Brazil Truth

Rottenchester just posted a lengthly retort to my comments on his blog from last night, questioning how I could accused WHAM of media bias and providing a hypothetical if a Dem was investigated by the media for doing the same thing.

Yet, the proof of bias (see post above) is right on WHAM's website. Here's a link to the PDF on the channel's website with the expenditures. Notice something there? Right on the first page, the document is stamped January 31, 2008. Why is this relevant? Because Kuhl's office could NOT have provided the report to the reporter on the 2nd, since the report is not required to published until 60 days after the trip.

Here are excerpts from the Congressional Rules for "Official Travel" that apply to CODELS: "Additionally, the Speaker of the House may approve official foreign travel for a group rather than an individual. Group official foreign travel is called a 'congressional delegation' (CODEL). In the case of a CODEL, the committee chairman, ranking member, or senior employee must write the report for the entire group and submit the report to the Chair of the Committee on International Relations before the end of the session. The report should cover the per diem expenditures, transportation expenditures, and miscellaneous expenditures, as well as the reasons for the expenditures. Within 60 days of the beginning of the next regular session of Congress, the Chair of the Committee on International Relations must file a consolidated report of all committees' official foreign travel expenses with the Committee on House Administration. Changes may be made by submitting an amended report to the Clerk of the House (Emphasis added)." So as you can see the official foreign travel report should have been filed by "the committee chairman, ranking member, or senior employee" who "must write the report for the entire group" and it must be submitted before the end of the congressional session. Not in 30 days and certainly NOT by Congressman Kuhl! Even if Congressman Kuhl was traveling alone the rules state that "members must submit an expense report to the committee chairman within 60 days of the conclusion of the trip," not in 30 days. The 30 day rule applies only to officially connected travel, i.e., official travel paid by a private source, which this trip wasn't!

The Price of Kuhl's Brazil Trip: $0.00671 Per Constituent

Congressman Kuhl just posted the total amount of his portion of the bipartisan Brazil delegation on energy independence: $4,028.93, or $0.00671 per constituent. Rottenchester found the post "snotty". But, when WHAM-13 has expended countless hours trying to do a hit job on Congressman Kuhl "getting to the truth", such a response is warranted. Now they're attacking the figure which Congressman Kuhl released since it may not include the cost of the military air transport. Of course, this expense would have been incurred anyway even if Congressman Kuhl didn't go, as his non-participation would not have cancelled the trip. Frankly, given that this trip helped in gathering information on energy independence, is encouraged by the State Department to foster diplomatic relations, and our congressman was invited by the Democratic organizer of the delegation, I would think that this should be a positive for Kuhl. It shows that he takes energy independence seriously, he's willing to help this country foster diplomatic ties, and it shows his bipartisan spirit by being invited to attend and represent our interests over there.

If only WHAM-13 cared so much about every other dollar that the feds waste rather than do a full "investigative report" on the legitimate spending of four grand...

Kuhl: A Taxpayer's Best Friend

Two days ago, Rottenchester reported on Channel 13's hit job "in-depth story" on Congressman Kuhl's bipartisan fact-finding mission to Brazil. 13WHAM's web article posed the following question, "How much did it cost taxpayers for U.S. Representative Randy Kuhl (R, N.Y.) to spend six days in Brazil?" The figures haven't come out yet, but I can only assume that it was a few thousand dollars.

As part of my response to this story, I wanted to contrast this with the millions of dollars that Congressman Kuhl has saved average taxpayers through his votes in Congress. So, I contacted Americans for Tax Reform to get its response on Kuhl's tax record. This morning, I received the following statement from ATR President, Grover Norquist:

Randy Kuhl has pledged in writing to the people of his district that he would oppose income tax hikes. He has kept his word. On a series of tax and limited government votes, Kuhl has demonstrated real leadership. In the last Congress, he had a "Hero of the Taxpayer" voting score of 92%. [OntarioGOP Note: Kuhl's ATR rating in 2006 was 95%, and in 2005 was 88%, giving him a combined ATR score of 92% in the 109th Congress.]

Kuhl's strength in defending the taxpayers of the 29th district of New York is particularly-praiseworthy given the unrelenting opposition of Big Labor. Time and again, he has sided with taxpayers over corrupt union bosses seeking to spend taxpayer dollars to enrich themselves.

Question to Channel 13: Why do you want to investigate the cost of a few thousand dollars for a legitimate, previously disclosed trip, while ignoring the tax savings that Congressman Kuhl's constituents have received through his service?

What's Wrong with This "Hornell Evening Tribune" Headline?

This is the headline appearing in the Hornell Evening Tribune: "'Sorry' but it didn't happen: Kuhl, Massa agree on one thing: Challenger didn't apologize over criticism of Brazil trip".

What's wrong with it? When I first read it, my heart skipped a beat since it's not what we've been reporting here this week. But if you actually read the article, you discover that they still don't agree on what happened. The only thing they agree on is that Massa didn't apologize to Engel directly, since Engel was in Brazil (as I reported here), but Massa's still claiming he didn't call Engel's office to apologize, while Kuhl (via the information relayed to him by Engel's office), still says that Massa did call Engel's office to apologize about this whole flap (read here for why that's very relevant). The Evening Tribune's headline is only adding more confusion to this whole thing:

Massa, the Democrat who challenged Kuhl in 2006 and will again in 2008, denied the claim made in the e-mail, saying he's never spoken to Engel before.

"I called Eliot Engel's office to verify what the Washington Post said about the delegation trip," he said. "That's the only conversation I've had there. [OntarioGOP Note: This is the first time that I know of where Massa actually admits to calling Engel's office.]

"What Randy is talking about, I have no idea," Massa added.

During his weekly telephone press conference call this morning, Kuhl was asked whether or not Massa had apologized, due to the conflicting statements made by the 29th Congressional seat opponents.

"He hasn't," Kuhl said. "He called Eliot Engel's office to apologize, but Eliot was in Brazil and wasn't reachable."

Asked why Massa was apologizing, Kuhl said he assumed because of the comments made about the trip.

"Eliot Engel was insulted by it," he said. "His (Massa's) statements speak for themselves."

Kuhl referred media inquiries about the matter to Engel, because the two had discussed the alleged apology attempt.

"That's the statement Eliot Engel made to me," he said. "You'd have to question Eliot Engel or his staff about it, but that was the message given to me." (Emphasis added)

UPDATE: I should have slammed the first paragraph of the article to begin with: "So, apparently Eric Massa didn't apologize to the man who planned a congressional delegation trip to Brazil last week." There are two sides to this story, even after you read the whole article, and apparently the Evening Tribune only sides with Massa's version if that's how they want to begin this story. Shameless!

The Relevance of Massa's Apology and Flip Flop

In response to my previous post's update, Rottenchester got the following comment from Massa spokesman Jared Smith: "Eric Massa has made absolutely no apologies on this subject and stands by his previous statements."

So now we have a categorical denial from Massa, while Eliot Engel's office still asserts that Massa called them while Engel was away to apologize.

This whole episode speaks volumes for Massa and his campaign. Massa had a field day with bashing Congressman Kuhl about this trip for a week now. He thought he had a campaign issue and ran with it, gaining some press coverage and generating lots of buzz in the blogosphere in an otherwise slow news week. Yet, in order to attack Congressman Kuhl, Massa would have to imply that the five Democrats who also went on this bipartisan trip were wrong in going, particularly the trip's organizer, Eliot Engel, a fellow Democrat from New York serving his tenth term in Congress. Massa derided this trip publicly, yet Engel's office claims that Massa privately called them to apologize. This is as two faced as you can get. He actively drums up this non-story to create controversy, and then knowing this would anger the Democrats on the trip, he does an about-face privately. You know, "Psst, I really didn't mean to offend you, just my opponent. I mean, I almost won last year, and I need to exploit this as much as I can. Sorry!"

And then, after it's revealed publicly that he did call to apologize, he refutes it. Yet, one has to ask, why on Earth would Eliot Engel's office lie about this? Engel is a Democrat's Democrat, a guy who would love to see his party gain seats next year. In fact, it only stands to reason that Massa would want to apologize to such a powerful New York Democrat like Engel, given his seniority in the party, his access to donors, his contacts on Capitol Hill, etc.

But after Engel's office publicly disclosed Massa's apology, this created a conundrum for Massa. He either had to (a) admit that he did apologize to Engel, which would mean that Congressman Kuhl also deserved an apology (i.e., Congressman Kuhl did the exact same thing as Engel here, so logically, he should get an apology too), or (b) deny that he apologized, since it makes him look weak and hypocritical to the public after how much he drummed up this issue. Massa chose the latter route, but now risks being publicly accused of lying from a senior member of his own party and/or privately lose the support of such a high ranking New York Democrat.

Massa's certainly dug a big hole for himself...

Massa Flip-Flopping on Apology

Rottenchester contacted the Massa campaign today about the story I posted yesterday regarding Massa's apology to U.S. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) for his remarks about the Brazil trip. Massa now claims that he hasn't talked to Engel about this and stands by his original statement. However, Meghan Tisinger, Congressman Kuhl's press secretary, just confirmed with me that Engel is backing up their story that Massa did indeed call him to apologize about this.

UPDATE: Megan Tisinger just emailed me with a clarification on this. Because Engel was in Brazil, Massa did not talk directly to Engel, but did call Engel's office to apologize. Note that Massa's now claiming that he "not had the opportunity to speak with Congressman Engel." Obviously Massa's trying to wiggle out of this by stating flatly that he didn't talk to Engel directly, which is technically true, but with no mention that he had spoken with someone in Engel's office to apologize.

U.S. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) Questions Massa's "Fitness to Serve in Congress"

So Massa thought he had a campaign issue with Congressman Kuhl's bipartisan fact-finding mission to Brazil. Instead, a leading Democrat congressman from New York responded to the criticism by questioning Massa's "fitness to serve in Congress" and an editorial appeared in the D&C stating that "Massa's assertion that learning more about ethanol production in Brazil doesn't help Kuhl's constituents, who include Monroe County residents, is wrong" (Emphasis added). Massa ultimately apologized to the Democrat congressman in question, U.S. Rep. Eliot Engel.

Here's a statement from Congressman Kuhl on the matter:

WASHINGTON – Dec. 3 - U.S. Representative John R. "Randy" Kuhl, Jr. (R-Hammondsport) issued the following statement today about Eric Massa's apology to Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) after Massa made inappropriate comments on the congressional delegation mission to Brazil:

"Over the last few days Mr. Massa has made false accusations and insulted the reasoning behind a bipartisan congressional delegation mission to Brazil. Friday during an interview with Brian Tumulty of Gannett News, Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) who chaired the congressional delegation trip to Brazil, was asked about Mr. Massa's statement. Rep. Engel responded by calling it a cheap shot and questioned "[Mr. Massa's] fitness to serve in Congress." Mr. Massa then called Rep. Engel's Washington DC office to apologize for his inappropriate comments."

"While I have grown accustom to Mr. Massa's misguided and self-serving attacks, it is unbelievable that he would attack members of his own political party and then upon getting criticized by a Democratic leader, turn around and redact his comments. This bipartisan congressional delegation trip allowed nine representatives to see firsthand how energy independence can positively affect the economic and environmental welfare of a prosperous nation. It is unclear how Mr. Massa believes a trip to Iowa by this delegation would produce equally valuable results."

"This trip has allowed us to gain a greater understanding of South America's largest and most populous nation and meet with Brazilian leaders, including the Vice President, in an effort to form a stronger alliance. As our country faces the challenges of the twenty-first century, it is imperative that we work in tandem with our global partners to find solutions to benefit us all. We cannot ignore the great progress and ideas emerging from all corners of the world. As representatives of the United States, we have the duty to ensure our constituents have access to the best the world has to offer and to work unilaterally to improve the lives of all Americans."

The Brazil Trip

Following up on my post from yesterday, the Hornell Evening Tribune has a story on the controversy. Frankly, this story has no legs. Massa, in his usual hyperbole, said, "In the middle of winter, Randy Kuhl is on a summer vacation in Brazil." Um, Eric, if you think we're in the middle of winter now, just wait til that period of time between December and March! I mean, really, how long have you lived here???

This is the most interesting piece of the article, which hasn't been discussed much in the blogosphere:

Congressional delegations, according to Kuhl, allow members of Congress the opportunity to broaden their perspectives and better understand U.S. relations abroad. The trips, he said, are encouraged by the State Department and help create relationships and partnerships with other countries.

"It also provides a frame of reference so the Congressional leaders can come back to Washington and propose new legislation to improve the United States," Kuhl said. (Emphasis added)

So while Massa is still flipping out over losing last year and attacking Congressman Kuhl every chance he gets, our Congressman is on a bipartisan fact-finding mission, which is encouraged by the State Department, in order to foster diplomatic realtions with another country and gather more information on how to make America more energy independent in the future. 'Nuff said!

Sugar is the New Oil

I don't know about you, but Jimmy Smit's new drama, Cane, is definitely becoming one of my favorite shows of all time. And the idea that sugar-based ethonal can help our country succeed in becoming more energy independent is gaining traction on Capitol Hill. That is why Congressman Kuhl is joining 10 of his congressional colleagues on a bipartisan fact finding mission to Brazil, which is being lead by U.S. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY), to see how sugarcane has helped its country's energy needs.

Of course, Rottenchester and ladkiddo over at rochesterturning are poking fun at this trip, and Eric Massa had a field day with it at his press conference today, but frankly, this country is yearning for more avenues towards energy independence and this bipartisan trip is a perfect way for Congressman Kuhl to see first hand how Brazil is achieving it through cane.

Also, to answer ladkiddo's question on whether "this [trip was] mentioned in any of his town hall meetings," the answer is yes!

Finally, reading Massa blagging on about home heating assistance money, a.k.a. HEAP, reminds me of when my mother worked for my native county's Social Services Division downstate, her main job handling HEAP applications for over 10 years; she retired earlier this year. The amount of fraud she witnessed was unreal. True, she did have clients who had real hardships and needed this assistance, but they were few and far between the ones trying to manipulate the system by not reporting their true income (as an aside, at one time they were called "recipients," but that wasn't too PC, so that changed to "customers" and then finally "clients" to make everyone feel warm and fuzzy inside). As my mother would say, "HEAP is a joke!"