Month: February 2009

Progressive Punch has added a new and incredibly useful layer of analysis to its rankings of members of Congress by voting record.

The “Select by Score” pages now indicate how progressive representatives and senators are compared to the districts and states they represent.

Select by Score Senate rankings

Select by Score House rankings

As before, you see members of the House and Senate ranked from most progressive to least progressive, based on all votes as well as on certain “crucial votes.” Calculating a separate score for “crucial votes” reveals which Democrats are not reliable when the chips are down. This helps prevent gaming of the system, as when Joe Lieberman voted against filibustering Samuel Alito’s nomination for the Supreme Court, then turned around and voted against confirming him.

For the new feature, Progressive Punch has placed every state and Congressional district into one of five categories: strong D, lean D, swing, lean R, and strong R. Each Congress-critter’s “crucial vote” score is then compared to the political lean of the district or state. In the right-hand column on the “Select by Score” pages, every member of Congress now has a rating from 1 to 5, with 5 being the most progressive. Progressive Punch explains:

The “%” and “Rating” columns underneath the “Progressive Score vs. State Tilt” are two different ways of measuring the same thing. They both measure how naughty or nice a member of Congress’ voting record has been in relation to his/her district. We’re grading on a curve. Five stars in the “Rating” column indicate members of Congress who are doing the best in terms of voting MORE progressively than could necessarily be expected given their states or districts. Those with one star are performing the worst in relation to their districts.

For more details on the methodology behind this analysis, click here for House ratings and here for Senate ratings.

Why is this useful? It’s now much easier to see which Democrats in Congress are voting about as well as could be expected, and which ones should be doing a lot better.  

Here are a few examples. Senators Dianne Feinstein and Harry Reid have identical lifetime progressive scores on crucial votes. However, since Feinstein represents a strong Democratic state (CA) and Reid represents a swing state (NV), Feinstein gets a 1 while Reid gets a 3.

Ron Wyden (OR), Barbara Mikulski (MD) and Amy Klobuchar (MN) have very similar lifetime scores, but Wyden and Klobuchar get 4s because they represent lean-Democrat states. Mikulski gets a 3 when graded on a curve that takes into account Maryland’s solid Democratic profile.

Similarly, Daniel Inouye (HI) gets a 1, while Jon Tester (MT) gets a 3 for almost the same “crucial vote” score, because Montana leans Republican.

Jeff Bingaman (NM), Jim Webb (VA) and Byron Dorgan (ND) have very similar progressive lifetime scores, but Bingaman gets a 2 for representing a lean-Democrat state, Webb gets a 3 for representing a swing state, and Dorgan gets a 4 for representing a lean-Republican state.

Scanning down the Select by Score House page, a few Democrats stand out. There’s Timothy Bishop (NY-01) with a 5 rating for how he represents his swing district, while most of the House members with similar lifetime scores get 3s, because they represent strong Democratic districts.

Dave Obey (WI-07) and Peter DeFazio (OR-04) get 4s because they represent lean-Democrat districts. Most of the House members with similar lifetime progressive scores get 3s.

Amid a large group of House Democrats who get a 2 when their crucial vote score is compared to how strongly Democratic their districts are, James Oberstar (MN-08) gets a 4 for a similar progressive score because he represents a swing district, while Michael Michaud (ME-02) and Paul Hodes (NH-02) get a 3 because their districts lean Democratic.

How can progressives use this information? One way would be to determine which incumbents in safe Democratic seats should face more pressure from the left. In extreme cases, this pressure could include a primary challenge.

Also, these rankings reveal which Democratic primaries should become top priorities for progressives when incumbents retire. For example, John Murtha (PA-12) and Henry Cuellar (TX-28) represent strongly Democratic districts but vote like Democrats representing swing or Republican districts.

I discussed Iowa representatives’ rankings in more detail at Bleeding Heartland. The relatively low score for Leonard Boswell (IA-03) was no surprise, but Bruce Braley (IA-01) and Dave Loebsack (IA-02) didn’t fare much better when graded on the Progressive Punch curve that took into account their strongly Democratic districts.

In keeping with today’s economic climate, it looks like both the DCCC and the NRCC bought more election than they could afford in 2008, and are now both armpit-deep in debt. (The DCCC is replenishing its coffers more quickly, but it’s also deeper in the hole.)

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee will report that it ended January with $2 million in cash on hand and $16 million in debt left over from the 2008 election cycle. The DCCC raised $3.5 million last month and spent $2 million.

Meanwhile, the National Republican Congressional Committee had $1.1 million in the bank on Jan. 31 and reported $6.5 million in debts. The NRCC raised $1.5 million and spent $1.3 million last month.

This has some immediate ramifications, though, because it leaves both parties pretty well tapped when it comes to funding advertising for the NY-20 special election. (Don’t look for the parties to trouble themselves in the IL-05 and CA-32 elections!) So far, both Scott Murphy and Jim Tedisco have hit the airways; however, Tedisco’s ads have been partially funded by the RNC, while Murphy’s ads seem to be on his own dime.

Pass the popcorn.  It’s going to be a bumpy ride to 2010 in Illinois.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI…

Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn called Friday for Sen. Roland Burris to resign.

“At this time we have a senator who has a cloud over his head,” Quinn said at a news conference. “It’s time (for Burris) to put the interest of the people of the land of Lincoln ahead of his own and step aside and resign from office.

“I think very highly of his career. He’s done so many good things,” Quinn said. “But at this time… to step away and resign (would be) a heroic act.”

It was a “gigantic mistake” for Burris to accept a Senate appointment from disgraced former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, Quinn said. Quinn replaced Blagojevich when he was removed from office last month.

The Senate Ethics Committee has launched an investigation of Burris in the wake of disclosures that he spoke with Blagojevich’s brother about possibly raising money for the former governor.  Watch troubles mount for Burris »

The Sangamon County, Illinois, state’s attorney is also considering whether to file perjury charges against Burris.

Burris insisted Wednesday that he was innocent of any wrongdoing in his appointment to the Senate seat formerly held by President Obama.

“It is time to “squarely address the issue and do what’s right for the public interest,” Quinn said. iReport.com: Should Burris resign?

Quinn said he supported a bill introduced in the Illinois legislature that would set up a special election for all future U.S. Senate vacancies.

Illinois needs a “clear process for dealing with the issue of vacancies when it comes to the United States Senate,” Quinn said.

The bill would allow the governor to set the date of a special Senate primary within 72 days of the vacancy. A general election would follow within six weeks after the primary.

The governor would be empowered to name a temporary replacement until the special election.

Quinn said that if given the power to name a replacement he would not name someone with an interest in running in the special election.

Quinn was sworn in as Illinois’ governor on January 29. He had been serving as the state’s lieutenant governor until Blagojevich was removed from office.

Associated Press:

The head of the National Republican Senatorial Committee approached former Gov. George Pataki this week about running for the U.S. Senate in 2010, according to a person who spoke to Pataki about the private meeting. […]

Pataki, now in private law practice, hasn’t yet accepted or rejected the idea, the person said. The race would be against Kirsten Gillibrand, who was recently appointed to succeed Hillary Rodham Clinton when she became Barack Obama’s secretary of state.

When the NRSC is desperate to drag in a bozo who left office with some downright cruddy approval ratings, you know that the GOP shelf is pretty bare in the Empire State.

So what of Peter King? He still could run, but one gets the distinct sense that his Viagra dosage is running pretty low now that he’s missed the opportunity to run against Caroline Kennedy.

(H/T: P-co)

Missouri Treasurer Sarah Steelman declares open season on white guys in suits, and that means you, Fat E. Bluntz Rep. Roy Blunt:

“I’m in the process of laying the groundwork that I need to get done before making an official announcement,” Steelman told POLITICO. “I’m definitely strongly leaning towards doing this.”

Her expected entrance in the campaign increases the likelihood of a divisive primary, which Blunt had been trying to avoid.

In the interview, Steelman took some sharp jabs at Blunt, describing the seven-term congressman Blunt as being part of the “old-boys’ network” who has spent too much time in Washington.

“Roy Blunt is another white guy in a suit, and I think the public wants change,” Steelman said. “There’s a good old boys’ network out there that’s hard to penetrate… and it’s not always in the best interest of the party or for conservative principles.”

Hoo boy. Can Steelman succeed in mucking up two statewide primaries in a row for the GOP? Granted, I fully realize that Hulshof was probably doomed anyway last year, but she sure didn’t make things any easier for Kenny Boy.

This one could be pretty fun to watch.

Research 2000 for Daily Kos (2/16-18, registered voters):

Patty Murray (D-inc): 53

Dave Reichert (R): 40

Patty Murray (D-inc): 55

Rob McKenna (R): 39

(MoE: ±4%)

Research 2000 takes a look at the 2010 Washington Senate race for Daily Kos, and there’s really not much to see here. Patty Murray wins easily against two of the few Republicans that people in Washington actually like, Rep. Dave Reichert and Attorney General Rob McKenna. But neither of them have given any indication of running for the Senate, and if either of them had any urges, this poll is likely to squelch those.

McKenna has his sights set on the 2012 gubernatorial race (which will presumably be an open seat), while Reichert is (as I’ve talked about at length) the GOP’s only hope of holding onto the Democratic-leaning WA-08 and the state GOP won’t want to sacrifice him for a longshot bid against Murray. With Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers climbing the House leadership ladder and Dino Rossi having seen the extinction of his career, there just aren’t any top-tier elected GOPers in the state to make this race.

Expect them to take the route they took in 2006 with Mike! McGavick and pick some super-wealthy self-funder you’ve never heard of, who won’t break 40% but will at least be able to pay for his own funeral. (It’s been long-threatened, but it may finally be John Stanton‘s turn in the dunk tank.)

All races are always winnable. It’s just that sometimes, they are only winnable by one side.

Article: http://www.bayoubuzz.com/News/…

Papers have been filed with the Office of the Louisiana Secretary of State which started the process requiring sufficient signatures to force a recall election for the office held by Representative Cao.

What is a recall election?  As many people may remember, the recent recall election in California that can be summed up as a clusterf*** of a race.  You can see a picture of the ballot here: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi…

Of the 135 candidates, notable ones include: Tom McClintock, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Cruz Bustamente, Gary Coleman, Larry Flynt, Arianna Huffington, etc.  

One elected official, State Representative Juan A. LaFonta, Democrat of District 96 told Bayoubuzz that he does not know about the existence of the petition but that he would sign it.  

“We don’t need Cao to be Steve Scalise”, said LaFonta.  Scalise is a Republican who represents a neighboring conservative Congressional District.  “People are starving and Cao needs to represent the people of the district”, LaFonta said.

The group of ministers who filed the petition want to make sure that he faces a recall which could be a very daunting act, if not impossible act in Louisiana based upon the state’s history.

So what are the rules for a recall election in Louisiana and what is the likelihood of a recall election?  First, you have 180 days to get 33% of signatures of voters in the district.  A high bar, to say the least.  

Two local African-American Ministers have launched a recall petition against newly elected Second District Congressman Anh “Joseph” Cao that already reportedly has over 12,000 signatures in its first week.   Rev. Toris Young, President of the Louisiana Ministerial Alliance of Churches for All Peoples, has joined with his fellow Minister Aubry Wallace to attempt to obtain the verified signatures of more than 101,000 registered voters in the 2nd District, more than a third of the registered electorate, in just 180 days.

Link: http://www.bayoubuzz.com/News/…

12,000 signatures in 7 days is a pace that can succeed, but can the religious and political leaders in the district maintain such a vigorous pace?  Time will tell. (Original H/T to DK but I looked up the CA ballot and Louisiana law myself)