U.S. Attorney Mulls Challenge To Dem Rep. Chris Carney In Pennsylvania
Thomas Marino, the U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Pennsylvania who appeared on a short list of U.S. attorneys to be fired last November, is considering a run for Congress, he confirmed in an interview with us yesterday.
Marino is eyeing the state's 10th District seat, currently held by Dem Chris Carney, who defeated incumbent Don Sherwood last November amid allegations that Sherwood choked his mistress.
In a phone interview, Marino told us that he was "considering" a run for the seat -- but added that it was "one of several options that I have." It's certainly an active consideration: Marino said that he'd met a number of Pennsylvania Republicans, including Republican National Committee staffers, to discuss a possible bid. When asked whether he was being recruited for a run, he only said that there had been people at the federal, state, and local level who have been "encouraging" him to run for the seat.
The NRCC's operatives have privately described Marino as a choice candidate for the district, and the local Pennsylvania press has floated his name, but this is the first time to our knowledge that Marino has publicly acknowledged or discussed that he was actively considering a run. The earliest that Marino would decide whether to seek a bid, he said, would be early next year.
Marino's active consideration of a run is noteworthy partly because U.S. attorneys risk skirting ethics regulations when they move to run for office.
The regulation in question is the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees from engaging in certain political activities, but does not ban employees from considering a run for office. They are however, prohibited from meeting with individuals to plan "the logistics and strategy of a campaign."
It's a fine line, one that Ed Dowd, the President-Elect of the National Association of Former United States Attorneys (he was the U.S. attorney for St. Louis from 1993 through 1999), said that U.S. attorneys should be aware of: "U.S. attorneys should be very cautious with dealing with possible runs for political office, because they're supposed to be running their offices in a totally impartial, apolitical way."
When asked about any possible conflicts of interest for a U.S. attorney who's considering a run for Congress as a Republican, he said that the office analyzes "every cases closely and thoroughly, and if we feel that there's a potential of conflict of interest, we bring that to the Justice Department." He also said that defense lawyers are able to raise possible conflicts in court.
Marino's level of seriousness about possibly challenging Carney was evident in a letter he wrote to a top staff member for Pennsylvania GOP Rep. Charlie Dent thanking the staffer for a meeting. In the letter, which we've obtained and which you can view in our TPM Document Collection, Marino wrote:
"I am seriously considering running for Congress in 2008...serving our great country by representing the 10th Congressional District would be a distinct honor and a privilege for me." Carney's district tilts heavily Republican, and national Dems have made defending him a top priority.
Asked to describe his politics, Marino said, "I'm an independent thinker. I assess the situation on its merits and then make a decision. I don't toe the line for any entity or cause, because every situation is different. You have to take as many facts in as possible to come to the best conclusion." Marino pointed to his name being on the firing list as evidence that he's an "independent thinker."
According to The Washington Post, Marino appeared twice on lists drawn up by Alberto Gonzales' chief of staff, Kyle Sampson – lists made in September and then again on November 7, 2006. Six of the nine U.S. attorneys on the November list were fired. It's unclear why Marino was targeted for removal and why he came off the list.
Before being nominated by President Bush to be a U.S. attorney in 2002, Marino was the district attorney in Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, for ten years.
"It's unclear why Marino was targeted for removal and why he came off the list."
Hmmm. Is this the offical call to place our bets?
I've got a wager or two. . . .
May 31, 2007 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
So I guess Marino openly acknowledges that Bush did the right thing by canning him. Otherwise he wouldn't be carrying the banner for Bush's party. So either he was an incompetent/corrupt/whatever as US Attorney who deserved to be fired, or he likes being part of a gang that fires people for being "independent thinkers" -- kind of like the kid that gets beat up by creeps and joins the gang so he can do the same to somebody else.
He sounds like a bad idea whose time has come. Look out, PA.
May 31, 2007 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's still the USA--he hasn't been canned.
May 31, 2007 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
The intention was clearly to fire him. That he was saved by a wave of publicity makes no difference -- either the top leaders of his party saw him as incompetent or corrupt or something bad, or they tried to dump him for his "independent mind".
May 31, 2007 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Count me as one newly minted independent (doesn't pay to screw your base Harry and Nancy) who would relish seeing someone knock out carney, a man who has been blasted by Blue America for misrepresenting himself to progressives.
The dems shouldn't expect a lot of netroots help for carney.
May 31, 2007 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Marino pointed to his name being on the firing list as evidence that he's an "independent thinker.
Marino sure sounds like a Bushie. It's exactly the kind of thing Bush would say.
That plan floated to fire all 93 - sounds positively Rovian now.
Everyone was on the short list at one time. And virtually everyone came off. Now the Republicans have dozens and dozens of potential political candidates who can run for office under the banner of "independent thinker."
When they're all exactly the opposite.
May 31, 2007 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure what to think... More Muckingracking is needed here.
How does one come off the list? What actions or perceptions redeemed him in the eyes of the Rove machine?
So he's "incompetent or corrupt or something bad", or he won his way back into the good graces of Karl by being corrupted.
Hmmmmm. Seems like a questionable situation any way you look at it.
*****************************************************
“I, ..., do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..."
May 31, 2007 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
You'd actually vote for a Republican US Attorney who sucked up enough to get himself off the firing list?
Boy if you think Reid and Pelosi are screwing you just wait until you see the new Republican majority.
As a matter of fact ya petulant sh*t why not go over to Townhall.com and read Fred Thompson's garbage about Hamas and Iran right now? Join your new friends and see how you fit in brendan. Cuz if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
May 31, 2007 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look up Carney's profile for Gods sake markg8...
Actually I was hoping when I first saw the headline that Carney was going to get a primary challenge. Wishful thinking!
The guy is BAD news... regardless how red the district is... Progressives in the district (hoping there are some) need to get some help from the DNC and actually try and investigate some of their candidates before they put them up against a guy who tries to strangle his girlfriend.
May 31, 2007 6:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did it ever occur to you that voting for a Republican impersonating a Democrat is no better than voting for a Republican admitting to the shame?
Best, Terry
May 31, 2007 7:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah I looked at it Sand. Some snippets:
"Carney told the New Yorker's Jane Meyer: “I was looking at terrorist links between al-Qaida and state sponsors of terrorism, including Iraq … On a scale of zero to ten, where zero would be none and ten would be operational control, [the ties between Saddam and al-Qaida] were about a two and a half …
Carney claims that his experience working for the counterintelligence group curbed his enthusiasm for the Iraq War
Carney told the New York Times that he is “probably to the right” of most House Democrats, a fact borne out by many of the views espoused on his campaign website."
I don't know what you expect. Look at his fricking district. Ever been to rural PA? Like they say, ya have Philly and Pittsburgh with Alabama in between. If we kill every Blue Dog then welcome back John Boehner as Speaker, Mitch McConnell as Senate Majority leader. Is that what anybody here wants? If so I respectfully suggest you've just marginalized your newly minted ass out of any influence at all. A progressive in Carney's district wouldn't get 1000 votes.
June 1, 2007 12:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Did it ever occur to you that Pelosi is a better Speaker than Boehner and Reid is better than McConnell? I don't care what kind of redneck we have to elect from redneck districts. Their legislation is never going to make it to the floor anyway.
June 1, 2007 12:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is like Fulbright's argument he had to support segregation in order to be an enlightened senator from Arkansas. The result was enormous harm to the Democratic Party that resulted in decades of Republican dominance.
When you prostitute yourself, you get a certain rep that not everyone desires.
Tester is far from my ideal Democrat but his stirring argument against the Patriot Act should have thrilled everyone who has any feeling at all for the Bill of Rights.
When you don't demand excellence, you have no right to complain about subpar results.
Do you really believe that the American public as a whole agrees with the wingnuts? Do you discount the notion that a Democratic Party that actually stands for a free and open society that cares about the least of its citizens and its obligations in the world is doomed to defeat?
I don't.
Best, Terry
June 1, 2007 1:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
You're kidding!
Right of most democrats you say, he's over the cliff. Richard Perle doesn't give fundraisers to any other democrats that I know? Although, the way the DLC is going it wouldn't surprise me.
Also, let's provide the full quote please:
The guy is a war blue dog... no in fact he's nearer a fricken Feith and Perle neocon... he's far more insidious and dangerous than a drunken Boehner...@! Plus, I don't want Carney elevated to any 'Democratic' committee war planning seat thank you v. much...
Get real... try and set your standards a little higher please... especially when we could have run a far more eligible anti-neocon war candidate against a republican nut who had severe anger management problems.
June 1, 2007 3:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Of course not. But in Carney's district they apparently do. Keep in mind, in one of the biggest towns just outside the district, Hazelton, the mayor is actively trying to run Hispanics out of town with the support of the rest of the populace. It just might kill the town but they don't care.
I don't quite get you. Are you saying that standing for a free and open society that cares about the least of its citizens and its obligations in the world dooms us to defeat? Or the opposite?
Here's what I don't discount. If we try to weed out every congressman like Carney, a guy who actually worked in the bowels of the Pentagon with Doug Feith and has turned against the DoD then we are doomed to defeat. We need to work on
him to get his vote in September just like we need to work on Repubs. As for primarying him I suggest you go up to those hardscrabble towns in northern PA, where about the only thing on AM radio is Rush and O'Reilly and knock on a few doors. Carney might just be the most progressive we're able to get up there.
June 1, 2007 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
He was also endorsed by Wesley Clark
http://securingamerica.com/node/1218
Here's Howie Klein at Firedoglake lauding him last September:
http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/06/blue-america-chris-carney-pa-10/
Here's Real Clear Politics' take on the 10th:
http://tinyurl.com/2ejeju
"Pennsylvania’s 10th Congressional District is one of the most conservative in the entire Commonwealth. It occupies the Northeast corner of the state – excluding Scranton and Wilkes-Barre – as well as a sliver of central Pennsylvania. The result is a district that is overwhelmingly rural and Republican."
Nobody even ran against Sherwood in 2002 and 2004 it's so Republican.
Here's the WaPo votes database on his key votes:
Carney voted with Pelosi and Obey on Iraq until the last vote. That makes him no worse than Dick Durbin.
http://tinyurl.com/32z9cm
Making him out to be a complete wingnut is wrong. Yeah he voted against the Hate Crimes bill and for the last bill for Iraq funding. But he has a whole lot of other positions that are mainstream Democratic. Christopher Carney has voted with a majority of his Democratic colleagues 90.4% of the time during the current Congress. Trying to primary him in 2008 is a waste of resources and could very well hand the seat back to a Repub.
June 1, 2007 10:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
As both a constituent and a DCer, I can tell you he's actually doing a pretty impressive job of walking an incredibly thin line. His district, my district is inredibly conservative, and conservative of the worst sort. In my county Republians outnumber Dems 2-1. To get elected, you have to have wide based support, there simply aren't enough liberals out there to get you elected without carrying a percentage of the wingnuts.
That said, Carney would move more to the left if he could, but as a freshman who is going to be targeted by the RNC he has to be very careful. If he wins reelection in 08 and again in 10, watch for him to move, and attempt to move his district, leftward. Give him some time, and trust me, you don't want a republican getting a lot of play in this district. Remember, Sherwood only lost by 8, and he strangled his mistress.
June 1, 2007 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink