Month: February 2007

An interesting development:

Unwilling to wait for the courts to rule on the disputed Sarasota elections, a key member of the U.S. Senate is launching an investigation into the 13th Congressional District race.

U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said she will ask the investigative arm of Congress, the Government Accountability Office, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology to conduct a “top-to-bottom investigation” to determine what caused 18,000 Sarasota County undervotes in the race for Congress.

A GAO investigation could definitely lap the current court case brought by Dem Christine Jennings. Right now, we’re still waiting on an appeal of the trial court judge’s ruling that Jennings can’t get review ES&S‘s voting machine source code. At first I thought we’d find out this month, but now Jennings’ lawyers are saying we won’t hear any earlier than March.

But with Feinstein’s newly aggressive posture, we  might not even have to wait on the appeals process: The Senate can issue subpoenas to crack this stubborn nut open. Then the real fun begins.

P.S. It’s also notable that this pressure is coming from the Senate, rather than the House, which has said it prefers to wait until the court case runs its course. My sense, based on tiny hints in the article linked above, is that the Senate has a freer hand here, since (as Feinstein is doing) it can frame the issue as purely one of election integrity, rather than appearing to try to increase its majority by an extra seat.

(Thanks to ca democrat.)

(If Hagel decides to skip a re-election bid (for whatever reason), this could be a marquee race. Nebraska has a long history of electing Democrats to the U.S. Senate. – promoted by James L.)

From today’s Omaha World Herald:

Mayor Mike Fahey knew what was coming when he agreed recently to meet with two of the nation’s top Democrats – a pitch for him to run for the U.S. Senate.

In the past, Fahey quickly blunted any speculation that he was interested in running for higher office. That has changed, with Fahey now saying he will consider a Senate race if Republican U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel doesn’t seek re-election in 2008.

Late last month, Fahey was in Washington, D.C., for a mayors conference when he was asked to meet with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

“They talked to me about the Senate race, and they were very complimentary,” Fahey said. “They said all the right things.”

The DSCC is apparently recruiting Fahey to run for the seat, that’s a very good sign. It’s worth noting that this is only a possibility if Hagel does not run for reelection, but if Fahey does run for Senate, this becomes a tremendous pick-up opportunity.

Okay ramblers, let’s get ramblin’.

From The Times of London, dated Feb. 10:

Barack Obama will make his formal entry into the 2008 presidential race today at the old state capitol building in Springfield, Illinois, invoking the legacy of another man who began his political career against the same backdrop of Doric columns — Abraham Lincoln.

Karl-Thomas works for Actblue. X-posted to dKos and MyDD

Most Swing State readers have at least some familiarity with ActBlue.  You may be among the 15,000 who contributed via the 2006 Netroots fundraising page, or among the 110,000+ contributors who have used ActBlue to send $18 million (and counting) to over 1200 Democratic campaigns and committees since we launched in 2004.  And as a SSP reader you certainly know why Democratic dollars are crucial to the political future of the country.

But in recent conversation one prominent blogosphere denizen made an eye-opening comment. To paraphrase: “I know ActBlue is the place where I go to contribute to the netroots candidates…but is that the big idea?” Well…yes and no.  The netroots fundraising page is a big idea — $1.5 million raised on that one page alone sure made a lot of people take notice.  But there’s a bigger picture here, a bigger idea about changing politics.

Rather than spewing off a bunch of talking points, though, we’re going to take a different approach: in the coming days and weeks, as part of the BlogPac/ActBlue fundraising drive we’re going to tell you some stories, do some analysis, and use those pieces to build up a 30,000-foot view of ActBlue and how it’s shifting the terrain on which our political battles are fought.

Seeing as I’ve just recently joined ActBlue after having graduated from UT-Austin, I wanted to start by just taking you through some of the highlights that jumped out at me when I was thinking about jumping on board full-time, and then tell you a bit about where we’re going.

What is ActBlue?- ActBlue is a Federal PAC and series of State PACs active in 22 states that empowers anyone — individuals, local groups, and national organizations — to fundraise for the Democratic candidates of their choice. To date, that’s $18,953,791 worth of empowerment. Our goal is to help Democrats get elected by putting ActBlue’s powerful fundraising tools in the hands of every local blogger, Democratic committee, and progressive grassroots group around the country.  We’re going make sure every eligible state legislative campaign and executive campaign knows that with ActBlue can accept online contributions from day one. And we’re going encourage every federal campaign to leverage ActBlue’s community fundraising platform — and thereby encourage them to engage in a more democratic politics.

ActBlue Facts and Stats- ActBlue is now being used for Presidential level fundraising with our 2008 candidate and draft funds. But to set up the framework for how we got here let me begin by pointing out some interesting historical data.

• ActBlue was there for candidates like Richard Morrison in 2004, Paul Hackett in 2005, and Ned Lamont & Ciro Rodriguez in 2006. In each case, impressive candidates and their supporters organized to raise unexpected online funds that changed the electoral dynamic and media perception of races across the country. The power of small donors was realized.
• In the 05-06 cycle, the top 5 recipients benefiting from ActBlue were Freshman Sen. Jim Webb ($890k), Freshman Rep. Joe Sestak ($870k), IL-10 challenger Dan Seals ($540k), OH-02 challenger Paul Hackett ($540k), Freshman Rep. Tim Mahoney ($510k).
• Progressive bloggers Daily Kos, MyDD, Swing State Project, Firedoglake, Crooks & Liars, Down with Tyranny, Atrios, and AmericaBlog together raised $2.3 million in 2005-06. You know the rest…
• Over 110,000 people have now donated to candidates using ActBlue. The average contribution is $110 split between two candidates. 500 candidates for federal elected office received contributions via ActBlue in primaries and general elections. Over 360 state level candidates and committees in our 22 active states received contributions. There are 1,200 fundraisers who have set up ActBlue fundraising pages to support their favorite candidates with unique methods (like the HelpMeGetAHaircut page, Pizza for Progressives, or I Donated a Case of Beer to Barack Obama page).
• Supporting ActBlue as part of the BlogPAC/ActBlue monthly recurring donations campaign is a great investment. With only $25,000 in seed money when it was started in 2004, ActBlue turned around and saw $850,000 distributed to Democrats. For 05-06, distributions grew to $18 million with only $345,000 in operating expenses. So while traditional fundraising practices return $2 on ever $1 in investment, ActBlue was able to turn every $1 in investment into $50 in return for campaigns.

ActBlue Success Stories- Some specific projects that were active last year under the radar of the netroots community at large include the following.

• Secretary of State Project- The Secretary of State Project used bloggers, of which I was one, and ActBlue to raise $415,000 for seven Democratic candidates for Secretary of State in swing states.  The result: Democratic victories in Ohio, Minnesota, New Mexico, Nevada, and Iowa with a near miss in Colorado bringing hope for fair 2008 presidential elections in these states.

 

• Sen. Maria Cantwell- ActBlue’s slate-style fundraising has encouraged unprecedented teamplay among Democrats.  In 2006, Maria Cantwell, facing her own challenging race, used ActBlue to raise $100,000 for Darcy Burner, Peter Goldmark, and Richard Wright, all of whom were facing tough House races in Washington state.

   

• ActBlue Utah- Utah citizen-activists and party committee members came together to raise $10,000 so that ActBlue could expand to support Utah state candidates.  ActBlue and the Utah State Democratic Party then worked to train Democratic candidates and campaign staff in using ActBlue to fundraise online.

So where are we going from here?

1. Expansion to further states- State legislative and executive candidates in 22 states can fundraise with ActBlue; we’re going to be tackling the remaining 28. We’re currently active in Alabama, Arizona, California, Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Maine, Mississippi (soon), Montana, North Dakota, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia (full launch end of February), Wisconsin, and Wyoming. If your state isn’t listed and you know some resident campaign finance experts or geeks let us know and we may very well move your state to the top of the list!
2. Training and campaign services-  It’s not enough to just provide technology; we want to help campaigns and fundraisers use it well.  In the summer and fall of 2006 we began a series of very successful training conference calls about fundraising in general and ActBlue in particular.  We see an enormous opportunity to positively influence the operations of campaigns and the impact of grassroots activists through online-, phone-, and in-person trainings.
3. Expanding ActBlue beyond fundraising to volunteering and event management-  Just as ActBlue has created a unique public space for online fundraising, we will be expanding our website to enable campaigns, groups, and individuals to publicize events, accept online RSVPs, and manage their volunteers.

This is be no means the end or final vision for ActBlue; it’s evolving and growing with the input, needs, and suggestions of campaigns and donors like you. I’ll be exploring many of these areas in more detail in future posts- giving examples of great ideas and ways people have effectively used ActBlue to achieve victory and grow the Democratic Party across the country.

So what do you think?– Seriously, the power of distributed fundraising is similar to the power of distributed idea creation. What types of things do you think we could do or should investigate? Legal barriers might prevent some suggestions, for others it might be money or time. But there very well could be some outstanding innovative ideas, big picture or small tweaks that we should know about. Leave a comment, we’ll be reading and responding. And if you like what we do, may I again direct your attention here.

From the Evans-Novak Political Report (via e-mail – no link):

While some discuss a fourth election contest between Rep. Baron Hill (D), and former Rep. Mike Sodrel (R), Hill may actually be preparing for a run against Gov. Mitch Daniels (R). For Hill, the equation is simple: a weakened Republican governor in a mostly conservative state, with no other obviously strong Democratic candidates in the wings. Although Republican polls smile on Daniels, nearly everyone attributes the failure of GOP congressional candidates last year to anger over some of Daniels’s official acts, such as the privatization of the state’s Northern Toll Road and the shift to Daylight Saving Time.

The Democratic mayors of Fort Wayne and Indianapolis have decided against entering the race, as has Sen. Evan Bayh (D). That leaves only State Senate Minority Leader Richard Young (D).

Meanwhile, Hill’s own conservative district could give him trouble again in the presidential election year — as it did unexpectedly in 2004 — should he try to stay in the House. This will particularly be the case if someone like Hillary Clinton heads the Democratic ticket.

Should Hill decide to run for governor, Sodrel would be heavily favored to take back this seat against any comer.

One additional detail to note is that Hill had by far the weakest showing of the three Democrats who beat Republican incumbents in Indiana last year. He won with just 50% of the vote, and indeed, a Libertarian candidate took nearly 10,000 votes – just a shade more than Hill’s margin over Sodrel.

So I do agree that this might be a possible “escape route” for Hill, and that it would probably come at the cost of his current seat. However, I’m not sure Novak is right about Daniels’ current approval ratings. In November, he was 41st in net approval among all governors according to SUSA, at 43-49. And it’s worth noting that four of the guys who were less popular than Daniels no longer hold office.

On the flipside, a more recent poll puts Daniels at 57-40. But be aware that the firm that took this poll, Public Opinion Strategies, is a Republican outfit. And while Daniels didn’t commission this poll (the Indiana Association of Realtors did), he’s been a client of theirs in the recent past. I look forward to seeing SUSA’s next survey to see where things really stand.

Race Tracker pages (feel free to edit as needed): IN-GOV | IN-09.

A lot is at stake tonight in the special election to fill New York’s 7th State Senate district.  Our guy, Craig Johnson, has a lot going for him: money, mo’, and Spitzer (I hear that he’s a steamroller).  The Republicans have… well, what do they have other than a pile of dirty tricks?

I won’t be able to liveblog the results tonight due to an exam tomorrow, but I’m sure that Newsday will put something up as polls close at 9PM Eastern.  And for the best coverage of the night’s events, you can’t do much better than the folks over at the Albany Project.

Let the games begin.

UPDATE: Results here.  With 242 of 264 EDs counted, Craig Johnson has just pulled ahead by 800 votes… C’mon, Han old buddy, don’t let me down.

UPDATE 2: Whoa, make that a 2000+ vote lead for Johnson!  Very nice!

UPDATE 3 (DavidNYC): Craig Johnson wins! Go Team Blue!

(Great, great stuff. – promoted by James L.)

Cross-posted from MN Campaign Report and Big Orange at DavidNYC’s request – hope it’s up to snuff!

The National Journal (subscription req’d) recently dug into disbursement records for Congressional and Senate candidates in the 2006 election to answer an interesting question:  How much did a given candidate spend on each vote he or she eventually received?  Alternately, how efficiently did candidates spend their hard-earned warchests?

As noted, this is an interesting question, especially when it comes to Minnesota.  The 2006 U.S. Senate race between Hennepin County Attorney Amy Klobuchar and Sixth District Congressman Mark Kennedy saw nearly $20 million in candidate committee disbursements, and the race between Michele Bachmann and Patty Wetterling to succeed Kennedy in his Congressional seat was quite expensive as well. 

But there’s something missing from the National Journal’s analysis.  Even in an underfunded position, a certain number of voters are always going to vote a certain way – what’s usually known as “the base”.  The Republican base was never going to vote for Amy Klobuchar in statistically significant numbers, nor was the DFL base going to defect in droves to the Kennedy banner.  It’s the votes beyond the base – the marginal votes earned – that might yield more insightful data.

Likewise, there’s a margin in terms of dollars spent.  Even marginally competitive candidates are going to raise and spend at least a certain level of money – it’s what they raise and spend beyond that level that we can focus on as a measure of their effectiveness.

This Marginal Dollars per Marginal Positive Outcome has been used by Baseball Prospectus in analyzing clubs’ efficiency in spending – high-revenue teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, and Dodgers pay dearly for each win above what a team of rookies, each paid the league minimum, would achieve.

Enough baseball – more political statistics!

Some definitions:

• —Net Disb:  Net Disbursements from the candidate’s primary campaign committee, courtesy of FEC.gov
• —dBP:  District Base Percentage.  This is a somewhat fudged figure, based on convention wisdom about the political dynamics in each district and statewide.  It accounts for a slight DFL tilt statewide, conservative tilts in the Second and Sixth Congressional Districts, a heavy tilt toward the DFL in the Fifth, and a generally even balance in the First.
• —dTV:  District Total Votes.  Total number of votes cast in this race for competitive major-party candidates.  Fifth District candidate Tammy Lee counted in this analysis, as did John Binkowski in the Sixth, but Robert Fitzgerald and others did not.
• —Bvotes:  Base votes.  Candidate’s vote total times their base percentage – again somewhat fudged due to conventional wisdom.
• —Mvotes:  Marginal votes.  Total votes minus base votes – this is an attempt to represent votes the candidate earned over the course of the campaign beyond those that would vote for a carrot with the right letter after its name.
• —Mdisb:  Marginal Disbursements.  This is another somewhat fudged figure.  In the several competitive congressional races in Minnesota, I defined the minimum spending level as that of Alan Fine, Republican candidate in the Fifth District, who raised and spent a shade under $200,000.  For the Senate race, I defined “competitive funding” as a cool $3,000,000 – in an inexpensive media market, three million should provide at least a modicum of competitiveness in a statewide federal race.  If anyone has a better figure for this, I’m all ears.
• —mD/mV:Marginal Dollars Spent per Marginal Vote Earned – the mother lode.

Caveats:  There are several fudge points in this analysis, including the base percentages and disbursement levels.  I hope they’re generally accurate.  This analysis also does not account for larger political events and trends, including hurricanes, wars, and ineptitude leading to popular dissatisfaction.  Nor does it account for independent expenditures by political parties and outside organizations, the effects of which are difficult to quantify.

Nevertheless, in the aftermath of 2006, this analysis may further clarify who spent money well and who did not.

The chart above reveals some interesting trends.  Many of the mD/mV numbers make sense – Mark Kennedy spent a lot of money on each vote he earned, because he didn’t get many beyond his base.  Tim Walz, in defeating entrenched incumbent Gil Gutknecht, spent his smaller warchest efficiently.  Although Keith Ellison had a natural advantage in a DFL-friendly district, it turns out that he spent a fairly high dollar amount for each vote beyond the hardcore DFL vote, and Tammy Lee spent efficiently, if only to achieve a 25% finish.  And fittingly, the Sixth District race saw two candidates spending massive amounts of money for each vote beyond their bases.

Given the final outcome, it appears that this was an extremely inefficient race on which to spend money.

Earlier in the day, Markos billed the likely matchup between Maine’s Rep. Tom Allen (D) and Susan Collins (R) for control of her Senate seat in 2008 as a “battle of the titans”, which leads me to ask: does Allen really have what it takes to win this thing?

Now, I’m not trying to say that Allen is a weak candidate.  In a state with only two House districts, it’s clear that Allen would be a fairly serious threat to an entrenched Collins.  But with a Senator as popular as Collins (who enjoys a whopping 73% approval last November, according to the latest SUSA tracking poll in November), Allen will have to execute a perfect campaign in order to win.

Let’s check his track record as of late.  Here’s how he fared in 2006, according to CNN:

Allen (D): 61
Curley (R): 31
Kamilewicz (I): 8

And here’s his 2004 performance:

Allen (D): 60
Summers (R): 40

Allen’s district has a PVI of D+6.2.  His House colleague, Democrat Mike Michaud, occupies a seat that’s a shade less Democratic at D+3.5.  In his sophomore re-election bid in 2004, he won by a margin of 58-39, a margin very similar to Allen’s, who had been serving since 1998 by this point.  In 2006, Michaud crushed his Republican opponent by a 70-30 margin.

Now, there are a lot of dynamics left unstated here: Kamilewicz, his 2006 third-party opponent, ran a peace campaign that probably cut into his left flank, although it only cost a mere $42,000.  And while Allen enjoyed a 4-1 spending advantage over Republican Darlene Curley in 2006, he didn’t exactly saturate the market with his total expenditures of $650,000.  But the point I’m trying to make is this: winning with 60%, especially in a Democratic year such as 2006, doesn’t leave me feeling overwhelmed.

Does anyone have a better sense as to why Allen hasn’t been able to peak above 60% since 2002?

From Taegan Goddard’s Political Wire:

“Alan Schlesinger — the Republican who got 10 percent in last year’s Connecticut Senate race against independent Joe Lieberman and Democratic flash-in-the-pan Ned Lamont — is sniffing a possible congressional bid for the seat of new U.S. Rep. Ron Klein (D-FL),” according to the Palm Beach Post. “Schlesinger says he’s been spending a few months a year in Palm Beach County for about 20 years and has family here. He recently spoke to the Boca Raton Republican Club.”

“The GOP wants to retake the marginally Republican seat Klein won from 26-year Republican incumbent Clay Shaw last year. But big-name local Rs have so far stayed on the sidelines.”

This one gives me the giggles.  I think we would all warmly welcome the return of Alan Gold, no?