Month: May 2008

As we move the campaign from Democratic primary to general election mode, I am going to make some changes to the weekly progress report.  Over the last few months I’ve used this weekly report give updates on the events we’ve participated in over the past week.   I’ll continue to keep you informed on where we’re at and what we’re doing but I’m going to provide comment on issues of interest to the citizens of the 5th district.   We’ll also keep you updated on what is going on inside the campaign.

Truckers Converge on Washington – Fuel Prices Are Hurting Everyone:   Last week, truckers converged on Washington to protest the high price of diesel fuel and to show members of Congress the negative effects on the transportation industry that is so vital to our nation’s economy.   In response to the trucker’s rally, Congressman John Peterson issued a press release stating the following: “For the past year and four months, the House Democrat leadership has done absolutely nothing to reduce the price at the pump. Their unwillingness to address the energy crisis at it’s roots “supply and demand” will only further enhance the economic burden on every man, woman, and child in America.  The protest today, by blue collar, working class truckers, further emphasizes how out of touch the Democrat-controlled Congress is with the American people.”.

I have to take issue with Congressman Peterson’s statement placing blame on the policies of the Democratic Congress over the past 16 months.   In fact, this crisis has been building in the 6 years prior while the Republican Party had total control of the White House and Congress and no meaningful legislation was offered to avert the impending crisis.   Additionally, it must be recognized that the instability of the Middle East, brought on by President George W. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq, is a factor in OPEC’s ongoing policy to drive oil prices to record highs.  

It should also be noted that President Bush has done little to influence OPEC policies either.   I can remember in the 90’s when OPEC would begin to drive up the price per barrel of oil, President Bill Clinton would immediately order a release of strategic oil reserves to put more oil on the market which would stabilize oil prices.

Frankly, blame must lie on both sides of the aisle in Washington.   Back in the 1970’s, our nation received a wake up call but leaders in Washington ignored it for the last 30 plus years.  While other nations invested in alternative fuels and worked to decrease their dependence on oil from the Middle East, government leaders in the United States continued to allow the powerful petroleum industry to dictate our energy policies.  

Now, we are at a critical point again.   Families are struggling to afford gas and heating oil.  Truckers are feeling the pinch of higher diesel fuel prices which will be passed on in higher prices to the consumers.   Everyone is hurting, except who?  Who is making record profits?  The same powerful petroleum industry that our government leaders allowed to dictate our energy policy for the last 30 plus years!   And, does anyone really believe the solution is to allow the petroleum industry access to traditional oil reserves.   No, we need to move away from “Big Oil” controlling our energy policy and move towards renewable and alternative fuel technologies.  The wake up call has returned, the alarm clock is ringing and we better not hit the snooze button again.

I’ve made it clear from the start of this campaign that I’m not running against Congressman Peterson.   He has been very helpful and supportive to Clearfield County and our county commissioners have built a very positive relationship with him throughout his service as our congressman.   The point I’m making is the oil crisis we are facing is truly a threat to our economy, our national security and our way of life.   There is no time for partisan finger pointing.  Congressman Peterson is correct in this regard.  We need our leaders in Washington to address this issue NOW.   Congress needs to forget it is an election year and get to work on plausible solutions in a bipartisan manner because the people they claim to represent are suffering.  They can’t wait for January 2009, they need help now.  

Campaign Organization Changes:  Over the next few weeks, we will be announcing some important changes and additions to the McCracken for Congress campaign committee.  The changes will put organization in place throughout the 5th Congressional District.  We know going forward, the race will be tough and we need to work to earn votes in every county in the district.   It will be important to have organized campaign teams in every county to work at the local and county level to spread our message.  It will also help to have people we can count on at the local level who know their communities and will help me learn more about the issues important the people they know.

Mark B. McCracken

Your Candidate For Congress

————————————————————————————————–

This diary is cross-posted at McCracken’s campaign blog, PA’s Blue Fifth

Mark McCracken for Congress

ActBlue page

From the Memphis Commercial Appeal:

Vice President Dick Cheney will stump for Republican Greg Davis at a Southaven rally next Monday, one day before the special election to fill the seat once held by Roger Wicker, the White House confirmed this morning.

Cheney is expected to attend one campaign event, spokesman Jamie Hennigan said. Details of where and when the event will take place were not available so far in advance of the date, he said.

The vote-rich suburb of Southaven, Davis’ base, is one of the strongest counties in Mississippi for the GOP, so if they’re going to roll out Cheney’s pasty ass in order to ramp up turnout, that would be the most logical place to do it.

It looks like the GOP is going to pull out all the stops in order to prevent another loss here.

UPDATE: Davis also has a particularly disgusting new ad out hitting Childers on Obama.  If you want to fight back, please consider doing so on the Swing State Project’s Actblue page for Travis Childers.

Special election: 5/13.

(H/T: 6DofA)

The newest Granite State Poll conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center (4/25-30, likely voters) is out.  Let’s take a look at the numbers.

The Senate race (February in parens):

Jeanne Shaheen (D): 52 (54)

John Sununu (R-inc): 40 (37)

Undecided: 7 (7)

(MoE: ±4.4%)

NH-01:

Carol Shea-Porter (D-inc): 39

Jeb Bradley (R): 45

Undecided: 13

Carol Shea-Porter (D-inc): 43

John Stephen (R): 35

Undecided: 20

(MoE: ±6%)

NH-02:

Paul Hodes (D-inc): 51

Bob Clegg (R): 24

Undecided: 23

Paul Hodes (D-inc): 52

Jennifer Horn (R): 25

Undecided: 22

(MoE: ±6%)

The margin of error may be quite high, and while the GSP has not always had the greatest track record, the results do confirm that Shea-Porter is in a much tougher spot than Hodes is.

(Excellent work.  From the diaries – promoted by James L.)

You may recall I did a few diaries last month where I explored the relationship between representatives’ voting records and the lean of their districts (see here and here). One other question I had wanted to work into my discussion was the role of the various ideological Congressional caucuses.

There are pretty clear differences between the voting records of members of the different caucuses, but does membership in particular caucuses correlate with a particular kind of district? And is any particular caucus generally ‘out-of-whack,’ where the members as a whole tend to overperform or underperform their districts? In particular, I was wondering about the Blue Dogs, who tend to get the lion’s share of the abuse from the left blogosphere. It’s well understood they’re the most conservative members of the House Democrats… but are they also the most underperforming?

For those who aren’t familiar with the caucuses, there are three major ideological caucuses for the House Democrats: the Progressive Caucus, which comprises many of the House’s most liberal members (and, generally, those from the most urban districts), the New Democrat Coalition, which, although it’s a lineal descendent of the Democratic Leadership Council, tends to represent the ideological midpoint of the Democratic caucus, and the Blue Dog Coalition, representing the most conservative Democratic House members (and, not coincidentally, most of the ones from the most rural districts). Also within the Democratic party are the Congressional Black Caucus, which has significant overlap with the Progressive Caucus, and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, which tends to range across the Democratic spectrum. Likewise, although it receives less attention, there is a similar schism on the Republican side, between the Main Street Partnership, comprised generally of more moderate representatives in suburban districts, and the more conservative Republican Study Committee.

Here’s an instance where a picture is worth a thousand words: this chart has a box for each representative (grouped in rows of 10), arranged from most liberal voting record at top to most conservative at bottom, color-coded according to caucus membership. (For record, I’m using Progressive Punch Chips are Down scores, circa March 2008.) As you can see, there’s a pretty clear stepping downward from Progressive to NDC to Blue Dogs to Main Street to RSC. (You’ll notice a lot of squares where there are two, or in one case three, colors jammed in there. A number of people are members of multiple caucuses.)

Notice that this chart is a pretty good match for the following one, which arranges each representative from most Democratic-leaning district (as measured by PVI) at top, to most Republican-leaning district at bottom. In other words, in general, you can see the same basic clustering of Progressive (and CBC) members at top, NDC members below that, and a whole lot of RSC at the bottom. The swing-district middle is a bit more muddled here, split largely between Blue Dogs and Main Streeters with a lot of odds and ends.

While these two graphs show that, in general, there’s a pretty good correlation between voting record, district lean, and caucus membership, they aren’t connected and thus don’t show individual outliers who are either underperforming or overperforming their district leans. For that, let’s turn to a scatterplot that was originally put together by plf515 (from this diary). The vertical axis is how liberal the representative is (here measured by National Journal composite scores from 2007); the horizontal axis is the district lean. I’ve added the same caucus-based color-coding as the previous two graphs. (Note that this graph only covers Democrats.)

The diagonal line represents essentially the center of gravity for all the points on the graph. Dots close to the line represent those for whom voting record and district lean are a predictable fit. The further away from the line a dot is, the more of an outlier the representative is. Above the line, the far-away dots are representatives who are voting more liberally than one would expect based on the district (overperforming the district), while the dots far below the line are representatives who are underperforming the district lean with their voting records.

As you can see, the outliers aren’t consistent with any one caucus or any particular type of voting record: there are some Congressional Black Caucus members who are lagging their extremely Democratic districts (Bill Jefferson in LA-02, as well as Artur Davis in AL-07 and Kendrick Meek in FL-17, two of the four members of both the CBC and the NDC), and there are some Blue Dogs whose conservative records are low even in relation to their moderate or conservative districts (Jim Marshall in GA-08, Dan Boren in OK-02, John Barrow in GA-12, and Jim Cooper in TN-05). (The other two marked outliers are Jose Serrano, of the Progressive and Congressional Hispanic Caucuses, but located in the nation’s most Democratic district… and the purple one is, of course, Dan Lipinski of IL-03, who is unaffiliated although voting like a Blue Dog in a D+10 district.)

More generally, looking at the placement of the dots, they seem to follow the same general pattern: more Progressives and CBC members at the liberal ends of the spectrum, more Blue Dogs at the conservative end, a cluster of NDC members near the very middle. Looking at them in relation to the diagonal line, though, you can see some differences in where they are, relative to the overall center of gravity. The mass of the Blue Dogs tend to cluster below the diagonal line; eyeballed as a whole, they’re underperforming, albeit slightly. The same goes with the Congressional Black Caucus, which clusters below the diagonal line at the other end of the graph, where they tend to occupy the most Democratic districts in the country and are liberal but don’t necessarily have the most liberal voting records to match.

Clustered above the diagonal line tend to be the Progressives — or I should say the “Progressives only,” since many of the Progressive/CBC double-dippers tend to fall below the line — who tend to fall in the D+5 to D+20 range but also in the uppermost tier of liberal voting records. (The Massachusetts delegation alone seems to make up a sizable portion of this clump, along with a few stalwarts like Maurice Hinchey in NY-26 and Tammy Baldwin in WI-02.)

So… as the charts show, caucus membership corresponds pretty well with both voting record and district lean, although, naturally, there are lots of individual deviations. Here are some more data on the caucuses:

All Blue Dogs (49)

20 from South, 7 from Northeast, 12 from Midwest, 10 from West

Median PVI: R+3

PVI Range: D+13 (Baca) to R+17 (Matheson)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 86.43

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 95.65 (Loretta Sanchez) to 68.22 (Barrow)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 57.87

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 83.52 (Mike Thompson) to 29.82 (Marshall)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 76.06

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 93.76 (Arcuri) to 60.39 (Cramer)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 54.1

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 77.8 (Loretta Sanchez) to 43.5 (Marshall)

Bad Votes on Iraq Supplemental: 40 (81.6%)

Bad Votes on FISA: 34 (69.4%)

Bad Votes on ENDA: 14 (28.6%)

Bad Votes on Stem Cells: 9 (18.4%)

Bad Votes on SCHIP override: 1 (2.0%)

Median Rural % of District: 39

Rural % of District Range: 69 (Michaud) to 0.0 (Harman and Loretta Sanchez)

Blue Dogs Only (24)

12 from South, 2 from Northeast, 8 from Midwest, 2 from West

Median PVI: R+4.5

PVI Range: D+10 (Mike Thompson) to R+17 (Matheson)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 85.43

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 94.07 (Mike Thompson) to 72.99 (Marshall)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 53.96

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 83.52 (Mike Thompson) to 29.82 (Marshall)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 72.84

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 88.95 (Charlie Wilson) to 60.39 (Cramer)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 51.8

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 75.8 (Mike Thompson) to 43.5 (Marshall)

Bad Votes on Iraq Supplemental: 21 (87.5%)

Bad Votes on FISA: 18 (75%)

Bad Votes on ENDA: 10 (41.7%)

Bad Votes on Stem Cells: 8 (33.3%)

Bad Votes on SCHIP override: 1 (4.2%)

Median Rural % of District: 45.25

Rural % of District Range: 69 (Michaud) to 11.3 (Cooper)

Blue Dogs + NDC (20)

7 from South, 5 from Northeast, 4 from Midwest, 4 from West

Median PVI: R+2.5

PVI Range: D+12 (Schiff) to R+15 (Lampson)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 86.01

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 95.65 (Loretta Sanchez) to 68.22 (Barrow)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 53.37

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 81.4 (Loretta Sanchez) to 31.61 (Lampson)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 80.18

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 93.76 (Arcuri) to 64.94 (McIntyre)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 55.9

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 77.8 (Loretta Sanchez) to 45.8 (Barrow)

Bad Votes on Iraq Supplemental: 14 (70%)

Bad Votes on FISA: 9 (45%)

Bad Votes on ENDA: 4 (20%)

Bad Votes on Stem Cells: 1 (5%)

Median Rural % of District: 16.6

Rural % of District Range: 55.4 (Carney) to 0 (Harman and Loretta Sanchez)

[Note: There are also one Blue Dog/CBC member (Sanford Bishop), four Blue Dogs/CHC members (Cardoza, Costa, Baca, and Salazar), and one Blue Dog/New Dem/CBC member (David Scott).]

All New Democrats (59)

17 from South, 17 from Northeast, 8 from Midwest, 17 from West

Median PVI: D+5

PVI Range: D+38 (Greg Meeks) to R+15 (Lampson)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 93.52

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 98.29 (Capps) to 68.22 (Barrow)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 73.94

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 93.26 (Capps) to 31.61 (Lampson)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 85.42

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 94.75 (Courtney) to 64.94 (McIntyre)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 67.5

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 94 (Capps) to 45.8 (Barrow)

Bad Votes on Iraq Supplemental: 29 (49.2%)

Bad Votes on FISA: 16 (27.1%)

Bad Votes on ENDA: 6 (10.2%)

Bad Votes on Stem Cells: 1 (1.7%)

Median Rural % of District: 6.8

Rural % of District Range: 56.9 (Kind) to 0 (6-way tie)

New Democrats Only (33)

6 from South, 11 from Northeast, 4 from Midwest, 12 from West

Median PVI: D+7

PVI Range: D+28 (Crowley) to R+4 (Mitchell)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 93.99

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 98.29 (Capps) to 75.03 (Altmire)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 75.84

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 93.26 (Capps) to 38.2 (Altmire)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 87.72

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 94.75 (Courtney) to 75.03 (Altmire)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 70

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 94 (Capps) to 51.3 (Altmire)

Bad Votes on Iraq Supplemental: 13 (39.4%)

Bad Votes on FISA: 5 (15.2%)

‘Bad’ Votes on ENDA: 1 (3.0%)

Median Rural % of District: 5

Rural % of District Range: 56.9 (Kind) to 0 (4-way tie)

[Note: There are also three New Dem/CBC members (Artur Davis, Kendrick Meek, and Greg Meeks), two New Dem/CHC members (Gonzalez and Cuellar), and one New Dem/Progressive (Tom Udall).]

All Progressives (68)

9 from South, 21 from Northeast, 17 from Midwest, 21 from West

Median PVI: D+20

PVI Range: D+43 (Serrano) to R+1 (John Hall)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 97.24

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 99.26 (Baldwin) to 92.18 (Kucinich)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 89.11

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 97.19 (Baldwin) to 74.72 (Hare)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 94.82

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 98.49 (Ellison) to 83.74 (Kaptur)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 84.3

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 95 (6-way tie) to 66.3 (Kucinich)

Bad Votes on Iraq Supplemental: 1 (1.5%)

‘Bad’ Votes on ENDA: 3 (4.4%)

Bad Votes on Stem Cells: 1 (1.5%)

Median Rural % of District: 0.65

Rural % of District Range: 61.8 (Welch) to 0 (25-way tie)

Progressive Only (33)

2 from South, 14 from Northeast, 6 from Midwest, 11 from West

Median PVI: D+15

PVI Range: D+36 (Robert Brady) to R+1 (John Hall)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 97.23

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 99.26 (Baldwin) to 92.18 (Kucinich)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 89.14

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 97.19 (Baldwin) to 74.72 (Hare)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 94.98

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 98.03 (Hirono) to 83.74 (Kaptur)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 84.5

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 95 (Schakowsky, McGovern, and Baldwin) to 66.3 (Kucinich)

‘Bad’ Votes on ENDA: 1 (3.0%)

Bad Votes on Stem Cells: 1 (3.0%)

Median Rural % of District: 4.4

Rural % of District Range: 61.8 (Welch) to 0 (5-way tie)

Progressive + CBC (26)

7 from South, 5 from Northeast, 10 from Midwest, 4 from West

Median PVI: D+30

PVI Range: D+43 (Rangel) to D+10 (Bennie Thompson)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 97.26

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 99.03 (Jesse Jackson Jr.) to 93.97 (Eddie Bernice Johnson)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 89.52

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 96.07 (Jesse Jackson Jr.) to 77.38 (Corrine Brown)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 96.23

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 98.49 (Ellison) to 87.51 (Corrine Brown)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 84.3

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 95 (Conyers and Gwen Moore) to 67.7 (Corrine Brown)

Bad Votes on Iraq Supplemental: 1 (3.8%)

‘Bad’ Votes on ENDA: 1 (3.8%)

Median Rural % of District: 0.05

Rural % of District Range: 37.2 (Bennie Thompson) to 0 (14-way tie)

Progressive + CHC (8)

2 from Northeast, 1 from Midwest, 5 from West

Median PVI: D+23.5

PVI Range: D+43 (Serrano) to D+10 (Grijalva)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 97.73

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 99.14 (Linda Sanchez) to 95.66 (Gutierrez)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 90.43

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 96.61 (Linda Sanchez) to 80.98 (Gutierrez)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 94.59

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 98.23 (Grijalva) to 91.13 (Gutierrez)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 89.3

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 95 (Linda Sanchez) to 75.3 (Pastor)

‘Bad’ Votes on ENDA: 1 (12.5%)

Median Rural % of District: 0

Rural % of District Range: 16.4 (Grijalva) to 0 (6-way tie)

All CBC (39)

17 from South, 8 from Northeast, 10 from Midwest, 4 from West

Median PVI: D+27

PVI Range: D+43 (Rangel) to D+2 (Sanford Bishop)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 96.75

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 99.03 (Jesse Jackson Jr.) to 91.77 (Artur Davis)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 87.01

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 96.07 (Jesse Jackson Jr.) to 65.17 (Artur Davis)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 92.11

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 98.49 (Ellison) to 74.36 (Sanford Bishop)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 83.05

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 95 (3-way tie) to 61.3 (Artur Davis)

Bad votes on Iraq Supplemental: 5 (12.8%)

Bad votes on FISA: 1 (1.3%)

Bad votes on ENDA: 3 (7.7%)

Median Rural % of District: 0.1

Rural % of District Range: 52.3 (Butterfield) to 0 (17-way tie)

CBC only (8)

6 from South, 2 from Northeast

Median PVI: D+24.5

PVI Range: D+41 (Towns) to D+9 (Butterfield)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 96.48

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 97.57 (Alcee Hastings) to 95.14 (Jefferson)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 85.76

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 89.53 (Alcee Hastings) to 80.35 (Jefferson)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 89.52

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 92.19 (Al Green) to 86.54 (Jefferson)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 85

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 89.2 (Alcee Hastings) to 73 (Jefferson)

Bad votes on Iraq supplemental: 2 (25%)

‘Bad’ votes on ENDA: 1 (12.5%)

Median Rural % of District: 2.1

Rural % of District Range: 52.3 (Butterfield) to 0 (Towns)

All CHC (21)

6 from South, 3 from Northeast, 1 from Midwest, 11 from West

Median PVI: D+13

PVI Range: D+43 (Serrano) to R+6 (Salazar)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 95.66

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 99.14 (Linda Sanchez) to 85.24 (Cuellar)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 80.98

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 96.61 (Linda Sanchez) to 50.56 (Cuellar)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 87.38

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 98.23 (Grijalva) to 70.05 (Ortiz)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 76.7

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 95 (Linda Sanchez) to 50.5 (Cuellar)

Bad votes on Iraq Supplemental: 10 (47.6%)

Bad votes on FISA: 4 (19.0%)

‘Bad’ votes on ENDA: 1 (4.8%)

Median Rural % of District: 0.5

Rural % of District Range: 39 (Salazar) to 0 (9-way tie)

CHC only (7)

4 from South, 1 from Northeast, 2 from West

Median PVI: D+9

PVI Range: D+23 (Roybal-Allard and Sires) to R+4 (Rodriguez)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 92.65

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 97.26 (Napolitano) to 90.48 (Ortiz)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 71.91

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 88.7 (Roybal-Allard) to 64.63 (Ortiz)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 84.68

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 95.38 (Sires) to 70.05 (Ortiz)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 65

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 92.2 (Roybal-Allard) to 58.5 (Ortiz)

Bad votes on Iraq Supplemental: 4 (57.1%)

Bad votes on FISA: 1 (14.3%)

Median Rural % of District: 1.7

Rural % of District Range: 23.6 (Rodriguez) to 0 (3-way tie)

Unaffiliated Democrats (63)

10 from South, 25 from Northeast, 17 from Midwest, 11 from West

Median PVI: D+9

PVI Range: D+36 (Pelosi) to R+18 (Chet Edwards)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 95.39

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 98.91 (Pelosi) to 85.66 (Boyda)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 80.9

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 96.43 (Pelosi) to 55.93 (Boyda)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 88.56

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 98.54 (Tsongas) to 63.46 (Skelton)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 74.85

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 93.3 (Delahunt) to 53.7 (Chet Edwards)

Bad votes on Iraq Supplemental: 23 (36.5%)

Bad votes on FISA: 3 (4.8%)

Bad votes on ENDA: 5 (7.9%)

Bad votes on Stem cells: 6 (9.5%)

Median Rural % of District: 7.8

Rural % of District Range: 66.6 (Stupak) to 0 (8-way tie)

All MSP (37)

5 from South, 10 from Northeast, 15 from Midwest, 7 from West

Median PVI: R+4

PVI Range: D+6 (Castle) to R+14 (Granger)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 20.07

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 39.71 (Gilchrest) to 4.57 (Camp)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 6.74

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 25.29 (Gilchrest) to 1.14 (Calvert)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 14.18

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 31.41 (Shays) to 4.64 (Granger)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 39.3

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 48.3 (Gilchrest) to 20.2 (Calvert)

Good votes on FISA: 1 (2.7%)

Good votes on ENDA: 20 (54.1%)

Good votes on Min. wage: 28 (75.7%)

Good votes on Stem cells: 24 (64.9%)

Good votes on SCHIP override: 21 (56.8%)

Median Rural % of District: 21

Rural % of District Range: 58.6 (Camp) to 0.4 (Kirk)

All RSC (109)

56 from South, 5 from Northeast, 22 from Midwest, 26 from West

Median PVI: R+11

PVI Range: R+1 (Chabot) to R+26 (Cannon)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 4.18

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 24.75 (Tim Murphy) to 0.62 (Lamborn and Jordan)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 1.32

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 11.86 (Mario Diaz-Balart) to 0 (15-way tie)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 3.8

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 23.96 (Alexander) to 0.62 (Lamborn and Jordan)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 17.05

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 39.5 (Mario Diaz-Balart) to 6.7 (7-way tie)

Good votes on ENDA: 3 (2.8%)

Good votes on Min. wage: 20 (18.3%)

Good votes on Stem cells: 6 (5.5%)

Good votes on SCHIP override: 5 (4.6%)

Median Rural % of District: 25.5

Rural % of District Range: 73.5 (Aderholt) to 0 (Royce and Roskam)

[Note: There are two RSC/MSP members: Dave Camp and Mike Turner.]

Unaffiliated Republicans (54)

22 from South, 9 from Northeast, 15 from Midwest, 8 from West

Median PVI: R+8

PVI Range: D+3 (Saxton) to R+23 (Deal)

Median Progressive Punch 2007-08: 9.14

Progressive Punch 2007-08 Range: 36.43 (Chris Smith) to 0.77 (Boehner)

Median Progressive Punch Chips Are Down: 2.83

Progressive Punch Chips Are Down Range: 16.38 (Walter Jones) to 0 (7-way tie)

Median Progressive Punch Lifetime: 6.76

Progressive Punch Lifetime Range: 24.5 (Paul) to 2.71 (Boehner)

Median National Journal Composite 2007: 25.3

National Journal Composite 2007 Range: 44.5 (Chris Smith) to 6.7 (Boehner)

Good votes on Iraq Supplemental: 2 (3.7%)

Good votes on FISA: 1 (1.9%)

Good votes on ENDA: 11 (20.4%)

Good votes on Min. wage: 32 (59.3%)

Good votes on Stem cells: 7 (13.0%)

Good votes on SCHIP override: 15 (27.8%)

Median Rural % of District: 29.8

Rural % of District Range: 78.7 (Harold Rogers) to 0 (Bill Young and Fosella)

[Note: The Iraq Supplemental vote referenced is HR 2206 Roll Call 425. The FISA vote is S 1927 Roll Call 836. These were the Iraq and FISA votes where party discipline broke down the most; however, there have been a large number of Iraq Supplemental and FISA votes, and a bad vote on one of these by a representative does not mean a consistently bad position. Some ENDA votes have ‘bad’ in quotes to reflect that a handful of very liberal representatives voted against ENDA, presumably, from the left for being inadequate. The Region categories follow the basic 4 Census Bureau regions, with the exception of me counting Maryland and Delaware as Northeast states.]

SurveyUSA (5/2-4, likely and actual voters, 4/25-27 in parens):

Jim Schellinger (D): 41 (36)

Jill Long Thompson (D): 43 (48)

(MoE: ±3.8%)

I still suspect that JLT has the slight edge here, but this one seems up in the air.  We’ll be following the returns as they come in tomorrow night.

This seems too good to be true.  Rasmussen (5/1, likely voters):

Rick Noriega (D): 43

John Cornyn (R-inc): 47

(MoE: ±4%)

If this is anywhere near accurate, the results are shocking.  But if Noriega is to make a race of this, he’ll have to get his fundraising machine in gear: his war chest is only 4% of Cornyn’s $8.7 million on-hand.

(H/T: JLGarsh)

I’ve never posted a diary before, but I just came across this bit of good news on Rasmussen.

http://www.rasmussenreports.co…

SurveyUSA (4/30-5/1, registered voters, 3/12 in parens):

Al Franken (D): 42 (41)

Norm Coleman (R-inc): 52 (51)

Undecided: 6 (7)

(MoE: ±4%)

I haven’t bought the premise that this race is a “tossup”, and if this poll is any indication, Franken has some work to do before it can become one.

The confetti from last night’s LA-6 election has not even been swept away and excuses for the Republican’s most recent humiliation are already rolling out.  This morning, the Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza is trotting out the GOP’s argument for why they lost this seat and the IL-14, which they lost in March.

Given the competing national and local factors, both parties have a credible argument to make about today’s vote. Democrats will argue that Cazayoux’s victory in a Republican-leaning seat is yet one more sign that the Republican party’s brand is badly damaged and that independent voters are disenchanted with the GOP. Republicans will counter that both Jenkins and Jim Oberweis, the dairy magnate who carried their flag in the Illinois special election, were poor candidates whose losses should not be interpreted as a sign of anything other than that bad candidates often are defeated.

The tie breaker in this argument will come in ten days time when voters in Mississippi’s 1st district head to the polls in another special election — this one to fill the seat of appointed Sen. Roger Wicker (R). The northern Mississippi seat leans heavily to Republicans — Bush won it with 62 percent in 2004 and 59 percent in 2000 — and both parties have fielded credible candidates. Should Republicans lose in Mississippi, the panic button will officially be pushed among party strategists.

For tonight, the only clear winner is Cazayoux who comes to Congress and immediately becomes the favorite to win a full term in November. House Democrats also have to feel very good tonight, having grown their majority by two seats since re-taking control of the chamber in November 2006.

Tie breaker? There is no tie, we won the first two contested House races of 2008. How many more times do we have to win? The Republicans won for decades with morons like Jim Oberweiss and Woody Jenkins. Look at Jim Bunning and Tom Coburn in the Senate (and may more than I care to list). And how “credible” is Greg Davis when we all know he took awards from the neo-confederate CCC? Yes, Cazayoux is the big winner. It was his name on the ballot, but the victory was a team effort from the national Democrats to the netroots to local activists. This win is a DEMOCRATIC win. But before I wind this diary up, I want to leave you with last night’s press release from the NRCC.

“This should come as a warning shot to Democrats,” the NRCC said in a post-election press release. “The elitist behavior of the Democratic front-runner and the liberal and extremist positions that he and his fellow Democrats in Congress have staked their claim to, do not appear to be as salient as they once hoped.”

Uhhh guys, who won?

Candidate filing is sailing along with lots of states now having completed candidate filings and others with a full slate of Democratic House candidate long before filings close.

Below the fold for details and once again go and take a look at the 2008 Race Tracker Wiki.  

***I have included Cook PVI numbers where possible after blogger requests to do so!***

1 more House race now has a Democratic candidate that has filed in the last week:

GA-03 – R+?,

And one race comes off the list entirely!:

LA-06 – R+7, following Don Cazayoux’s superb special election victory last Saturday.

So 414 races filled! This of course includes 235 districts held by Democratic Congresscritters.

But we also have 179 GOP held districts with confirmed Democratic opponents.

So here is where we are at (GOP Districts):

Districts with confirmed candidates – 179

Districts with unconfirmed candidates – 0

Districts with rumoured candidates – 5

Districts without any candidates – 5

Filing closed – No Democratic candidate – 11

The GOP held districts with confirmed Democratic challengers are as follows:

AL-01 – R+12,

AL-02 – R+13,

AL-03 – R+4,

AL-04 – R+16,

AK-AL – R+14,

AZ-01 – R+2,

AZ-02 – R+9,

AZ-03 – R+6,

AZ-06 – R+12,

CA-02 – R+13,

CA-03 – R+7,

CA-04 – R+11,

CA-21 – R+13,

CA-24 – R+5,

CA-25 – R+7,

CA-26 – R+4,

CA-40 – R+8,

CA-41 – R+9,

CA-42 – R+10,

CA-44 – R+6,

CA-45 – R+3,

CA-46 – R+6,

CA-48 – R+8,

CA-49 – R+10,

CA-50 – R+5,

CA-52 – R+9,

CO-04 – R+9,

CO-05 – R+15.7,

CO-06 – R+10,

CT-04 – D+5,

DE-AL – D+7,

FL-01 – R+19,

FL-04 – R+16,

FL-05 – R+5,

FL-06 – R+8,

FL-07 – R+3,

FL-08 – R+3,

FL-09 – R+4,

FL-10 – D+1,

FL-12 – R+5,

FL-13 – R+4,

FL-14 – R+10,

FL-15 – R+4,

FL-18 – R+4,

FL-21 – R+6,

FL-24 – R+3,

FL-25 – R+4,

GA-01 – R+?,

GA-03 – R+?,

GA-06 – R+?,

GA-07 – R+?,

GA-09 – R+?,

GA-10 – R+?,

GA-11 – R+?,

ID-01 – R+19,

ID-02 – R+19,

IL-06 – R+2.9,

IL-10 – D+4,

IL-11 – R+1.1,

IL-13 – R+5,

IL-15 – R+6,

IL-16 – R+4,

IL-18 – R+5.5,

IL-19 – R+8,

IN-03 – R+16,

IN-04 – R+17,

IN-05 – R+20,

IN-06 – R+11,

IA-04 – D+0,

IA-05 – R+8,

KS-01 – R+20,

KS-04 – R+12,

KY-01 – R+10,

KY-02 – R+12.9,

KY-04 – R+11.7,

LA-01 – R+18,

LA-04 – R+7,

MD-01 – R+10,

MD-06 – R+13,

MI-02 – R+9,

MI-04 – R+3,

MI-07 – R+2,

MI-08 – R+1.9,

MI-09 – R+0,

MI-11 – R+1.2,

MN-02 – R+2.7,

MN-03 – R+0.5,

MN-06 – R+5,

MO-02 – R+9,

MO-06 – R+5,

MO-07 – R+14,

MO-08 – R+11,

MO-09 – R+7,

MS-01 – R+10,

MS-03 – R+14,

MT-AL – R+11,

NE-01 – R+11,

NE-02 – R+9,

NE-03 – R+23.6,

NV-02 – R+8.2,

NV-03 – D+1,

NJ-02 – D+4.0,

NJ-03 – D+3.3,

NJ-04 – R+0.9,

NJ-05 – R+4,

NJ-07 – R+1,

NJ-11 – R+6,

NM-01 – D+2,

NM-02 – R+6,

NY-13 – D+1,

NY-23 – R+0.2,

NY-25 – D+3,

NY-26 – R+3,

NY-29 – R+5,

NC-03 – R+15,

NC-05 – R+15,

NC-06 – R+17,

NC-08 – R+3,

NC-09 – R+12,

NC-10 – R+15,

OH-01 – R+1,

OH-02 – R+13,

OH-03 – R+3,

OH-04 – R+14,

OH-05 – R+10,

OH-07 – R+6,

OH-08 – R+12,

OH-12 – R+0.7,

OH-14 – R+2,

OH-15 – R+1,

OH-16 – R+4,

OK-05 – R+12,

OR-02 – R+11,

PA-03 – R+2,

PA-05 – R+10,

PA-06 – D+2.2,

PA-09 – R+15,

PA-15 – D+2,

PA-16 – R+11,

PA-18 – R+2,

PA-19 – R+12,

SC-01 – R+10,

SC-02 – R+9,

SC-03 – R+14,

SC-04 – R+15,

TN-01 – R+14,

TN-02 – R+11,

TN-03 – R+8,

TN-07 – R+12,

TX-03 – R+17,

TX-04 – R+17,

TX-06 – R+15,

TX-07 – R+16,

TX-08 – R+20,

TX-10 – R+13,

TX-12 – R+14,

TX-13 – R+18,

TX-19 – R+25,

TX-24 – R+15,

TX-26 – R+12,

TX-31 – R+15,

TX-32 – R+11,

UT-01 – R+26,

UT-03 – R+22,

VA-01 – R+9,

VA-02 – R+5.9,

VA-04 – R+5,

VA-05 – R+6,

VA-06 – R+11,

VA-07 – R+11,

VA-10 – R+5,

VA-11 – R+1,

WA-04 – R+13,

WA-05 – R+7.1,

WA-08 – D+2,

WV-02 – R+5,

WI-01 – R+2,

WI-06 – R+5,

WY-AL – R+19,

The following GOP held districts have a candidate that is expected to run but is yet to confirm:

None at this stage

The following GOP held districts have rumoured candidates – please note that some of these “rumours” are extremely tenuous!

LA-07 – R+7,

MI-06 – R+2.3,

NY-03 – D+2.1,

OK-03 – R+18,

OK-04 – R+13,

The following districts have not a single rumoured candidate:

LA-05 – R+10,

MI-03 – R+9,

MI-10 – R+4,

OK-01 – R+13,

WI-05 – R+12,

And last but not least the list I did not want to have to include.

The following Republicans will not have a Democratic opponent in 2008:

AL-06 – R+25,

AR-03 – R+11,

CA-19 – R+10,

CA-22 – R+16,

KY-05 – R+8

TX-01 – R+17,

TX-02 – R+12,

TX-05 – R+16,

TX-11 – R+25,

TX-14 – R+14,

TX-21 – R+13,

Finally due praise to those states where we have a full slate of house candidates – Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennesee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming.

It is also interesting to note that we have only one race left to fill in New York and Wisconsin. Thats 40 states with a full slate, and 2 states with one race to fill!  

There are also 5 states where filing has closed where we do not have a full slate: Arkansas, Alabama, California, Kentucky and of course Texas. Lets hope the last 3 Louisiana, Michigan and Oklahoma fill out.

Please note that in some races others at the racetracker site have confirmed candidates that I haven’t. This is because to satisfy me a confirmed candidate has either filed with the FEC, The Sec of State or has an active campaign website, or even if they come and blog and say yep I am running. Others are not so rigorous.

It is also great to see candidates in AZ-06, CA-42, FL-12, LA-06, MS-03, VA-04, VA-06 and WI-06; 8 of 10 districts we did not contest in 2006! The other 2, TX-11 and AL-06, will again go uncontested by Team Blue in 2008.

With 11 uncontested Republicans we will not reach our great 2006 effort of 425 races filled but we will do really well nonetheless.

*** Tips, rumours and what not in the comments please.***