In Iowa, the governor's legislative will can be overridden; Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal's cannot.

And that means if Iowa Republicans expect any of their agenda to be enacted over the next two years, they’ll first need permission from the famously thoughtful and pragmatic Gronstal:

His position as majority leader gives him sole authority to decide what bills the Senate will debate. Republicans will take control of the governor's office and Iowa House next month, but Gronstal will control the fate of their agenda for state government.

Everyone who knows him well, Republican or Democrat, describes him as a brilliant strategist. Although his wit and genial disposition usually mask his competitive side, he can be a bare-knuckled brawler.

At stake for Iowans will be action or stalemate on bills to ban same-sex marriage, restrict abortion, cut taxes and make the regulatory climate more business-friendly.

In sessions past, Senator Gronstal has had good working relationships with colleagues of all political stripes, no matter which party held the majority. But he knows that this year, it could be more difficult than ever to convince GOP legislators to behave reasonably.

Senator Gronstal earned national prominence for his promise to uphold the Iowa Supreme Court ruling that established Iowa as a marriage equality state – a promise he’s kept, repeatedly, using the full authority of the Majority Leader’s office. That, in turn, means Senator Gronstal will probably be the #2 target of national conservative groups in 2012, second only to President Obama.

But Senator Gronstal has built a long record as a thoughtful pragmatist and a brilliant legislator, able to tackle complex issues and build support for legislation across the political spectrum. And the former shipping clerk’s notorious frugality means he’ll always be in touch with the day-to-day struggles of working families in western Iowa:

For Gronstal, repairing a vacuum cleaner has a quick and satisfying finish, unlike crafting legislation, where the end game often isn't clear. A determined Mr. Fix-it, he once jacked up his house and built a new foundation entirely on his own. (He was the only guy in his neighborhood with a 30-ton hydraulic jack. He had his own dump truck, too, purchased for $400 with a blown engine that he replaced himself.)

Gronstal is one of five children of the vice president of Council Bluffs Savings Bank - a bank he and relatives still own - and he was taught to live beneath his means. When his two daughters were little, if a balloon popped, they'd say: "Save the pieces. Daddy will fix it."

Life in the Gronstal household has long meant used clothing, well-worn furniture, infrequent vacations, no credit card debt, and no-frills cars.

Since Senator Gronstal became the Chairman of our DLCC Board of Directors, he’s brought that same combination of earnestness, brilliance, and frugality to our organization. And as any of our visitors will attest, we have the well-worn furniture to prove it.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 21, 2010

Contact: Carolyn Fiddler
202.449.6754
fiddler@dlcc.org

Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee Executive Director Michael Sargeant released the following statement today on the outcome of the U.S. Census Bureau’s reapportionment announcement.

"Democrats have been planning for reapportionment and redistricting for several years now. By working with legislative leaders in the states and other partners on the data and legal aspects of the process, we'll be fighting against all GOP efforts to execute hyper-partisan gerrymanders in states where they control one or more components of redistricting, regardless of whether that state is gaining or losing congressional seats."

Delegate Bob Marshall has been busy.

As soon as the U.S. Senate voted on Saturday to repeal the policy that prevents gay soldiers from serving openly, the Virginia Republican was already dreaming up ways to continue discrimination in the Commonwealth just a little bit longer.

Responding to the federal repeal of the military policy banning open gays from serving in the armed forces, a state lawmaker in Virginia plans to fight back with legislation that bars "active homosexuals" from serving in the Virginia National Guard.

Delegate Robert G. Marshall said the Constitution reserves states with the authority to do so and that he'll introduce a bill in the state General Assembly next year that ensures the "the effect of the 1994 federal law banning active homosexuals from America's military forces will apply to the Virginia National Guard."

"With the repeal of 'don't ask, don't tell,' President Obama seeks to pay back his homosexual political supporters," the Prince William County Republican said.

Mother Jones took a look not only at the GOP Delegate’s reasoning behind his forthcoming piece of legislation, but also at his record of denying equal rights in Virginia and railing against the Obama administration.

He insists that his bill is strategic, but in fact, it's laced with states' rights reasoning: "After 232 years of prohibiting active, open homosexuals from enlisting in our military, President Obama and a majority in Congress are conducting a social experiment with our troops and our national security," he says.

It's not the first time Marshall's railed against federal power. He's decried "Obamacare" as "a power grab by the Obama Administration and Congress to extend their insidious reach further into our private lives" and sympathizes with activists who favor a "Repeal Amendment"—a constitutional amendment that would give states the right to disobey any federal laws they find objectionable.

If Del. Marshall’s name rings a bell at all, it may have something to do with the national notoriety he gained earlier this year by saying that children born with disabilities were God’s punishment for women who have ended a pregnancy.

Del. Marshall’s other greatest hits include the following:

[Marshall]'s best known in the state as an ardent opponent of abortion and gay rights. He sponsored a successful 2006 amendment to the state's constitution that banned gay marriage. And in the late '80s, he was the research director of the American Life League, arguing that all birth control should be illegal. In 1989, when asked by a Boston Globe reporter whether abortion should be permitted in cases of incest, he replied, "What if incest is voluntary?...Sometimes it is."

How fortunate for Del. Marshall that his sentiments on government involvement in private life are flexible enough to accommodate all of his efforts to deny others whichever rights its suits him to withhold.

With Virginia’s legislative session set to begin on January 12, we’ll be watching for further antics from Del. Marshall and his ilk in the right-wing fringe of the Republican Caucus.

Winning a previously Republican state legislative seat in this challenging cycle required an extraordinary Democratic candidate.

But extraordinary candidates were one of the hallmarks of the campaigns that made it onto our 2010 Essential Races list. Many of those extraordinary Democrats won in November, proving that Democrats can stay on offense even when the odds are stacked against us.

Below are four of those success stories from 2010 in which all Democrats should take pride.

Dan Muhlbauer in Iowa (HD-51)

On Election Night, Dan captured a previously Republican state House seat in rural Western Iowa. And he didn’t just eke out a win – Dan shocked political observers with his convincing 58%-41% victory.

It was clear from the start that Dan was a special candidate. He’s operated a family farm in Western Iowa for 32 years, while serving the community with local food banks, civic organizations, and as Chairman for the Crawford County Supervisors. In short, Dan represents the best of Democratic values in rural Iowa, and we know he’ll make his community proud.

Like many winning candidates this year, Dan focused his campaign on job creation, concentrating specifically on providing the new transportation needed to attract jobs in a rural district like his.

During the campaign, he explained that part of his platform in an interview with KCIM Radio.

Richard Pan in California (AD-5)

Out of 120 state legislative seats in California, only one seat changed hands from one party to the other in this year’s elections – and that feat was accomplished by Democratic pediatrician and Assemblyman-Elect Richard Pan.

A political outsider, Dr. Pan is a pediatrician and an award-winning educator at UC Davis Children’s Hospital. He has a long history of community involvement, including as a board member for the United Way California Capitol Region, the BloodSource regional blood bank, and other community groups.

Dr. Pan defeated the author of the infamous Proposition 8 ballot measure that took away the rights of hundreds of thousands of Californians to marry the person they love. What’s more, Dr. Pan won his upset victory in a district with a narrow Republican registration advantage – demonstrating that even in a Republican district in a challenging year for Democrats, Californians don’t want to be governed by a far-right social agenda.

Because of his Republican opponent’s involvement with Proposition 8, outside special interests led by national anti-equality groups flooded the airwaves with attack ads against Dr. Pan.

But Dr. Pan fought back with his own message of finding common-sense solutions for job creation and health care to successfully capture this seat from the GOP.

Linda Greenstein in New Jersey (SD-14)

Before her upset victory in a state Senate special election this November, in which she defeated an incumbent Republican appointee, Linda Greenstein spent a decade in the state Assembly fighting for good government and ethics reform.

Her effectiveness and tenacity in the fight for reform have earned Linda respect across the political spectrum – no small feat for a staunchly progressive legislator who supports top priorities like education and equal rights.

Voters in this swing district clearly shared that respect, bucking the national trend and delivering a convincing victory for Senator-Elect Greenstein rather than the incumbent GOP appointee.

The key to Senator-Elect Greenstein’s win was a focused campaign based on job creation – yet another issue where the candidate’s impressive record reinforced her words:

But she also built a professional campaign team that produced some eye-catching TV ads that helped cut through the standard campaign clutter. Senator-Elect Greenstein’s “stencil” ad is a perfect example.

This campaign was especially important because this was the only GOP-held legislative district up for election this year in New Jersey. Senator-Elect Greenstein’s victory helps set the stage for 2011, when the entire New Jersey legislature will be up; it also provides New Jersey Democrats a needed boost at a key moment in the new GOP governor’s administration.

Kendall Van Dyk in Montana (SD-25)

This November, Kendall defeated an incumbent GOP state Senator by just 4 votes out of more than 6,200 cast and it’s easy to see why his community trusts him enough to send him to the Montana Senate.

Born and raised on a cattle ranch outside Three Forks, Kendall’s made a career out of protecting Montana’s natural beauty as a coordinator for Trout Unlimited. Kendall stood true to those principles after he was elected to the state House, winning the 2009 “Legislator of the Year” award from the Montana Wildlife Federation.

One of Kendall’s top legislative accomplishments in the state House was a landmark stream access law – an important priority for sportsmen, conservationists, and others in Montana:

Despite his successful fundraising and his district’s inexpensive media market, Kendall built his campaign as a true grassroots effort, inspiring waves of volunteers and taking his message directly to voters through door-to-door campaigning and direct mail.

And with a final margin of just four votes – or 0.06% - it’s clear that every hour Kendall and his volunteers spent knocking on doors made a difference. He and his supporters should be extremely proud of their hard work.

Legislators and lobbyists often work together closely, but a recent investigation by The Oklahoman revealed that a Republican state Senator has developed a relationship with a lobbyist that was anything but professional.

A state senator and lobbyist who are having a romantic affair worked together to steer a lucrative state contract toward a private company that had hired the lobbyist, an investigation by The Oklahoman has revealed.

The wife of Sen. Harry Coates said Monday her husband has told her he is having an affair with lobbyist Haley Atwood. Atwood, 29, who didn't deny the affair with Coates, 60, also is married.

At issue here is not the affair itself, but rather the inappropriate influence that may have been wielded by the lobbyist to secure a lucrative contract and even change state law.

State officials last week announced plans to award a $10 million-a-year state contract for a new juvenile center to the Ada Youth Academy Authority, which has selected a private operator, Rite of Passage, to run the new center.

Rite of Passage earlier this year hired Atwood for consulting work.

Coates, R-Seminole, and Atwood have since been actively involved in helping Rite of Passage and the Ada group secure the juvenile center contract, records and interviews show.

According to the AP, the Oklahoma Attorney General’s office has involved itself in the matter.

The Oklahoma Attorney General’s Office has launched an investigation into a $10 million-a-year contract for a new juvenile facility awarded to an Ada group working with a lobbyist romantically linked to a state senator.

The contract was to be signed Monday, but was delayed after The Oklahoman reported Republican state Sen. Harry Coates and lobbyist Haley Atwood were having an extramarital affair and Coates helped steer the contract to Ada Youth Academy Authority. Neither Coates, 60, nor Atwood, 29, would comment on the alleged relationship.

Companies whose bids for the contract for the juvenile center failed allege that Sen. Coates, Atwood, and the Director of the Office of Juvenile Affairs “rigged” the bidding process to favor Atwood’s client.

In addition to potential improprieties surrounding the contract for the center, records demonstrate that lobbyist Atwood sought the change in state law that allowed Oklahoma to send juveniles to the proposed facility.

The practice wasn't previously possible, but agency officials and Atwood were successful this year in lobbying the Legislature to change state law to allow it, records and interviews show.

Rite of Passage operates its academies as charter schools and couldn't have accepted state juvenile inmates if not for lawmakers changing the law this year.

Meanwhile, GOP Sen. Coates reportedly has refused to sign the separation papers drawn up by his wife’s attorney. Sen. Coates, who was narrowly reelected this year to his seat in Senate District 28, featured his wife on his campaign literature, and she actively campaigned for him. She knew nothing of the affair until Sen. Coates broke the news to her the day after the election.

While this year was full of challenges for Democrats, Election Day brought successes, too.
Democrats won victories across the country, large and small, and even though many of them didn’t earn front-page headlines the next morning, we have plenty of reasons to be proud of what was accomplished.

Starting with the three below, we’re going to highlight some of the Democratic winners from this year’s Essential Races program whose victories make us especially proud.
Given how close some of these races were in the end, they’re a real testament to how everyone can make a difference for the progressive cause – by volunteering, donating just a few more dollars to the right campaign, or even simply reminding a few friends to get out and vote.

Stay tuned next week for another installment in our “Meet the Winners” series!

David Carlucci in New York (SD-38)

David captured a previously Republican state Senate seat in Rockland and Orange Counties, New York, winning by a strong margin to become the youngest member of the New York state Senate.

A true progressive and a reformer, David ran on a platform of creating a more open and accountable government – and that promise of reform was backed by his own experience and track record as Clarkstown’s popular and well-respected Town Clerk.

That track record was the subject of one of New York’s most eye-catching ads from the 2010 cycle:

As his campaign continued to catch fire in 2010, David’s district was included in the final installment of the DLCC Essential Races program. These Grassroots Essential Races were chosen entirely through grassroots nominations, and David’s race received the third-most nominations of any in the country (out of more than 6,000 districts with elections this year).

David talked about his campaign and what in means for New York in an interview with Capitol Tonight:

Kate Segal in Michigan (HD-62)

An expert on health policy, it took first-term state Representative Kate Segal less than two years to rise to become Vice-Chair of the Health Policy Committee. But her tenacity and support for a progressive health care vision made Rep. Segal a top target of Michigan Tea Party activists, who fielded one of their own against her in 2010.

Like many Tea Party targets, Rep. Segal endured withering, misleading attacks throughout the campaign, but she focused her campaign on her success helping to retain local businesses and protect important civic projects like the Michigan Youth ChalleNGe Academy, which she discusses in the video below.

In September, Rep. Segal’s efforts were recognized when she was named “Legislator of the Year” by the Michigan Works! Association, a two-decade-old group representing employment and job training agencies around the state.

Thanks to her own focused campaign and her record of accomplishments, Rep. Segal not only turned back her right-wing challenger, but she did so with a convincing 55%-45% victory.

For her second term, Rep. Segal has already been elected by her Democratic colleagues to the second-highest position in their House caucus – Democratic Floor Leader. Rep. Segal is also now one of the newest members of the DLCC Board of Directors.

Larry Seaquist in Washington (HD-26-2)

Before joining the Washington legislature in 2006, Democratic state Representative Larry Seaquist led a storied career as a former US Navy Captain and Pentagon strategist, commanding four ships in his 32 years of service (including the Battleship Iowa).

But despite Rep. Seaquist’s unique history and personal popularity, his politically competitive district was vulnerable in this year’s elections.

Rep. Seaquist decided to try and break through the usual clutter of election-year TV ads with this simpler, yet effective ad that reminded voters of his long history of service and effective leadership in the legislature:

Swing voters rewarded Rep. Seaquist for his commitment to Washington’s public schools and transportation infrastructure by narrowly re-electing him to a third term this fall. His victory, in turn, helped Democrats retain their majority in the state House.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 7, 2010

Contact: Carolyn Fiddler
202.449.6754
fiddler@dlcc.org

The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee’s Board of Directors met today to elect leadership for the coming year. Iowa Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal was elected to his fifth term as Chair of the DLCC. Nevada Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford will serve as the DLCC’s Vice Chair, and New Hampshire Sen. Sylvia Larsen will become the Board Secretary. Pennsylvania Rep. Mike Gerber was reelected Treasurer. Virginia House Democratic Leader Ward Armstrong will remain Finance Chair.

New Board members include California Speaker John Perez, Delaware House Majority Whip Valerie Longhurst, Ohio House Democratic Leader Armond Budish, Michigan House Democratic Floor Leader Kate Segal, and Missouri House Democratic Leader Michael Talboy.

"The election of this leadership team marks an important step forward for the DLCC,” said DLCC Executive Director Michael Sargeant. “As we reflect on the challenges and successes of the past cycle and plan for the 2011 and 2012 state legislative elections, this Board of Directors will help Democrats across the country continue to fight for the issues that matter.”

"I am honored to continue my leadership of the DLCC as we work to elect Democratic state legislators nationwide,” added DLCC Chair and Iowa Senate Majority Leader Gronstal. “Democrats in statehouses will continue our hard work to reverse the damage our states have suffered from Republican policies by continuing our efforts to create and save jobs while balancing state budgets. In tough times Democratic legislators will continue to provide steady leadership and make the wise investments needed to move our states forward.”

In a vote that was as suspenseful as it was significant for thousands of Illinois families, the Democratically-controlled Illinois legislature has approved that state’s first law granting same-sex couples the right to form civil unions:

The bill would give gay couples the chance to enjoy several of the same rights as married couples, ranging from legal rights on probate matters to visiting a partner in a hospital that won’t allow anyone but relatives into a patient’s room. (…)

Sen. Heather Steans, D-Chicago, was one of many referencing Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement as she urged colleagues to join her in “bending the moral arc of justice.”

“This is a legacy vote,” Steans said. “It makes a statement about the justice for which we stand.”

Sen. David Koehler, D-Peoria, said he sees the issue “through the eyes of a father who has a gay child,” a daughter who “doesn’t have the same rights” as his other children.

The measure passed handily in the state Senate but was much closer in the state House, where it passed with just a single vote to spare. The law itself will take effect in June of 2011. Illinois’s Democratic governor, who literally applauded the final vote, has promised to sign the bill in a public ceremony shortly after the New Year.

It’s unclear whether this was the Governor’s intent, but delaying that ceremony until next year will make it an excellent symbolic gesture, proving that many states’ dramatic progress on equal rights will continue far beyond 2010.

Republicans captured a bare majority in the Colorado House by just a single seat – with one race going down to just a handful of votes. But apparently, legislative Republicans view that as a mandate to invite hate into the halls of the state capitol. Literally:

Republican legislators Monday hosted an informational meeting to discuss immigration in Colorado, but the Colorado Independent has learned two of the presenters invited to speak were from organizations founded by white supremacist John Tanton. One of those organizations, The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), has been named a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

In addition to FAIR, The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) — which also presented at the meeting — was founded by Tanton.

Tanton has argued that for U.S. culture to survive, the country must maintain a clear white majority. The SPLC refers to him as the “racist architect of the modern anti-immigrant movement.”

That meeting was held inside the state capitol.

Yet despite the SPLC’s reports that detail FAIR’s long history of peddling racist conspiracy theories and employing members of white supremacist groups in key leadership positions, Republican legislators were unmoved:

“If you’re trying to say they have an agenda, well, I don’t know about that, but I do know the Southern Poverty Law Center has an agenda that I have never been impressed with,” [GOP Sen. Kevin] Lundberg added.

The meeting was intended at least in part to be a springboard for Colorado Republicans seeking to pass an Arizona-style anti-immigrant bill. To pass such a bill, Republicans must first convince Coloradans that their motive is based on policy, rather than hate.

But with top GOP leaders already aligning their legislative caucus with hate groups and denigrating the organizations founded to combat hatred, that’s going to be a tough sell.

A couple of weeks ago we introduced you Texas Republican state Rep. Leo Berman (R-Tyler), who filed a bill that would require any candidate for president or vice president of the United States to show his or her birth certificate to the Texas secretary of state.

The fact that GOP Rep. Berman has proposed legislation as a result of his belief in a soundly disproved, racially charged conspiracy theory has attracted the attention of some national media outlets.

One such outlet was CNN. On Monday night, Anderson Cooper aired an interview he’d conducted with Rep. Berman on his nightly show. In a segment over 12 minutes in length, a patient and respectful Cooper took on and tore down each of Rep. Berman’s supposed “facts” and assumptions.

Check out the video:

While too long to post in its entirety, here are some excerpts from the transcript, in which Cooper takes on the birth certificate nonsense and explains that any American could travel to Pakistan during the time Obama visited that country as a student. Cooper also helpfully points out that while Rep. Berman insists on seeing President Barack Obama’s college records, he raised no objections to President George W. Bush withholding his own.

COOPER: Representative Berman, you've said this bill is needed because -- and I quote -- "we have a president who the American people don't know whether he was born in Kenya or some other place." Do you personally believe that President Obama was not born in Hawaii?

BERMAN: Well, you know, I really don't know. If you look at my white hair, you can tell I have been around for a while. And I have known everything about every president that I have come across for the last 70-some-odd years. I don't know anything about President Obama. I wish I did.

COOPER: How can you say that?... Because, I mean, there is a -- a birth certificate. There's a certificate of live birth, which is what the State of Hawaii sends out. We're showing a picture of it to our viewers. It's got a raised seal. And it's got the stamp of the -- the -- the -- the health register from the state. Why -- why isn't that good enough?

BERMAN: Well, because it's not an original birth certificate. It doesn't show the parents' place of birth. And, also, we know for certain that President Obama's father was born in Kenya. Since he was born in Kenya, in -- that was a British protectorate. President Obama was born in 1961. And with his father being a British citizen, at least, President Obama, we think holds dual citizenship.

COOPER: Well, actually, technically that's not correct. He may have been born with dual citizenship because of the technicality of his father being under the British -- a British subject, being from Kenya, but he automatically lost that in -- in -- when he -- at the age of 23, as anybody -- anybody does. And -- and to say that that document is not –

BERMAN: How do you lose that?

COOPER: To say -- it's just -- it's the way it happened. To say that that document, though, is not the original birth certificate that is what the state sends out when anybody asks for a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii. And it's accepted by the U.S. State Department as valid for a U.S. passport. And -- and the Hawaii state health director has acknowledged that, back in 2008, she has -- and I quote -- "personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Senator Obama's original birth certificate on record, in accordance with state policies and procedures."
….
COOPER: -- do you not acknowledge that the state of Hawaii has the original birth certificate? The health director there says it. The governor of Hawaii says this is not an issue. The governor of Hawaii, who is a Republican, was quoted as saying: "I had my health director, who is a physician by background, go personally view the birth certificate in the birth records at the Department of Health. We issued a news release at the time saying the president was, in fact, born at Kapi'olani Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii. And that is just a fact." Is she lying?

BERMAN: Well, my question to you, then Anderson, is why -- did you see it? I would like to see it.

COOPER: Well, you can go … You can go and see it. The nonpartisan fact-checking organization FactCheck.org, they -- they looked at it. It has a raised seal. They say it's legit.

BERMAN: A raised seal could be put on by any type of machinery. But what I'm saying is where are the president's passports? Where are his travel documents? Where are his school records? Why don't we know anything at all about a president who has such a radical agenda? There is a radical agenda. And I would like to know something about the President of United States.
…
BERMAN: You haven't answered me. You haven't -- tell me, where are his passports?

COOPER: I am answering it. The state of Hawaii, for a fact, has verified the original birth certificate is there. When you -- if you request one, as the Obama campaign did, what they are sent is the certificate of live birth. It's the short form. It's what they send out. Hawaii doesn't send out the long form. Yet, for some reason, in this man's case, it's not acceptable to you.

BERMAN: Well, let me -- let -- let's say it is acceptable to me. Now, let's answer -- let's get on to another point. Where are the president's passports and his travel records which got him to Pakistan in the early '90s, when no U.S. citizen could get to Pakistan at all?
…
COOPER: Sir, I don't mean to contradict you.
BERMAN: I'm sorry?
COOPER: I -- I respect you. And I respect, certainly, your service to this country, but where do you get your information? Because that -- that -- what you have just said is factually incorrect.

BERMAN: I'm getting my information the same place you are getting your information.

COOPER: Ok. Well, how do you know the president traveled to Pakistan, what did you say, in the late '90s, late '80s?

BERMAN: I think it -- late '80s, early '90s. That's common knowledge.
COOPER: That's actually not true, sir.
BERMAN: Everybody knows he traveled to Pakistan -- he had a passport -- when -- U.S. citizens couldn't travel to Pakistan. So, which country –

COOPER: Ok. Sir, he traveled to Pakistan in 1981, and -- and when he was a student. And -- and, actually, Americans could travel to Pakistan then. In fact, I -- we have an article from "The New York Times" from 1981 from the travel section about the joys of traveling in Pakistan. You needed a -- American citizens, I think they needed a 30-day visa, but American citizens could go and travel in Pakistan. That's just an Internet rumor that you're spreading.

BERMAN: No, it's -- it's not an Internet rumor that I'm spreading. I'm sorry, it's not.

COOPER: Sir -- Barack Obama went to Pakistan in 1981, when Americans could go there. It -- it is an Internet rumor that Americans couldn't travel there. And you had the dates completely wrong. You're saying the early '90s.
...
BERMAN: Why won't you show us the long birth certificate or the passport? And why didn't the United States Congress -- we have 535 members of the United States Congress. They are the only body of the federal government in a Constitution that really should be vetting the president of the United States -- because they take an oath of office in which they will support and defend the Constitution against -- of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and they will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, so help me God…. Not a single member of the -- United States Congress raised their hand when they were counting the electoral votes in 2008 -- to say, show us. I want to see it.

COOPER: Sir, just of the points you -- of the points you have raised, the factual points to -- to -- I mean, you're basing legislation on stuff that's basically just rumors and -- and stuff that's been proven to be false. I mean, you -- you say that -- that President didn't release college records. That's true. He hasn't released college records. But, under federal law, the schools can't release them, and he doesn't want to, for whatever reason. And you know what? George W. Bush didn't want to, for whatever reason, from Andover and from Yale. You didn't seem to object about that. You've raised medical records issue, that he didn't fully release his medical records. Well, you know what? John McCain didn't fully release his medical records either. They both did in a very limited way.
…
COOPER: But how much of this is about -- purely about politics? Because look, you -- you -- you are a good person, and you've served your country remarkably in the military, and you're a public servant now. But you're basing legislation on things which have been disproven. And you've said -- in the past, you said -- and I quote -- "I believe that Barack Obama's God's punishment on us today." Is this just about politics? That you don't like this guy, and, therefore, you're raising these objections about him?

BERMAN: Well, it's -- it's a lot more than politics.

Serving the people of Texas in the state House is a lot more than politics, too. Hopefully Republican Rep. Berman will approach real issues facing Texans with the same zeal he’s bringing to the pursuit of a demonstrably false internet rumor.

Too often, talk of health care policy focuses on the numbers and statistics. But from Arizona, we now have the disturbing story of how budget cuts imposed by GOP ideologues in the legislature have broken the state’s promise to save 98 individuals’ lives:

You can hear the weakness in his voice, even though doctors implanted a pacemaker in 2008. They've told [Randy] Shepherd that he needs a heart transplant to survive.

AHCCCS (pronounced like "access") was the only health insurance Shepherd could get because he had a pre-existing condition and, since he was forced to stop working in his plumbing business, little money. The agency authorized his transplant more than a year ago.

"The nurse who's the transplant coordinator did tell me about two months ago that I'm the next one of my body size and blood type, so the next [heart] that's available is mine," Shepherd says. (…)

But as of Oct. 1, AHCCCS said it is unable to pay for Shepherd's transplant. In fact, facing a $1.5 billion budget deficit, Arizona has cut out all state-funded lung transplants, some bone-marrow transplants and some heart transplants — including transplants for the condition Shepherd has.

Unlike typical budget cuts that might end state health coverage for a certain number of citizens – itself a difficult decision to make – Arizona Republicans decided to cancel coverage for procedures that had already been approved for individual patients.

Those individuals then spent months, even years, believing their procedures would be covered when a donor match was found. And that deception, according to University of Pennsylvania bioethicist Arthur Caplan, makes the GOP's decision doubly cruel:

"They then stop trying to raise money, stop trying to see what Uncle Fred might be willing to give them," Caplan says. "They don't have the bake sale. They don't make the appeal in church."

But rather than accept responsibility for their cruelty, Arizona Republicans attempted to deflect blame to Washington, DC – an outright lie that legislative Democrats quickly condemned:

Brewer’s office lied by blaming federal law on Tuesday for their own state cuts to transplants after a man was turned away from a liver transplant. In fact, Brewer and the Republican majority attempted to cut transplants in 2009, then successfully cut transplants in 2010 before the federal health care law passed.

“This was no one else’s choice but that of the Republican majority and Gov. Brewer, and it was theirs only,” said Assistant House Democratic Leader Kyrsten Sinema. “Every other state in the entire country pays for these transplants, every single one. The federal law has nothing to do with this.”

In 2009, the transplant program was saved thanks to a Sinema amendment.

HB 2010, the legislation that explicitly ended converge for most transplants, was opposed by every Democrat in the state legislature and supported by every Republican except one. Unless GOP leaders call a special session to reverse their catastrophically cruel action, January is the earliest that this issue can be addressed.

Meanwhile, those 98 individuals will be forced to suffer through the holiday season unsure of their very survival.