Sweet Seat

The battle to sit on the throne of Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District has been lively, engaging, boiling-hot and nasty.

Did you expect anything less? The last go-around two years ago was a tight, hard-fought campaign, so Omahans knew Round 2 in District 2 would likely be more of the same. The seat has been held by Republican Lee Terry for 10 years. In 2006, the 2nd District race pitted the same two candidates against each other – Terry vs. young gun Jim Esch, a Democrat.

This time around the big dogs came in from Washington, D.C. Both the Democratic Congressional Campaign Commission and the Republican Congressional Commission have joined the race, pumping about $500,000 each into their respective candidates campaigns, with a large chunk of that coming in the final days via some hard-hitting TV commercials.

In one of the latest TV attack ads, the NRCC refers to Esch’s drunken driving conviction and say he has “poor judgment” on tax issues and Social Security. For his part, Terry did issue a statement saying that he did not condone the use of personal issues, such as a DUI from seven years ago, in ad campaigns.

(It’s curious in the NRCC ad, as well as an ad produced locally by Terry’s camp, that the TV ads use a photo image of Esch that was on the cover of the July 30 issue of the City Weekly. Both TV ads used the photo without permission from the City Weekly or its photo editor. Stay tuned for more on this one.)

“He (Terry) did not believe it was fair, what the NRCC ad inferred, that he would prefer they take out the DUI reference,” said Dave Boomer, Terry’s campaign manager. “The rest of the ad is accurate. Jim Esch wants to raise taxes, and he’s clearly on record of supporting that.

“Esch at the same time is running an ad that is blatantly false on accusing Lee of cutting veterans programs and health care, and that’s a flat-out lie.

“If Lee were a freshman Republican these ads would be a real problem because he would still be relatively unknown to the public. Congressman Terry has been in office 10 years, and has served the district very well, and people know him. I don’t believe these negative attack ads that the DCCC has will have much of an effect.”

Esch has declined to pull his ad in question. As for the DUI comment in the Republican ad, “I knew if we got close it was probably going to get a little ugly, so I’m not terribly surprised by it,” he said.

“You know it’s close when they start getting into the personal attacks … . I stand by our ads; I think they’re well researched. If he doesn’t stand by his ads, then he should talk to them about taking it down.”

According to figures from the Nebraska Election Commissioner’s office, there are 127,158 registered Democrats in Douglas County, which makes up most of the 2nd District, versus 123,505 registered Republican voters. It’s the first time since 1994 that Democrats have an edge in voter registrations in Douglas County.

Terry’s campaign has taken note of this turn around by running newspaper ads that are targeted at Obama-Terry voters, if there are such people. Boomer said the ads are not a Terry endorsement for Obama.

“Traditionally, Lee has won about 1 out of 5 Democrats,” Boomer said. “And they tend to be the kind of social conservative pro-life Reagan Democrats types, but there are others that for any number of reasons are supporting him.

One Obama-Terry ad quotes a woman named Melanie.

“Melanie is a real person here in Omaha; I characterize her probably left of center and she’s voting for Obama,” Boomer said. “She’s had it with the national Republicans, but she’s voting for Lee because she thinks he works hard and is honest.”

Esch thinks it’s panic on Terry’s part.

“I think it again shows how close this race is, that they’re scrambling for every vote that they can get, and I find a hard case to be made that someone looking for change in this country is going to go with a 10-year incumbent that’s been a part of a system that is clearly broken,” Esch said.

You can find an exhausting amount of information on where the candidates stand on major issues on their Web sites: jimesch.org and leeterry.com.
Election Day is this coming Tuesday, Nov. 4. Go vote.

Barack Obama/Joe Biden vs. John McCain/Sarah Palin
By Sean Brennan

Anybody else getting kind of worn out by the finger-pointing, flat-out lying and tiresome rebuttals being tossed around during the three presidential debates? Thought so. How many times did Obama or McCain begin a statement with the phrase,

“That’s simply not true…”? Plenty. Well, we’ve dug up and attempted to simplify some direct answers to questions given by and posted on the Washington Post’s Web site. What we’ve gathered for you are basic, fast facts on several key issues regarding the 2008 Presidential Election; much more detail can be found at Projects.WashingtonPost.com.

Topic Barack Obama

Age 47

Born Aug. 4, 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii

Experience Illinois state legislator, 1997-2004;
U.S. Senator (Illinois), 2005-current

Education B.A., Columbia University, 1983;
J.D. Harvard Law School

Wife Michelle Obama (married 1992)

On the economy Most policies, including tax cuts,
would focus on assisting the middle class

On Iraq Claims he would begin withdrawing
troops immediately

On healthcare Claims he will establish a new public
insurance program and a mandate that all children have health care

On immigration Supports legalizing what he says are 12
million undocumented people living in the United States by giving them a chance
to pay a fine

On the climate Supports an “economy-wide market-based cap-and-trade system” on carbon, which he believes will reduce U.S. carbon
emissions by 80 percent by 2050; also
wants to increase fuel efficiency standards by 4 percent per year

On education Supports pay raises for teachers

Embarrassing side note Bowled a 38 while campaigning
in Pennsylvania in 2007

Did you know? Obama began his effort to quit smoking just two years ago

YouTube moment When he claimed at a campaign in
Beaverton, Ore., that he’d visited all
“57 states”
(www.youtube,com/watch? v=EpGH02Dtlws)

Absolutely useless fact First date for he and his wife was
Spike Lee’s “Do the Right Thing”

Topic John McCain

Age 72

Born Aug. 29, 1936 at the Coco Solo
Naval Air Station in Panama

Experience U.S. House of Representatives (Arizona),
1983-1986; U.S. Senator (Arizona),
1987-current

Education U.S. Naval Academy, 1958

Wife Cindy Lou Hensley (married 1980)

On the economy Supports lower taxes across the income spectrum and Bush’s current tax cuts
permanent

On Iraq Doesn’t support withdraw of troops until the “war is won”

On healthcare Emphasis on preventive care; supports insurance access that is available across state lines

On immigration Emphasis on securing the U.S.-Mexican
border

On the climate Also supports market-based cap-and-trade system on carbon ad greenhouse gas
emissions as well as development
of hybrid vehicles

On education Wants public schools to improve;
supports parental school choice

Embarrassing side note Sarah Palin

Did you know? Would be the first president born outside
the 50 states

Absolutely useless fact As a child, when angered, McCain would
hold his breath until he passed out

Nebraska District 2 Congressional Race

Jim Esch vs. Lee Terry

The gloves have officially come off in this race (you already know that by now if you read the story starting on page 10), which has been described as a dead heat in recent weeks. Terry’s got the experience but challenger Esch nearly beat him in 2006 and seems to have made more strides as the rematch nears. Make no mistake about it – your vote counts in this one. Here are a few fast facts on the candidates; go to each’s official Web sites (listed below) for their stances on several key issues as both offer clear and thorough outlines of their plans for you to peruse.

Candidate Jim Esch

Party Democrat

Web site JimEsch.org

Age 32

Born Dec. 6, 1975 in Omaha

Experience Greater Omaha Chamber of Commerce and Greater Omaha Economic Development Partnership, 2003-05;

Education B.A. from Creighton University, 1998; J.D. from Creighton University School of Law, 2000

Family Single

Profession Attorney

Campaign funds raised as of Oct. 16, 2008 $593,000

Useful fact Raised $15 million for business, jobs and investment while working towards Omaha Chamber of Commerce efforts

Useless fact Lives on top of Urban Outfitters in the
trendy Saddle Creek Records complex

Candidate Lee Terry

Party Republican

Age 46

Born Jan. 29, 1962 in Omaha

Experience Omaha City Council, 1991-98
(two years as president); U.S. House
of Representatives, 1999-current

Education B.A. from the University of Nebraska;
J.D. from Creighton University Law School

Family Wife, Robyn Terry

Profession Attorney

Campaign funds raised as of Oct. 16, 2008 $1.3 Million

Useful fact Known best for his support of alternative energy and the nation’s fight for energy
independence

Useless fact Has appeared on “The Colbert Report” and teamed up with Stephen Colbert on an op-ed to the Los Angeles Times

Nebraska Senate Race

Scott Kleeb vs. Mike Johanns

Of the three races affecting the most Nebraskans (the office of president and the open Senate and Congressional seats), the Kleeb vs. Johanns race for a spot in the Senate is the longest shot for Democrats to win. Johanns has held a double-digit lead in pre-race polls and has a huge edge in terms of campaign financing and political experience – he’s been Nebraska’s governor after serving as mayor of the state’s second-biggest city. That’s not to mention the fact that he is tight with some of the biggest
Republican players in Washington. However, Kleeb has given himself at least a Hail Mary’s chance thanks to his charisma, youth and the fact that anti-Republican sentiment is probably at an all-time high. To get a handle on each candidate’s stances on the important issues, visit their Web sites listed below.

Candidate Scott Kleeb

Party Democrat

Web site ScottKleeb.com

Age 33

Born Aug. 23, 1975 in Adana, Turkey

Experience Teacher, Hastings College; ran (and lost) for the 3rd Congressional District seat in 2006

Education B.A. from University of Colorado; Master’s degree and Ph.D. from Yale University,

Family Wife, Jane Fleming

Profession History teacher, Hastings College;
Director of Operations for Morgan Ranch

Campaign funds raised as of Sept. 30, 2008 $216,000

Useful fact Held a position at the United Nations
while in college

Useless fact Wife is a political analyst for Fox News

Candidate Mike Johanns

Party Republican

Web site MikeJohanns2008.com

Age 58

Born June 18, 1950 in Osage, Iowa

Experience Lancaster County Board, 1983-87;
Lincoln City Council, 1989-91;
Lincoln Mayor, 1991-98;
Governor of Nebraska, 1998-2005;
United States Secretary of Agriculture, 2005-2007

Education B.A. from Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota, ;
J.D. from Creighton University Law School,

Family Wife, Stephanie Johanns

Profession Attorney

Campaign funds raised as of Sept. 30, 2008 $1.4 million

Useful fact Johanns is opposed to amnesty for illegal immigrants

By Will Simons

Other issues on the ballot

This current election, like the last one and the next, is, without a doubt, important. But believe it or not, aside from the media circus following the presidential campaign trails and the local congressmen and senators battling it out with their opponents, several other issues face Nebraskans in the polling booth this November 4. Remember, an informed voter is an empowered voter – compiled here is a breakdown of Proposed Amendment No. 1, an issue not plastered across television and on signs around town. Also compiled here is look at the county and district judges seeking retention on the ballot.

Proposed Amendment No. 1: Government Non-Tax Revenue

Back in 1990, Nebraskans voted in favor of the Local Option Municipal Economic Development Act (passed as LB840 by the Unicameral in 1991). LB840 gave authorization to counties, cities and villages in Nebraska to collect and appropriate sales and/or property tax dollars for purposes of economic and industrial development upon approval of local voters.

A vote for Proposed Amendment No. 1 essentially modifies the language of LB840, allowing counties, cities and villages to seek out additional sources of revenue beyond just tax dollars for economic and industrial development.

Pros: There are few vocal opponents to the proposed amendment. In fact, the Legislature voted 46-0 (three did not vote) to put the proposal on the ballot. It’s designed to make sites across Nebraska more desirable locales for possible economic growth – which is a good thing as the basic idea is that any appropriation of tax dollars and other sources of revenue put to lure potential projects, say a multi-million dollar racetrack or an ethanol plant, would in the long run generate many, many more tax dollars.

Cons: There is a purposeful vagueness as to where exactly these additional revenue sources might come from. Additional occupation taxes? Surplus utility funds? Local arts programs? Tobacco companies? Small business owners? This theoretically opens the door for abuse of power, but luckily voters have to approve any “additional revenue sources” first.

District/county judges up for retention

Last week, KETV-7 reported that the most recent judge to lose his retention was Supreme Court Justice David Lanphier in 1996 after a campaign targeted him for his rulings against term limits.

This time around there are no judges stirring up such controversy, but that shouldn’t give a judge a free ticket towards retention, now should it? To help voters make a more informed decision, the Nebraska State Bar Association surveyed Nebraska attorneys on the fairness, temperament, legal analysis and other factors of Nebraska judges. See how the numbers crunched, according to results of the NSBA survey, for the judges on the ballots in Douglas County (District Four) and Sarpy County (District Two) below.

(Attorneys rated judges on a 1-5 scale in several categories, 1 being very poor performance and 5 being excellent.)

Douglas County District Court (District Four)

Judge Patricia A. Lamberty
Highest mark: Appropriate Communication (4.18)
Lowest mark: Legal Analysis (3.85)
Approval percentage: 90.74

Judge Sandra L. Doughery
Highest mark: Punctuality (4.47)
Lowest mark: Impartiality (4.21)
Approval percentage: 93.03

Judge Michael Coffey
Highest mark: Fairness (4.21)
Lowest mark: Legal Analysis (3.92)
Approval percentage: 91.28

Judge Marlon A. Polk
Highest mark: Appropriate Communication (4.05)
Lowest mark: Legal Analysis (3.5)
Approval percentage: 81.2

Judge Gerald E. Moran
Highest mark: Punctuality (4.37)
Lowest mark: Appropriate Communication (4.02)
Approval percentage: 91.37

Judge Gary B. Randall
Highest mark: Trial Management (3.95)
Lowest mark: Impartiality (3.69)
Approval percentage: 85.48

Douglas County Court (District Four)

Judge Marcena M. Hendrix
Highest mark: Judicial Temperament & Demeanor (4.2)
Lowest mark: Punctuality (3.76)
Approval percentage: 89.35

Judge Thomas G. McQuade
Highest mark: Punctuality (3.65)
Lowest mark: Judicial Temperament & Demeanor (3.13)
Approval percentage: 75.55

Judge Joseph P. Caniglia
Highest mark: Temperament & Demeanor (4.26)
Lowest mark: Legal Analysis (4.01)
Approval percentage: 94.71

Judge Stephen M. Swartz
Highest mark: Punctuality (3.78)
Lowest mark: Judicial Temperament & Demeanor (2.52)
Approval percentage: 67.23

Judge Lyn V. White
Highest mark: Punctuality (3.06)
Lowest mark: Impartiality (2.28)
Approval percentage: 40

Judge Edna R. Atkins
Highest mark: Appropriate Communication (4.19)
Lowest mark: Legal Analysis (3.71)
Approval percentage: 90.15

Judge Darryl R. Lowe
Highest mark: Trial Management (3.27)
Lowest mark: Judicial Temperament & Demeanor (2.6)
Approval percentage: 59.91

Judge John E. Huber
Highest mark: Punctuality (3.92)
Lowest mark: Judicial Temperament & Demeanor (3.24)
Approval percentage: 80.88

Judge Craig Q. McDermott
Highest mark: Punctuality (4.15)
Lowest mark: Legal Analysis (3.94)
Approval percentage: 94.47

Sarpy County District Court (District Two)

Judge David K. Arteburn
Highest mark: Attentiveness (4.27)
Lowest mark: Legal Analysis (4.01)
Approval percentage: 92.41

Judge Randall L. Rehmeier
Highest mark: Judicial Temperament & Demeanor (4.64)
Lowest mark: Legal Analysis (4.4)
Approval percentage: 97.34

Sarpy County Court (District Two)

Judge Todd J. Hutton
Highest mark: Judicial Temperament & Demeanor/Trial Management/Does work in prompt and timely manner (4.34)
Lowest mark: Impartiality (4.09)
Approval percentage: 91.72

Judge John F. Steinheider
Highest mark: Dose work in timely and prompt manner (4.23)
Lowest mark: Judicial Temperament & Demeanor (3.73)
Approval percentage: 86.24

Judge Robert C. Wester
Highest mark: Fairness (4.02)
Lowest mark: Punctuality (3.7)
Approval percentage: 88.17

Action Affirmative
By Augusta Olsen

Nebraska voters have the opportunity to vote on Initiative 424, an initiative to eliminate affirmative action practices in state government. While voters are sure to see the question on the ballot, their votes on the issue may not even be counted, as the state still awaits a verdict from Lancaster County District judge Karen Flowers on the validity of this initiative in Nebraska.

Members of a local group, Nebraskans United, filed a lawsuit in Lancaster County in September asking that the initiative to be removed from the ballot. They allege that out-of-state petitioners used unlawful practices to gather at least 50,000 of the 136,589 signatures used to get the initiative on the ballot. At press time, Judge Flowers had not come to a verdict on the case.

Initiative 424 requires that “The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or pubic contracting.” A clause in the initiative excludes any state program which is required to exercise affirmative action policies to secure federal funding.

The initiative is part of a nationwide agenda fronted by California businessman and politico Ward Connerly, a former regent in the University of California system. Connerly spearheaded the original initiative in California, which was passed by popular vote in 1996. Similar initiatives led by Connerly’s organization were approved by voters in Washington in 1998, and Michigan in 2006.

Connerly says he was motivated to eliminate the practice of affirmative action after seeing unfair admissions practices in the university system, in which students with higher academic achievement were overlooked in favor of minority students. He says this kind of action is in direct conflict to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and creates lasting resentments in our society.

“In 1961, President John F. Kennedy said, ‘Race has no place in American life or law.’ That quote establishes the framework for our society, I believe, to guide us in the direction of being blind to color, certainly in the public domain,” said Connerly at a debate on Initiative 424 at the Omaha Press Club last Wednesday.

“The issue is before you and it begs the question of whether any government entity in the state of Nebraska should treat its citizens, any of its citizens, differently on the basis of race. You will often hear those who say, ‘Well, it’s a good idea, it’s a very noble idea, but are we there yet? Is the time appropriate to do this?’ I would submit that there has never been a more appropriate time for us to cast aside the issue of race,” said Connerly.

Connerly used the example of Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential candidacy as evidence that our country is beyond the issue of race in government. However, Obama does not support Connerly’s initiatives, and in fact, they have been endorsed by Sen. John McCain.

Connerly’s national opponents say his effort is a money-driven initiative that uses an African-American man as its spokesperson, but is not in the best interest of minority groups. The Ballot Initiative Strategy Center points out on their Web site that Connerly paid himself more than $1 million in 2005 through his own organizations, the American Civil Rights Institute and the American Civil Rights Coalition, mostly for speaking on the topic of eliminating affirmative action. Major contributors to these groups include three of the most conservative, right-wing interest groups in the country. The Sarah Scaife, John M. Olin and Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundations have donated more than $5 million to the American Civil Rights Institute since Connerly formed the organization in 1997, according to Media Transparency, a media watchdog group.

This year, Connerly and his group petitioned to get the initiative on the ballot in five states: Nebraska, Colorado, Oklahoma, Arizona and Missouri. They succeeded in collecting enough signatures in Nebraska and Colorado. Now in these two states, the initiative faces tough opposition from local groups who support affirmative action policies.

Opposition to Initiative 424 in Nebraska includes not only Nebraskans United, but also the University of Nebraska, Creighton University, Metropolitan Community College, Omaha Public Schools, the ACLU, the NAACP, and the Omaha, Lincoln and Kearney Chambers of Commerce, among others. Warren Buffett is one of the main contributors to the Nebraskans United campaign against Initiative 424, having donated $50,000. An editorial statement from the Lincoln Journal-Star published on Oct. 15 also denounced the initiative.

Nebraskans United campaign manager, Omaha attorney David Kramer, says that his group opposes the ban for several reasons. Kramer, who calls the proposition “a solution looking for a problem,” suggests that Initiative 424 is an artificial initiative foisted upon the people of Nebraska by outside interest groups, and is not in the true interest of Nebraskans.

He cites the proposed change to the state constitution as extreme, as any disputes about the fairness of affirmative action practices could be addressed through litigation first.

He raises questions about the unintended consequences of passing this amendment.

“We have scholarships at the University of Nebraska Law School that are privately funded scholarships administered by the university like the Kinkela scholarship,” said Kramer at the Omaha Press Club debate.

“The Kinkela scholarship is granted yearly to multiple women who have military service background. Mrs. Kinkela was a woman who had military service who wanted to encourage other women to go to college. [Under the proposed amendment, this scholarship would be] gone. Why? Because it is gender-specific.”

“The state of Nebraska today has 22 affirmative action programs – each agency has one, but those programs aren’t mandated by the State of Nebraska. Once again, they are mandated by federal law, federal contract, federal grant or federal legislation. And the result of that is, should this [initiative] pass on Nov. 4, the day after that, there still will be 22 affirmative action programs at the state level,” said Kramer.

At this point, only time and Judge Flowers will tell if Nebraskans’ vote on Proposition 424 will be counted. If Judge Flowers rules against the Nebraskans United lawsuit, then voters will decide if our state will join others in eliminating affirmative action practices.