Susan's Selective Memory

Over at Susan's blog the junior senator recaps what she calls a "busy week in Washington." And indeed it was.

And yet somehow, her 545 word post manages to skip both the failure of the Webb amendment and her unconscionable--and much-discussed--vote against restoring habeas corpus.

I wonder why she'd skip right over the week's two most important events...

WaPo: Collins Visibly Angry

Don't miss this juicy anecdote in today's Washington Post (via Turn Maine Blue) about the disconnect between Maine's senators.

Sen. Collins was apparently none too happy about having to stand alone in opposition to reinstalling the right of habeas corpus.

Snowe apparently did not inform her leadership of the switch, according to aides and senators familiar with the decision. Therefore, Collins never got the message, leaving her all alone.

Collins, who is facing a potentially tough reelection battle next fall against Rep. Tom Allen (D-Maine), an antiwar liberal [sic], was visibly angry, according to eyewitnesses in the chamber's press gallery. She paced around the floor, confronting several members of the leadership.

So: Is this how she decides how to vote?

I mean, we're talking about a core modern legal principle for crying out loud, and Sen. Collins is worried about blending in with the crowd?

BDN Double Standard?

Yesterday, we commented at some length about BDN's decision to cloak objective, verifiable facts in the language of "he said/she said."

Specifically, Tom Groening's article on Sen. Collins' decision to break her two-term pledge seemed carefully constructed to avoid blurting out the obvious and undisputed truth that Collins is in the process of breaking a promise to voters.

Well today, BDN runs a story on Rep. Allen and Moveon.org--also by Tom Groening. And yet, would you believe that this time there's no hedging and no attribution to the opposing campaign?

This despite the fact that the Maine GOP has been pushing the Moveon.org narrative for some time.

So why is BDN reporting out attacks on Rep. Allen in neutral, objective language while portraying demonstrable facts about the junior senator as mere allegations?

Here at Collins Watch, we'd like to think that Groening took our commentary about the first article to heart, and changed his ways.

But somehow, I'm not convinced that's what's going on here.

Habeas Watch

I missed this, but Maine Democrats caught it: Yesterday, Sen. Collins voted against reinstalling habeas corpus, the ancient right to challenge one's detention in court.

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) voted in favor of the habeas provision.

Reporting on The Pledge

Give the Bangor Daily News credit for paying attention, this early in the race, to Sen. Collins pledge to serve no more than two-terms. (We discussed the pledge here.)

That said, Tom Groening's reporting leaves a lot to be desired.

Start with the headline: "Democrats say Collins broke two-term pledge."

Well, did she or didn't she? Why the suspense?

Unfortunately, the article itself is similarly non-committal:

Sen. Collins, according to Democratic Party spokeswoman Carol Andrews, made the pledge to serve just two terms while running for the seat in 1996. Collins announced the two-term pledge on April 1, 1996, while signing a document supporting a constitutional amendment limiting terms for members of Congress.

While seeking re-election in 2002, Collins reaffirmed her pledge to serve two terms in a letter to a constituent, according to Andrews.

The Collins campaign does not deny she made the pledges.

(Emphasis added.)

So let's review. A Democratic spokeswoman makes a couple of charges. Sen. Collins doesn't deny them. But the reporter still thinks it's necessary to couch the information as "according to Democratic Party spokeswoman..."

Why not, y'know, do some actual reporting and find out whether the charges are true so that you can give readers the unmediated, straight scoop? (Hint: The fact that the Collins camp hasn't refuted them is telling.)

Look, BDN isn't the only journalistic organization guilty of this kind of lazy reporting. But when I read a newspaper, I don't want to just hear what some party hack said happened. I want to know what actually happened.

Especially in a situation like this, where verifying the facts is so easy.

The truth is, Sen. Collins, by running for a third term, has broken her pledge. Period. Full stop.

Enough with the hedging.

This Is Leadership?

Sen. Collins is nominally in favor of the Webb amendment.

And yet, when she's asked about its chances of passage, does she work to rally support for the measure? Does she use the opportunity to underscore the dangers of stretching our military too thin?

Of course not.

"Senator Warner’s voice carries a lot of weight with the caucus and I think his decision to oppose Senator Webb’s amendment may very well stem the tide of support," said Ms. Collins.

I think this speaks volumes.

They Write Op-Eds

Quoth Congressman Allen:

The young service men and women from Maine that I met...were sent to Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein, and they did it swiftly and decisively. We need to end their mission, not re-label it.

Hoodwinking NPR

This isn't the first time NPR has given readers and listeners the mistaken impression that Sen. Collins supports a bill that would mandate a withdrawal of US troops from Iraq.

Granted, the junior senator has worked hard to conceal that even now, she's unwilling to support legislation that would rein the President in.

But a national news organization like NPR shouldn't allow itself to get hoodwinked so easily.

Photographic Proof

Contrary to what you might think from looking at Sen. Collins' relaunched site, the junior senator and President Bush have in fact been in the same room at the same time.

(Unless one of these is a cardboard cut-out.)

Susan's Blog

Check it out.

Her whole website appears to have relaunched.

UPDATE: Lots of nice snapshots in the photo gallery. But I can't seem to find any of the junior senator with her good friend President George W. Bush.

In fact, a Google search of the site turns out nary a reference to our President.

Hmm...

The Funeral Police

I don't blame Congressman Allen's campaign for drawing attention to the dual roles played by two Collins aides. It's worth pushing the junior senator to explain the arrangement.

That said, I can't get too worked up about senate staffers working on their boss's campaign. To me, it seems inevitable in the age of the permanent campaign.

But Collins Chief of Staff (and campaign manager) Steve Abbott's reaction is something to behold:

Abbott countered that Allen, the six-term 1st Congressional District representative, is improperly sending his office staff to events in the 2nd Congressional District. Abbott suggested it was a way for Allen to increase his visibility in the 2nd District.

Abbott listed dates and events, including military funerals and business announcements from May through July, and the names of the Allen staffers who attended.

You read that right.

Abbott is calling Allen out because his staffers have been seen at the funerals of Maine soldiers who happened to live outside his district.

Now, call me old fashioned, but sending a staffer to the funeral of a local soldier sounds a lot like common courtesy--something the Collins camp has been making a fetish of lately.

And yet, there's Steve Abbott, not only disclosing that he's been tracking the movements of Allen staffers, but also that he thinks their presence at soldier funerals smacks of impropriety rather than, say, decency or respectfulness.

What was that about the importance of civility?

At the risk of stating the obvious, it behooves anyone in Congress or thinking of running to err on the side of maximum respect for American soldiers, and particularly the fallen.

Not because it's politically expedient. But because, ultimately, everyone in Congress bears some responsibility for the fate of those soldiers.

If Sen. Collins--and even Steve Abbott--had exercised that responsibility a bit more responsibly over the last few years, maybe we wouldn't be where we are today.

Collins Questions Petraeus

And Crocker. Not that she gets much of an answer.



Via TPMmuckraker.

Q & A

As The Left Coaster intimates, it will be interesting to see how Sen. Collins performs on Tuesday at the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing with Gen. David Petraeus.

Will she ask tough questions, pushing the general off of his talking points? Or will she stick to generalities and empty bromides?

Clearly, the hearing presents the junior senator a golden opportunity to demonstrate to constituents that she takes their concerns about our Iraq strategy seriously. And being tough on Petraeus costs her nothing.

But how best to mask her demonstrated unseriousness on the Iraq question? Among her options: She could draw attention to the fact that the surge has failed on its own terms; push Gen. Petraeus to clarify his comments about his America's long term presence in Iraq; or demand that he explain what "winning" in Iraq means and what it's likely to cost.

In any case, we'll be watching.

UPDATE: If Collins really wants to surprise us, she'll ask Petraeus about this.

Lynx Politics

John Richardson pens a long, nuanced piece for the Kennebec Journal about the shifting endangered species-status of the Canada lynx, and a meeting Maine's senators set up between an interior department deputy assistant secretary and timber company representatives, at which staffers for the senators were present.

Naturally, a PAC associated with the company has made contributions to both senators (as well as Rep. Allen and Rep. Michaud) over the years.

So: Was setting up the meeting a gift to special interests? An unremarkable example of constituent services? A favor to the governor?

Richardson doesn't offer any easy answers--he does a good job of following a complicated set of facts where they lead him. And I'd like to give his piece another read before floating any theories.

But it's fair to say his report provides more evidence, if any was needed, that the line between good government and backroom shenanigans isn't always as bright as some of us would like it to be.

In the meantime, Maine press: More thoughtful, well-researched political reporting like this, please?

Woodward Recuses Himself

From the Bangor Daily News:

Two editors at the Bangor Daily News with close ties to candidates vying for a U.S. Senate seat in the 2008 election have recused themselves from dealing with any aspect of the paper’s coverage of the campaign for the duration of the race.

Executive editor Mark Woodward and assignment editor Tim Allen took the action this week after conferring with fellow editors about apparent conflicts of interest the two have...

"Although my wife and I have only the same stake in the outcome of this election as any other Maine voters, and nothing more, the appearance of having a conflict can be damaging to the integrity and credibility of the newspaper," Woodward said. "Our newspaper's role in the campaign is to report the news, not be part of it. For Tim and me to step out of the news process in this campaign is only common sense."

Collins on Petraeus

Well, not Petraeus exactly. But the junior senator did talk to NPR about Iraq:

"I draw a distinction between a timeline and a deadline," Collins said. "I am for a timeline for changing our mission...What I've opposed is a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq, a hard deadline that is unrelated to what is happening on the ground."

Fair enough.

At least she's fessing up to her unwillingness to rein in the President.

Incidentally, can someone tell me who these nefarious "precipitous withdrawal" advocates are? It's not at all clear--unless Collins and other Republicans think twelve months qualifies as "precipitous."

If they think that, I really wish they'd mention it to the American people.

Allen on Petraeus

He says:

The withdrawal of one brigade does not begin to do what needs to be done and is unacceptable. To get out of Iraq, we need to set a binding deadline for withdrawal. We must stop talking about if we bring our troops home but how and when.

Sen. Collins, your thoughts?

Craig Watch

Radio silence, still, from camp Collins on the Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) situation, which now seems likely to drag on quite a bit longer.

The junior senator has disowned a contribution from Craig's PAC--a conspicuous and rather extreme step. But she has yet to explain the move, or tell Mainers whether she wants Craig to resign.

Was That So Hard?

Judging from this article and this editorial, The Bangor Daily News seems to have arrived at a reasonable response to the conflict-of-interest that exists given Executive Editor Mark Woodward's ties to Sen. Collins.

Reading the two pieces, one learns:

--Woodward is not involved in formulating the paper's editorial positions.

--Woodward "has asked five newsroom editors to investigate the conflict-of-interest issue, and report on whether any changes are needed."

--Editorial page editor Todd Benoit believes that, "A newspaper has a responsibility to build in safeguards against conflicts, and one way it does this is to announce their potential. Another...is for editors to recuse themselves from covering certain stories to deflect even the potential of a potential conflict of interest.

So that's good to know.

It must be said that Benoit's column--which manages to sound haughty and defensive at the same time--knocks down a number of straw men and makes a number of dubious points on the way to basically the right conclusion. (Hint: "Our spouses have to work somewhere" isn't a terribly persuasive defense.)

So let's hope this isn't all just lip service.

But it's Labor Day Weekend--why nitpick? This is definitely a step in the right direction.

Saying No To Craig

Sen. Collins has apparently decided to return a $2500 contribution from the PAC run by Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID).

The Boston Herald article doesn't explain her reasoning. But I'd sure be curious to know what it is, given that the junior senator hasn't had any reservations about taking $10,000 from the Northern Lights PAC operated by Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK).

You know, the Sen. Stevens who's currently under scrutiny in a public corruption probe.

Here's the paperwork for the PAC's $10,000 contribution to Collins, which was broken down into three separate donations.

The Stevens PAC last gave to Collins on March 14 of this year.