Month: March 2009

I read Nathaniel90’s material concerning redistricting in Nevada.  Our growth has slowed way down during the the last four years, and as a result it is unlikely that we (Nevada) will get a fourth congressperson.  But if we do get a fourth congressperson, those CD boundaries have already been decided.  Well, I shouldn’t say that, but nearly everyone who counts has signed off on the new boundaries.  If you are interested I will e-mail you these new boundary lines.  Also, per the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Abrams v. Johnson, 177 S.Ct. 1925 (1997) we will need to redistrict, even if we continue with three CDs.  These new boundaries have also been decided upon.  Forrest.Darby@cox.net

Yet another GOPer looks to bail out of the misery that is life in the House minority:

Rep. J. Gresham Barrett made it official Wednesday: He will be a candidate for South Carolina governor in 2010. The four-term Republican announced his candidacy electronically. He sent an e-mail to supporters linking to a video on his new campaign site, Gresham Barrett for Governor.

Barrett is the first of what is likely to be a crowded field of Republicans vying for the nomination.

Current Gov. Mark Sanford , a Republican, is barred from running for a third term and the open seat has attracted attention from a number of state-level officials on both sides of the aisle.

Nonetheless, a whole passel of Republicans are eager to take Barrett’s place:

But should Barrett attempt to succeed outgoing Gov. Mark Sanford (R) and retire from the House in two years, a legendary name around South Carolina and in Washington, D.C., is expected to surge to the front of the line: Strom Thurmond Jr.

Thurmond, a lawyer in the region and son of the late Senator, undoubtedly would have universal name recognition with conservative voters and is widely known to have expressed interest in Barrett’s seat in the past. The late statesman’s son, a former federal prosecutor, did not return a message left at his Aiken, S.C., law firm.

Behind Thurmond, state Reps. Rex Rice and Michael Thompson also are considered possible Republican primary frontrunners in the district, which was previously represented by now-Sen. Lindsey Graham (R). Rice, a wealthy local businessman, also could devote significant resources to his campaign and has the requisite ties with the local business community. …

State Sen. Greg Ryberg, who sank millions of dollars of his own money on losing a state treasurer’s race two years ago, also is considered a 2010 GOP ballot possibility in Barrett’s district. State Sen. Tom Alexander (R) is rumored to covet higher office as well.

The district, though, is brutal territory for Dems. Until 1994, this seat was actually held by Democrat Butler Derrick, who apparently had the good sense to get out of the way of Hurricane Gingrich. The presidential numbers tell a painful tale: after going for Bush 34-66 in 2004, the needle barely moved to 35-64 in 2008. Given that SC as a whole moved eight points in our direction, standing still qualifies as falling behind. Sorry, open seat fans.

It’s hardly a surprise, but the Club For Growth’s Andy Harris is giving this Congress thing another shot:

In a fund-raising letter to supporters, Republican state Sen. Andy Harris says he has decided to run again for the 1st Congressional District seat he narrowly lost last year to Democrat Frank Kratovil.

“After talking with my wife, my family and my closes supporters, I’ve decided that I will in fact run for the U.S. Congress once more and am asking you for your help to make this campaign a success.”

On balance, we’re probably better off fending off Harris rather than a fresher face. Rematches — especially ones following a hard-fought open seat battle — are rarely successful for the loser.

MI-11 is positioned to be one of the Dems’ top pickup possibilities in 2010; it’s a district that Obama won 54-45, where Bad Thad McCotter squeaked past a no-name challenger last year, and where McCotter’s anti-stimulus vote is particularly jarring in one of the most economically hard-hit districts in the country. But we have to have the right candidate to do it, and the Dems’ top recruit, state House speaker Andy Dillon, just said no:

House Speaker Andy Dillon (D-Redford Twp.), in Washington D.C. to push for more federal loan money for the Big Three automaker, confirmed today he was approached in the nation’s capital to run in the 11th Congressional District in 2010, but he “respectfully declined.”

Dillon is prevented by term limits from another go-round in the state House, so it’s not as if he has to fear giving up his current seat for a 50-50 shot against McCotter. It might be that he has his eye on something else (possibly the governor’s race, where the most prominent Dem interested so far is Lt. Gov. John Cherry, who may suffer from his ties to unpopular current Gov. Jennifer Granholm).

• NY-20: The Troy Record, one of the major papers in the district, calls out GOP candidate Jim Tedisco in an angry editorial for not living in the district and for sticking to the Republican negative campaigning playbook.

• OK-Gov: Former Republican Congressman J.C. Watts says he’s weighing a run for governor and will make a decision in 45 days. (Mark your calendars for April 17th.) But how will Watts, who made tentative pro-Obama noises last year, play in a GOP primary? (D)

• CA-19: More R-on-R fun: A wealthy Republican fundraiser in California is itching to recruit a primary challenger for GOP Rep. George Radanovich. Assemblyman Mike Villines might be interested. Radanovich’s district supported Bush by monstrous margins, but only went for McCain by 52-46 last year. (J) (UPDATE: Villines’ office writes in to say that he will be supporting Radanovich in 2010.)

• CA-Sen: Best wishes to Carly Fiorina, the former Hewlett-Packard CEO who moved on to Republican politics and had been mentioned as a possible candidate against Barbara Boxer in 2010. She’s been diagnosed with breast cancer, which may put her political activism on hold.

• DC Voting Rights: The House vote on the DC Voting Rights Act has been pushed back until next week, as leadership figures out how to prevent the GOP from adding language that strips most of what remains of DC’s gun laws (after the Supreme Court partially struck them down last year).

• 2010 House: The Hill has a nice preview of some of the hot House races in two years, and candidates bubbling up to fill those slots.

Fairleigh Dickinson Univ. (2/25-3/2, registered voters, 1/2-1/7 in parentheses):

Jon Corzine (D-inc): 32 (40)

Chris Christie (R): 41 (33)

Jon Corzine (D-inc): 36 (46)

Steve Lonegan (R): 32 (28)

(MoE: ±4%)

Chris Christie (R): 43 (32)

Steve Lonegan (R): 15 (15)

Rick Merkt (R): 1 (5)

Brian Levine (R): 2 (0)

(MoE: ±6%)

Jon Corzine seems to be joining neighboring governor David Paterson in a race to the bottom, losing steam as the state’s economy falters. He trails US Attorney Chris Christie by 9, compared with a 7-point lead in January (prior to Christie’s announcement of his candidacy). These numbers are consistent with Corzine’s mediocre approve/disapprove of 40/46.

Christie still must get through a primary, most prominently against former Bogota mayor Steve Lonegan, who seems to be running to Christie’s right. I have to wonder if Corzine’s best hope would be to spend his buckets of money now to make sure that the wingnutty Lonegan wins the primary (a la the Dems’ gaming the system in the 2002 Riordan/Simon primary in California)… otherwise, he’ll be digging a lot deeper into his pockets, and having to bank on economic recovery, in November.

UPDATE: Ooops, look like we never got around to reporting Quinnipiac‘s last poll of this race from 1/29-2/2, which had Christie up 44-38. We have enough information now that Pollster has some trendlines up, and the results ain’t pretty.

Marist (2/25-26, registered voters, 1/27 in parentheses):

David Paterson (D-inc): 26

Andrew Cuomo (D): 62

(MoE: ±4.5%)

Rudy Giuliani (R): 78

Rick Lazio (R): 17

(MoE: ±5.5%)

David Paterson (D-inc): 38 (46)

Rudy Giuliani (R): 53 (47)

David Paterson (D-inc): 47

Rick Lazio (R): 35

Andrew Cuomo (D): 56

Rudy Giuliani (R): 39

Andrew Cuomo (D): 71

Rick Lazio (R): 20

(MoE: ±3%)

Kirsten Gillibrand (D-inc): 36

Carolyn McCarthy (D): 33

(MoE: ±4.5%)

Peter King (R): 32

George Pataki (R): 56

(MoE: ±5.5%)

Kirsten Gillibrand (D-inc): 49 (49)

Peter King (R): 28 (24)

Kirsten Gillibrand (D-inc): 45 (44)

George Pataki (R): 41 (42)

(MoE: ±3%)

Whew! That’s a lot of data for one poll. And none of it is good for Gov. David Paterson, who can’t muster even half the support of AG Andrew Cuomo in a primary matchup… and if he miraculously makes it through the primary, he’s poised to get creamed by Rudy Giuliani, of all people.

There’s also the wee matters of his approval rating (26% ‘excellent’ or ‘good,’ which is lower than George Pataki, Mario Cuomo, or Eliot Spitzer ever managed), disapproval over his handling of the budget (30/59, down from 42/41 in January, suggesting that most of his continued plunge is about the budget and not about senate seat blowback), and terrible ‘wrong track’ numbers for the state of New York (27/65). The only thing he has to be thankful about: that he’s not ex-Rep. Rick Lazio, the one man in the state who’s even less popular.

On the Senate front, Paterson’s appointee Kirsten Gillibrand is still in something of a holding pattern as her constituents get to know her. She’s getting only 18% ‘excellent’ or ‘good ratings, compared with 32% ‘fair’ or ‘poor,’ but 50% of the sample just says ‘don’t know.’ She fares well against Rep. Peter King, but ex-Gov. George Pataki (who hasn’t really expressed interest in the race, although John Cornyn has been privately buttering him up) makes the race competitive. Her toughest task may still be defending her left flank in the primary, although unlike Quinnipiac‘s February poll, which had Gillibrand down 34-24 to Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, Marist gives Gillibrand the narrow edge. (Discussion is underway in andgarden‘s aptly titled diary.)

Episode 2 in my series of diaries mapping out possible redistricting scenarios in the states has arrived! Today, I map Michigan and Nevada.

Grain of salt alert: my districts are based on county estimates from 2007 which are due to be adjusted soon with 2008 numbers. Also, I am using projected seat totals that are equally subject to change.

The number geeks among us will really enjoy what’s below the fold…

Michigan

The battle for control of redistricting in Michigan is wide open in the 2010 elections, with a competitive open race for the governor’s mansion being vacated by term-limited Democrat Jennifer Granholm and the state Senate standing at a narrow 21-17 Republican advantage. Since Democrats have a strong 67-43 edge in the House, the one scenario that seems unlikely is a repeat of 2001’s GOP gerrymander. Given the difficulty of both holding Granholm’s spot and picking up those three Senate seats, my best bet would be a continuation of split redistricting power when map-making time comes around in 2011-2012…and usually, split control means incumbent protection.

But hark, Michigan is expected to lose a seat in redistricting, going from 15 down to 14. Someone will have to be the unlucky loser. If Democrats somehow won the trifecta, they could force two GOP incumbents (say, Mike Rogers and Dave Camp) to run against each other. But since I’m presuming split control, it will have to be a Republican against a Democrat.

At first, the logical choice seemed to be eliminating Thad McCotter by pitting him against longtimer Sander Levin. But I decided against this for a very good reason: Gary Peters must be protected in any plan, and since Oakland County is a relatively competitive county, its Republican voters have to go somewhere. So if McCotter and Levin went against each other, it would likely have to be a GOP-leaning district, one a liberal like Levin would have trouble winning. Meanwhile, there was one incumbent other than Peters (Mark Schauer) whom I pointedly wanted to protect, and the only way to make him safe that I saw was to encroach on heavily Democratic Ingham County (Lansing). Thus the solution was reached: a Democratic-leaning 7th District that forces Schauer against Mike Rogers in a seat Schauer would likely win.

Would Republicans in the state Senate vote for such a plan? Well, they probably would if it protected the congressional delegation’s weakest GOP member, McCotter…and by giving him Livingston County, it does.

There is only one problematic side effect of my map: it pushes Sander Levin’s home out of the district in which he’d presumably run. I’m not clear whether his hometown of Royal Oak would be represented by Peters or McCotter, but his base would be shifted to working-class Democratic parts of Macomb and Wayne Counties. I’m sure he’d move if necessary; Michigan isn’t new to messy redistricting plans. In retrospect, I probably could have split Oakland County three ways and allowed Levin to stay put, but the way my map is configured, he’d need to pick up a lot of Macomb County’s Democrats anyway.

Without further ado, here it is:

District 1 – Bart Stupak (D-Menominee) — I think I finally found the way to make his district relatively strong for a future Democrat (face it, some day, 10 to 15 years down the road, Stupak will retire, and the Upper Peninsula isn’t as Democratic as it once was): I gave Stupak 89% of Bay County, making Bay City the largest source of district population.

District 2 – Pete Hoekstra (R-Holland) — Hoekstra will likely run for Governor in 2010, but another conservative West Michigan Republican should succeed him, and that person will be plenty safe in 2012 under my plan.

District 3 – Vern Ehlers (R-Grand Rapids) — had to expand a little and take Kent County whole, but will remain strongly GOP-leaning.

District 4 – Dave Camp (R-Midland) — this thing stretches from Lake Michigan to the Saginaw area now because of lagging population, but it should stay strong for Camp and any credible Republican in most years.

District 5 – Dale Kildee (D-Flint) — like most of the state’s districts, this one had to expand geographically, taking much of Michigan’s Thumb from Candice Miller. With all of Genesee County intact, no doubt it stays a Democratic seat.

District 6 – Fred Upton (R-St. Joseph) — possibly became a bit more Republican by taking some of Mark Schauer’s more conservative turf, but not significantly so. Stays safe for Upton, competitive or slightly GOP-leaning in a future race.

District 7 – Mark Schauer (D-Battle Creek) vs. Mike Rogers (R-Brighton) — the horror of hard-right Rogers representing 66% Obama-supporting Ingham County is coming to an end! Rogers’ saving grace, heavily Republican Livingston County, is removed from the district as Ingham combines with Schauer’s less Democratic geographical base to make Rogers a goner. After 2012, Schauer could likely rely on Lansing more than Battle Creek or Jackson to get him reelected.

District 8 – Gary Peters (D-Bloomfield Township) — contained entirely within Oakland County, grabbing more Democratic areas from Sander Levin, who presumably has enough clout and seniority to make it in a modified but definitely Dem-friendly Macomb/Wayne district. As I said before, if there’s anything I would have done differently with this map, it’s keeping Levin in Oakland, but since these are based on 2007 county population estimates anyway, this plan is only a rough guideline of how I see redistricting going down in two or three years.

District 9 – Candice Miller (R-Harrison Township) — heavier in Macomb County, snatching its more Republican areas while only creeping a bit up the Thumb.

District 10 – Thad McCotter (R-Livonia) — he finally becomes safe, because no matter the trends in Oakland or Wayne, he’ll have Livingston County to keep him in Congress. It was a tough call figuring out which Republican would be hurt by redistricting, but as I mentioned, Oakland County is relatively 50/50 in neutral election years and those Republicans have to go somewhere…it’s far easier to imagine a bipartisan plan targeting Rogers, whose district is one of the truest gerrymanders in the state.

District 11 – Sander Levin (D-Royal Oak) — okay, maybe the legislature can find a way to keep him in Oakland County, but regardless, his district will stay safely Democratic (though it has to shed a few Dems for Peters’ sake).

District 12 – Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (D-Detroit) — while population loss has been severe in Detroit, the Voting Rights Act as practiced today would seem to protect both Kilpatrick and Conyers. Her district will grow in area but should stay majority-black and overwhelmingly Democratic.

District 13 – John Conyers (D-Detroit) — ditto.

District 14 – John Dingell (D-Dearborn) — stays safely Democratic. When Dingell retires, it will be fascinating to see the primary battle play out between a Dingell-esque old-school “GM-approved candidate” and an Ann Arbor latte liberal.

Most likely result of this plan: 8 Democrats, 6 Republicans. While the Senate won’t like losing a Republican, the fact is that people like Upton, Rogers, and McCotter already represent districts that voted for Obama, so to cement GOP seats in the future, something’s gotta give. Saving McCotter should be enough of a consolation prize/sweetener to win Senate approval for a plan like this.

On to Nevada

Over the last decade, no state has represented a more different kind of America from Michigan than Nevada. While a slowdown in migration is currently resulting from the poor economy, and a “desert foreclosure crisis” has slowed Nevada’s growth to something of a halt compared to past years, the Silver State is still a lock for a new seat. As in Michigan, Democrats have a realistic chance at a takeover, but for now, control is split. 2010 will be a huge year in Nevada, with Harry Reid fighting for reelection, GOP Gov. Jim Gibbons badly unpopular, and term limits finally taking effect in the Democratic-controlled legislature. Gibbons’ approval ratings render him DOA either in the primary or the general, but the difference could be crucial. Term limits could help either party, and might affect control of the Senate, though the Assembly is lopsided enough to remain Democratic regardless.

In any case, while Democrats will gun for a shutout, the current state of affairs is split control, and I drew my map accordingly. What you’ll immediately notice is that the “cow counties” north of Las Vegas finally have not one, but two, districts representing them in Congress. Yet appearances can be deceiving; Dean Heller’s District 2 will actually be dominated by Reno and Carson City, while my proposed District 4 (likely a competitive seat) will have mixed turf in northern Clark County as its population base.

District 1 – Shelley Berkley (D-Las Vegas) — will probably become even tinier in area and stay solidly Democratic.

District 2 – Dean Heller (R-Carson City) — I tried my darnedest to protect Heller knowing that whether Democrats control the process or power is split, Heller will not be a target, but he will lose the southern part of his district no matter who draws the lines. In a Democratic wave year like 2008, this district would not look great for him what with Dem trends in Washoe County and Carson City, but if he can endear himself to Reno and hold strong at home, he should be fine.

District 3 – Dina Titus (D-Las Vegas) — will also contract and become more Democratic regardless who draws the lines.

And the new District 4 – stretches up from North Las Vegas to Elko County — this should be a competitive seat, with a Democratic-leaning Clark County base counterbalanced by Art Bell libertarians in Pahrump and cowboy conservatives up north. If Democrats manage to hold the Senate and win the governor’s mansion in 2010, they will seek to make the new 4th more Democratic than did I and further protect Heller in his increasingly centrist turf, but again, I’m assuming split control for now.

Net result: Berkley and Titus are safe, Heller is fine as long as he can win Reno, and a new wild card is introduced. The question is: is there any politician in Nevada who would know how to win over the suburbs of Las Vegas and Elko?

Episode 3 (coming soon): will cover Iowa and Ohio (two of my best)

Episode 4: New Jersey and Georgia

Episode 5: Florida and Louisiana

Episode 6: Pennsylvania and Utah

EDIT: Re: my Michigan plan, it seems that I inadvertently am forcing two Republicans against each other. Brighton is in Livingston County, not Ingham County. Very well, then, let Rogers and McCotter have each other out, but would Senate Republicans go for it? I would point out that a similar situation occurred in Indiana back in 2001 (the state lost a seat, and a Democratic Governor and House passed a plan — with approval from a Republican Senate — that forced GOPers Brian Kerns and Steve Buyer against each other).

The Republican Party leadership seems determined to squeeze Bunning into retirement and are adopting a new strategy in pursuit of their goal by starving him of campign donations and assistance.  As noted in the Politico story:

That means little fundraising help from top Republicans in Washington, little to no engagement with the National Republican Senatorial Committee and a cold shoulder from Kentucky political strategists.

[skip]

Behind the scenes, Republicans in Washington and Kentucky are beginning to shut out Bunning, with no plans to give him the usual access to an extensive network of personnel, e-mail lists and contact information to reach out to potential supporters in his state.

http://www.politico.com/news/s…

The initial effort to persuade Bunning to retire failed miserably for Republicans.  Bunning even went so as to threaten to resign, allowing the Democratic governor to select a successor, and also threatened to sue the NRSC if they supported a challenger.  Needless to say, these actions did not endear Bunning to the Republican leadership, but they do seem to have succeeded in getting them to at least be more subtle in their efforts.

The article really shows how desparate McConnell and Cornyn are to force Bunning out.  Obviously, these guys interact with him every day.  So, the fact that they are so desparate to rid themselves of him suggests that Bunning is even more likely to implode while campaigning than even we might have believed.  If the GOP leadership is this desparate to get rid of Bunning, then we really need him to be the Republican nominee.  Besides donating to Bunning within the next few months, is there anything we can do to show Senator Bunning our “support”?

Voters in Illinois’ Fighting 5th are choosing the Democratic nominee to replace Rahm Emanuel tonight. We won’t be liveblogging the race tonight (sorry, liveblogging fans), but if you have any predictions, now’s the time to put it all on the table.

UPDATE (David) (9:40PM): With 80% of the vote counted, Mike Quigley has a pretty substantial 2,100 vote lead.

10:27PM: The AP calls it for Quigley. Congrats to the newest member of our caucus. (Okay, yeah, there is a general election, but check out how many total votes there were in the GOP primary.)