Thread: 'L-word' looms large in Marshall-Collins race

http://www.macon.com/mld/macon/15595155.htm










--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted on Sun, Sep. 24, 2006



'L-word' looms large in Marshall-Collins race

By Travis Fain
TELEGRAPH STAFF WRITER

Given a political campaign's tendency to boil things down to labels, there is this question to answer in the 8th Congressional District: How conservative or liberal is Jim Marshall?

The Macon Democrat has a reputation for being on the conservative side of his party. Mac Collins, a former congressman and Marshall's Republican challenger in November's general election, considers himself "the real conservative" in the race.

Collins' campaign uses the word "liberal" at nearly every turn to describe the incumbent Democrat. Television commercials have focused on the issue - and not just those from the Collins and Marshall campaigns. Big money national groups have gotten into the game on the Republican side. That is a testament to the race's importance in the national landscape as Democrats try to win a majority in the House and Republicans try to hold onto it.

In a district redrawn by the Georgia General Assembly in 2005, at least in part to make it easier for a Republican to get elected, it seems that both sides have decided the word "liberal" could drag down Marshall's campaign.

"Jim's falling all over himself to call himself not a liberal," said Chris Grant, a Mercer University political science professor.

Grant called Marshall "pretty much a moderate" and "more conservative than most of the rest of the Democrats in the House of Representatives."

Indeed, Marshall often bucks his party, voting with the Republican majority on various issues, including immigration issues, foreign policy and social issues such as gay marriage. But on plenty of other occasions, he has voted with his own party - and against President Bush - perhaps most noticeably on tax issues.

"If Mr. Marshall is a true conservative, ..." Collins asked recently, "why didn't he switch parties ... and save me a year and a half of work?"

Marshall press secretary Doug Moore rails against the liberal label. He said Marshall's father was an Army general. Marshall himself was an Army Ranger and was recently named to the Ranger hall of fame.

"They don't put liberals in the Army Ranger Hall of Fame," Moore said.


MARSHALL'S RECORD

Charles Bullock, a political scientist at the University of Georgia, described Marshall as "about as conservative as they come when it comes to Democrats." This "puts him about in the middle of the entire House," with plenty of Republicans well to the right of Marshall when it comes to political philosophy.

Marshall voted against gay marriage. He's voted several times in favor of the Patriot Act, though he's also said some of its provisions come "close to the line" in violating civil liberties.

He's been endorsed by the National Rifle Association's political action committee - which Marshall mentions prominently in one of his commercials. But that endorsement has a lot to do with being an incumbent. Both Marshall and Collins have A ratings from the NRA and, when candidates tie, the organization's political action committee goes with the incumbent, NRA spokeswoman Autumn Fogg said.

Ad campaigns, both from Collins and third-party groups, have attacked Marshall's record on the death tax and on taxes in general. Marshall favors the death tax - known to Democrats as the estate tax - and has voted to renew it, as stated in various campaign ads. But Moore notes that Marshall has also voted to raise the tax threshold to $5 million for one person and $10 million for a couple, though that bill has not yet become law.

Marshall has said he thinks a complete repeal would drive up other taxes. Collins said Congress needs "to repeal the death tax totally."
On the more general issue of taxes, Marshall says that he's voted for more tax cuts than he's voted against.

But he got an F last year from the National Taxpayers Union, which describes itself as nonpartisan rating service that looks at "every vote that significantly affects taxes, spending, debt and regulatory burdens on consumers and taxpayers." In 2004, Marshall received a D from the group, according to www.ntu.org.

Other ads from both the Collins campaign and third-party groups also have targeted Marshall's stances in immigration, but he has frequently voted to toughen immigration laws. Two out of three major immigration bills before the House on Thursday passed with bipartisan support, but a third passed with almost unilateral Republican support and little support from Democrats. Marshall split with the majority of his party and voted for the bill. He also was the only Georgia Democrat to vote last week in favor of a federal law requiring voters to show photo identification at the polls.

Both candidates have said they're against amnesty for illegal immigrants. Both also have publicly supported legislation to make English the country's official language.

Collins' campaign has pushed the immigration issue heavily, saying repeatedly that Marshall approved a measure that allows illegal immigrants to receive food stamps. But as with many issues, the actual vote backing that up - and what the vote meant at the time - is in dispute.

An amendment to House Resolution 4766, in Congress in July 2004, called for enforcement of a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Nearly all Democrats voted against the amendment, as did about two-thirds of Republicans.

Among other things, the legislation dealt with immigrants who are required to have a sponsor. That sponsor agrees to support the immigrant and keep them from becoming dependent on government benefits.

In arguing for the amendment, its sponsor, U.S. Rep. Thomas Tancredo, R-Colo., explained that the immigration act allows the government to sue sponsors to recover government expenses for the sponsored immigrant, but that law is not enforced.

The amendment would have called for enforcement, Tancredo said, according to congressional records of the debate that are available through the Library of Congress' Web site.

During debate, Tancredo was asked if the amendment would "in any way change existing law regarding immigration and food stamp eligibility."

"It does not," he replied, according to the record.

"Jim opposes food stamps for illegal immigrants," Marshall press secretary Moore said. "He's never voted for food stamps for illegal immigrants. ... Not even arguably."

Collins' campaign sees it differently.

"That bill was to re-enforce existing law, and Mr. Marshall voted against enforcing existing law," Collins communications director Bill Hagan said.

Much has also been made of a vote Marshall made allowing ballots written in Spanish to be provided in districts with a heavy Hispanic population. The vote, on an amendment to House Resolution 5672 in June, dealt with an aspect of the Voting Rights Act. The amendment would have barred the use of government funds appropriated in the bill itself on bilingual ballots, which are provided for by the Voting Rights Act.

"Jim wants every American to speak English, but citizens get to vote whether they speak English or not," Moore said of the vote.

Responded Hagan: "It's an aspect of the Voting Rights Act that is orchestrated by the Democratic Party to encourage voting by illegal immigrants."

THIRD-PARTY COMMERCIALS


The 8th District is widely considered to be one a Democrat or Republican can win. That brings in the big bucks and the third-party ads.

By law, these advertising campaigns - run through entities sometimes called 527 groups, named for a section of the Internal Revenue Service code - can't be associated with either campaign. Federal election laws place far fewer restrictions on how 527 money can be raised and spent. This is sometimes referred to as "soft money."

The Washington Post reported earlier this month that the National Republican Congressional Committee plans to spend more than 90 percent of its $50 million-plus advertising budget on negative ads and opposition research.

The national strategy is manifesting itself in Macon, where the NRCC has run at least two commercials.

One set off a mini-maelstrom, with Marshall's camp saying the ad, about a vote on health savings accounts, was inaccurate and demanding it be pulled. The NRCC countered, saying the ad was accurate. Fax machines were abuzz with letters from lawyers and dozens of backup documents from both sides. In the end, the NRCC replaced the ad with a new one - a decision that committee communications director Carl Forti said was unrelated to the controversy.

Moore responded: "Then why aren't they running it right now? It's pretty clearly false."

Forti said "every ad we put up, we expect to be both truthful and fair."

Another group, the Sacramento, Calif.-based Economic Freedom Fund, also has gotten involved by running commercials and sending mailers. The Telegraph's calls and e-mails to the group have gone unreturned, and The Associated Press reported in a recent story a similar inability to reach EFF representatives.

But online records from the Federal Election Commission show that the group has had one donor from the first of the year through Sept. 8, the date of the most recent financial filing available on www.fec.gov.

Bob J. Perry of Houston, Texas, gave the group $5 million in two installments, the records show. Perry also was a donor to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a third-party group that produced commercials about Sen. John Kerry's military career during the 2004 presidential elections. He's also given money to various Republican campaigns and committees, including the NRCC, online filings show.

The Economic Freedom Fund ads focus on Marshall's voting record and describe him as liberal, but they take a narrow view of the voting record and provide little context.

One commercial references Marshall voting against a bill (House Resolution 4517) to make it easier to build refineries.

Marshall did vote against it. But Moore points to several other bills Marshall voted for to increase refinery capacities and expedite the permit process. The bill referenced in the commercial would have "taken away local control" over where a refinery can locate, Moore said.

Though Collins' campaign has declined to comment on third-party ads, Collins has emphasized the difference between him and Marshall when it comes to energy issues. Collins said he thinks alternative fuel research is important, but so is increased drilling for oil. Collins said he supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, something Marshall has voted against.

Another Freedom Fund ad says Marshall "votes liberal for millions in wasteful spending." The ad cites - in small type displayed on the screen for only a moment - a vote from 2003 to back this up. That vote, on House Joint Resolution 2, was for a general budget bill that 190 Republicans - a majority - also voted for. It was an appropriations bill needed to keep the government running and included, among other things, funding for Middle Georgia hospitals, Moore said.

An Economic Freedom Fund mailer blasts Marshall for siding "with (U.S. Rep.) Cynthia McKinney in voting against sanctioning the terrorist group Hamas." Marshall voted against the bill in question (HR 4681), as did McKinney. He went against the majority of both parties. The bill, now in the Senate, would prevent any member of the government from negotiating with Hamas, an organization elected to leadership in the Palestinian Authority.

Collins would have voted for the bill, Hagan said, calling it a "common sense" decision. Marshall's vote was controversial enough that he explained it in an editorial piece that appeared The Telegraph. He wrote that "given time to change and adjust, (Hamas) may have the strength and credibility to break the cycle of hatred and violence on behalf of those it now represents, the Palestinian people."

The bill showed "the incompetence of Congress in the conduct of foreign affairs," he wrote.


THE NANCY PELOSI FACTOR

San Francisco Democrat Nancy Pelosi's name has come up repeatedly in the 8th District race.

Republicans have repeatedly tied a vote for Marshall to a vote for Pelosi, who could become speaker of the House if the Democrats take control of Congress. At a recent gathering of area Republicans endorsing Collins, Collins mentioned her, as did two of five other speakers.

Marshall has voted twice for Pelosi to be speaker. When the next vote comes, Marshall's "going to vote for a Democrat," but doesn't know who yet, Moore told The Telegraph.

"He intends to support someone who will be good for Georgia and good for the country," Moore said.

Responded Hagan: "Sounds to me like Jim Marshall's extremely confused. ... Now that he has a Republican-leaning district, he doesn't know who he's going to vote for?"

The majority party gets to pick the speaker of the House - a key position because the speaker sets the agenda for the House and can slow a bill's progress, Grant, the Mercer professor, explained. The speaker also has heavy influence in the selection of committee chairmen, who also wield significant power, he said. Altogether, whoever wins the majority will set the agenda for the next two years.
"I think if the Democrats take the majority, they're going to ask for an investigation into the Bush administration's policies in the war in Iraq," Grant said.

"This is the real issue in this campaign," Collins said recently. "Who is going to control the House of Representatives the next two years?"




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To contact Travis Fain, call 744-4213 or e-mail tfain@macontel.com.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© 2006 Macon Telegraph and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.macon.com

"Jim wants every American to speak English, but citizens get to vote whether they speak English or not," Moore said of the vote.

I guess he overlooked the part that you HAVE to speak English in order to be a citizen.