Month: June 2008

The Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund has thrown down $200,000 on an ad buy targeting GOP Rep. Marilyn Musgrave. The Hill has more:

Earlier in the week the organization endorsed Musgrave’s challenger, businesswoman Betsy Markey, in a release assailing Musgrave’s environmental record as “atrocious.”

“This is just the beginning of a sustained campaign, and the rest will be rolled out in due course,” said Jessica Brand, an Action Fund associate.

Musgrave has been a traditional target of third-party expenditures for the past several cycles, and it looks like this year will be no different. Will the constant barrage of negative ads finally do Musgrave in? The internal polls — from both sides of the aisle — look dicey for Musgrave.

In other Colorado news, the League of Conservation Voters has been ponied up $125,000 on media buys and $10,000 on door hangers on behalf of Democrat Mark Udall last week, bringing their total investment in the Senate race to over $375,000.

Rep. Bill “Brain Fade” Sali just can’t stay out of trouble. His latest offense? Supporting a successful insurgent candidate against the incumbent Idaho GOP chair, who was the preferred choice of Gov. “Butch” Otter. The Idaho Statesman’s Dan Popkey writes that crossing Otter might have some in-state consequences:

But Otter matters most. If he throws his arms around Sali – as 2nd District GOP Rep. Mike Simpson literally did in 2006 – it could be decisive. Otter can help Sali retire a $135,000 debt and keep pace with Minnick, who out-raised Sali two-to-one in the first quarter.

Or Otter could decide his schedule is just too tight to help the congressman who defied him, leaving Sali reliant on out-of-state money and following the beat of his different drummer on the campaign trail. […]

“It was a slap in the face to the governor,” said a GOP lawmaker who spoke to me on condition I not use his name.

When asked about getting even, Otter replied: “Wait and see.”

Sali has strained some other relationships at home, too. From Real Clear Politics:

The incumbent faces more pressing problems for the current campaign. Sali’s consultant, an Idaho-based firm called Spartac LLC, is the candidate’s long-time friend, but he says he won’t do any more work for the incumbent unless he’s paid first, the Spokane Spokesman-Review reported last month. Sali still owes Spartac $76,000, and has total debts of $135,000, according to FEC reports.

It’s no secret that Sali has had trouble fundraising, which is why he was added to John Boehner’s ROMP program earlier in the year. But if Sali is going to rely on PACs and his fellow members to bail his ass out against well-funded Democrat Walt Minnick, should he really be insulting one third of the House GOP caucus? From the Politico:

Rep. Bill Sali (R-Idaho), addressing a gathering at the Shake the Nation rally in Idaho on May 16, told those assembled that he goes “to work in a place that, well, it’s quite a mess: your nation’s capital.”

“I tell people,” he said, ” ‘As bad as you ever thought it was, just know it’s a lot worse.’ In spite of that, I work with a group of probably around 130 people that are very good folks, people that I look up to, that I respect a great deal, people who would be quite comfortable sitting in these pews on a Sunday. I hope you’re encouraged by that.”

What does Sali think of the other 69 of his Republican colleagues? Are they godless heathens?

You’ve got to hand it to Bill Sali — he sure knows how to make politics in Idaho interesting.

SSP currently rates this race as Likely Republican.

The race for Kentucky’s First Congressional District’s House seat is definately heating up with the weather. As we approach the dog days of summer, the Ryan for Kentucky campaign is definately gaining steam. Today, we have several pieces of new news to pass on to our fellow Democrats. Heather Ryan is hitting her stride, and is ready to fight to expand our Congressional majorities!!  

The first piece of news we have is this letter to the editor sent by Heather to Louisville’s Courier Journal in response to their article about “Exxon Eddie’s” horse initiative:

To the Editor:

As the Democratic candidate for Kentucky ‘s First Congressional District, I have followed with interest Republican Congressman Ed Whitfield’s (KY-01) performance presiding over a dog-and-pony show before a House Energy Subcommittee.  Mr. Whitfield’s plan to add a layer of federal bureaucracy to regulate the horse racing industry is unnecessary in light of the industry’s ability and willingness to self-regulate their business practices.  Congressman Whitfield is obviously exploiting the recent death of Kentucky Derby runner-up Eight Belles to make political points during an election season.  At a time of skyrocketing energy prices, when oil companies like Exxon-Mobil  boast record profits, doesn’t seven-term Congressman Whitfield  realize that the House Energy and Commerce committee’s Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection subcommittee should be dealing with more pressing issues?

In much more important news, due to inquiries by many potential constituents, including myself Heather has decided to speak on the FISA compromise the Senate will vote on later this week. From the email sent to me by Heather:

Later this week, the Senate will be considering passage of the compromise on the FISA Bill. Since many voters in the First Congressional District of Kentucky have contacted me wondering what my stance on this legislation is, I felt compelled to speak on this issue.

While I was in Washington on that terrible day of Sept. 11, 2001 when planes crashed into the World Trade Center and in Western Pennsylvania, and the Pentagon, I can understand the passion that has fueled this bill. Having said that, I must urge the Senate to reject this FISA compromise as proposed and passed by the House of Representatives with H.R. 6304.

There are several reasons why I feel this bill is unnecessary. First, I think that we have lost focus on the fact that a competent Administration could have actually gone a long way in preventing this tragedy. The Bush Administration was warned in advance of 9-11 and did nothing at the time to prevent it. I believe if the Bush Administration would have acted on the intelligence provided them, then the 9-11 tragedy could have been avoided through the laws that existed at the time.

I also believe this law is an extension of the Bush Administration’s attempts to politicize the Justice Department. Prosecuting entities are provided by the Constitution with checks and balances on which to operate. They already have very broad powers and if they found a credible threat would have no problem getting a warrant in a timely fashion.

Finally, I believe that FISA and this compromise are an abomination to the Constitution because it seeks to circumvent the checks and balances provided all of us by that sacred document. I strongly oppose giving the Telecom Corporations immunity when they knew they were breaking the law, when the Bush Administration asked them to break the law.

I saw where my opponent in this race, “Exxon Ed” Whitfield voted for this Legislation. I think it is pretty ironic when the very Republicans who lecture us regarding limiting the roll of the Federal Government propose, and push through, the House of Representatives a bill that vastly broadens the powers of the Federal Government. This is one issue on which Progressives, Moderates and Conservatives should all be able to agree. There are certain things on which none of us should ever compromise, and the Constitution is one thing on which I will never compromise as Representative of Kentucky’s First District.

Indeed. I don’t think I could have put it better myself. Heather has shown with this response that she, simply put just gets it. None of us should forget the incompetence of the Bush Administration leading up to 9-11, and how it contributed to that tragedy. We should remember too, that they have now attempted to politicize the Justice Department to make us forget that incompetence.

The truth of the matter is that this law is unneccesary. Toying with the Constitution is a dangerous precedent for anyone to set, especially at the behest of the most incompetent administration in modern times. Heather is spot on in her analysis of the Republicans, including Exxon Eddie, lecturing us on the size of the Federal Government while voting to broadly expanding the powers of that entity.

As usual, Exxon Eddie has shown no vision or leadership on this issue. Of course we all know that Exxon Eddie is

Asleep at the Wheel

It is refreshing to see a candidate that isn’t afraid to speak the truth, especially on such an important issue as the Constitution. It is also refreshing to see a candidate that isn’t afraid to break from her party’s leadership when she feels they are wrong. We need more candidates like that in the Congress. As much as we complain about what we feel is capitulation by our party’s leadership, we simply must fight for newer and better Democrats like Heather Ryan.

In more light-hearted news, Ryan for Kentucky today unveiled it’s new “Bag Eddie” series, designed to show some of the ridiculousness of Exxon Ed Whitfield and his fellow Kentucky Republican lackeys. Catch the first installment here:

Mitch McConnell makes an appearance in this one:

Now, you know what to do. We need Democrats in the Congress who share our ideals and aren’t afraid to fight for them. We need Democrats who don’t buy into the propoganda put forth by the Bush Administration. Why not support a Democrat who clearly gets it??:

http://www.actblue.com/page/am…

I think the Ryan for Kentucky quote of the week says it all:

“What this country needs is more unemployed politicians”.

Edward Langley

Best wishes everyone!!

Sudden bombshell out of Albany, New York: Joe Bruno, the longtime leader of the Republican delegation in the state senate, won’t stand for re-election. According to the New York Daily News:

It’s confirmed. A high-ranking Senate staffer said: “He will not run for re-election. It’s still open as to whether he will serve out the term until Dec. 31 or leave. early.”

For those not following state legislature races, control of the New York State Senate is the big enchilada this year. Each year we’ve chipped at it, edging closer to control (we’re currently down 32-30), and prognosticators have increasingly felt like this was the year it would flip, removing the main obstacle to implementing progressive policy in New York and placing 2010 redistricting control entirely in Democratic hands.

Apparently Bruno saw the handwriting on the wall (i.e. the remainder of his career spent in the minority) and decided this was a fine time to leave (although there’s also the small matter of his outside business interests being under FBI investigation). This may be the hole in the dam that bursts wide open; a number of other aging Republicans in Democratic-leaning areas (who are in their 70s or 80s, have been serving in the state senate since the 1970s, and have provided the margin for control) have stuck around largely because Bruno has corralled them, trying to maintain the majority. With him gone, look for a stampede for exits from other dinosaurs facing extinction like Frank Padavan and Caesar Trunzo.

Our candidate in SD-43 (in the Albany suburbs) is Brian Premo, although stronger challengers may emerge with Bruno out of the picture.

H/t RandySF.

Is there an IRC channel associated with SSP?  I’d love to chat with y’all online; I personally slightly prefer IRC over blogging, though I will admit that I waste enough time on the internet already.  But still, an IRC channel would be a really cool thing for SSP to have!

This is a nice boost for Democrat Elwyn Tinklenberg:

Democrat Elwyn Tinklenberg has picked up a key endorsement in his bid to unseat Republican Michele Bachmann in Minnesota’s 6th Congressional District. The Independence Party of Minnesota is backing Tinklenberg instead of fielding their own candidate.

Why does this matter? In 2006, Independence Party candidate John Binkowski won 8% of the vote in MN-06 to Bachmann’s 50% and Democrat Patty Wetterling’s 42%. That’s not to say that this is now a 50-50 race, but Tinklenberg won’t have to worry about splitting the anti-incumbent vote this time around, so this is a pretty sweet score for him.

SSP currently rates this race as Likely Republican.

When it comes to downballot races, it has been the New York State Senate that has held much of my attention this election year. And from the Albany Project’s Phillp Anderson  comes a report that Republican Majority Leader Joseph Bruno is making moves that may indicate an intent to retire this year rather than lead a likely minority in a state where the Republican Party will be mostly shut out at the federal and state levels.

Because today, the last day in the last regular legislative session that Bruno’s Republicans will control for a long, long time, brings us another odd clue that it may be Uncle Joe’s last hurrah as well. A few weeks ago we learned that the long neglected Senate Minority conference room received a rather extensive renovation, a move that some interpreted as a sign that the Republican majority in the Senate could see the writing on the wall and wanted to spruce up the joint while they still controlled the spending to do so. I’m also hearing quite a bit about some rather vicious infighting in Uncle Joe’s caucus and much of it appears to be generational in nature. The Republican majority in the New York State Senate is on the way out and they all know it. This seems to have some members, particularly the younger ones, fairly upset. Today we learn that one of Joe Bruno’s closest aides is being set up with a long term gig at a significant pay cut.

An experienced Dem hand in Albany spoke to me about the possibility of Bruno “taking a dive”, as he put it, last week. I’ll believe that when Bruno actually holds a press conference where he throws in the towel, not before, but the signs that he may be at least considering spending more time with his horses continue to mount.

I have been reading TAP since I discovered it in 2007 and there is probably no one in the New York blogosphere better connected to his state’s politics than he. Like Phillip, I will wait and see what the official word is, but retirement makes every bit of sense to me. Obama will win there big. We will likely pick up 3-4 of the remaining Congressional seat now held by Republicans. The Governor, both senate seats and the State Assembly are firmly in Democratic hands and the Senate is likely to flip. Furthermore, the once mighty New York Republican Party is now a mere shadow of the era Nelson Rockefeller, Jacob Javitz and Al D’Amato. The handwriting is on the wall. Maybe Joe will do the sensible thing and walk away.

By popular demand (meaning questions from at least two different commenters), I need to do a follow-up to The Class of 2008: Who’s Going to Be Progressive? from last Friday that sees it through to the next step. I had previously investigated The House Seats Where We Made the Most Progress in 2006, comparing the DW-Nominate scores of new Democrats elected in 2006 against the Republicans who occupied the seats until 2006. The question arose: which seats will potentially have the biggest similar right-to-left shifts in 2008?

There’s a big problem there. The demographic prediction method I was using in the Class of 2008 diary was, at best, a blunt instrument, and I feel a little embarrassed using it even to estimate broad categories like “Progressive” or “Blue Dog,” let alone using it to extrapolate specific legislators’ future DW-Nominate scores to three significant digits. However, I quickly realized the importance of making some educated guesses about this topic, pushed along by Mimikatz‘s diary over at Open Left. It’s important information for deciding what races to give our relatively-tiny netroots dollars to, where we can have the most leverage in moving the needle to the left.

As an added bonus, most of the races that topped the list are lower on prognosticators’ watch lists. Many are on the DCCC’s “Emerging Races” list and on Swing State Project‘s “Likely R” or “Races to Watch” lists. Again, that stretches the effect of our dollars, and it means our targeted giving can help clue the DCCC in for what deserves “Red to Blue” status instead. Here are the top 20 races for maximum right-to-left impact:

District	110th Rep.	110th Score	111th Rep.	111th Score	Difference
CA-46	Rohrabacher (R)	0.836	Cook (D)	-0.600	-1.436
NJ-05	Garrett (R)	0.771	Shulman (D)	-0.600	-1.371
AZ-03	Shadegg (R)	0.923	Lord (D)	-0.400	-1.323
CA-50	Bilbray (R)	0.715	Leibham (D)	-0.600	-1.315
FL-24	Feeney (R)	0.768	Kosmas? (D)	-0.350	-1.118
CO-04	Musgrave (R)	0.684	Markey (D)	-0.400	-1.084
ID-01	Sali (R)	0.852	Minnick (D)	-0.200	-1.052
TX-07	Culberson (R)	0.637	Skelly (D)	-0.400	-1.037
MI-07	Walberg (R)	0.623	Schauer (D)	-0.400	-1.023
MN-02	Kline (R)	0.615	Sarvi (D)	-0.400	-1.015
OH-01	Chabot (R)	0.665	Dreihaus (D)	-0.350	-1.015
IL-13	Biggert (R)	0.508	Harper (D)	-0.500	-1.008
MN-06	Bachmann (R)	0.703	Tinklenburg (D)	-0.300	-1.003
CA-26	Dreier (R)	0.495	Warner (D)	-0.500	-0.995
FL-15	Weldon (R – open)	0.590	Blythe? (D)	-0.400	-0.990
IL-06	Roskam (R)	0.538	Morganthaler (D)	-0.450	-0.988
NY-13	Fosella (R – open)	0.518	McMahon? (D)	-0.450	-0.968
NV-02	Heller (R)	0.561	Derby (D)	-0.400	-0.961
NE-02	Terry (R)	0.545	Esch (D)	-0.400	-0.945
NC-10	McHenry (R)	0.745	Johnson (D)	-0.200	-0.945

More over the flip…

Now let’s look at the rest of the Toss-ups and Lean races, that didn’t fit into the previous table. These tend not to have as big a right-to-left impact, as these tend to be races where a Main Street (i.e. ‘moderate’) Republican currently occupies the seat. (Although in some cases, the moderate Republican is retiring and a probably-more-conservative Republican is running to replace him or her.) As you can probably tell, this is where the “Red to Blue” races cluster.

District	110th Rep.	110th Score	111th Rep.	111th Score	Difference
MI-09	Knollenberg (R)	0.428	Peters (D)	-0.500	-0.928
WA-08	Reichert (R)	0.324	Burner (D)	-0.600	-0.924
IL-10	Kirk (R)	0.323	Seals (D)	-0.600	-0.923
OH-02	Schmidt (R)	0.535	Wulsin (D)	-0.350	-0.885
MN-03	Ramstad (R – open)	0.433	Madia (D)	-0.450	-0.883
NY-26	Reynolds (R – open)	0.462	Powers? (D)	-0.400	-0.862
CT-04	Shays (R)	0.241	Himes (D)	-0.600	-0.841
VA-11	Davis (R – open)	0.419	Connolly (D)	-0.400	-0.819
OH-15	Pryce (R – open)	0.413	Kilroy (D)	-0.400	-0.813
NY-29	Kuhl (R)	0.358	Massa (D)	-0.450	-0.808
MO-06	Graves (R)	0.499	Barnes (D)	-0.300	-0.799
NJ-03	Saxton (R – open)	0.288	Adler (D)	-0.500	-0.788
NJ-07	Ferguson (R – open)	0.280	Stender (D)	-0.500	-0.780
NM-01	Wilson (R – open)	0.317	Heinrich (D)	-0.450	-0.767
NY-25	Walsh (R – open)	0.312	Maffei (D)	-0.450	-0.762
NC-08	Hayes (R)	0.457	Kissell (D)	-0.300	-0.757
IL-11	Weller (R – open)	0.386	Halvorson (D)	-0.350	-0.736
NV-03	Porter (R)	0.324	Titus (D)	-0.400	-0.724
AK-AL	Young (R)	0.401	Berkowitz? (D)	-0.300	-0.701
LA-04	McCrery (R – open)	0.482	Carmouche (D)	-0.200	-0.682
AZ-01	Renzi (R – open)	0.337	Kirkpatrick? D)	-0.300	-0.637
OH-16	Regula (R – open)	0.325	Boccieri (D)	-0.300	-0.625

Finally, some of you may be wondering where the smallest right-to-left impact would be felt. That would be MD-01, where Wayne Gilchrest is one of the most moderate Republicans in the House (0.257), and district demographics predict Frank Kratovil as Likely New Dem, Possible Blue Dog (- 0.350), for a difference of – 0.607. (Bear in mind that the Republican candidate this year, though, is Andy Harris, who’s well to the right of Gilchrest, so this race gains some importance.) IL-18 is runner-up, and a similar case (Aaron Schock is likely to be well to the right of retiring Ray LaHood). This leaves IA-04 as the race with a GOP incumbent and the smallest impact (Tom Latham at 0.412 versus Becky Greenwald, predicted at – 0.200, difference of – 0.612).

If you’re wondering where the likely DW-Nominate scores came from, the short answer is: my butt. The longer answer is, I assigned a relatively round number to each category from my Class of 2008 diary, based on where Progressives, sorta-Progressives, New Dems, and so on, tended to cluster. The assigned value, however doesn’t seem as important in providing the right-to-left shift as just how wingnutty the current Republican is; see how much correlation there is between my first list and the list of vulnerable Republicans as predicted by my PVI/Vote Index.

Here are the assigned values (along with the Dem representatives who have scores in the 110th closest to those scores, so you have a point of comparison):

Likely Progressives: – 0.600 (Diane Watson, Mike Honda, Alcee Hastings)

Likely Progressives, Possible New Dems: – 0.500 (Zoe Lofgren, E.B. Johnson, Charlie Rangel)

Likely New Dems, Possible Progressives: – 0.450 (Al Green, Tom Allen, Loretta Sanchez)

Likely New Dems: – 0.400 (Albio Sires, John Yarmuth, Sander Levin)

Likely New Dems, Possible Blue Dogs: – 0.350 (Mel Carnahan, Shelly Berkley, Brian Higgins)

Likely Blue Dogs, Possible New Dems: – 0.300 (Ruben Hinojosa, Dutch Ruppersburger, Silvestre Reyes)

Likely Blue Dogs: – 0.200 (Baron Hill, Zack Space, Allen Boyd)

Based on people’s comments from the Class of 2008 diary where they gave some anecdotal evidence that so-and-so scored too low, I gave a +0.100 bonus to Schauer, Kissell, Baker (in MO-09), and Barth, lifting them out of Blue Dog terrain. Please keep the comments coming, in case there are any other cases you see where someone’s ranking doesn’t pass the smell test.

Rasmussen (6/18, likely voters, 5/14 in parens):

Tom Udall (D): 58 (53)

Steve Pearce (R): 30 (37)

(MoE: ±4%)

Damn, son. When Tom Udall wins this thing, he’ll essentially be taking out three Republicans: Pearce, Wilson, and Domenici. They should call him: Tom Udall, Republican slayer.

(Hat-tip: ChadInFL)

You all knew it was inevitable: at some point, Democratic donors, exhausted by the finally-concluded presidential primary and looking into their empty wallets, would take a little breather from giving, allowing the GOP to play catch-up.

Fear not, though, fellow downballot enthusiasts: most of the damage occurred at the DNC vs. RNC level. The DSCC and DCCC had still slightly better months of May than their Republican counterparts, and they maintain towering edges in cash-on-hand.

Committee	May Receipts	May Disbursements	May Cash-on-Hand	May Debts & Obligations
DSCC (est.)	$5,920,000.00	$4,950,000.00	$38,530,000.00	$0.00
NRSC (est.)	$4,890,000.00	$2,700,000.00	$21,560,000.00	$0.00
DCCC	$6,091,737.14	$4,192,275.05	$47,174,105.00	$0.00
NRCC	$5,017,140.54	$5,096,869.15	$6,654,801.50	$0.00
DNC	$4,795,890.97	$5,263,698.72	$3,965,886.11	$6,306.93
RNC	$24,377,740.11	$11,513,030.77	$53,508,001.57	$0.00
Total Democrats	$16,807,628.11	$14,405,973.77	$89,669,991.11	$6,306.93
Total Republicans	$34,284,880.65	$19,309,899.92	$81,722,803.07	$0.00

Ordinarily, I wouldn’t worry too much about the DNC/RNC chasm: the DNC has consistently lagged the RNC lately. That points to one of the most remarkable things about the Obama campaign: for most people, the Obama website has become top-of-mind for direct giving, leading to a bypass of the DNC.

One potential warning sign I see on the horizon, though, is the RNC turning around and allocating a lot of its money to Congressional races, as it realizes that its last best shot at preventing Democratic hegemony is in the Senate by holding GOP losses to 3 or 4 there. If polling continues to go south for McCain along the same trajectory as the last couple weeks, it’s not out of the question that the RNC will consider writing down the McCain campaign as a casualty loss, in order to bolster the likes of Gordon Smith and Roger Wicker.