

You can tell it's the end of October: the leaves are turning, the days are getting shorter, the frost is on the pumpkin...

... and Mike Rogers is going negative.

Coming soon: the argument that Mike has nothing to do with the recent slimefest mailers going out around the 8th CD, since the mailers were paid for by the (rather nervous!) MI Republican Party rather than the Rogers campaign.

But at the end of the day, long-time incumbents -- especially those with strong ties to the state party apparatus -- know exactly how things work. If Rogers was serious about keeping his campaign on the high road, you can bet he would have communicated this to the MI GOP.

This is just another example of how Mr. Rogers is happy to let others do his dirty work. Last week, we learned about the negative push polling from the "Victory Center" where Rogers' campaign is based; a month ago we were treated to the spectacle of questionably legal pro-Rogers signage in Genoa Township.

Way to demonstrate your ethics and leadership, Mr. Rogers!

Where's Mike?

2008-10-21T09:31:00.003-04:00

With the election just around the corner, it's no surprise that Mike Rogers is in the news for his usual blend of evasion and ignoring the voters.

In the "Ignoring the Voters Category," Mr. Rogers broke new ground this week -- he didn't bother to show up at a well-attended candidate forum in Lansing last week.

"People need to hear what the candidates have to say, they need to ask the questions so that they know what the candidate's positions are and the things that personally concern them," Prosecutor Stuart Dunnings says.
[snip] there were also other questions the crowd had for candidates who didn't show up like Congressman Mike Rogers (emphasis added)

Moving right along to "Evasion Expertise," Livingston County radio station WHMI reports that Rogers challenger Bob Alexander is concerned about fake polling calls circulating in the district.

Democrat Bob Alexander of Lansing says voters have been receiving calls from various organizations that claim to be conducting polls. According to recipients, the poll asks questions to establish their party preference, but soon moves directly to a question which, he says, are false allegations. Alexander says the calls are calculated to be inflammatory and in some cases, factually inaccurate. He alleges a call to the Rogers’ campaign confirmed the polling calls are coming from the “Victory Center”, which houses Rogers’s re-election operations.

The classic response from Rogers' spokeswriter?

The Congressman’s spokeswoman Sylvia Warner tells WHMI that "Congressman Rogers' campaign does not discuss any polls the campaign may or may not be doing.”

Once again, someone else does Mike Rogers' dirty work. Then we're treated to the spectacle of Mr. Rogers being shocked, shocked to find that such dastardly things are going on. Somehow, though, he's never shocked enough to do more than grin, shrug and say that he didn't ask for it to be done.

Golly! This is just the kind of leadership we need to solve our nation's problems, isn't it?