I accompanied a friend this morning to 2nd Congressional District Congresswoman Thelma Drake’s Coffee with the Candidate. We arrived just about the same time as Drake so I had a chance to introduce the two of them before we headed into the room.
My friend had previously announced that she was voting for Drake. Since I was aware of the scheduled coffee meetings because of Drake’s earlier mailings, I suggested we attend this one. When she picked me up, she had Drake’s latest mailing with her, the first she had received. Given that my own household had received two copies of the mailing, I figured that this latest mailing had gone to the entire 2nd 😉
Since the mailing was just delivered yesterday, I didn’t figure many people would have a chance to attend. I was wrong. I expected maybe 10-15 people. Instead, the room was quite full and extra chairs had to be added. I would guess that there were at least 30 or so people in the room. One of Drake’s staffers from the Euclid Road office was there, but no campaign staff. For the most part, Drake was on her own.
As we arrived at the entrance to the library, a couple of MoveOn.org people were there, waving large red hands. After we sat down, several people who I know from other events came in. This definitely was not a completely Drake crowd. That mailing had pulled in some folks who, until yesterday, were unaware of the coffees, and they came armed.
The gathering got a bit rowdy but never out of hand. Drake did a good job of handling some difficult questions, including several related to this morning’s (I think she said it was 1:30am when they voted) vote on the minimum wage/estate tax bill, which is supposed to cost approximately $300 billion. Drake mentioned that there were several other provisions in the bill – I believe she said 17 – outside of the minimum wage hike and estate tax reduction. (One she specifically mentioned was the $250 above-the-line deduction for teachers.) When asked, however, Drake admitted that she would not have voted for a simple increase in the minimum wage without the estate tax provision.
One person asked her about the offshore drilling. This allowed Drake to demonstrate her in-depth knowledge of the issue and temporarily quieted the crowd. Another question about the ability to get to know people on the other side of the aisle elicited a response from Drake that I think is telling about why Congress can’t get any work done: Drake said that little time is spent with members of the other party. She said that people used to stay in Washington on weekends and other days, but in this day of cheap airfares, nearly everybody goes home. So there is little time to develop relationships with folks outside of your own group. She did mention that the chair of one of her committees paired newer (freshman and sophomore) representatives with more experienced ones on sub-committees and this allowed her the opportunity to get to know a Democrat from Georgia (whose name I didn’t get).
There was a bit of talk about immigration and the issue of children born in the US being automatically made citizens. Drake said that she believes that the extension of the 14th amendment (which deals with slavery) is not correct and that other exceptions to children born here – such as those of diplomats – already exist. She believes that we need to look at the temporary worker rules and have companies that bring in such workers pay for their health care. Existing rules on immigration are not being enforced and she disagrees with the proposal in the Senate (and that of President Bush) on the dealing with the problem of immigration.
She voiced support for the program which listens in on phone calls, saying that for landlines, such wiretapping is done only when one person on the call is a known terrorist. Another program for access to cell phone calls she also supports.
One point that really stood out in my mind was Drake’s position on representation. She mentioned something about how well people represent the districts that they are elected from. My friend questioned her on this, since Drake had said to several people that it was obvious that some people who she represented disagreed with her. For herself, she said she makes decisions on what she thinks is best. She believes that is why the people elected her and if they disagree with this approach, they should vote for somebody else.
The meeting ran beyond the scheduled noon cutoff and Drake (who must be exhausted, by the way) answered all questions. Aftwerwards, I asked Drake whether this meeting was typical and she said no. I didn’t think so 😉
There are 4 more of these coffees scheduled over the next few weeks:
08/05 10:00 AM – 11:30 AM Kempsville Area Library
08/12 10:30 AM – 12:00 PM Pretlow Branch Library
08/18 10:30 AM – 12:00 PM Princess Anne Area Library
08/19 10:30 AM – 12:00 PM Willow Oaks Branch Library
(I may make the one on the 19th since a couple of my sisters live in the 2nd in Hampton and they may want to attend. I like everybody to vote with as much information as possible and they have already heard Phil Kellam speak.)
Oh – and my friend’s vote? Don’t ask 😆
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Sounds like she had a tough crowd, but she handled the questions well. I disagree with nothing that she answered.
Vivian, great reporting.
Jim – I’ll bet you had an easier time this morning than she did 😉
My sense was that Drake ducked some hard questions where her alligence to the Neocons and the death of the Constitution may not have played well, even with rabid supporters. Further, although Drake can be charming and disarming, she too often did not answer questions, talked around them, or simply misdirected the listeners or lied. Many of her “facts” were questionable. What disturbs me most is, as Burke so aptly put it, “all that it takes for evil to triumph is for good men [and women] to do nothing.” By doing nothing to redirect her party to eschew corruption and to adhere to the Constitution, Drake fosters the evil that now controls the highest levels of our government. And, what I can not forgive is her ignorance (or just plain lying) about critical issues such as COPE and net neutrality. Simply by being a rubber-stamp for the Bush administration, Drake is a very dangerous and ill-informed person. By willingly taking bribes from monied interests such as the telecom lobby and military contractors and then voting in their interests and not that of her constituents or the country in general, Drake herself has lost all moral authority. Virginia deserves better than Drake!
Vivian, so now we are allowing people to call someone a crook on your website? I know it isn’t against the law, but it is in extremely poor taste. Sure people have the right to write what they want, but you don’t have to allow it to be posted on your blog. Frankly, if you decide to leave it on the website it means you are an enabler of this preposterous trash coming fromt the MoveOn whackos. Is that who you are? I don’t think so.
Ellen – I didn’t think that she ducked the questions. A lot of what was said to her was not in the form of a question but was instead in the form of a statement. She did say several times that the person speaking was entitled to their opinion 🙂 I really do not recall (and my notes do not show) any comments of hers on COPE or net neutrality. Are you sure we were at the same coffee? 😆
“Your conscience” – this blog doesn’t censor comments, unless they contain profanity. There is a good reason for not censoring or editing comments: once a blog owner starts doing that, we open ourselves up to lawsuit.
I think I have been pretty clear about the what I think about the MoveOn ads.
Conscience — someone’s name is next to that post. I’d let it stay.
In fact, I’d go so far as to argue Ellen’s post has more credibility than your own pseudonymous post… doesn’t it?
Great post, Vivian.
Who cares what the name of the person is making the argument? Why does it make it more credible just because a name is attached, unless we attach more weight to some people’s names than others. It is the ideas and the soundness of the argument that is debated on blogs, not personalities. I hope…
to “your (anonymous) conscience”
Why don’t you take the time to learn a little about what Move On truly is about before resorting to childish name-calling? Those of us who you call “whackos” are committed to NOT standing by & allowing “evil to trimumph” by doing nothing. How is speaking out about injustice considered to be something only “whackos” do????
Think for yourself rather than parroting the “lamestream” press, which perpetuates continual fraud on the American people. It has a specific culture which functions within specific corporate controlled parameters; it is the new propoganda. As Americans we are SOOOOOO being conned by neo-cons. Their self-serving interests are ALWAYS at the expense of regular citizens & the working class. Wake up!
“Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.”–Thomas Jefferson
Move On invites you to have a one-on-one civilized discussion with one of our representatives–if you have the guts. I suspect not. But you are apparently drowning in denial about the Neocons complicity in the relentless devestation of our government, our communities, our country & the world. Your denial-your loss.
Wake up, oh slumbering shy one.
Ann Williams,
c/o Move On &
Hampton Roads Independent Media Coalition
PS–With appreciation to Vivian for providing a community vehicle for dialogue!