The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has launched a radio ad blitz as part of its “Drive for 25″ campaign — an effort to win back the House in 2012. One of the ads, which launched Nov. 4, specifically targets Rep. Vern Buchanan, R-Sarasota, who is currently embroiled in a scandal dating back to his 2006 and 2008 congressional campaigns, during which he allegedly reimbursed employees who made donations to Vern Buchanan for Congress.

The Federal Election Commission eventually fined Buchanan’s former business partner, Sam Kazran, and a car dealership the two once owned together, Hyundai of North Jacksonville, for the donations.

The Department of Justice launched its own investigation into Buchanan in October. And, as The Florida Independent has exclusively reported, the House of Representatives’ Office of Congressional Ethics also launched a preliminary investigation into Buchanan in late September.

Though the Office cannot comment on ongoing investigations, two sources supplied the Independent with documentation related to the investigation, which was launched on Sept. 29. As part of its investigation, the Office requested specific information from former Buchanan employees about any contributions made to his campaigns.

“With one year to go until the election, the House Republicans’ Majority is in peril as it gets freezing cold back at home and Republicans face a chilly response to defending the indefensible,” said DCCC Chairman Steve Israel in a press release. “House Republicans will be forced to defend protecting Big Oil and the ultra wealthy instead of protecting Medicare and creating jobs and defend their big ethics scandals too.”

Below, the full text of the ad:

Republicans in Washington are doing everything they can to protect tax loopholes for big oil companies and their millionaire friends, while voting to end Medicare and raise seniors’ health care costs.   

And what’s Vern Buchanan doing to stop it? Nothing. 

His priority these days seems to be looking out for himself.   

Buchanan was named by an independent watchdog group as “one of the most corrupt Members of Congress.”    

A federal investigation found that Buchanan’s former car dealership violated the law in an “extensive and ongoing scheme” and fined them $68,000. 

Now, Buchanan is under criminal investigation by the Department of Justice. He’s also being investigated by the Office of Congressional Ethics.

How can we expect Congressman Vern Buchanan to fight for us when he’s so busy looking out for himself?

I’m fed up. Call Vern Buchanan and tell him to fight for us, instead of looking out for himself.

On Monday, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee will unveil its latest in a series of ads targeting House Republicans — one of whom is Florida’s own Vern Buchanan, R-Sarasota.

The DCCC will air the ads for one week, in 25 Republican-held districts across the country, as part of its “Drive for 25″ campaign, the number of seats they would need to retake the House.

Via The Hill:

Voters in some districts will hear generic ads calling their representative part of the problem with Washington and critiquing how Republicans voted on tax cuts for the wealthy and Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) budget. But some Republicans will get hit with highly tailored ads knocking them on issues that have been controversial for them in the past.

“Congressman David Rivera’s under criminal investigation for his personal and campaign spending. He spends more time defending himself than fighting for us,” says the narrator in the ad targeting the Florida Republican.

In a recent sit-down with the St. Petersburg Times, DCCC Chairman Steve Israel said that Buchanan “has a lot of money but he also has a lot of ethical baggage.” The ad targeting Buchanan will likely bring up some of his recent controversies — including allegations that he reimbursed his employees for donations made to his 2006 and 2008 congressional campaigns.

Buchanan is currently under investigation by the Department of Justice, and the House ofRepresentatives’ Office of Congressional Ethics launched a preliminary investigation into Buchanan in late September.

“I just cannot believe that Congresswoman Bachmann sponsored and brought to the American people, the use of images from the Holocaust, actual photographs of skeletal remains of people from the cremetoria, in order to make a point about the health insurance bill,” says Israel. “I can’t believe that Congresswoman Bachmann would stand where she stood and see those images and not have the common decency to say, ‘I disagree with the use of those images.’”

It’s another sign, if any were needed, that Democrats consider Bachmann a useful foil. And it’s another attempt to make Republicans pay for embracing the energy of Tea Party activists.

Today, New York Democratic Reps. Carolyn McCarthy and Steve Israel took a step to change that, introducing legislation that would prohibit the roughly 2,500 people on the Transportation Security Administration’s terrorist no-fly list from buying guns.

A 2005 report from the Government Accountability Office has added fuel to the lawmakers’ concerns. During a five month period in 2004, the GAO found, firearm-related background checks were performed on 44 people discovered to be on terrorist watch lists. In 35 of those cases, the gun purchases were allowed to proceed because the buyers weren’t found to be felons, fugitives or in any other category that would disqualify them from buying weapons.

“According to the Department of Justice (Justice),” the GAO wrote, “under federal and state law, neither suspected nor actual membership in a terrorist organization is a stand-alone factor that would prohibit a person from receiving or possessing a firearm.”

More recently, the FBI found (pdf) that, of 279 potential gun buyers found in 2006 to be on the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File, only 49 were denied based on state or federal prohibitions.

Of course, even under the McCarthy-Israel bill, there would be nothing to stop these folks from buying weapons at gun shows, where unlicensed dealers aren’t required to do background checks in any event.

The National Rifle Association has yet to weigh in on the bill. Still, it’ll be interesting to see if the pro-gun group, which has a history of opposing even the slightest weapons restrictions, will support the rights of suspected terrorists to buy guns. Indeed, when a similar Senate bill was offered in 2007, the group did just that. It seems that in the eyes of the gun lobby, suspected terorists have Second Amendment rights, too.

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.

A trio of senators introduced legislation today allowing owners of gas-guzzlers to trade their vehicles in for thousands of dollars in credit on a more fuel-efficient car.

The temporary “cash for clunkers” program would work like this: Owners of vehicles that get less than 18 miles-per-gallon would be able to turn in those cars for $2,500 to $4,500 in credit toward the purchase of a more efficient model. The gas guzzler would be scrapped, getting it off the road forever.

Sponsors of the bill — Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) — say the four-year program would retire up to one million gas guzzlers in the fourth year while saving up to 80,000 barrels of fuel per day. From Collins’ statement:

Taking these cars and trucks off our roads and highways would help reduce our dependence on foreign oil, decrease greenhouse gas emissions, and stimulate the economy. In addition, it would help boost demand for manufacturers of newer, efficient models and bring in new business for car dealers who are struggling in the current economy.

In the House, the same bill was introduced today by Reps. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.), Jay Inslee (D-Wash.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Dennis Moore (D-Kansas).

The lawmakers aren’t the only ones pushing cash for clunkers as part of the Democrats’ yet-to-be-released economic stimulus proposal. Writing in the Detroit Free Press earlier this month, Brookings Institution economist Jason Bordoff laid out both the economic and environmental advantages of such a program:

Cash for clunkers can provide timely economic stimulus by giving people money quickly to spend on cars. Each stimulus dollar would also have high bang-for-the-buck because it would be directed toward the purchase of a newer car, and thus less likely to be saved, used to pay down debt or applied in other ways that do not boost consumer spending. Since low-income people are more likely to own older cars, the program is also targeted at those most in need.

With new car sales plunging, the stimulated demand for new cars would pep the auto industry and assembly lines. Even the purchase of a used car would indirectly boost new cars sales because the scrapping of each old vehicle from the U.S. fleet paves the way for more.

Cash for clunkers would also reduce carbon emissions, local pollution and oil consumption. Older cars emit far more local pollution. A California study, for example, found that in 2010, vehicles from model year 1998 or earlier will be responsible for 25 percent of miles driven but 75 percent of local pollution.

Sounds like a way to kill a few birds with one stone. But while the proposed program may be worthwhile for someone driving a 20-year-old gas-guzzler, how do you entice the driver of that $50,000 Escalade to scrap it for $4,500?