Ohio Republican George Voinovich is expected to announce Monday that he won’t seek reelection to the Senate in 2010.
A two-term senator, former governor and Cleveland mayor, Voinovich has been a political fixture in his state for decades. But recent press reports from his home state have indicated the 72-year-old lawmaker is considering retirement, and a person close to him told Politico that the announcement will come Monday. […]
A Voinovich spokesman would only confirm that he will make an announcement Monday on his future. But a Senate Republican leadership aide said that Voinovich’s planned retirement is “real” and an announcement will come soon.
Assuming Voiny follows through tomorrow, his announcement will be the fourth GOP Senate retirement this cycle so far (Brownback, Martinez, and Bond being the other three amigos), and will hand Democrats another excellent opportunity to pad their majority.
For the Democrats, Lt. Governor Lee Fisher and 17th CD Rep. Tim Ryan appear to be on a primary collision course, though other names could conceivably throw down, as well. Republican contenders include ex-Reps. Rob Portman and John Kasich, though it might be nice for House Democrats if someone like, say, current 12th CD Rep. Pat Tiberi gave up his seat to run for the job, as well.
Perhaps more importantly, the recent wave of Republican retirements seems to have induced a certain level of panic among Senate GOPers:
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), one of the biggest fundraisers for the NRSC last cycle, said the wave of retirements has caused some panic among Republicans.
“I’m really concerned because it’s important we have some balance here because if we don’t, one side can do whatever it wants to do, and that’s not good for the country,” Hatch said. “To the extent that some of these folks decide to leave and they certainly have the right to do that, we’re going to have to find good candidates to run and hopefully hold onto our seats.”
Finding good candidates should be Job No. 1 for Republicans right now, but the early signs aren’t all that encouraging for John Cornyn’s NRSC: Jeb Bush has already turned down a Senate seat that could have easily been his in Florida, and the committee has no obvious silver bullets in Missouri and Ohio. Moreover, we have yet to hear much in the way of serious buzz surrounding challenges to Democratic incumbents in 2010.
Republicans may have some wind at their backs if Obama stumbles or if the national economy slides further over the next two years, but they may not be in much of a position to take advantage of that if they end up being saddled by retirements and recruitment failures made in these early days of no hope.
More discussion already under way in Populista’s diary.
Update: CNN says that their sources are also confirming the same details about Voinovich’s announcement tomorrow, which will come at 4pm Eastern.
Could we really pull off a third no-loss season in the Senate? If so, get the wish list ready: we might have a 4 year window to pass the progressive legislation we want. After that, who knows?
All four of our Senate appointments have given us heartburn. I was starting to wonder if Republicans might sneak in and steal a couple. But now, they’re going to have to defend open seats in two states Obama won and another where McCain barely won.
when Democrats were their own worst enemy.
We finally got to the point where if we don’t commit sucicide, the voters reward us. The drama over the appointments is the only thing working against us now, and that has to be addressed, particularly because 2010 is the generational year. If we pick up the five or so seats that we should, anti-progressive atitudes have no chance of dominating for the next twenty years. We may not hold all of them, though there is no reason to think we won’t, but no way would we go back to the days of only a dozen or so really good progressives in the Senate.
In terms of 2010, the only thing we have to fear is ourselves.
tomorrow will be no less HUGE than the one in Missouri this week. This one won’t be as easy to turn over as Missouri if Carnahan runs, but if we get one of our top three or four candidates in this race Ohio should have two Democratic senators in 2010.
The only candidate I see who can win or even come close against Ryan or Fischer is Portman. Ohio is now at least a light blue state, and will be for the foreseeable future.
Hopefully, more of these to come. The only race this cycle where a retirement hurts us more than it helps us is in Kentucky.
As good as this cycle has started out this year the preliminary goal for Democratic senators for 2010 has to be somewhere in the 67-70 range.
I’ve already got us winning five if we get our preferred candidates in Missouri, Ohio, Florida, Kentucky, and Kansas with: Carnahan, Ryan, Sink, Conway, and Sebelius.
A True Progressive in the mold of Sherrod Brown.
He used to host some weekend show on Fox News I believe. Came across as an empty-suit partisan hack. Doesn’t strike me as someone who can win statewide these days in Ohio. Hopefully he runs.
has checked out of 2010, can Judd Gregg be far behind?
Congressman Tim Ryan is a regular contributor to Daily Kos.
OH is losing 2 CDs after 2010, which will most likely come from Eastern OH where 4 Democratic seats are most at risk: Ryan, Wilson, Boccieri and Space. Though Ryan is the most senior of the 4, he may be better off going for the Senate rather than facing a primary fight in what will almost certainly be a less democratic leaning district against more conservative democrats.
in my diary but I have to add this to this thread as well.
Also, I hope Ryan gets the nod, not Fisher. I’ve been reading more about him and he seems like a pretty weak candidate. I’ll stick by my Ronald Burris analogy.
You know what? This one isn’t that surprising, for two reasons. One: If you haven’t noticed, he started putting his foot down against his party right around the John Bolton nomination, and had to be talked into letting him through without recommendation. Two: He’s the man who initially let Tom Noe manage funds for the Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Compensation, during his time as governor. A smartly-run campaign would show no mercy in regards to that fact, and that fact has done wonders for turning Ohio towards the Democrats.
He thinks if Republicans are bad at this cycle, and Democrats are good then it’s not good for the country. I fail to see the logic of his argument. Republicans have been rather bad for the United States this past decade and on, and if retiring long time incumbents and putting in some new voices is the best way to go, then I don’t see a problem with that.
http://www.politico.com/news/s…
it looks like ryan is a safer, more moderate candidate because his district is purpler, but both sutton and ryan seem like young, smart, attractive candidates. what about fisher? any thoughts about him?
the supreme court nominee discussion is interesting although it really seems like a very rare (perhaps impossible) thing that we could stop a GOP nominee because of his/her position on choice. the american public and the press believe it’s a president’s perogative to name the justices he/she wants barring scandal (hiring illegal aliens, smoking pot, sexual harassment – tho i know thomas got appointed anyway) or a too colorful academic history (bork – tribe?).
part of what makes candidates strong in purple or red states are the things that WE DON’T LIKE about them. i am strongly pro-choice, but i know a significant percentage of PA and PH democrats are not so i assess the odds and go with the best we can get.
i also hate the dave matthews band, which tim ryan really likes apparently. while i struggle with this, i have to admit it makes him stronger with the ohio electorate, and it may be what he really believes, so i accept it.
but which senators love Big Star – that’s what i really want to know. which ones can sing the lyrics to “ballad of el goodo”?