First off, if any one Democratic congressman or woman currently serving in the House has proven themselves to be a champion for liberal ideals; has been legislatively prolific; is willing to get down & dirty in debates on the House floor, and is unabashedly unapologetic for calling out the opposition party for bad policy... it's Alan Grayson.

The story's written by Dave Weigel via Slate.com: The Congressman Formerly Known as Crazy - Why Alan Grayson is now the most effective member of the House.:



Alan Grayson is running 40 minutes late, but his reason is sound. At 11:30 a.m., the House Science Committee started marking up NASA’s funding bill, adding and subtracting whatever they could. At 5 p.m., the committee was still at it. When the members finished a half hour later, the only headline they’d generate would be about the killing of a program to “send a robotic mission to a small asteroid by 2016.” Grayson, once again, had walked under the radar. The Democratic congressman from Orlando had convinced the Republican-run committee to adopt five of his amendments. One would bar “the federal government from awarding contracts to corporations convicted of fraud,” and another would force NASA to “consider American public-private partnership human space flight” before it partnered with foreign space programs. Each was getting him closer to an unheralded title: The congressman who’s passed more amendments than any of his 434 peers. “We’ve passed 31 amendments in committee so far,” says Grayson. “Hardly any Democrats who put in amendments put in any effort to get to 218. They just think they’ve accomplished something when it’s ruled in order, and that’s the end of the story.” (my emphasis)

That, my friends, seems to be a big part of the problem in Congress. Everyone seems to be there just for the paychecks, the perks and the profitable post-congressional careers.

Second, in order to be effective in Congress one must actually get elected. And, whether it's substantially self-funding a campaign -- like Grayson did back in 2008 -- or it's raising money like he did in 2012, until we can manage to reform the way campaigns are financed, (i.e., public financed campaigns) we need good congress critters that can do both.



For someone supposedly so polarizing, Rep. Grayson doesn't seem to have any problems raising money. In fact, according to the chart at right provided by OpenSecrets.org, Grayson is much more proficient at raising money than your average congress critter. Especially this last go-around in 2012.

OpenSecrets.org



Cycle Source of Funds, 2013-2014, Campaign Cmte. only -Individual Contributions - $357,314 (71%) - Small Individual Contributions - $298,575 (59%)

- Large Individual Contributions - $58,739 (12%)

- PAC Contributions - $64,775 (13%)

- Candidate self-financing - $0 (0%)

- Other - $81,479 (16%)

The last time the media noticed Alan Grayson, he was a freshman Democrat, a member of the 2008 Obama wave, trying and failing to survive 2010. Grayson joked that Dick Cheney left a “torture rack” in the White House, said that the Republican health care plan was for people to “die quickly”—so on and so on, all very helpful to a press trying to prove that the Tea Party had an ideological match on the left. Grayson went down by 18 points to the blandly conservative former state senator Daniel Webster, or “Taliban Dan,” as a Grayson ad called him. The Washington Post eulogized him as “a controversial liberal icon that many in the Democratic Party weren’t sad to see lose.” Grayson’s back because the last round of redistricting created a new, safe seat in metro Orlando. He won it, reclaiming a job he says he wants to keep “for a long, long time.” In doing so he’s stopped being a Republican target and started getting along with the majority. In his office, the only evidence that he used to irritate the other party is a plaque on his desk: "I Have Flying Monkeys and I’m Not Afraid to Use Them." He doesn’t use them on Republicans anymore. “I don’t think they feel the same sort of glee,” he says. “I don’t see them using me as a fundraising ploy.”

That’s how he attached a ban on funding for “unmanned aerial vehicles,” i.e. drones, to the homeland security bill. He swears that they don’t back away from him because of his old persona—well, his relationship with Webster is “strained,” but he points out that Webster won re-election by 5,000 votes and Grayson won with 70,000. Never mind that. Are the members of Congress more forgiving than members of the press? “It’s either that, or we’re all senile,” he says. “In some cases it’s a short conversation. In some cases it’s a long conversation. In some cases, they’re desperate to talk to somebody. Some members are actually very lonely people.”

The ratio between small and large individual contributions is pretty good.Grayson and his able staff are both enthusiastic and diligent. They scan every bill that comes out of the majority. And they also scan amendments to bills passed by previous Congresses that died along the way at some point in the process but appear to be ripe for resurrection. They then mold those amendments to be more appealing to the libertarian wing of the GOP, and Grayson does all the lobbying to his colleagues himself.Psychology may be a prerequisite in Congress these days, especially when dealing with a bunch of whiny, neurotic children. lol

Which brings us to the third reason why Grayson is qualified to be a future Speaker.

If he's having trouble pushing legislation past the Republicans, his fail-safe position is to try his best to tie the bill or amendment to a bedrock libertarian principle. And if he runs into resistance on his own side of the aisle he takes his case to his cohorts in the progressive and/or black caucuses. Together, those two caucuses make up almost half of all Democrats and they always have to be reckoned with these days. But most of the time, he needs his people skills with the opposition.



“They might come from the perspective that Barack Obama is a horrible president, and I come from the perspective of being critical of the military-industrial complex.” Grayson added one amendment to the last homeland security funding bill that prohibited “funds in the bill from being used in contravention of the First, Second, or Fourth Amendments.” That was surprisingly easy to do. “We knew they couldn’t vote against it,” he says. “They wouldn’t want to roll call vote against the Constitution. They’re constantly trying to acquire the Constitution for their own purposes, and claim that they’re the guardians of it, so we knew that couldn’t fail.”

That's some brilliant strateegerizing goin' on there.

According to Weigel, Grayson really enjoyed the passing of that particular amendment. He expressed his delight when writing the legislation into the Congressional Record.



“The intent of Congress with this legislation,” Grayson wrote, “is to place an absolute prohibition on any DHS involvement of any type or to any degree with any surveillance of Americans without specificity or without probable cause, such as the National Security Agency’s recently revealed surveillance program.” That, he says, was “the benefit of future courts, for the benefit of future administrations

... “vote against any and every cut to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security benefits” in a theoretical sequestration fix. Democrats never got the chance to act on that threat, because, paradoxically, the Republican House’s inability to cut big deals has kept entitlements off the block. “You never heard people say—why doesn’t Pelosi do more?” says Grayson. “Some people would say, why doesn’t she do less? There are Democrats who’ve said since then, I wish she didn’t do so much. But now it’s a common feeling even among the lobbyists that the Republican leadership doesn’t deliver for them. All they do is put out these ‘message’ bills.”

The lack of support from both the minority leadership and from the other end of Pennsylvania Ave. hasn't stopped him. He claims he never talks to the White House before pushing amendments. And in some ways that's a good thing. Perhaps the most audaciously progressive move he's made since reentering Congress was to co-write a letter to leadership with Californian freshman congressman Mark Takano pledging to...I think Grayson's secret to success is because of his flexibility. And he exhibits that flexibility without genuflecting or compromising his liberal ideals. He's been able to pass things that had no business passing in such an obstructionist environment. And the ones he didn't succeed in passing have been close.

Weigel leaves us with this little anecdote.



Halfway through our conversation, Grayson has to trek from his office to the House floor for a series of votes. He disappears into the chamber, emerging after almost everybody else. On the way out he spots Florida Rep. Trey Radel, a 37-year-old freshman who that morning had written an op-ed about his love for hip-hop. “I need to talk to you when you have a moment,” says Grayson. Radel actually has plenty of time, and the two congressmen stroll back to their offices, just out of earshot. When they’re done, Grayson returns to his staff and informs them that “Radel says yes” on another NSA-limiting amendment. “[California Rep. Dana] Rohrabacher says yes,” he says. “We need four more.” They’re going to be gettable. “These guys despise the NSA.”

Whether I made the case or not, Alan Grayson is a certainly a force to be reckoned with. He's not looking to get rich, (reportedly worth around $54 million ) He has the guts. He has the progressive mindset. He has the skills. (both people and legislative) And he's got the drive to live up to the title of liberal icon.

End of case

You can donate to Grayson's campaign Congressmanwithguts.com.