Scott Kleeb Speaks to the Midwest Nebraska Central Labor Council

By: Lisa Hannah

Our old friend Scott Kleeb popped up in North Platte at the Midwest Nebraska Central Labor Council's 17th Annual Labor Day picnic as one of the guest speakers. There was a crowd of about 400 present. Some of his statements and information on his ongoing activities deserve highlighting: Scott Kleeb visits Labor Day picnic   Big issues -- health care, energy independence - haven't gone away, Kleeb said, "They need a louder voice." "I'm still engaged, energized and excited about our district," he said. "Unlike a lot of people predicted, I haven't picked up and left Nebraska." Kleeb is teaching three college history and government courses at Hastings College. He also works with students to help them "servant-leadership" under a Hastings College program - helping them find ways to fix problems. And, Kleeb sells Nebraska beef in Europe for the Morgan Ranch of Burwell. He and his wife have a new baby daughter. Kleeb recently brought energy conservationists together with rural Nebraskans in Scottsbluff. He introduced members of the National Energy Defense Council from Washington, D.C. to businesspeople from Scottsbluff. They talked about ethanol and wind power. The two groups share the desire to lessen the nation's dependence on oil, but they come at it from different perspectives. Nebraskans want to boost the economy. The Washington group wants to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the atmosphere. "The best coalitions come from people with different views and interests," Kleeb said. "When they find common ground and a common goal, they can really get things done." If Kleeb runs again, he wants to engage more people in government and help them stay involved. "The only way we win is by getting involved in the process," he said. "It's about all of us participating in democracy." Scott Kleeb wants to stay involved "I have the same concerns, energy and desire as I did a year ago," Kleeb said. "I will be involved in the future. If that means running for office in a year, or two years, or four years, well, that's definitely an option. "When we have representation that votes against securing more health care for our children, against securing America, and doesn't support a balanced budget, and is not representing out interests, then yes, I am still engaged," Kleeb said. He said his 2006 campaign did better than expected. "We wanted to build a campaign and find out what people are concerned about," he said. "We did better than expected because we connected with Democrats, Republicans and Independents. The issues were the same regardless of party." After his loss to Smith, Kleeb moved to Hastings, where he works as an advocate of renewable energy sources and helps sell beef internationally for a Sandhills cattle Ranch. He also teaches history at Hastings College. Kleeb married Jane Fleming and daughter Maya was born last month. "It is a matter of working for everyone," Kleeb said.

It's clear he's keeping an eye on Smith, and his message continues to be much more inclusive than Adrian Smith's. He continues to be active in promoting our state's best interests and gaining the real world knowledge and connections needed to make a real positive impact. I especially like his philosophy of bringing people of different perspectives together on issues they can share in common. That is how positive change and progress is made. Maybe Smith should sign up for a class with Scott Kleeb. Maybe he could teach him something that is worthwhile. Who knows?  I've recently seen some comments from people on various boards about the fact Scott has not been a career politician and that he's probably just wanting to go to Washington to get away from Nebraska. I find this rather ironic. These are probably many of the same people that voted for term limits because they didn't want career politicians. The same people that probably voted for Smith even after he was quoted as saying "I want got get elected and stay their until retirement." Do they think Smith wanted to get out of Nebraska? I'd say that comment sure makes it sound like it. Whatever Scott's plans are for the future, I'm proud to call him a fellow Nebraskan, and we are lucky to have someone of that caliber continuing to promote what is great about our state.

Go to full text...

Newspapers Publish Letter Exposing Smith's Lies and the GOP Responds

By: Lisa Hannah

As a follow up to the recent mass mailing Smith sent out on immigration, I decided to write a letter on Smith's deceptions and send it out to the many 3rd District newspapers. Of those, 4 of the major papers published it. Here is the letter I sent: Congressman Adrian Smith recently sent out a mass mailing to constituents regarding immigration. This represents the third mailing in seven months. According to the House Statement of Disbursements, the first one cost nearly $50,000 for production and postage. He contracted with a partisan political "persuasion" firm called Targeted Creative Communications to produce the first one. This firm has advertised themselves as having "a proven track record of propelling Republicans to victory with award-winning direct mail, targeting and campaign strategy."   In this most recent mailing, what Smith presented was very misleading. He stated he voted to provide $26.4 million to train and support local law enforcement in enforcing immigration law, as well as for prohibiting federal funds for cities that pass "sanctuary" laws. He also took the position that border security needs to be increased. The votes were on amendments within the Homeland Security Appropriations bill, which also contained increases in funding for border security. What he failed to disclose was that when the full bill came up for the vote to pass, he voted against it. He stated that he voted to stop illegal immigrants from receiving federal housing assistance. When an amendment was offered on the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act banning illegals from having access to low-income housing, he voted for it. However, he voted against the full bill. When a ban on assistance was offered as final amendment on the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, he voted for the amendment. However, there was confusion on what the final vote was. Instead of trying to work things out, Smith joined a large number of Republicans and walked off the floor before the vote was settled. As a result, the amendment was not adopted and the bill passed without his participation.  Finally, he states he is cosponsoring three different pieces of legislation regarding immigration, but it took him one to three months after introduction to sign onto them. Congressman Smith has not introduced any legislation of his own, nor has he been a part of the development of other legislation regarding illegal immigration. And when it comes to legislation that's been up for debate, he's voted for amendments, but against the full bills. He could be accused of flip-flopping.   Congressman Smith is using dishonest political spin at taxpayer expense to mislead his constituents. The people of the Third District should demand better from him. The Scottsbluff Star-Herald published the letter on Thursday, which my sources out there say is one of the bigger editions due to all the inserts. They don't post these on-line, however, so I can't link it. They report it was published in full.  The same goes for the other three - no editing or removing: Published 8/29/07 Kearney Hub: Smith's mass mailings raise questions Published 8/30/07 Grand Island Independent: Rep. Smith's mailings 'misleading' Published 9/1/07 North Platte Telegraph: Writer does not care for Smith That last heading, at the NP Telegraph, made me laugh. So while they should be commended for publishing it, their title speaks volumes of what they think as a paper. The key is that more people were exposed to Adrian Smith's attempts to mislead them. Those really in support of major immigration reforms may have seen the truth of what Smith is REALLY doing in Washington as our Representative.

Today, there was a response from the 3rd District GOP, and I think it speaks volumes: Smith has fought against illegal immigration I am writing today in response to Lisa Hannah's letter of August 28th. Unlike Ms. Hannah, who has written several letters to the editor attacking Rep. Smith, I am very proud of the work he has done with regards to illegal immigration.   From the time he was a state senator, Smith has worked to fight against illegal immigration, and I was happy to receive the letter from Congressman Smith. I have had a chance to speak with him directly on this issue, and he understands how important this matter is. It's unfortunate that some would rather attack   Congressman Smith at every opportunity rather than acknowledge that he is doing a good job and is a man we should be proud of. Judy E. Glassburner 3rd District GOP Vice Chair Geneva, NE Why do I think this speaks volumes? They mention I'm attacking Smith TWICE in the letter. They then say how good Smith is doing on illegal immigration and how he understands how important it is. HOWEVER, they give no examples of his good work, and they don't counter any of the real facts I presented. Why? Because they know I'm telling the truth. They know I can back up what I stated 100%. And just like Smith, when talking with my husband at the gas station accused me of attacking him, they also accuse me of attacking him. But this is a knee-jerk reaction on their part. Why? Because every single criticism I've sent in his direction is backed up with facts.  Now, some may differ with me on my opinions and conclusions on some issues, but there is a difference between criticism and attacking. Criticism of a elected official involves taking their actions, analyzing those actions against facts available, and pointing out where you feel they are at fault. Attacking involves taking an issue and deflecting from it by focusing on the person criticizing rather than focusing on the issue at hand.  I criticized Smith and pointed out his lies. The 3rd District GOP, in turn, attacked me when they could not defend Adrian Smith and his actions. My work has now been completely vindicated!

Go to full text...

Adrian Smith's House Votes 7/30/2007 - 8/5/2007

by: Lisa Hannah

I've been delayed in getting this posting together because 1) It's summer and I'm busy, and 2) it was a big, long week before the summer recess full of all kinds of drama. Essentially I had to weed through all the muck as the Republicans threw a great big temper tantrum. This last week before the recess really showed Adrian Smith in his true form: A follower who will do whatever his party leaders and biggest contributors tell him to do, even at the expense of his own constituents.

So what exactly did he do? Adrian Smith: - Voted against continuing health insurance coverage for children who's parents work and make too much money to qualify for Medicaid, but can't afford insurance for their children. That would have ended coverage for 45,000 of Nebraska's children. He did so because of cuts in the Medicare Advantage program. A program that has not proven cost effective, and is a nod to the insurance and drug manufactors.  - Voted against tax credits for renewable energy because loopholes were closed that ended much of the ongoing corporate welfare to the Big Oil companies during a time of record profits. It's a tax credit that benefits Nebraska's ethanol industry. - Voted against a maximum continuous deployment period for troops of one year, as well as minimum rest periods between deployments. There were exceptions made for the President to waive those in times of emergency, as well as in cases where troops volunteer for redeployment.  - Voted against ensuring that workers receive fair, prevailing wages on federal contracts that are granted to build renewable energy systems. If that NO vote had prevailed, it would have prevented those in the Third District working on building any ethanol plants that receive federal funds from being assured a fair wage. - He voted against fair wages for working women. When the Supreme Court ruled against a woman that filed suit for receiving wages less than her male counterparts, they dismissed it saying she filed too late. The bill that was submitted clarified and protected this timeline for women in the future. - He voted against an earmark to continue research into protecting grapes from disease, among other things, to ensure a better crop. He sided with those saying it would benefit the wine industry. He forgot that there is a growing number of small, independent wine producers in Nebraska that would benefit from this research. - He voted against the energy bill, which contains so many benefits through wind and ethanol promotion for Nebraska.  - Smith joined in with his party to play petty, political stalling games all week by voting for every motion to adjourn (except the one time a Democrat moved for it), and voting against the approval of the journal every time. Finally, Smith failed to even vote for the Agriculture Appropriations Bill because, after a confusing vote, he did what his party leadership told him to do and WALKED OUT. They threw a major temper tantrum when there was some confusion, and chose to walk instead of staying and working things out. He then joined the same leadership to cosponsor a resolution to try and bring the bill back to the floor. The night of the walkout, there was confusion as to whether or not a motion to recommit had passed or failed. Votes were being changed, the board was fluctuating, and there was chaos. The Republicans felt they had won the vote, but the board changed to that not being the case. The House Majority Leader (a Democrat) moved to vacate that vote so the Republicans could redo it and the vote would be without controversy. They wouldn't accept. They demanded that they won. They then walked out. In the ensuing votes, the Democrats agreed to redo the vote, but with the Republicans leaving (and all but a few of them choosing to stay), they redid the motion to recommit that then failed on a voice vote. They then passed the bill. In cosponsoring the new resolution, Smith joined with his party leadership saying they wanted to have a redo to add the provision that illegals don't have certain rights (that are already on the books, by the way). They had their chance to have a "Do Over", but they walked out. They demanded it again well after the fact. After all that, he still managed to miss another vote on the Water Resource Development Act. Why? Well, he said he was at a meeting. The interesting thing was he was there voting 8 minutes before on another vote, and this vote took place around 10:30 IN THE EVENING. Why would someone have a meeting that late at night? Adrian Smith spent the entire week never once speaking up on any issue. Not one statement on the record. He let his party leadership do everything for him. He never showed any kind of leadership of his own, and he took positions that were not of benefit for the people of Nebraska.

Go to full text...

Chuck Hagel Delivers Devastating Blow to Republicans' BS

House Republican Leader John Boehner visited Nebraska this week to make appearances at a series of high-dollar fundraisers for all three of Nebraska's Republican Congressmen - who've each remained good little partisan lap-dogs despite the nationwide implosion of the Republican Party.

Taking advantage of a few news reports that suggested some minor progress in Iraq, Boehner fantasized to the Lincoln Journal-Star:

After "investing all their political capital on failure in Iraq," Democrats soon will need to adjust to signs of U.S. success, House Republican Leader John Boehner said Wednesday.... The Bush administration's surge of additional U.S. troops into combat in Iraq has been "very successful," Boehner said....  

While the Iraqi government needs to make more progress in meeting U.S. benchmarks for political accommodation and stability, Boehner said, "the Iraqi parliament has made more progress in keeping its promises than the Democrats in Congress."

I'll give Boehner credit for working in a couple of choice soundbytes. The trouble is that they're so far out of touch with reality that they can't even be taken seriously. And, who better to hammer that fact home than Nebraska's Republican Senator, Chuck Hagel:

Hagel took issue with House Republican Leader John Boehner's own assessment that the Bush administration's strategy has been "very successful" in Iraq. "Everyone is entitled to his opinion," Hagel said, "but the facts do not bear that out".... "On the same day Boehner was boldly proclaiming we were winning in Iraq, Basra was under siege by roving gangs and militias," Hagel said. "Shiite militias are in charge in the southern third of Iraq," he said. On the same day, Hagel said, as many as 500 people were killed in the north. 

"All Sunni cabinet members of Nouri al-Maliki's government are gone," he said. "There is no functioning government in Iraq." Five U.S. soldiers were killed that day, Hagel said, and the Green Zone was hit by 25 mortar attacks. "I'm not sure on what basis Boehner says the surge (of additional U.S. troops) is working," Hagel said.

Thank you to Senator Hagel for refusing to join Nebraska's Republican Congressmen in burying their heads in the sand to the harsh realities of the Iraq War. By continuing to stand with John Boehner and President Bush through four-and-a-half years of delusion and deception, Jeff Fortenberry, Lee Terry, and Adrian Smith have all proven themselves completely undeserving of the people's trust and the offices they hold.

The one point on which Hagel was wrong in his response is that Boehner is NOT entitled to say whatever he damn well pleases about the Iraq War - not when he's an elected representative with a responsibility to protect our men and women in combat and to speak the truth to the American public.

The fact that Boehner - as Minority Leader in the House of Representatives - continues selling this disastrous and failed war policy of the Bush Administration is an undeniable testament to the sad state of the Republican Party.

The fact that he speaks for Nebraska's Republican Congressmen when engaging in this deadly game of spin and deception- with their approval and with their support - should be the only call to action we need to clean house in 2008, replacing these mere Republicans with true leaders who won't betray their oath, sell their silence, and forsake our trust in the name of partisan loyalty.

Go to full text...

Scott Kleeb: Waiting for a Sign

The Omaha World-Herald checks in with the 3rd Congressional District's 2006 Democratic nominee, Scott Kleeb, giving little clue to his current plans but proving his continued commitment to public service and to the people of Nebraska:

Democrat Scott Kleeb has been hitting up supporters for campaign contributions this summer, but he hasn't made up his mind to run for public office again. "It's more of a declaration to supporters from last year that I'm still engaged," Kleeb said of his fundraising e-mails and letters. He said he is staying in touch "to let people know I didn't do what a lot of people expected me to, which was to pick up and move out of state."  

Kleeb gained national attention in his losing bid last year against Adrian Smith in Nebraska's heavily Republican 3rd Congressional District...Smith, who won by 10 percentage points, depicted Kleeb as a carpetbagger. Kleeb grew up on military bases overseas and attended college in Colorado and at Yale University. He and his wife now live in Hastings. Kleeb's campaign committee reported about $70,000 cash on hand as of June 30 and no debt. Kleeb could opt for a rematch with Smith, run for the U.S. Senate or none of the above.  

Much is unclear about how the Senate field will shape up. Incumbent Republican Chuck Hagel has yet to announce whether he will seek re-election. Former Sen. Bob Kerrey and Omaha Mayor Mike Fahey, both Democrats, are possible contenders if Hagel retires.  

Regardless of which race he considers getting into, Kleeb said, he needs to make a decision by midfall. In the meantime, he is teaching at Hastings College and working on a project to encourage community service among students. Kleeb also is trying to promote the development of alternative energy sources and helping a Nebraska ranch market its beef internationally.

It's good to see the World-Herald hasn't forgotten about Kleeb, whom they endorsed for Congress in 2006 praising his intellect, his eloquence, and his ability to "provide common ground across partisan and ideological lines." And, of course, we can't forget the World-Herald's criticism of Smith for his lack of skills, his poor reputation, and his inability to lead.

No doubt, there's still a lot of excitement about Kleeb and supporters who are still very much onboard should he run for office again in 2008. But, the natural urge to strike while the iron is hot and tap into that base while it is still very hungry has to be balanced against practical considerations. Smith's incumbency. The sheer size of Republicans' registration advantage in the 3rd District. The added difficulty of running alongside a Democratic Presidential ticket. Not to mention, well-founded concerns about establishing a reputation for losing elections.

Kleeb has what it takes. I know I'm not alone in being excited about his potential and his future in Nebraska politics. But, he's also a young man who can probably afford to think about things a little more long-term. Only he and his family can know when the time is right for them. On the other hand, Kleeb has to be mindful so the opportunity to win and to serve doesn't pass him by.

It sounds like we can expect Kleeb to announce his intentions within the next few months. That puts him in pretty good company amongst potential 2008 candidates for Congress and the U.S. Senate who should be giving us a clearer picture of next year's races soon after Hagel decides on his next course of action (supposedly before Labor Day).

I'll refrain from offering any further speculation about Kleeb in 2008 and beyond. But, readers are encouraged to partake in our new poll to have some say of their own. And, as always, please comment freely. You never know who might be reading.

Go to full text...

Smith's Summer Vacation Plans

by: Lisa Hannah

He's going golfing with the uber rich and John Boehner. -------------------------------- Our wonderful 3rd District Congressman has some of his summer plans all set. Next week, on August 16th, Adrian Smith gets to go golfing with the grown ups. His dear leader, John Boehner, has consented to take him golfing at one of the newest golf courses in the country, which also happens to be located near Mullen, Nebraska on the Dismal River.

The Dismal River Golf Club was designed by Jack Nicklaus, and is an exclusive club for the uber rich and constipated in our society. The rates for this club make it very clear that it's not a place that most normal local ranchers can jump in their trucks and go golfing at: CHARTER MEMBERSHIP - $3,600 annual dues (fixed for 5 years) - 50% guest fee discount for immediate family and children 23 or younger - $10,000 membership-transfer-to-heir fee - 120 day tee sheet - Guest privileges for 7 guests per day - $200 daily guest fee includes golf cart, and breakfast and lunch at Jack's Shack - Unlimited holes-played-per-day MINI CORPORATE MEMBERSHIP - Annual Dues - $6,000 (fixed for 5 years from club opening) - Two Designees - $5,000 transfer fee to change a designee (no transfer fee in connection with death or retirement of designee) - 180 day tee sheet - Guest fee for corporate outing is $200 per guest per day including cart as well as breakfast and lunch at Jack's Shack SOCIAL MEMBERSHIP - Cost - $3,000 - Annual Dues - None - Tee Sheet - Social Members will be allowed to use practice facilities for a daily fee of $20 and, when built, the par-3 course at a daily fee of $75 - Social Member Minimum - $1,000 per year (includes spa, lodging, food and beverage) You can go to the site to see the extended details but you see that the rates are out of the league of most people in the 3rd District of Nebraska. Very few could ever afford it. Now, if you want to rub elbows with Smith and Boehner on August 16th, you can fork out $1500 for an individual, $2500 for couples, or if you're really generous, you can be a "Hole Sponsor" for $2500 (I won't even go there with the whole question on what hole we are talking about). It's nice to see that Adrian has moved up in the world. He's learning how to pander to the wealthy and elite all in pursuit of his ambition of staying in Washington until retirement. It also shows where his priorities with the people of the 3rd District stand.

Go to full text...

Smith and the Farm Bill

by: Lisa Hannah

(We know her. We love her. By now, she has to know as much about Adrian Smith as his own mother. She's done absolutely wonderful work with her Smith Watch site, and I couldn't be happier that she's joined us at NNN. Enough from me - let's let Lisa do her thing. - promoted by Kyle Michaelis) Before I get this going, I first want to say that I think what Kyle has started with NNN 2.0 is fantastic. This really takes the progressive Nebraska Blogosphere to a whole new level. Through this medium, bloggers can really work together to move Nebraska forward, and I am honored to be a part of it…… Much has been said about the passing of the House's version of the Farm Bill. Whatever your feelings on the final product, my focus was on the actions of Adrian Smith. Adrian Smith showed no leadership on the Farm Bill issue. He contributed only two ideas for the bill, and only one was accepted. He talked big about things needing to be different or better, but never did anything to make those changes or differences that he hinted at. Matter of fact, you'd be pressed to find anything that he was specifically focusing on with his blanket statements. Smith then joined right in with the party leadership in decrying what they chose to call a "tax increase". What they were upset about was the fact that the House Way and Means Committee closed a tax loophole on multination companies doing business in the US, but that are based in countries we have no treaties with (such as the Caribbean Islands). In closing this loophole, they would have to pay the taxes they SHOULD be paying, but are avoiding through using safe havens. Smith argued this would harm such companies as Swift and McCains, who have manufacturing plants in Grand Island and cost 3rd District residents their jobs. This assertion was false. Those companies are based in countries we have treaties with. During this outcry, I voted to try and adjourn, and when that failed, he voted to prevent the passage of the resolution that set for that tax increase, along with all the rules for the debate of the Farm Bill. If either had succeeded, the Farm Bill would have been delayed. In the end, though, that effort failed. Smith and the rest of the Republicans failed to acknowledge that needed provisions, such as increases in the nutrition programs, had to be paid for. They failed to offer their own suggestions. They failed to realize that most Americans have actually thought that those companies that find loopholes to avoid paying their taxes SHOULD have to pay their fair share. After all, American businesses have to pay their taxes, why not those companies that base themselves in non-treatied countries in order to avoid those taxes while making a profit off the American people? They failed to acknowledge that those WITH treaties would see little, and more likely, NO impact from this change in the tax code. Yes, Smith eventually voted for the Farm Bill despite the tax provision, but from moment one he made sure to let everyone know that he's against this tax provision, that it was labeled "partisan" and repeatedly talked about the fact it could be removed in the Conference Committee. Of course, he's right about that, and if it does, so be it. As long as the PAYGO principals are applied and the end result is still a strong Farm Bill, that will be okay. But if it isn't, Smith will have to face a choice.

In the past, when faced with issues that would benefit the constituents in his district, but would possibly affect his campaign contributors in a way they didn't like, he ALWAYS voted against his constituents. Most of the First 100 Hours agenda was like this. He voted against minimum wage increase, negotiating for better prices on drugs for seniors, reductions in student loan rates, and even voted, the first time, against implementing the 9/11 Commission recommendations. Not once did he say "well, I'll vote for it even though I'm not quite happy with it, and hope the Conference Committee will make the right changes". Nope, he voted against them on principal - and because he was expected to by his biggest campaign contributors. But then Smith was faced with the Farm Bill. He knew the pressure was on that he would HAVE to vote for it no matter what because he had been forced to reassure voters he would despite the monetary influence of the anti-ag Club for Growth. But then the tax provision was thrown in. That really put him in a bad position. Smith had to come out speaking loudly against this tax provision, and standing with the Republicans on that matter. But he also had no choice in voting the way he did. It would be political suicide in Nebraska if he did. However, he's now set the stage with all his statements that, should the tax provision remain, he will be justified in voting AGAINST THE FARM BILL. That's right. That's my prediction. He's talked long and hard about the "partisanship", regardless of the fact that the most non-partisan people - the many ag groups that were intent on watching this - are generally fine with the provision. The only "partisanship" that has come out has been the Republicans in this outcry against it. But the fact is that he will then be able to go back to the people of Nebraska and say: "See - the Democrats made me do this with their partisanship", and will blame the other side for forcing him to vote "NO". In doing so, many will fall blindly in behind him and say "yeah, he's standing on principle". That is - those hardcore in-state Republicans that will never consider voting for anyone with a "D" by the name. Smith will also, then, appease the campaign contributors that are putting pressure on him to reject this Farm Bill, and they will, in turn, promise to pay for over half his reelection campaign. As Nebraska Farmers Union President John Hansen stated: "The Republicans are looking for a reason to not get this farm bill passed because it makes it harder for them to win back those rural seats they lost in the last election. Partisan politics is playing a role here." If the Farm Bill does not pass because of this partisan gamesmanship, many will suffer. Especially the farmers, ranchers, and working poor of the 3rd District of Nebraska. I hope I'm proved wrong. It will be a good day if I am. But if I'm not, let's hope people will have been prepared and will not fall for the spin put forth by Smith and his biggest backers.

Go to full text...