Drought Aid Fight May Play Role in Nov. Elections

Oct. 4 , 2002 -- A standoff between the Senate Democrats and the Bush administration over millions of dollars of aid aimed at helping farmers deal with a continuing drought continues to be one of the top topics on the campaign trail throughout the Midwest.

The fight focuses on a massive $6 billion aid package that sailed through the Senate, but has stalled in the House. In addition, President Bush has indicated that he may well veto the measure if it ever reaches his desk.

The proposal flew threw the Senate on a bipartisan vote of 79 to 16. All but one of the 16 Republican senators up for re-election in 2002 backed the bill sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle and Sen. Tim Johnson, both Democrats from hard-hit South Dakota.

The House has not taken action on the bill and the president has voiced opposition to the proposal as drafted. So, senate Democrats forced the issue by including the $6 billion in a larger appropriations bill being negotiated by the House and Senate.

White House and Cabinet officials have argued that the emergency drought aid ought to come from the massive $180 billion, six-year farm bill enacted in May.

"This proposal would add $6 billion on top of the already generous farm bill only a few months after the bill was enacted. This is unacceptable," Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman wrote to senators prior to the vote.

The aid is aimed at helping farmers and ranchers who have been hard-hit by the lack of rain. Some of the most affected states include Minnesota, South Dakota, Iowa, Missouri and Montana -- all states where incumbent Democrats are facing tough re-election campaigns.

And in at least one race it has seemed to have an impact. In South Dakota, Sen. Johnson maintains a single-point edge over his opponent, U.S. Rep. John Thune, in the race and according to a poll from mid-September, has wide support for his drought policies. According to the Dakota Poll, voters prefer Johnson's aid plan to Thune's 41 to 33 percent. With the race as close as it is, opinions on these programs could tip the race.

But not all areas affected by the drought are praising the Senate plan. In Oklahoma, at least one editorial voice urged the president to carry through with his veto threat.

"So farm subsidies continue to soar, warding off the otherwise necessary effects of the agricultural marketplace. Taxpayers, who foot the bill, are getting a double dose this year largely because many lawmakers running for re-election need to be seen as farmer-friendly," The Sunday Oklahoman editorialized in late Sept. "Let's hope the House of Representatives, which so far has refused to include any drought aid, stands firm. If not, then maybe Bush should limber up his right arm for a veto."

Throughout the region recently, the issue on every candidate's lips -- and in many of their ads -- is Social Security.

Missouri & Kansas

Sept. 16, 2002 -- A Republican political action committee has pulled a radio ad aimed at African-American voters in Kansas City that equated Social Security to "reverse reparations."

GOPAC, the group that funded the ad, called it a mistake and said it had been pulled from the airwaves.

"We disavow it and have seen to it that it was immediately pulled," GOPAC spokesperson Mike Tuffin said.

Regardless, Democrats were quick to release a transcript of the ad.

Female Announcer: You've heard about reparations, you know, where whites compensate blacks for enslaving us. Well, guess what we've got now? Reverse reparations. Under Social Security today, blacks receive twenty one thousand dollars less in retirement benefits than whites of similar income and marital status.

In the U.S. of A., white men live seven years longer than black men. One third of the brothers die before retirement and receive nothing. Almost half the married sisters lose their husbands before they rank Social Security spousal benefits. President George Bush proposed reforms that help our community in three ways. First, we get a higher minimum benefit. Second, our women get their fair share in their spouses Social Security. And, third, blacks get retirement accounts with real financial assets.

So the next time some Democrat says he won't touch Social Security, ask why he thinks blacks owe reparations to whites?

John Uhlmann, who is with the Kansas City-based firm that produced the ad and a member of GOPAC's board, said the spot had been pre-produced by his company and that GOPAC never approved running it. Uhlmann told the National Journal's Hotline that the spot was delivered to the station by accident.

In the Hotline interview, Uhlmann defended the ad and called for a serious debate on Social Security and its effects on the black community.

The spot has provoked a strong response from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

"The Republican ad attacking Social Security as the equivalent of 'reverse reparations' that African-Americans must pay to white people is wrong on the facts and outrageous in its intent," NAACP Chairman Julian Bond said in a statement.

GOPAC issued a release Sept. 12 saying it did not support the ad and would review its relationship with the production company for a spot containing language it called "misleading and offensive."

"The ad agency produced and presented scores of possible ads to GOPAC for approval," the statement read. "GOPAC gave direct approval for the vendor to place seven of these ads. None of the GOPAC-approved ads mentioned Social Security."

Iowa

Gov. Tom Vilsack (D) has been fighting for months to strengthen his position in the polls as he battles Doug Gross (R), a corporate lawyer and onetime chief of staff for former Gov. Terry Branstad.

"The race for governor of Iowa is the political equivalent of a World War I trench battle. Lots of effort and treasure have been spent for little or no gain," political writer David Yepsen wrote in the Sept. 10 Des Moines Register. "Polls show Democratic Gov. Tom Vilsack and Republican challenger Doug Gross have been in a close contest for three months. It's an Iowa 'Battle of Verdun.'"

Vilsack suffered a casualties in his trenches in early September, when Gross garnered the backing of the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation. The move, while not a total surprise, undercuts the Vilsack campaign's contention that Gross, as a corporate attorney, is out of touch with farmers and other ordinary Iowans.

New poll numbers released three days later by two television stations seem to confirm Yepsen's account. The survey has Vilsack's lead slipping from 53 percent to Gross' 36 percent in early May to a lead of 48 to 43 percent over Gross in early Sept.

The poll did hold some promising news for another Democrat, though. Vilsack leads Gross by 11 points in the 1st Congressional District where Bettendorf mayor Ann Hutchinson, a fellow Democrat, is running against U.S. Rep. Jim Nussle (R).

Although most analysts say Hutchinson has little chance of knocking off Nussle, Vilsack's lead may indicate a chance for a Democrat to pick up support in the 1st District.

The news comes as the Iowa Democratic Party launches a new ad targeting Social Security privatization and calling for support of Hutchinson.

"The stock market goes up; the stock market goes down. Privatizing social security puts seniors on a roller coaster, not knowing if they will have enough money for food and medicine," the ad script reads. "Ann Hutchinson believes it's wrong to gamble with our seniors' retirement. She opposes any attempt to raid the social security trust fund and is fighting to guarantee the benefits our seniors have earned."