In Ohio, Representative Betty Sutton calls her Republican rival, Tom Ganley, a “dishonest used-car salesman” who has been sued more than 400 times for fraud, discrimination, lying to customers about repairs, overcharging them and endangering their safety. She warns voters, “You’ve heard the old saying, buyer beware!”

In Arizona, Representative Harry E. Mitchell accused his opponent David Schweikert of being “a predatory real estate speculator who snatched up nearly 300 foreclosed homes, been cited for neglect and evicted a homeowner on the verge of saving his house, just to make a buck.”

In New York, Representative Michael Arcuri introduces his Republican challenger, Richard Hanna, as a millionaire who “got rich while his construction company overcharged taxpayers thousands, was sued three times for injuries caused by faulty construction and was cited 12 times for health and safety violations.”

But others, like Time’s Mark Halperin, are noting that some GOP candidates for whom it seems like their previous careers — working at Lehman Brothers, drawing up budgets under the Bush Administration — would paint targets on their backs, are cruising towards strong leads despite the efforts of Democrats to point out their complicity in the financial collapse:

In Ohio, the ex–Lehman Brothers executive (and former long-term Republican Congressman) John Kasich has opened up a comfortable lead over the incumbent Democratic governor Ted Strickland. Also in the Buckeye State, Rob Portman, who headed both the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative in the last Bush Administration, is considered by even most Democratic strategists to be a lock to win an open Senate seat and beat the state’s lieutenant governor Lee Fisher. Ohio voters have been told over and over again, on radio and television, flyers and blast e-mails, about how rich Kasich got in the era of Wall Street plunder, and how Portman contributed to George W. Bush’s record of deficits and the blight of American jobs shipped overseas. But those messages have bounced off like popgun caps rather than pierced like silver bullets.

The same can be said of Florida GOP governor candidate Rick Scott, whose company defrauded the government by submitting false Medicare claims, and Pennsylvania Senate candidate Pat Toomey, who worked in derivatives on Wall Street and later proposed placing seniors’ social security payments in privatized personal savings accounts. But the comfortable leads enjoyed by the GOP candidates in question seem less like a function of backlash from Democratic attack ads and more like an expression of frustration with sitting members of Congress and of support for their opponents, whatever baggage they might carry.

In the broad battle of ideas over the state of the economy, it appears that the GOP has successfully steered concerns away from corporate excess and malfeasance and towards government spending. Going negative gives Democrats a chance to define their opponents as people apart from such broad narratives that they likely feel powerless to change at this point. It might not be the complete answer, but it hardly seems like the source of their woes.

Up to this point, the specifics of Rangel’s alleged missteps have been cloudy, leading most Democrats to reserve judgment in the case, despite the bipartisan ethics committee’s indications that there is “substantial reason to believe” that Rangel broke House rules. Only two Democrats — Rep. Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) and Rep. Walt Minnick (D-Idaho) — have hinted that Rangel should resign, but that trickle of criticism could soon become a flood of condemnations if the statement sounds bad this afternoon.

According to Politico, Rangel has begun to tell his colleagues that he understands they’ll do what’s politically expedient when the time comes. “I know you love me,” he told a junior Democrat. “But love yourself more.”

Republicans, for their part, have had a field day singling out Democratic lawmakers who have thus far held on to campaign funds linked to Rangel, but appear in no rush to call for Rangel’s resignation:

The National Republican Congressional Committee issued more than 40 news releases criticizing lawmakers who had not returned their Rangel-linked donations, such as Rep. Dan Maffei (D-N.Y.), a former Ways and Means aide who has collected more than $80,000 through Rangel. But Republicans have been careful not to call for Rangel’s resignation, hopeful that he will fight out the public trial throughout September and place Democrats in an uncomfortable spot.

House Democratic leadership, on the other hand, continues to withhold judgment, claiming yesterday that they had not spoken to Rangel on the issue. Aware of the potential political cost of an open ethics trial against Rangel in September, they nonetheless appear hesitant to force the 40-year incumbent’s hand. Nor do they seem particularly eager to further alienate the Congressional Black Caucus, which threatened last December to withhold support for financial regulatory reform until the administration did more to help minority-owned businesses.

Yesterday evening, Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, issued a statement that warned against casting premature judgement in the case of the Black Caucus’s co-founder, arguing that such a stance “violates the core American principle of the presumption of innocence.”

For three of the incumbents listed below, this is the second quarter in a row where their challengers beat them in total receipts: Dan Lungren (R-Calif.), Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.)  and Tim Bishop (D-N.Y.). And several incumbents who outraised their challengers through last quarter failed to do so through this second quarter (through March 31): Ron Klein (D-Fla.), John Hall (D-N.Y.), Larry Kissell (D-N.C.), Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), Betty Sutton (D-Pa.) and Jim Gerlach (R-Pa.).

Two members who were outraised as of Jan. 31 have since turned things around: Florida Republican Bill Young and Washington Republican Dave Reichert. Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) was also outraised as of Jan. 31, but Murtha died in February.

Our complete list of House challengers who outraised incumbents:

Randy Altschuler (R-N.Y.): Democratic Rep. Tim Bishop raised a healthy $1.3 million through Mar. 31 and still found himself outraised overall by Altschuler. Altschuler, who is running against Bishop in New York’s 1st District, reported raising $2 million through Mar. 31. But Altschuler’s fundraising take isn’t indicative of donations — he loaned himself more than $1 million. Regardless of how he got the cash, Altschuler was also left with $200,000 more than Bishop after expenses. Republicans have long viewed Bishop as a potential target, due to GOP competitiveness in the district on the local and national levels. The party believes 2010 may be its time to strike because of the national climate and its well-funded challenger — and Altschuler plans to use Bishop’s support for the president’s health care reform plan against him.

Ami Bera (D-Calif.): Republican Rep. Dan Lungren finds himself outraised by first-time candidate Bera yet again in California’s 3rd District, according to the most recent campaign finance totals. Bera, a physician, raised $1.25 million total through March 31, including a $21,000 personal loan, and Bera reported $977,000 remaining in his campaign account after expenses. Lungren, who is serving his eighth term in the House (which includes a stint in the 80′s before he became state attorney general) raised $976,000 total and reported only $650,000 on hand. The district, located in the Sacramento suburbs, supported Barack Obama for president in 2008 while Lungren won re-election with less than 50 percent of the vote. The GOP contends Lungren is favored for re-election, but Democrats have already targeted the race and Bera’s totals are only bolstering their efforts.

Casey Clark (D-Md.): A $50,000 personal loan helped keep Clark ahead of Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.) in total funds raised for the second quarter in a row. Clark reported $152,500 raised through March for his campaign in Maryland’s 6th District, and Bartlett raised $120,000. But Bartlett remains miles ahead of Clark on available cash. Bartlett reported $379,000 on hand while Clark had only $70,000 remaining at the end of March. That cash on hand advantage is one of several reasons why few are watching this 2010 race.

Tim D’Annunzio (R-N.C.): D’Annunzio has self-funded his way to the top in the race against Democratic Rep. Larry Kissell in North Carolina’s 8th District. After adding $850,000 in personal funds to his campaign, D’Annunzio reported $970,500 raised overall, placing him ahead of the other GOP candidates in the race as well as Kissell, who raised $676,000. A major bright spot for Kissell: D’Annunzio is spending virtually all the money in his account ahead of the competitive primary — D’Annunzio reported just $75,000 remaining at the end of March. Kissell reported $326,000 on hand. Republicans had been strongly recruiting for this race, and though they failed to secure their top-tier prospects, the district remains competitive.

Tom Ganley (R-Ohio): Ganley gave himself a whopping $2 million loan this past quarter, which easily made him the strongest total fundraiser in Ohio’s 13th District race. Ganley’s $2 million-plus total put him ahead of Democratic Rep. Betty Sutton, who raised a total of $504,000 through March. Ganley was previously running for Ohio Senate, but dropped out in February to challenge Sutton. Though Ganley’s wealth may complicate things for Democrats, the party’s edge in the district continues to bodes well for Sutton.

Nan Hayworth (R-N.Y.): Hayworth, an ophthalmologist, counts a $400,000 personal loan among her total receipts, which has put her ahead of incumbent Democratic Rep. John Hall in total campaign money raised for the New York 19th District race — $918,000 to $856,000. But it’s Hayworth, not Hall, who will need cash to endure a potentially difficult primary. Multiple Republicans are jockeying for the position, while incumbent Hall stands alone on the Democratic side. Hall reported $553,000 on hand and Hayworth reported $658,500 on hand.

Rich Iott (R-Ohio): A $390,000 loan helped boost Iott’s campaign finance totals ahead of incumbent Democrat Marcy Kaptur in Ohio’s 9th District. Iott was able to report $399,000 raised through Mar. 31 while Kaptur reported $214,000 raised. But Kaptur saved an enormous amount of money from her last re-election bid. Kaptur boasts more than $1 million cash on hand and Iott reported just $179,000 remaining at the end of March. Republicans cast Kaptur, a 14-term incumbent, as vulnerable because of her support for health care reform, but she has a record of consistently winning past re-elections with ease.

Doug Pike (D-Pa.): And the last major self-funder on this list is Pike, who gave himself more than $1 million for a total of $1.6 million raised through March. That total beats out Pennsylvania’s 6th District Rep. Jim Gerlach (R) who reported raising $891,000. Gerlach is not new to competitive re-election races. He is a perennial  target because of his split district (voters their supported Barack Obama for president in 2008 by 17 percentage points while simultaneously re-electing Gerlach). Gerlach has never won an election by more than 52.1 percent.

Allen West (R-Fla.):
At the beginning of the cycle, it was Republican state House Majority Leader Adam Hasner who most worried Rep. Ron Klein’s (D) campaign. When Hasner declined to run, that left Klein’s unsuccessful 2008 challenger, West, in the race. But this cycle, West’s fundraising totals are beginning to overshadow Klein’s and additionally, Republicans have been offering West a national platform for his campaign. West raised more than $2 million through March, while Klein raised $1.9 million. Klein still has an advantage in cash on hand, reporting $2.65 million remaining as of Mar. 31 while West reported just over $1 million remaining. West has been employing the campaign services of BaseConnect, which has drawn scrutiny for its high direct mail costs. But West and other clients have defended the group’s tactics, noting that in addition to fundraising support, BaseConnect has increased his campaign’s visibility and his access to the party.

List of races originated from Center for Responsive Politics information. All fundraising totals were obtained from the Federal Election Commission.

Julissa Treviño contributed to this story.

The result? Of the new vehicles sold under the program, the top three were all Japanese — the Toyota Corolla, Honda Civic and Toyota Camry — and only two of the top 10 were built by one of Detroit’s Big Three automakers.

Fast forward five months, and the same lawmaker who designed the program is now blasting the Japanese for excluding American models from Japan’s own clunkers initiative. The Washington Post reports today that Rep. Betty Sutton (D-Ohio), who sponsored America’s clunkers program, filed a resolution Tuesday “calling for the U.S. trade officials to initiate a trade case against Japan if its program continues to exclude U.S. brands.”

“It’s outrageous,” Sutton said Wednesday. “They specifically designed it to exclude the participation of U.S. auto imports.”

This is no black and white issue. The foreign transplants do plenty of manufacturing in the U.S., creating thousands of jobs, particularly in the Southern states. Still, if the goal was to boost sales in Detroit, Sutton might have fought harder to limit the program to vehicles made in the U.S., as her initial proposal would have done.

The amendment, which would provide financial incentives for people to trade in their old vehicles for more fuel-efficient ones, arose from a compromise between two competing cash-for-clunkers bills, one of which was authored by Sutton and both of which contained much stronger environmental standards than the final product.

Sutton’s bill would have required the new vehicle to get at least 27 miles per gallon, while the bill favored by environmentalists would have mandated 25 percent higher fuel efficiency than the average vehicle in its class. The Sutton amendment — co-sponsored by John Dingell (D-Mich.), Jay Inslee (D-Wash.), Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and Bruce Braley (D-Iowa) — requires just a 4-mpg improvement over the old vehicle for passenger cars, as long as the “clunker” got no more than 18 mpg. And for large light-duty trucks, a driver is eligible for a $3,500 voucher if he or she upgrades to a vehicle that’s only 1 mpg more efficient.

The result is that people can receive $3,500 to buy a car that gets just 22 mpg — this on the same day that President Obama announced new regulations that will mandate that cars get 42 miles to the gallon by 2016.

And so in introducing her amendment, Sutton framed it in terms favoring the auto industry, rather than the environment.

“Over the last few months, auto sales have greatly suffered,” Sutton said. ” … This program has the potential to help change that.”

Another sign that the amendment lacks real environmental teeth: it’s getting broad support from the Republican side of the aisle.

Update 4:45 PM: The amendment just passed, with 50 votes in favor, 4 against and 1 present.

–

TWI is on Twitter. Please follow us here

The measure supported by The Times, sponsored by Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) in the Senate and Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) in the House, would give drivers up to $4,000 for a car that gets 18 miles per gallon or less, if they trade it in for a vehicle that is 25 percent more fuel-efficient than the average in its class. The alternative, sponsored by Rep. Betty Sutton (D-Ohio), requires that the new vehicle get just 27 mpg. (The national average for 2011 vehicles, according to new regulations, will be 27.3 mpg.)

A cash-for-clunkers program would have two main goals: stimulating the flagging American auto industry and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Sutton’s bill favors the former, and has therefore won much more support in Detroit, because it stipulates that only American vehicles can be bought under the scheme. The Schumer-Israel plan, on the other hand, emphasizes the latter, with higher fuel-economy standards and no buy-American clause.

Yet in the long run, the Schumer-Israel bill could actually do more to get Detroit back on its feet. By encouraging the production of fuel-efficient cars, the measure could help Detroit retool for a new auto economy that will favor smaller cars and hybrids. The Sutton bill does nothing to dissuade Detroit from continuing to produce the gas-guzzlers that helped get the American auto industry into its current fix.

In related news, The Michigan Messenger reports on a similar plan to get people to trade in their old household appliances.