Don’t get caught flat-footed in front of the press!  Below is a quick rundown of today’s “must reads.” – John T. Doolittle, House Republican Conference Secretary

The Morning Murmur - Thursday, March 08, 2006

1.  DeLay Wins Texas GOP Primary – Washington Post
Rep. Tom DeLay, facing an unusual four-way Republican primary, won the party's nomination Tuesday, calling his victory a rejection by voters of "the politics of personal destruction."

2. House Republicans to Try to Block Ports Deal – USA Today
House Republican leaders on Tuesday embraced legislation that would block a Dubai-owned company from taking over operations at several U.S. ports, brushing aside a veto threat from President Bush.

3. Democrats' Data Mining Stirs an Intraparty Battle – Washington Post
A group of the ultra-liberal Democrats, including billionaire George Soros, is raising money to start a private firm to compile huge amounts of data on Americans to identify Democratic voters.  Those involved in the effort acknowledge that their activities are in part a vote of no confidence that the DNC under Chairman Howard Dean is ready to compete with Republicans on the technological front.

4. Will's Follies Go On – New York Daily News Op-ed
Will Rogers, The Dust Bowl era humorist who once famously said, "I don't belong to any organized party. I'm a Democrat," would feel right at home in his party today.  For years, Democrats have been more of a collection of disparate interest groups than people united around a political philosophy.

5. Rep. Conyers' questionable ethics – Washington Times Op-ed
A report last week in the Hill newspaper documented allegations from former staffers that Rep. John Conyers has repeatedly violated House ethics rules. Mr. Conyers had better have a good explanation for all this.

For previous issues of the Morning Murmur, go to www.GOPsecretary.gov

FULL ARTICLES BELOW:

1. DeLay Wins Texas GOP Primary – Washington Post

By Sylvia Moreno
Wednesday, March 8, 2006; 7:21 AM

AUSTIN, March 7 -- Rep. Tom DeLay, facing an unusual four-way Republican primary, won the party's nomination Tuesday, calling his victory a rejection by voters of "the politics of personal destruction."

"I have always placed my faith in the voters, and today's vote shows they have placed their full faith in me," DeLay, 58, said in a statement issued by his reelection campaign.

"Democrat attacks and the politics of personal destruction were heavily used by my opponents in this Republican primary, and they were rejected just like they will be in November," he said.

The 11-term congressman, who voted in his suburban Houston district Tuesday morning and greeted voters at several polls, spent the rest of the day in Washington, voting to renew the USA Patriot Act in the late afternoon and attending an evening fundraiser held by two Capitol Hill lobbyists. The event raised money for DeLay's reelection campaign -- a race that will pit him against Nick Lampson, a former congressman. Lampson had no opponent in Tuesday's Democratic primary.

With 100 percent of the 216 precincts reporting in congressional District 22, which includes all of Fort Bend County and part of three other Houston-area counties, DeLay had 62 percent of the votes, allowing him to win the GOP nomination outright without a runoff. His closest GOP opponent, Tom Campbell, had 30 percent, followed by Mike Fjetland with 4.7 percent and Pat Baig with 3.3 percent.

DeLay -- under criminal indictment on a money-laundering charge; rebuked three times by the House ethics committee; and linked to former GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who has pleaded guilty to political corruption charges -- faced his toughest primary race in his 22-year congressional career. Although he spent about $2 million, DeLay ran a low-profile primary campaign, focusing on reaching the most dedicated voters through direct-mail pitches and phone calls. He did not run any radio or television ads, reflecting the campaign's belief that they would heighten the profile of the GOP primary and bring out anti-DeLay voters.

But Tuesday night, the tenor of DeLay's campaign changed dramatically.

"I'm honored . . . to defend this district from the funding and activism of America's most radical Democrats," he said. "Liberal activists like Barbra Streisand, George Soros and Nancy Pelosi all have a dog in this fight, and his name is Nick Lampson."

DeLay and Lampson begin the battle for the November general election virtually tied for cash on hand. According to campaign finance reports filed in mid-February, DeLay had $1.3 million in the bank to Lampson's $1.4 million. According to a Houston Chronicle poll taken in early January, Lampson also had a lead over DeLay of eight percentage points.

District 22 is now also more Democratic by DeLay's own making. Under a 2003 redistricting plan that he guided and that the Texas legislature passed, DeLay agreed to surrender GOP voters to bolster some other congressional districts in Texas and get more Republicans elected to Congress. That redistricting plan ultimately led to DeLay's legal and ethical problems in Austin and Washington.

Lampson, who represented Beaumont and parts of East Texas in Congress, was ousted from office in 2004 under the new redistricting map. He moved into District 22 last year and soon began his campaign against DeLay. Sailing to the Democratic nomination, Lampson ended primary day swinging, too.

DeLay "gets headlines for all the wrong reasons," Lampson said, according to the Associated Press. "I'm looking forward to that headline on November 8th: 'No Further DeLay.' "

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/08/AR2006030800469.html

2. House Republicans to Try to Block Ports Deal – USA Today

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republican leaders on Tuesday embraced legislation that would block a Dubai-owned company from taking over operations at several U.S. ports, brushing aside a veto threat from President Bush.

"We want to make sure that the security of our ports are in America's hands," said Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., whose House Appropriations Committee planned to approve the measure Wednesday.

The move marks the latest step in a Republican revolt in Congress unlike any other in Bush's five years in office. The president has yet to veto any legislation, and GOP leaders have been careful to avoid sending him anything that he wouldn't sign.

Now, eight months before an election, they have decided to challenge him.

"We're not going to let the Democrats get to the right of us on national security," Republican Rep. Peter King, the House Homeland Security Committee chairman, said recently.

The legislation is expected to reach the House floor next week as part of a $91 billion measure for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and aid for Gulf States recovering from Hurricane Katrina.

GOP House leaders informed the White House staff of their intention Tuesday at a House leadership meeting attended by Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman. He didn't respond when House Republicans detailed the legislation, according to participants.

"The president's position is unchanged," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said.

Republicans and Democrats in Congress have spent weeks criticizing the Bush administration for approving DP World's purchase of London-based Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co., which holds contracts at several U.S. ports.

Many lawmakers, fearing security breaches in an era of terrorism, oppose the deal because a foreign government would be managing terminals at American ports. Dubai, part of the United Arab Emirates, controls the company.

Efforts by the Bush administration to quell the controversy have failed on Capitol Hill, and voters are largely opposed to the DP World plan.

"The political reality is, if you have three weeks to explain it, and you can't explain it ... it's time to end it," King, R-N.Y., said Tuesday.

House Republicans feared that if they didn't act now to block the deal, Democrats would force their own vote on the issue and it would pass overwhelmingly.

"This has become a very hot political potato," House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said. "I have seen it in my district. I have seen it every place I have been."

Declining to go into specifics, Lewis said only that his legislation would not single out any one country or company but would effectively prevent DP World from assuming control of terminals at six U.S. ports.

He suggested that he would be open to changing the legislation, if needed, to get the Senate on board and reach middle ground with the White House. However, Lewis said, "we could have a confrontation at the other end."

Indeed, the legislation sets up a fight with the president, who wants the money for Katrina aid and the wars but has threatened to veto any measure that would block or delay DP World's takeover.

The administration last month reluctantly agreed to do a broader investigation into potential security risks of DP World's plans in hopes of stunting a potential revolt by members of Bush's party. Republican congressional leaders were mindful that a vote could embarrass the president and further weaken him at a low point in his presidency.

But criticism has persisted, particularly in the House.

In an unusual break from the administration, Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, has pledged to do whatever it takes to block the deal.

Meanwhile, King has suggested that DP World could soften the controversy by subcontracting its U.S. port operations to an American company and, thereby, having no role in work at the ports.

Michael Moore, DP World's senior vice president, said the company has not discussed such a scenario with administration officials or lawmakers.

But DP World's chairman, Sultan Bin Sulayem, said in an interview on CNN's "The Situation Room," "We are appreciating that initiative." He did not rule out King's proposal, but he did not say the company was considering it.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-03-07-ports-deal_x.htm

3. Democrats' Data Mining Stirs an Intraparty Battle – Washington Post

With Private Effort on Voter Information, Ickes and Soros Challenge Dean and DNC

By Thomas B. Edsall

Wednesday, March 8, 2006; A01

A group of well-connected Democrats led by a former top aide to Bill Clinton is raising millions of dollars to start a private firm that plans to compile huge amounts of data on Americans to identify Democratic voters and blunt what has been a clear Republican lead in using technology for political advantage.

The effort by Harold Ickes, a deputy chief of staff in the Clinton White House and an adviser to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), is prompting intense behind-the-scenes debate in Democratic circles. Officials at the Democratic National Committee think that creating a modern database is their job, and they say that a competing for-profit entity could divert energy and money that should instead be invested with the national party.

Ickes and others involved in the effort acknowledge that their activities are in part a vote of no confidence that the DNC under Chairman Howard Dean is ready to compete with Republicans on the technological front. "The Republicans have developed a cadre of people who appreciate databases and know how to use them, and we are way behind the march," said Ickes, whose political technology venture is being backed by financier George Soros.

"It's unclear what the DNC is doing. Is it going to be kept up to date?" Ickes asked, adding that out-of-date voter information is "worse than having no database at all."

Ickes's effort is drawing particular notice among Washington operatives who know about it because of speculation that he is acting to build a campaign resource for a possible 2008 presidential run by Hillary Clinton. She has long been concerned, advisers say, that Democrats and liberals lack the political infrastructure of Republicans and their conservative allies. Ickes said his new venture, Data Warehouse, will at first seek to sell its targeting information to politically active unions and liberal interest groups, rather than campaigns.

As it stands now, the DNC and Data Warehouse, created by Ickes and Democratic operative Laura Quinn, will separately try to build vast and detailed voter lists -- each effort requiring sophisticated expertise and costing well over $10 million.

"From an institutional standpoint, this is one of the most important things the DNC can and should do. Building this voter file is part of our job," Communications Director Karen Finney said. "We believe this is something we have to do at the DNC. Our job is to build the infrastructure of the party."

In the 2003-2004 election cycle, the DNC began building a national voter file, and it proved highly effective in raising money. Because of many technical problems, however, it was not useful to state and local organizations trying to get out the vote.

The pressure on Democrats to begin more aggressive "data mining" in the hunt for votes began after the 2002 midterm elections and intensified after the 2004 presidential contest, when the GOP harnessed data technology to powerful effect.

In 2002, for the first time in recent memory, Republicans ran better get-out-the-vote programs than Democrats. When well done, such drives typically raise a candidate's Election Day performance by two to four percentage points. Democrats have become increasingly fearful that the GOP is capitalizing on high-speed computers and the growing volume of data available from government files and consumer marketing firms -- as well as the party's own surveys -- to better target potential supporters.

The Republican database has allowed the party and its candidates to tailor messages to individual voters and households, using information about the kind of magazines they receive, whether they own guns, the churches they attend, their incomes, their charitable contributions and their voting histories.

This makes it possible to specifically address the issues of voters who, in the case of many GOP supporters, may oppose abortion, support gun rights or be angry about government use of eminent domain to take private property. A personalized pitch can be made during door-knocking, through direct mail and e-mail, and via phone banks.

This approach is designed to complement the broad-brush approach of television and radio advertising, which by its nature must be addressed to large, and often diverse, audiences.

Traditional get-out-the-vote efforts operated crudely, such as by canvassing neighborhoods in which at least 65 percent of residents voted for a particular party. It was often deemed too inefficient to focus on neighborhoods where the partisan tilt was less decisive, and it ran the risk of doing more to turn out the opposition's vote.

The advantage of data-based targeting is that political field operatives can home in on precisely the voters they wish to reach -- the antiabortion parishioners of a traditionally Democratic African American church congregation, for instance.

Consultants working for the Republican National Committee developed strategies to design messages targeting individual voters' "anger points" in the belief that grievance is one of the strongest motivations to get people to turn out on Election Day.

Under the direction of Bush adviser Karl Rove, the RNC and state parties repeatedly tested the voter file and different ways to contact voters to determine which were most effective at boosting turnout.

"They were smart. They came into our neighborhoods. They came into Democratic areas with very specific targeted messages to take Democratic voters away from us," then-DNC Chairman Terence R. McAuliffe said after the 2004 contest. "They were much more sophisticated in their message delivery."

Ickes has quietly raised an estimated $7.5 million in start-up money for Data Warehouse. A prospectus said the company will need at least $11.5 million in initial capital.

In addition to Soros's support, Ickes has the financial backing of some of the wealthy participants in a new fundraising group called the Democracy Alliance. He and Quinn, who will be chief executive of Data Warehouse, have hired technology specialists from internet retailer Amazon.com and a Harvard-Massachusetts Institute of Technology computer project.

Quinn had worked on the voter file program under McAuliffe, but Dean brought in his own people after he took over in early 2005.

These included former Dean presidential campaign workers who formed a company called Blue State Digital, now under contract with the DNC.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/07/AR2006030701860.html

4. Will's Follies Go On – New York Daily News Op-ed

Wednesday, March 8th, 2006

Will Rogers rides again. The Dust Bowl era humorist, who once famously said, "I don't belong to any organized party. I'm a Democrat," would feel right at home in his party today.

President Bush and the GOP hold all the cards in Washington, and what a mess they've made of it. It's a situation ripe for big Democratic gains in the fall elections, and early polls show the public leaning heavily the Dems' way in generic matchups.

At least that was the case before yesterday's Washington Post reported the disarray among party leaders about how to seize the opportunity. Some of the details look like outtakes from a Rogers' comedy routine.

After saying the leaders keep pushing back the release date for their legislative proposals, from last November to "a matter of weeks" from now, Post reporters found the reasons: Democrats can't agree on what they stand for! The mucky-mucks can't decide whether to run nationalized campaigns or stress local issues. And they can't decide the right balance between attacking Bush and pushing their own ideas.

The latter, of course, is hard to do if you don't know what those ideas are.

Not to worry, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada told the paper: "By the time the election rolls around, people are going to know where Democrats stand."

That's a relief. Mark your calendars, ladies and gentlemen. Only seven months to go until we learn what the party believes in.

That belief system is still clearly a work in progress. As reporters Shailagh Murray and Charles Babington recounted, Reid and Nancy Pelosi, his House counterpart, met with Dem governors who appealed for help in crafting a message that emphasized "just two or three core ideas." Sources told the paper Reid offered six ideas, and so did Pelosi - though they weren't the same six. Uh-oh.

Wait, it gets better. "Even the party's five-word 2006 motto has preoccupied congressional Democrats for months," according to the article, which quotes Reid as saying: "We had meetings where senators offered suggestions. We had focus groups. We worked hard on that. ...It's a long, slow, arduous process."

So far, the best and brightest have produced this motto: "Together, America Can Do Better." It does come with a little baggage, however - John Kerry used it in 2004, and you know how that worked out.

Not everybody likes the motto, and The Post says: "There is an effort afoot to drop the word 'together.' It tests well in focus groups and audiences, Democratic sources said, but it makes the syntax incorrect."

Yet even a blue-state copy editor might not be able to save the slogan, for The Post adds dryly, "Governors privately scoff at the slogan."

The disarray is a sign of the chickens coming home to roost. For years, Democrats have been more of a collection of disparate interest groups than people united around a political philosophy. Attempts to identify core beliefs inevitably end up either offending some of the interest groups or being so wacky that swing voters run in the other direction. This inability of Dems to broaden their base explains why Republicans have won seven of the last 10 presidential elections.

Will Rogers saw the problem coming 70 years ago. He's still right, and we're all still laughing.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/397614p-336965c.html

5. Rep. Conyers' questionable ethics – Washington Times Op-ed

Published March 8, 2006

Should Democrats retake control of the House in November, Rep. John Conyers would become chairman of the Judiciary Committee. This is important to note because the committee is responsible for bringing articles of impeachment to the floor and Mr. Conyers has called for a resolution seeking an investigation into "those offenses which appear to rise to the level of impeachment" of President Bush. That's not quite a call for impeachment, but a surprise November upset could be enough to convince the new chairman to follow through on his implicit threat.
   

Mr. Conyers has a few things to answer for first, such as allegations from former staffers that he has repeatedly violated House ethics rules. A report last week in the Hill newspaper documented the charges, some of which have gone mostly unnoticed since first coming to light several years ago. Taken together, the charges present a disturbing office environment where staffers are treated as servants and friends can expect favors to be granted.
    

One former Conyers legal counsel, Sydney Rooks, who left the office in 1999, says Mr. Conyers had her tutor his son, John, during working hours and that "she was not given additional compensation for the work," according to the Hill. She said other staffers had to pick up the Conyers children from school and in effect babysit them in the office. Former staffer Deanna Maher alleges the congressman allowed a former top aide convicted of fraud to obtain a fake passport through the office, and then fled to Ghana. The aide was eventually recaptured and extradited to the United States. She also alleges that Mr. Conyers used his staff to work on the campaigns of friends and relatives, including his wife's, without taking leave. In 1998, she says, Mr. Conyers ordered her to live in his Detroit home for six weeks taking care of his children while his wife attended law classes. In a Dec. 22, 2004, letter obtained by the Hill, Miss Maher said Conyers staffer Melody Light "conducts her law practice (charging legal fees) out of the congressional office... She has in effect hung out her shingle on [Conyers'] office door." Says Miss Maher in a Jan. 13 letter to the House ethics panel: "I could not tolerate any longer being involved with continual unethical, if not criminal, practices which were accepted as 'business as usual'. " She quit in May.
    

If true, these allegations represent a clear violation of House rules. Using staffers for personal business as babysitters or tutors is exploitation and a blatant misuse of taxpayer dollars. Mr. Conyers had better have a good explanation for all this.

http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20060307-092817-1442r.htm

###