Yesterday the DCCC introduced its Frontline program for the 2010 electoral cycle. These are the 40 incumbents considered to be most vulnerable, who are targeted for independent expenditures as needed to keep their seats in the D column.
Not all of these incumbents will stay vulnerable; in the previous cycle, between solid Dem fundraising out of the gate and an auspicious political landscape, only 10 of the initial 34 wound up needing funding. This cycle may be a little different, though; we’re playing more defense in more Republican-leaning seats, and fighting the usual midterm tendencies to recoil against the party in power.
Here’s the list of 40; rather than listing them alphabetically, I’m listing them according to the difficulty of the district’s estimated presidential lean in 2008 (and also including each rep’s margin of victory in 2008):
| District | Rep. | 2008 Pres. margin |
2008 House margin |
|---|---|---|---|
| AL-02 | Bright | – 27 | 1 |
| ID-01 | Minnick | – 26 | 1 |
| MS-01 | Childers | – 24 | 11 |
| AL-05 | Griffith | – 23 | 4 |
| MD-01 | Kratovil | – 18 | 1 |
| AZ-01 | Kirkpatrick | – 10 | 17 |
| PA-10 | Carney | – 9 | 13 |
| AZ-08 | Giffords | – 6 | 12 |
| AZ-05 | Mitchell | – 5 | 10 |
| VA-05 | Perriello | – 3 | 0 |
| NY-29 | Massa | – 3 | 2 |
| OH-16 | Boccieri | – 2 | 11 |
| FL-24 | Kosmas | – 2 | 16 |
| NY-13 | McMahon | – 2 | 28 |
| CO-04 | Markey | – 1 | 12 |
| NM-02 | Teague | – 1 | 12 |
| IN-09 | Hill | – 1 | 19 |
| PA-03 | Dahlkemper | 0 | 2 |
| VA-02 | Nye | 2 | 5 |
| NY-24 | Arcuri | 3 | 4 |
| TX-23 | Rodriguez | 3 | 14 |
| NJ-03 | Adler | 5 | 4 |
| NH-01 | Shea-Porter | 6 | 6 |
| MI-07 | Schauer | 6 | 2 |
| NC-08 | Kissell | 6 | 11 |
| FL-08 | Grayson | 6 | 4 |
| IL-11 | Halvorson | 8 | 24 |
| OH-15 | Kilroy | 9 | 1 |
| CA-11 | McNerney | 9 | 11 |
| WI-08 | Kagen | 9 | 8 |
| IA-03 | Boswell | 10 | 14 |
| OR-05 | Schrader | 11 | 16 |
| OH-01 | Driehaus | 11 | 5 |
| IL-14 | Foster | 11 | 15 |
| NV-03 | Titus | 12 | 5 |
| NY-25 | Maffei | 13 | 13 |
| MI-09 | Peters | 13 | 10 |
| VA-11 | Connolly | 15 | 12 |
| CT-04 | Himes | 20 | 4 |
| NM-01 | Heinrich | 20 | 11 |
Take a moment to compare this with the House Vulnerability Index that we compiled last month. Pretty solid overlap: 18 of the 20 on the Index are also in the Frontline program. The two who aren’t are Chet Edwards, who’s well ensconced in his bright-red district, and Jim Marshall, who seems to finally be getting settled after a number of rocky cycles.
Note, also, the large number of sophomores who quickly locked down their iffy districts and have already graduated from their training wheels: Brad Ellsworth, Heath Shuler, Jason Altmire, John Yarmuth, John Hall, and Zack Space, among others. (Also observe who got the training wheels slapped back on: Mike Arcuri and the perpetually tottering Leonard Boswell.)
Who’s in the reddest districts without needing Frontline help? It’s all long-time representatives from the Blue Doggish end of the party, starting with Gene Taylor (36-pt McCain margin) and Chet Edwards (35). The rest of the top 10 includes some Tennessee and Arkansas reps who watched their previously safe districts fall out from under them, at least at the presidential level: Dan Boren (32), Lincoln Davis (30), Bart Gordon (25), Charlie Melancon (24), Ike Skelton (23), Marion Berry (21), Mike Ross (19), and Rick Boucher (19).
And who had the narrowest margins in their own House races, without requiring Frontline help? Top of the list is Paul Kanjorski, who most people seemed to have left for dead and who escaped with a 3-point victory; apparently, the consensus seems to be that he was uniquely vulnerable to Lou Barletta and there aren’t any other threats on PA-11’s GOP bench. Following him are Chet Edwards (8), Ron Klein (9), Chellie Pingree (10), Jason Altmire (12), Jim Marshall (14), Paul Hodes (15), John Murtha (16), Dennis Moore (17), and Tim Bishop (17).
Finally, not to be outdone, the NRCC is about to roll out its counterpart, the “Patriots” program. (Apparently they don’t feel so sanguine as to call it ROMP, or Regain our Majority Program, any more.) No word on who the recipients are yet. One key difference seems to be while Frontline offers a lot of carrots, the Patriots program seems to involve a whole lot of stick:
As one Republican source put it Monday, the effort is also designed to “end the welfare state that the NRCC has become over the past six to eight years” by setting strict benchmarks for Members and adding one big stick to the process. Namely, those candidates who aren’t working to help themselves will be cut off from NRCC financial assistance.
I love that metaphor you used!
How much money did they waste trying to save Sali in ID-02 simply because the nut didn’t like fundraising. If they were smarter they’d also create a “Bachmann” Clause to deny funds to anyone who finds themselves in a competitive race simply because they had to say something really stupid (of course we need to create a “Murtha” Clause on our side ;))
I feel that Childers is settling in, but it doesn’t hurt. I don’t get Halvorson’s presence. Other than that it’s a good start.
It is amazing how big hte margins are, though. So few competitive races…
Either that or there might be some truth to the
Paul Is DeadPaul Will Retire rumors.the plan they have is good and bad for us at the same time.
Its good because it means that some should be strong challengers who don’t make the grade won’t get pumped up to the point that they are competetive. The welfare state the NRCC turned into has probably saved several oftheir seats and caused us greif in others.
On the other hand, it means that the NRCC will have a lot more money to hand out to people who already have a lot of cash because they won’t be spending it on those who don’t. This means that several of our strong candidates could get wiped away by substantially being outspent.
Bright, Minnick, Kratovil, and Griffith will need it.
Other than that, our list is actually looking pretty strong. Either they overperformed in tough districts (Childers, Carney) or are now in more friendly turf (Perriello, Massa). Our Arizona reps will likely do much better without McCain mania getting out the Republican vote. Several other Democrats faced basically the toughest competition they could possibly get and still won (Kilroy, Hill, Adler, Shea-Porter, McNerney, Boswell). Some others also dislodged tough incumbents and should cruise from now on (Himes, Peters, Titus, Grayson, Nye, Driehaus).
I’d be surprised if we need to spend on more than 10 incumbents in 2010, though open seats will always be an unpleasant surprise. Fortunately our oldest incumbents are in very blue districts.
I expected Matheson to be on this list, if not in the actual list himself.
spot NY20 in the list.
My eyesight is not what it used to be.
Or did Gov Paterson get it off the list?
AL-02. Since Bright seems to enjoy going it alone and voting with republicans so much I say let him go it alone and use his own cash rather than the DCCC’s in 2010.
Republicans would have to win EVERY seat on this list for a majority of 1. Not gonna happen.
For all his douchebaggery he was the best prognosticator last cycle.
http://rothenbergpoliticalrepo…
The absence of McCotter is a surprise but the rest seems about right.
For real? Please tell me Bachmann will be included, lord knows she is as patriotic about America as all get out. God, Republicans are such tools. Patriot’s Program, GAHHHHHH!!!!!!
on a side note, I met my first Republican who thinks the party needs to move more towards the center bc they’ve tried conservative and they got whomped. So, there are a few smart ones out there.