Month: January 2007

It’s four years off in the horizon, but it’s never too early to plan ahead for open seat Senate races.  From CQ, comes word that Presidential hopeful Chris Dodd has determined that, one way or another, this will be his last term in the Senate:

Sen. Christopher Dodd, through his counsel, has sent a letter to the Federal Election Commission stating he “is no longer a candidate in the 2010 election for the United States Senate in Connecticut.”

Do you have a favorite to replace Dodd in four years?  A comebacker for Ned Lamont, perhaps?  Or maybe a promition for rising star Chris Murphy?  CT’s Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal, has long been rumored to have higher aspirations, but has been hindered by a lack of openings at the top of the ticket (and his unwillingness to challenge popular Republican Gov. Jodi Rell last November).  Has his time passed, or is this just the opening that he’s been waiting for?

On the flip side, who might be the Republican standard-bearer?  Chris Shays, who could prove formidable, will be 65 in 2010.  Rob Simmons, who lost narrowly to Democrat Joe Courtney last year, will be even older (67).  I can’t seem to find Blumenthal’s date of birth on the ‘net.

Update: Looks like we might be jumping the gun here, according to Hotline On Call:

Well, while legally true, CT Dems shouldn’t start licking their chops about the supposed “open seat” in three years. In order to transfer all of his money he raised for his 2010 re-election to his WH campaign account without penalty, he had to file a statement with the FEC saying he wouldn’t run. It’s simply an accounting thing, nothing more. In fact, should Dodd not be elected POTUS in ’08, he, indeed can legally open a new Senate 2010 account. He did this so that he could raise maximum amounts from donors who gave to that 2010 campaign account.

An inquiry to Dodd’s campaign about the above mentioned story prompted the following response from spokesperson Beneva Schulte: “It’s a legality that isn’t an indication of future plans.”

Dodd will be 64 in 2008.  Presumably, he should have enough gas in the tank for another term or two.  Or he could pull a Bob Graham.  We’ll see.

The Craig Johnson for State Senate web site is live – check it out at http://www.craigjohnsonforsenate.com/

Craig Johnson (D-WFP) is running for an open State Senate seat in New York’s Seventh Senate District on February 6th.  The Working Families Party has launched a major field operation to elect Craig Johnson, follow the action at WFP Blog.

18 days until Election Day!

So this is the second month of tracking the Top 50 House Pick Up Chances in the country. What is the most amazing about a project like this is the amount of new information there already is to switch decisions  about races. We have about  7 votes in the House that could be used  against certain Republicans in the House . We also have a new DCCC list of where they are looking to go in terms of targeting. In addition to the information from last month  I will include change as well reason for change

The Top 50 races

1. MI 7
  Republican Tim Walberg
  06 Winning Percentage  51%
  04 Bush Percentage  54%
  Reason for Weakness
  Tim Walberg is the most vulnerable Republican member of Congress because running against an opponent in a general election who spent only $ 55,000,.  He got just 51% in a 54% Bush District. His defeat of a Congressman Schwarz who was widely liked  will cause him problems.  If the Democrats can find a centrist in the Schwarz model we should be able to defeat this Freshman.

Change No Change
Reason: Tim Walberg has already cast his lot like the Right Wing Republican we expected including a no vote on the Minimum Wage,  the only issue is that lots of Republicans now seem to be circling  as well.

2. PA 15
  Republican Charlie Dent
  06 Winning Percentage  53%
  04 Bush Percentage 50%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Charlie Dent has only been re-elected once in now one of only eight Republicans to hold a seat that John Kerry won .  He also was one of only two incumbents in Kerry won districts not to have a well-financed challenger. The fact that he was only able to get 53% under these circumstance means that he is a very good target for defeat. 

Change  No change
Reason Charlie Dent remains vulnerable and  the DCCC now list him a such. This race will remain very hot
3.. FL 8
  Republican Ric Keller
  06 Winning Percentage 53%
  04 Bush Percentage  55%
  Reasons for Weakness
  You never want to run below the President of Your own Party in your district and this is exactly what happened to Ric Keller. This is particularly bad in a state where Republican loses were less than in other states. His 53% against a good but not great opponent in a peripherally targeted race was trouble enough, but he is now breaking a term limits and already has a republican primary challenger.

Change Up
Reason: On reflection Ric Keller seems even more vulnerable, and his rushing out to oppose Iraq would make sense for someone more vulnerable.

4.  NV 3 
  Republican Jon Porter
  06 Winning Percentage 48%
  04 Bush Percentage 50%
  Reasons for Weakness
  As a Member of Congress you never want to be getting less than 50% and that is exactly the position that Jon Porter find himself as he confronts life in the minority.  The Democrat was able to get 47%  with 5% going else where. If the Democrats can recruit a slightly more experience candidate and Ms. Hafen now counts. This race will be extremely close.
Change Down
Reason: Keller had to move up and therefore Porter had to move down  He remains  very vulnerable and is DCCC rated as such

5. WA 8
  Republican Dave Reichert 
  06 Winning Percentage  ?
  04 Bush Percentage  48%
  Reasons for Weakness
  A two term Congressman from one of eight Kerry won Republican held seats is by definition vulnerable, also a minority member. That he was able to get only 51% in both cycles adds to that vulnerability. This race will be very tight again. The Presidential should be helpful.
Change None
Reason. Reichert remains a Republican in a Democrat district who by an extremely small percentage and who just seems vulnerable 

6. AZ 1
  Republican Rick Renzi
  06 Winning Percentage 51%
  04 Bush Percentage 54%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Hints of corruption, a weak re-election performance including running behind the President of your own party and being a relatively junior member now in the minority these are the challenges now faced by Rick Renzi.  This is a member who is beatable.

Change Up
Reason: The DCCC lists it as vulnerable because of ethics issues that alone should make him more vulnerable.

7. CA 4
  Republican John Doolittle
  06 Winning Percentage 49%
  04 Bush Percentage 61%
  Reasons for Weakness
  A congressperson never wants to get  less than 50%, when that is combined with such a massive running behind of party ID It shows a member with a serious problem. The large amount spent on the legal defense fund might be why.  If Charlie Brown gives it another shot this could be a race.  We sure should make sure it is.
Change Up
Reason: The increased likelihood of Charlie Brown’s running again  makes Doolittle vulnerable as does the DCCC ranking  the district in its  ethically challenged catergory.

8. NJ 7
  Republican Mike Ferguson
  06 Winning Percentage  49%
  04 Bush Percentage 53%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Another Republican under 50% spells danger  for him. He also  is still a relative junior member just reaching the minority  for the first time.  Linda Stender should be encouraged to make the challenge again and regardless this can be a very close race.  Ferguson’s position on social issues are also out of step for the district.
Change Up
Reason: The Democratic Convention in Denver will make beating Marilyn Musgrave more difficult he drop allows this district to move up.

9.NC 8
  Republican Robin Hayes
  06 Winning Percentage 50%
  04 Bush Percentage  54%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Winning by less than 500 vote against the same opponent who was generally under-funded last time is all one needs to make the top ten list of vulnerable members, I think Larry Kissell should be the first person on the New Blue Majority List.
Change Up
Reason: Same as above

10. CO 4
  Republican Marilyn Musgrave
  06 Winning Percentage 46%
  04 Bush Percentage 58%
  Reasons for Weakness
  46% is a terrible number for an Incumbent.  It means serious problems particularly when your last election performance before was already 7% the President behind that of the President of your own party.
Change Down
Reason: In a traditionally Republican part of a trending Democratic State, CO 4 is likely to re-act slightly against the Democratic Tide. This just make beating Musgrave more difficult and it is more important to win Colorado in the Presidential than beating Marilyn Musgrave.

11. MI 9
  Republican Joe Knollenberg
  06 Winning Percentage 52%
  04 Bush Percentage 51%
  Reasons for Weakness
  This was probably the worst under-target in the nation besides PA 15 with less reasons  for it. The good news however is that Joe Knollenberg now a minority member spent a huge amount of money his campaign money just to hold on.  He is also relatively old so a retirement would not be surprising. Either way this seat should be a top priority.  Nancy Skinner was a very good candidate that not only the DCCC but us in the Netroots missed as well. If  she runs again I think supporting  her would be justified.
Change None
Reason, If anything this spot holds the best because it is now a DCCC target.

12.  IL 14
  Republican Dennis Hastert
  06 Winning Percentage 60%
  04 Bush Percentage 55%
  Reasons for Weakness
  How the mighty have fallen. It is quite likely this seat will  open up in 08 and if not Dennis Hastert is damaged goods, a bygone relic  of an era that is gone. Illinois is  also a state trending clearly our way.  This is a great  chance.
Change None
Reason: Looking at Dennis Hastert’s sad face it is hard to believe he will run again and open seats are generally easier to get.
13.  PA 18
  Republican Tim Murphy
  06 Winning Percentage 58%
  04  Bush Percentage  54%
  Reasons for Weakness 
  Scandal appears to be rearing itself into this district in a way that helps us.  This combined with a district remarkably similar to PA 4th where Melissa Hart was  recently beaten. If not for the scandal this district would rank lower but for now it is a prime target
Change Up
Reason: The scandal is now being addressed by the DCCC edging this seat up a spot.

14.  OH 16
  Republican Ralph Regula
  06 Winning Percentage 59%
  04 Bush Percentage  54%
  Reasons for Weakness
  When a nothing challenger holds you under 60% that is a problem. When you are already in your Eighties that is also a problem. When you are about to drop a tremendous amount in power that spells trouble. The Democrats already have a challenger and more will probably emerge.
Change down
Reason The Murphy Scandal  moves Regula down a spot no real change.
  15 .  IL 6
  Republican Peter Roskam
  06 Winning Percentage 51% 
  04 Bush Percentage  53%
  Reasons for Weakness
  This was the DCCC’s greatest folly, by choosing a non-local candidate. It allowed the Republicans to frame the race in a way favorable to them and ultimately win it.  That said the race was extremely close. A freshman Republican minority member has to beatable.  Finding a local candidate will be essential.
Change None
Reason: Roskam has voted like a right winger when his district is far more reasonable. He has to be considered a prime target

16. PA 6
  Republican Jim Gelach
  06 Winning Percentage  51%
  04 Bush Percentage  48%
  Reasons for Weakness
  51%,  three straight elections. It seems as  if  Jim Gerlach  is a survivor which makes him difficult to defeat and yet he clearly has to deal with transition from majority to minority.  A good Democratic Candidate will make this a  race again and quickly.
Change None
Reason Gerlach is vulnerable for the very same reasons he always has been.

  17. NY 25
  Republican Jim Walsh
  06 Winning Percentage  51%
  04 Bush Percentage  48%
  Reasons for Weakness
  After not having a real challenger in a long time Jim Walsh was faced with the scare of his life. Democrat Dan Maffei was also not as well funded as he could have been.  As  one of the eight Republican in Kerry won districts. Jim Walsh can expect a real challenge though unlike other members he will be ready for it.
Change None
Reason  Same basic reasons, he has been voting with Democrats on everything but stem cell research.

18. NM 1
  Republican Heather Wilson
  06 Winning Percentage 50%
  04 Bush Percentage  48%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Another absolute squeaker and another chance to take a Republican held seat. Heather Wilson is as slick as they come, though people do seem to think that Patricia Madrid made a late debate error. Regardless, she is vulnerable but difficult to beat.
Change None
Reason She is just a vulnerable as ever but is still as skilled as ever. She is also voting along with Democrats and making noise on Iraq.

19. WY AL
  Republican Barbara Cubin
  06 Winning Percentage  48%
  04 Bush Percentage  69%
  Reasons for Weakness
  No one likes Barbara Cubin and her extremely weak showing shows, and yet trying to overcome the Republican tilt of Wyoming is extremely difficult, particularly in a Presidential Year. It would not be surprising to see a better Republican challenge her in the primary. 
Change None
Reason Cubin keeps voting like a right winger and her value in the minority still drops. Although the Republican inability to really oppose Democrats so far in the House makes a primary less likely no one wants to run to be powerless.

20.  OH 15
  Republican Deborah Pyrce
  06 Winning Percentage  50%
  04  Bush Percentage  50%
  Reasons for Weakness
  If you basically run  in a tie with your opponent in a Congressional Race, you are vulnerable. However Deb Pryce is a seasoned campaigner and I am readily able to change roles, as her shift out of Republican Leadership shows.  This is a tough one but  completely winnable.
Change None
Reason: The DCCC keeps her on the target list and her district might be more Democratic in a Presidential but 06 was a great year for Ohio Democrats.  She is already leaving leadership aside and voting with Democrats a ton.

21.  CT 4
  Republican Chris Shays
  06 Winning Percentage  51%
  04  Bush Percentage 46%
  Reasons for Weakness
  In many ways Chris Shays is like many of the other close races except that he has more long term incumbency and will be expect a challenge. I am from CT so I know of recruiting difficulties.  It is a winnable race but one that requires a complete commitment to it.  Still  only eight Kerry won districts have Republican Incumbents this is one of them.
Change None
Reason: Shays voted against Medicare change but otherwise is voting with most of the Democratic agenda. The DCCC still seems interested.

22.  IL 10
  Republican Mark Kirk
  06 Winning Percentage  53%
  04  Bush Percentage 47%
  Reasons for Weakness
  The seventh  Kerry won district on the lists. Mark Kirk is much like Chris Shays was  after 2004. A scare yes, but he  still  had some breathing room. Picking him off will be very difficult, though Dan Seals giving it another try would be serious. 

Change None 
Reason: Mark Kirk is clearly leaving his leadership days behind  and voting with Democrats . This makes it easier for him to paint himself as moderate but it is also clearly as the DCCC said

23.  NY 13
  Republican Vito Fosella 
  06 Winning Percentage  57%
  04  Bush Percentage  55%
Reasons for Weakness
This race moved into the rankings from spot 26 because the DCCC targeted it for ethics  violations. New York’s Democratic Lean in the last election makes it seem entirely possible that this race will finally get hot. 

24.  PA 3
  Republican Phil English
  06 Winning Percentage 54%
  04  Bush Percentage 53%
  Reasons for Weakness
  This was another under-target in PA , an area which trended toward the party in a serious way. There have also been rumor’s abounding about Phil English. Finding a good challenger will be difficult but he is clearly vulnerable because of his underperformance.
Change Down
Reasons: Vito’s  weakness is just slightly greater.

25. MI 11
  Republican Thaddeus McCotter
  06 Winning Percentage 54% 
  04 Bush Percentage 53%
  Reasons for Weakness
  This was another Michigan under-target particularly in relationship to funding.  That means the Vulnerable exists and is real. It is going to be a very tough nut to crack, but it fits the profile of many of the Democrat upset victories that happened across the country this year.
Change Down
Reason: Just moved down a spot.

Dropped out of Top 25
Steve Chabot

Entered
Vito Fossella

26.  OH 1
  Republican Steve Chabot
  06 Winning Percentage 53%
  04 Bush Percentage  51%

27.  NJ 5
  Republican Scott Garrett
  06 Winning Percentage  55%
  04  Bush Percentage  57%

28. IL 11
  Republican Jerry Weller
  06 Winning Percentage 55%
  04  Bush Percentage  53%

29.  IA 4
  Republican Tom Latham
  06 Winning Percentage  57%
  04  Bush Percentage  51%

30. NY 3
  Republican Peter King
  06 Winning Percentage  56%
  04  Bush Percentage 53%

31.  OH 2
  Republican Jean Schmidt
  06 Winning Percentage 51% 
  04  Bush Percentage 64%

32.  VA 11
  Republican Tom Davis
  06 Winning Percentage 55% 
  04  Bush Percentage 50%

33.  NY 29
  Republican Randy Kuhl
  06 Winning Percentage  52%
  04  Bush Percentage 56%

34.  FL 1O
  Republican Bill Young
  06 Winning Percentage  66% 
  04  Bush Percentage  50%

35.  CA 26
  Republican David Drier
  06 Winning Percentage 57% 
  04  Bush Percentage  55%

36.  OH 3
  Republican Mike Turner
  06 Winning Percentage 59% 
  04  Bush Percentage  54%

37.  FL 24
  Republican Tom Feeney
  06 Winning Percentage  58%
  04 Bush Percentage  55%

38. DE AL
  Republican Mike Castle
  06 Winning Percentage 57% 
  04  Bush Percentage  46%

39.  NJ 3
  Republican Jim Saxton
  06 Winning Percentage  58%
  04  Bush Percentage  51%

40. MN 6
  Republican Michelle Bachmann
  06 Winning Percentage  50%
  04  Bush Percentage 57%

41. VA 2
Republican Thelma Drake
06 Winning Percentage 52%
04 Bush Winning Percentage  58%

  42.  OH 12
  Republican Pat Tiberi
  06 Winning Percentage 58% 
  04  Bush Percentage  51%

43.
NY 23
  Republican John McHugh
  06 Winning Percentage  63%
  04  Bush Percentage 51%

44.  OH 14
  Republican Steve LaTourette
  06 Winning Percentage  58%
  04  Bush Percentage  53%

45.  NJ 2
  Republican Frank LoBiondo
  06 Winning Percentage  62%
  04  Bush Percentage  50%

46. CO 6
Republican Tom Tancredo
06 Winning  Percentage 59%
04 Bush Percentage 60%

Reason Likely to be open

  47. WI 1
  Republican Paul Ryan
  06 Winning Percentage  63%
  04  Bush Percentage 54%

48.
MN 3
  Republican Jim Ramstad 
  06 Winning Percentage  65%
  04  Bush Percentage  51%

49 .  ID 1
  Republican Bill Salli
  06 Winning Percentage 50%
  04 Bush Percentage 69%

50.  MI 4
  Republican Dave Camp
  06 Winning Percentage  60%
  04  Bush Percentage  55%

Dropped out of Top 50
Ilena Ros-Lethinen
Fred Upton

Enter Top 50
Thelma Drake
Tom Tancredo

Continuing our analysis of House race expenditures of the 05/06 elections cycle (we looked at the top ten non-party committee expenditures of the cycle on Tuesday), today I’ll be posting total expenditures from the 22 races where a Democratic challenger beat a Republican incumbent (with the exception of TX-23, where I haven’t been able to accumulate all the relevant data yet). And by total, I mean everything except expenditures from the shadowy 527s: candidate expenditures (listed under the “Spent” column), party committee expenditures, and independent expenditures from all sources.

Here’s what I’ve tallied up:

District	Candidate	Spent	DCCC IEs	Other IEs	Incumbent	Spent	NRCC IEs	Other IEs
AZ-05	Mitchell	$1.89M	$2.12M	$1.02M	Hayworth	$2.94M	$2.25M	$7k
CA-11	McNerney	$2.34M	$216k	$1.1M	Pombo	$4.51M	$1.43M	$18k
CT-02	Courtney	$2.37M	$2.07M	$1k	Simmons	$3.09M	$2.74M	$14k
CT-05	Murphy	$2.44M	$2.08M	$975k	Johnson	$4.98M	$1.88M	$456k
FL-22	Klein	$4.14M	$2.31M	$25k	Shaw	$5.19M	$3.35M	$217k
IN-02	Donnelly	$1.49M	$918k	$355k	Chocola	$3.39M	$383k	$43k
IN-08	Ellsworth	$1.72M	$2.21M	$166k	Hostettler	$530k	$1.87M	$21k
IN-09	Hill	$1.86M	$3.08M	$75k	Sodrel	$2.64M	$3.25M	$69k
IA-02	Loebsack	$443k	(none)	(none)	Leach	$519k	$21k	(none)
KS-02	Boyda	$655k	$652k	(none)	Ryun	$1.03M	$272k	(none)
KY-03	Yarmuth	$2.2M	$321k	$5k	Northup	$3.4M	$248k	$1.01M
MN-01	Walz	$1.23M	$371k	$722k	Gutknecht	$1.69M	$409k	$22k
NC-11	Shuler	$1.75M	$171k	$267k	Taylor	$4.11M	$1.54M	$19k
NH-01	Shea-Porter	$286k	(none)	(none)	Bradley	$856k	$21k	(none)
NH-02	Hodes	$1.47M	$1.12M	$198k	Bass	$1.21M	$472k	$24k
NY-19	Hall	$1.57M	(none)	$5k	Kelly	$2.46M	$19k	(none)
NY-20	Gillibrand	$2.47M	$789k	$333k	Sweeney	$3.38M	$592k	(none)
PA-04	Altmire	$1M	$399k	$739k	Hart	$2.17M	$619k	$19k
PA-07	Sestak	$2.92M	$1.93M	$277k	Weldon	$2.89M	$3.56M	$13k
PA-08	Murphy	$2.35M	$1.72M	$189k	Fitzpatrick	$3.13M	$3.62M	$11k
PA-10	Carney	$1.51M	$1.11M	$683k	Sherwood	$2.27M	$1.51M	$10k
Total		$38.1M	$23.6M	$7.1M		$56.4M	$30.1M	$2M

Now, obviously, these numbers don’t tell anything close to the full story–they don’t discern between positive and negative expenditures, the nature of the expenditures, and the time frame of the expenditures. But the basic framework makes it a decent starting point for our discussion. Note that total expenditures from all sources gave the Republicans a nearly $20 million edge ($89M to $69M) in these 21 districts. Also note how the mediocre fundraising of former New Hampshire Reps. Bass ($1.2M) and Bradley ($0.86M) foreshadowed their surprise defeats last November. Another interesting fact: in this top tier of House races, Republican-allied PACs were almost nowhere to be found–in fact, if it weren’t for the $1 million spent by the National Association of Realtors PAC in support of Anne Northup (KY-03), Democrats would’ve enjoyed a 7-to-1 non-party IE advantage in these districts. Instead, they settled for 7-to-2.

Tomorrow I’ll be posting part two of this discussion, featuring expenditures from open seats, competitive races where Democratic challengers fell short, and the few races where Republican House challengers put Democratic incumbents on the defensive.

(Let’s do this thing! – promoted by James L.)

(Adapted from a post at the albany project)

We are very, very excited to announce “Raise New York”, a “blograiser” for SSD-07 candidate Craig Johnson featuring Governor Eliot Spitzer! And when I say “we”, I am referring to, amongst many others, The Daily Gotham, Rochester Turning, Democracy In Albany, onNYTurf, WNYMedia.net, Swing State Project and, of course, us here at TAP.

Raise New York will take place on Thursday, February 1st at Prey in NYC. The event will also be liveblogged here and at Daily Gotham and DailyKos. There will be photos, audio and video in near real time for those who for whatever reason can’t attend in person. It’s gonna be a hoot.

What is so exciting about this event for me is that, besides raising some much needed money for Craig Johnson, it represents a real opportunity for partnership building between the progressive net/grassroots and a state Dem Party establishment  that hasn’t always been so interested in such things. There exists some very real potential for some mending of fences and and some trust building amongst all these groups as they fight for a common goal, namely reforming our joke of a state government.

The very nature of how this event came about is unprecedented as far as I can tell. This has never been done, or done in this way, ever before.

It also represents something potentially very special for the progressive NY blogosphere. It’s a demonstration that we can and will work together towards that common goal when we choose to do so. That’s never happened before and these new relationships could turn into something pretty freaking amazing. In fact, this may be what I find  most exciting.

So please join us for this amazing event! Join us in person or online and let’s do all we can to make ol’ Joe Bruno’s majority one seat more tenuous.

I wanted to share an anecdote from the campaign trail with everyone.  In New York’s Seventh District, Craig Johnson (D-WFP) is running for an open State Senate seat in a special election set for February 6th.

Last night, while Craig Johnson was rallying supporters and the Working Families Party canvass was knocking on doors and talking to people, Craig’s Republican opponent Maureen O’Connell was sitting at home.

From Spin Cycle:

“One of Nassau Legis. Craig Johnson’s canvassers in the state Senate race ran into Johnson’s opponent, Republican County Clerk Maureen O’Connell, after the campaign worker got a little lost Monday evening.

O’Connell had just pulled into a driveway in the East Williston neighborhood when the canvasser, needing directions, approached her. As they talked, the canvasser recognized O’Connell and she realized she was talking to one of her opponent’s foot soldiers. They exchanged pleasantries and wished each other luck.”

Now, since the WFP is running the canvass, I can give you the inside story straight from the canvasser who talked to her:

“A little after 5:30, I was trying to find an address on my  turf and was looking from the sidewalk at a number on one of the houses from the  street to determine if it was on my walk list.  A woman saw me looking at her house and came out to ask if she could help me.

I recognized her as Maureen O’Connell as soon as she came out because she had an O’Connell lawn sign and I’m friends with one of her former Assembly opponents.  I decided to exchange pleasantries, and we each did some campaigning and talked about the situation in Albany.  Then she realized I was part of the WFP canvass campaigning for Craig Johnson, and we wished each other good luck and parted ways.  I kept canvassing for the rest of the night and she went back inside.”

Gonna have to work harder than that to win this race.

21 more days until Election Day!

Volunteer | Donate

Over the past few weeks, I’ve been spending a bit of time doing research into independent expenditures made by party committees and independent PACs to get a better sense of how the IE battle played out in many key races across the country. One of the things that I thought would be interesting to share with you all is a top ten list, for both our side and theirs, of the biggest non-party committee expenditures of the cycle for House races. Here’s what the Republican-allied side looks like:

District	Candidate	Committee	For/Against	Total Expenditures
KY-03	NORTHUP, ANNE	NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS PAC	For	$1,004,275.00
NM-01	WILSON, HEATHER	NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS PAC	For	$761,734.00
ID-01	GRANT, LARRY	CLUB FOR GROWTH INC PAC	Against	$441,437.17
CT-05	JOHNSON, NANCY	AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PAC	For	$318,426.00
FL-22	SHAW, CLAY	AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PAC	For	$202,179.00
GA-06	PRICE, THOMAS	PAC OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONS	For	$200,000.00
AZ-08	GRAF, RANDY	MINUTEMAN PAC INC	For	$115,482.80
CT-05	JOHNSON, NANCY	PAC OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONS	For	$100,000.00
FL-08	KELLER, RIC	NATIONAL RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION PAC	For	$100,000.00
IA-01	WHALEN, MIKE	NATIONAL RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION PAC	For	$100,000.00

And here’s what our side looks like:

District	Candidate	Committee	For/Against	Total Expenditures
OH-01	CHABOT, STEVE	AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY & MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES	Against	$620,670.00
OH-15	PRYCE, DEBORAH	AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY & MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES	Against	$530,425.00
VA-02	DRAKE, THELMA	MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION	Against	$529,537.70
CT-05	JOHNSON, NANCY	AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY & MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES	Against	$514,354.00
AZ-05	HAYWORTH, JD	NEA FUND FOR CHILDREN AND PUBLIC EDUCATION	Against	$480,763.99
CA-11	POMBO, RICHARD	DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE ACTION FUND	Against	$470,004.36
IL-08	BEAN, MELISSA	NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE	For	$465,568.00
CT-05	JOHNSON, NANCY	MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION	Against	$444,424.00
OH-15	PRYCE, DEBORAH	MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION	Against	$417,623.00
PA-10	SHERWOOD, DON	AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY & MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES	Against	$361,750.00

Aside from a few big players (most notably the National Realtors PAC, who also made considerable expenditures on behalf of Ed Case‘s primary challenge to Sen. Daniel Akaka, as well as Melissa Bean’s re-election campaign), there is a steep drop-off on the Republican side in terms of the number and quality of IEs relative to the robust and broadly-focused expenditures made by Democratic-allied PACs. Another thing to note is that these Republican expenditures are listed as disproportionately positive, while the Democratic expenditures were disproportionately classified as negative expenditures. Keep in mind, though, that such homogenous categories may betray the shades of grey that exist in such expenditures–this money could have been spent on advertising that contained a mix of positive and negative messages, but the particular committee may have chosen to file an expenditure as “for” a candidate rather than “against” someone else.

I’m still puttering around with a lot more numbers like these, so if anyone has any other research suggestions under the category of expenditures, please feel free to make a suggestion.

The DCCC has recently released some notes indicating that they plan on targeting Rep. Vito Fossella (NY-13), my favorite candidate for retirement, rather hard in his quest for a seventh term in 2008.  This from their press release on Jan 12, 2006;

The 2006 cycle proved that ethics matters to average voters. While there were several Republicans defeated this past cycle as a direct result of their ethical lapses, a handful returned to Washington and should be considered among the most vulnerable.

We will aggressively work in districts targeting ethically challenged incumbents like Tim Murphy (PA-18), Gary Miller (CA-42), Rick Renzi (AZ-01), John Doolittle (CA-04), Jerry Lewis (CA-41) and Vito Fossella (NY-13).

First off, if this is an indication of how Rep. Chris Van Hollen will lead the DCCC efforts to pick up more seats in 2008, then by all means my enthusiasm is going to be hard to keep subdued.  However I, like many of us have been burnt by the DCCC in the past, so I am not jumping into this new relationship naively thinking things will be different this time.  In 2004 the DCCC or some individuals associated with the group lead our Democratic candidate Frank Barbaro to believe that they were ready to interject some money into the race.  That money was always just around the corner.  They just toyed with our emotions for a bit and eventually stood us up.  If that was heartbreaking then 2006 just incensed us and lead many to swear off dancing with the DCCC ever again.  After many of the local officials slowly backed out of the race, Stephen Harrison a local lawyer stepped up to take on Rep. Fossella and walked into the nomination due to his fighting spirit.  After being vetted by the local party and being given the nod we find out that the DCCC decided to involve itself, backing a city council member who lived outside the district, in March just eight months before the election. 

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), which bankrolls House races, yesterday said it would embrace de Blasio’s candidacy. (Staten Island Advance)

De Blasio, whom was being backed by Rep. Rangel, eventually backed out after a month of indecision, leaving Harrison to focus on Rep. Fossella.  One of the bigger problems with this fiasco is that New York state has a late September primary.  This makes a divisive primary an ineffective spring board to then take on a Republican incumbent in under two months.

Curiously though it wasn’t until long after this past November that I came across this piece in the New York Sun from June 28, 2005;

New York Democrats are not alone in their efforts to win the Fossella seat. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has already started priming the 13th Congressional District for 2006.

SNIP

Over Memorial Day weekend, it paid for radio advertisements attacking Mr. Fossella’s vote against a measure that would have expanded Tricare, the military health-insurance program.

SNIP

The organization also commissioned a poll that matched Mr. Fossella with three potential Democratic challengers: City Council Member Michael McMahon, Assemblyman Michael Cusick, and state Senator Diane Savino.

SNIP

In addition to the Congressional Campaign Committee’s efforts, the Seattle-based Democratic Advancement Political Action Committee, a group created in 2002 to raise money for Democratic candidates nationwide, plans to organize grassroots field operations once a Democratic candidate is chosen.

I am bewildered as to where all of this is coming from.  DCCC funded polling?  DCCC funded radio advertising?  Organizing grassroots field operations?  Not surprisingly after the DCCC slumped away from the district eleven months later, no polling was done by the DCCC even though indications were that Fossella had internal polling showing him in trouble.  No radio ads were purchased by the DCCC.  No grassroots field operations were established.  Harrison went on to give Fossella the most competitive race yet, holding him to 57-43 (59-41 in 2004), being outspent by a margin of 13:1. 

And to make this flirtation worse, it was just back in June 2006, after the DCCC backed out of the race, that they put out a press release attacking three Republicans for their unethical lavish travels; Rep. Pombo (since defeated), Rep. Sweeney (since defeated) and Rep. Fossella.  We have heard the story before.

So it is not without some trepidation that I re-read that DCCC statement that they will be going after Fossella in 2008.  But not all developments are worrisome.  On December 18, 2006 I suggested that Rep. Fossella should be moved to new committees, instead of continually rewarding him with seats on both the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and the House Committee on Financial Services.  The reasoning is obvious;

The side benefit, and reason for suggesting these moves is that Rep. Fossella receives large amounts of financial support from the industries that benefit from limited oversight by these two committees; financial institutions and real estate/housing. Fossella’s largest sector donations come from the Finance, Insurance and Real Estate sector, a total of nearly $1.5 million in donations and influence, $358,790 of that just in the last election cycle.

2004-06 Donors (via Opensecrets.org)
1. Securities & Investment: $109,500
3. Real Estate: $86,050
4. Insurance: $60,250
5. Health Professionals: $52,700
7. Accountants: $37,400
9. Commercial Banks: $33,790

So it was with renewed excitement, and new found ability to control the minds of our new Democratic majority leaders, that news broke that Fossella was forced to give up one of his committee assignments.  In the end he choose to leave the House Committee on Financial Services, the largest sector donor to his campaigns.  It also made me appear to know what I was talking about back in December;

Should Fossella get moved from one of his committees he served on last term (04-06) consider that a good sign that this seat is on the DCCC’s list in 08 and that they are going to start the race early.

The actual implications of both of these developments will be more apparent next year, however right now we can see that Fossella’s fund raising abilities should be drastically impacted.  Without some unforeseen major fund raising prowess, Fossella could have trouble cracking $1 million.  To make matters worse for him, he ended his 2006 campaign over $200,000 in debt.  From what I have seen this campaign debt is a first for Fossella, who tends to carry over a nice chunk of cash meaning Democrats typically start out well behind.

So is this seat really in play or are we just setting ourselves up to be stood up and heart broken by the DCCC once again?  That answer will no doubt have a lot to do with who jumps into this race and how effective they are at early fund raising and early volunteer support.  You can follow speculation at 2008 Race Tracker.  However, if Fossella is one of the most ethically challenged (=corrupt) Republicans, can the DCCC really walk away from this district again? 

http://ny13.blogspot…

So the Minimum Wage increase got 82 Republican House votes, which on face is encouraging but in my mind it begs an important question. Why did it take nine years and Democratic Control of the House to actually get a Minimum Wage increase passed?

Excluding the two Freshman. 80 Republican Members of Congress voted for the Minimum Wage Increase. Now clearly on  some issues small minorities within a party often don’t break with their parties leadership on issues because of the danger . But this was by no means a small minority.  80 Republicans represented more than a third of the entire Caucus at the time.  This group could have easily forced the House Leadership to pass a Minimum wage increase that the Senate could have passed without linking  it to the Estate tax. I know there are many not in these parts but some in the party who would  think that now we are in the Majority we should be less aggressive in defeating Republicans who could be useful to us, better to focus on defending the seats we have.  Just remember that it is these 80 Republicans who kept the poorest workers in this country from getting a raise, not because they don’t believe in the Minimum Wage but because they didn’t have the courage to stand up to Tom Delay and Company.  It will take a lot more acts of actual political courage for me to believe any of these Members of Congress has truly changed.  So to the Shays’, Wilsons’ and Gelachs’ of the world, speaking for no one but myself, I am still coming to send you into the private sector.

The “80”  Should haves.
Aderholt
Alexander
Bachus
Biggert
Bonner
Bono
Bozeman
Brown Waite
Capito
Castle
Crenshaw
Davis  KY
Jo Ann Davis
L Diaz-Balart
M Diaz-Balart
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English
Everett
Ferguson
Forbes
Fossella
Frelinghuysen
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gillmor
  Goode
Goodlatte
Hayes
Hulshof
Jindal
Johnson IL
Jones  NC
Keller
King NY
Kirk
Kuhl
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
LoBiondo
Marchant
McCotter
McHugh
Miller MI
Moran KS
Tim Murphy
Peterson PA
Petri
Platts
Poe
Pryce OH
Ramstad
Regula
Reichert
Renzi
Rogers AL
Rogers KY
Ros-Lehtinen
Saxton
Schmidt
Shays
Shimkus
Simpson
Smith NJ
Smith TX
Stearns
Turner 
Upton
Walden OR
Walsh NY
Wamp
Weller
Whitfield
Wilson
Wolf
Young AK
Young FL

Since the infamous 1984 House election that was decided by a mere four votes, Indiana’s Eighth District has been a swing district that is fiercely fought for every two years.  Former Sheriff Brad Ellsworth’s recent 24% victory over incumbent Republican Congressman John Hostettler, however,  may herald a new era of less competitive races for this seat. Ellsworth’s strong fundraising ability, culturally conservative and fiscally conservative views combined with his telegenic presence will likely help him lock down this swing district.  The Eighth’s departure from its perennial spot on competitive House seat lists will leave a void for another microcosmic, marginal district; that is, in fact,  another  one called the “Eighth”, North Carolina’s Eighth District, to be precise.

The 8th has had a political history. The District shifted hands in 1960, 1968, 1974 and 1998 and it had close races  in 1984, 1988, 1994 and in 2006. This district is naturally polarized between the Central North Carolina Counties that are ancestrally Republican and the Eastern Counties that are full of Yellow Dog Democrats. The population parity of the Republican Textile Counties and the more Democratic rural counties contribute to the close elections in this district. The  2000 Almanac of American Politics notes the  1998 court ordered re-redistricting plan removed conservative Iredell, Moore and  Rowan counties from the 8th district and replaced them with predominately Democratic precincts. This move was meant to shore up Rep. Bill Hefner (D), who instead decided to retire in 1998.

His replacement was textile owner Republican Robin Hayes who won an open seat in a tough political environment for Republicans by 51%-49% over an underfunded political neophyte. Hayes then faced a rematch against Democrat Mike Taylor in 2000. Hayes exploited the political advantage of running as a Southern Republican in a Presidential election and he used pork barrel  projects to court public favor en route to a 11% victory.  Hayes wasn’t safe yet. The Democratic legislature added even more of Democratic Mecklenburg County and the Democrats nominated a local lawyer named Chris Kouri. Kouri and Hayes’ 2004 opponent lacked resources, charisma and experience.

Rep. Hayes’ low key nature helped him stay below the political radar of National Democrats, but unlike nearly all Southern Republican Congressman, Hayes’ district actually trended Democratic in the 2000’s – Bush’s victory percentage declined by 2% in 2004, despite going up by 3% nationally.
The 2006 election created a proverbial perfect storm for Democrats, but it later became a missed opportunity. In early 2005, the Congress voted 217-215 to approve the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), which put many North Carolinan textile workers at risk.  The deciding vote was cast by a Congressman named Robin Hayes, whose controversial vote left him vulnerable back at home. Instead of targeting Hayes, who occupies a a marginal district, Democrats ignored it and focused on helping former NFL player Heath Shuler in his run against GOP Rep. Charles Taylor. Taylor had won reelection in 2004 by a similar margin to Hayes, but he occupied an even more Republican district. The reason why the DCCC targeted the 11th and not the 8th  was likely candidate recruitment.

After Iraq War Vet Tim Dunn announced his bid for Congress in the 8th, Rahm Emanuel and the DCCC pledged their full support. Dunn’s campaign was plagued by fundraising troubles and he eventually dropped out before the primary. The remaining viable candidate in the district was a “Fourth tiered recruit” named Larry Kissell. Kissell was an 8th grade geography teacher, and ironically, a former textile worker. Kissell’s  matchup vs. the former textile owner was a David vs. Goliath race in more ways than one.  Hayes enjoyed a 7-1 cash advantage over Kissell.

For most of 2006, Hayes led by double digits. The turning point came when Kissell’s  campaign offered gas at $1.22 a gallon, the  same price it was when Hayes was elected to Congress. Kissell gained a huge boost from the Mark Foley scandal in early October. By early November, it was clear Kissell was on the verge of an upset. The combination of the War in Iraq, an unpopular  President and Congress also chipped away at Goliath. In the end, Hayes prevailed by the second closest margin in the Country – just 339 votes.  Had the DCCC had the foresight to target this race, an provided badly needed financial support,  Kissell would have won.

The problem now is what to do in 2008. Taylor’s rematch in 2000 flopped because of the increased conservative turnout. Another factor working against Kissell is that Hayes now understands his vulnerability — he won’t be caught politically sleepwalking like he was in 2006. Recent history isn’t sanguine for comeback candidates like Kissell.  In a similarly split district, Pat Casey lost an open seat race  to Don Sherwood in 1998 by only 515 votes, but he lost by 6% in 2000.

If the Democrats succeed in passing their agenda and nominate an attractive Presidential candidate like Barack Obama or Bill Richardson, they can win Republican districts like this one. If they remain divided on Iraq and nominate Hillary Clinton, this bellwether district will stick with Rep. Robin Hayes. On Election 2008, watch North Carolina’s Eighth – as the new “Bloody Eighth” goes, so goes the country.