Month: June 2009

Nevada Redistricting

According to the population estimates, I decided that Nevada would get a new congressional district even though it was hard hit by the foreclosure crisis. My goal was to create a new Democratic district while protecting newly elected Democrat Dina Titus in the 3rd Congressional district. I believe I succeeded  in packing most of the Republican areas into one district. I made the map with Dave’s Redistricting App which is really fantastic. My next map should be either Louisiana or New Jersey. Enough talk, here is the link to my maps: http://frogandturtle.blogspot….

District 1 Shelly Barkely (D) (Blue)

I gave Barkley a strong Democratic district containing much of Las Vegas and neighborhoods in North Las Vegas with high minority populations. Still, I believe I kept enough heavily Democratic areas out of the 1st to protect Titus and strengthen the 2nd. The district is still minority majority and I believe Barkley or any Democrat will have no trouble winning this district. It probably voted about 66% for Obama. The racial stats are 12% Black, 31% Hispanic, 8% Asian and 46% White. Status is Safe Democrat.

District 2 No Incumbent (Green)

This was the new district I created that I hope will vote Democratic. The current representative is Dean Heller and I put his home in Carson City outside of the district. I hope that will deter him from running here. Even though most of his district is here, it is the more Democratic parts. The district stretches from the northern border, through Reno, along the western border and finally goes to take in some Democratic neighborhoods in Clark County (Las Vegas.) I think 20% of the district is in Clark County and 60% is in Reno. This would almost ensure that if a Democrat is elected, he or she will be from Reno. Looking at the numbers, Obama won the northern part of the district by about 13,000 votes but I am not sure of his margin in the Clark County portion. I estimate that he still won about 53%-55% of the vote in this district. That percentage should be enough to elect a Democrat. The racial stats for this district are 3% Black, 24% Hispanic, 6% Asian and 64% White. Status is Lean Democrat.

District 3 Dina Titus (D) (Purple)

I definitely strengthened Dina Titus enough by giving her some precincts that were formerly in the 1st district and by taking out Republican parts of Henderson and the outer Las Vegas suburbs. I believe the district is too Democratic for Jon Porter. He will probably run for the Republican 4th district. Dina Titus should worry about nothing except that she might face a minority candidate in the primary. Whatever way it goes, this district is in Democratic hands for the foreseeable future. It probably voted around 61% for Obama. The racial stats are 10% Black, 31% Hispanic, 8% Asian and 49% White. Status is Safe Democrat.

District 4 Dean Heller (R) (Red)

This district is where I put most of the Republicans. It looks like it is centered in the “Cow Counties” or the counties outside of Clark and Reno Counties. Actually, it is based in Clark County and takes in Republican parts of Henderson. Even though I put Dean Heller’s home in the 4th district, I believe that Jon Porter or another Clark County Republican would run for this district. Dean Heller is a relatively new representative and he would definitely face trouble. Since most of the constituents live in Clark County, Heller will have to struggle to introduce himself to the people there. Still, I think it would be easy for a Clark County Republican to brand Heller as a Republican from the far corner of the state. Heller will probably lose but the district will most likely remain Republican. It probably voted about 56% to 59% for McCain. Racial stats are 4% Black, 18% Hispanic, 5% Asian and 70% White. Status is Safe Republican

Survey USA released a new batch of approval ratings for governors based on polls taken June 16. Iowa’s Chet Culver was at 42 percent approval and 51 percent disapproval. The previous SUSA poll in Iowa, taken in late April, found similar numbers for Culver: 42 percent approval and 50 percent disapproval.

CORRECTION: I did not realize that SUSA also conducted a poll in late May, which showed somewhat better numbers for Culver: 48 approve, 47 disapprove.

Probably this is just statistical noise, and Culver’s support is somewhere in the 40s. Alternatively, if you have some hypothesis that would explain why the governor’s support rose in May but dropped by mid-June, please post a comment.

Click here to see all of SUSA’s approval numbers for Culver since he became governor.

It would be nice if some other polling firm released a new Iowa survey soon.

Having noticed that Culver’s SUSA numbers bounced up last May and June after being in net negative territory from February through April 2008, I wondered whether a “legislative session effect” might have dragged him down from February through April of this year. Either that was not the case, or the weaker economy this year has prevented the governor from getting a post-session bounce.

Approval ratings in the low 40s are outside the comfort zone for an incumbent, but I wouldn’t hit the panic button yet. SUSA has tended to measure Culver’s support at lower levels than some other pollsters, and most governors have seen their approval ratings slip during the past year, presumably because of the economy and the fiscal problems affecting almost every state.

I couldn’t find any breakdown of Culver’s support among Democrats, Republicans and independents either at this site or on Survey USA’s site. If anyone has those numbers, please post a comment or send me an e-mail (desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com). I still think a large number of Democrats and independents who may not “approve” of Culver would choose him in a heartbeat over Chris Rants or Bob Vander Plaats, who are most committed to running for governor.

We’ll have a better idea of the governor’s re-election prospects when we see polling of head-to-head matchups with potential Republican challengers. Some of the Republicans considering this race would be stronger than others in terms of personal appeal or fundraising (though Culver will probably be able to outspend even the best GOP fundraisers).

Finally, keep in mind that despite ups and downs in the economy, Iowa hasn’t voted an incumbent governor out of office since 1962.

Share any thoughts about Culver’s chances or the GOP gubernatorial primary in this thread. Who has the potential to overcome Vander Plaats’ head start on campaigning? Can Rants reinvent himself as a likable politician? Who would benefit from a more crowded Republican field? Will the GOP primary be negative enough to do lasting damage to the eventual nominee?

Final note: Swing State Project currently considers the Iowa governor’s race to be safe D. I would rate it as likely D, and the Culver-skeptic contingent at Bleeding Heartland would probably argue for a lean D rating.

This piece in Roll Call mentions a couple of potential candidates on both sides to replace Charlie Melancon, who looks all but set to challenge Sen. David Vitter. It got James and me thinking: Why not take a look at all the state legislators whose districts are covered, either in whole or in part, by LA-03? So, after poring over maps and sifting through precinct results, we’ve come up with two lists – one for state senators, the other for state reps.

Note that some of these legislative districts are only partly within LA-03, and therefore some of these folks might not even live in the 3rd CD and/or may only represent a tiny slice of it. Interestingly, despite this area’s conservative bent, it’s represented by quite a few Democrats at the state level. This isn’t an uncommon phenomenon in many parts of the South (look at AL-05 in 2008, for instance), so hopefully this means we have something of a bench to look to here.

Of course, these lists don’t include countless other elected officials, prominent figures, and wealthy dudes who might make a run. But they are a good starting point – former state legislators make up over half of the House (PDF). So if you know anything about any of these folks, please let us know in comments.

RaceTracker: LA-03

 

Mo’ money, mo’ problems. Here are the May fundraising reports for the six major party committees (April numbers are here):

*Note: The NRSC’s receipts for the month of May include a $1 million transfer from the RNC.

Rasmussen (6/17, likely voters):

Roy Barnes (D): 48

Thurbert Baker (D): 8

DuBose Porter (D): 5

Carl Camon (D): 2

David Poythress (D): 2

Other: 5

Undecided: 31

(MoE: ±6%)

These are the most dominating numbers of the Democratic primary that we’ve seen for ex-Gov. Roy Barnes all year, but we only have a pair of Strategic Vision polls (from April and last week) to compare this one to. Strategic Vision pegged Barnes at a similar level of support, but they found Attorney General Thurbert Baker in “fighting chance” territory around the 30% mark at opposed to his pitiful 8% showing in this poll. Hopefully some other pollsters will start dipping their toes into this primary — note that this Rasmu poll has a rather portly margin of error at 6%.

The GOP:

John Oxendine (R): 35

Karen Handel (R): 11

Nathan Deal (R): 10

Eric Johnson (R): 3

Austin Scott (R): 2

Ray McBerry (R): 1

Other: 5

Undecided: 33

(MoE: ±5%)

Those nums are very, very close to Strategic Vision’s latest effort, which had Oxendine up by 35-13 over Handel, with Deal close behind at 12%. Maybe this will descend into a pretty hot wingnut-on-wingnut-on-wingnut fight, but for now, Oxendine is the man to beat.

RaceTracker: GA-Gov

Two Democrats vying for the nomination in the governor’s race that is: ex-Gov. Jerry Brown and San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom. Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa today stated unequivocally that he won’t be joining them in the race for Governor in 2010.

“The answer is no,” Villaraigosa said in an interview on CNN. “I feel compelled to complete what I started out to do… I can’t leave this city in the middle of a crisis.” He noted the city’s unemployment rate, residents who have lost their homes and the budget deficit.

Villaraigosa was considered a top contender until recently, and would have brought definite strategic advantages to the race (the only SoCal resident and the only Latino in the race). He never caught fire in the initial polls, though (and this weekend’s LA Times poll showing him with lukewarm approvals and barely beating Brown on his own turf in LA may have been the last straw). This way Villaraigosa saves his powder for another fight — such as the 2012 Senate race, if Dianne Feinstein retires.

RaceTracker: CA-Gov

I’m not joking:

Some politicians take their privacy more seriously than others, and are reticent about disclosing details of their personal lives. But it’s still very rare to see a sitting governor just up and go missing for days, leaving his office, his state’s law[] enforcement — even his wife — without any clue as to his whereabouts.

That’s what South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford has been doing since Thursday, when he reportedly left the governor’s mansion in a black SUV owned by the State Law Enforcement Division, which handles his security detail. His phones have been turned off, and he hasn’t responded to phone or text messages, a local paper, The State, reports. The last clue as to his location came when a cell tower near Atlanta picked up a signal from his phone. His wife, First Lady Jenny Sanford, has told the Associated Press that she doesn’t know where he is — but she says she’s not concerned.

There have been conflicting explanations for the governor’s absence. Jenny Sanford told the AP that her husband needed some time away from their children in order to write something. But a statement from his office says he’s “taking some time away from the office this week to recharge after the stimulus battle and the legislative session, and to work on a couple of projects that have fallen by the wayside.” It adds that the office will not discuss any specifics regarding his trip.

This is really nuts. And ditching the family on Father’s Day weekend, no less.

UPDATE: More:

“We’ve been concerned by the Governor’s erratic behavior for some time,” said South Carolina Senate Leader John C. Land III. “We’re praying for him and his family. I hope he is safe and that he contacts the First Lady and his family soon.”

RaceTracker: SC-Gov

The following are my thoughts on redistricting each of the Midwestern states-from Iowa and Missouri to Western Pennsylvania. I think in general, things look good for Dems right now, with the exceptions of Indiana and Missouri. But read on and tell me what you think.

In alphabetical order

Iowa

I think that in some ways, Iowa is the most predictable state because of the way they redraw their lines. You know that there will be a Democratic leaning 1st District in the northeast, a stronger Democratic 2nd in the southeast part, a Polk County/Des Moines based 3rd, and Steve King’s wingnut friendly 4th in the Western part of the state.

Indiana

With the GOP likely to run remap here, the consensus is that they’ll target Baron Hill by stripping him of Bloomington. I think that’s potentially dangerous, as neither Buyer or Burton are good campaigners. Furthermore, I think Baron Hill would be a great candidate for Governor, so the Indiana GOP better be careful what it wishes for……

Illinois

Two thoughts: if Kirk runs for Senate and we win his 10th (or if we win it outright), I’m guessing the ultimate target would be Judy Biggert, who’s older and less politically talented than Roskam. The best bet might be to pair them together in an ultra GOP DuPage based district and use the Dem leftovers with parts of say, the 9th to create a new Dem district.

Now my evil little thought: I wonder if we could create a Democratic leaning monstrosity with the most Democratic friendly parts of Rockford, Peoria, Champaign/Urbana, and Springfield. Yeah it’d be ugly, but so is Phil Hare’s 17th…..

Michigan

In Michigan, if Dems run remap, there are several ways to go with it. My guess is that they would draw Thad McCotter into an Ann Arbor based district that he couldn’t win-that’s by far the easiest. I also think they’ll. The other thing they should do is draw a Lansing based Democratic District drawn for Virg Bernero and give the GOP parts of the 8th to Candice Miller and pack all of the GOP’s Southeast strongholds into a single district. I suppose there’s also the outside possibility of a Dem Western district that combines the city of Grand Rapids with some of the Dem leaning counties on Lake Michigan, but I’m not sure Vern Ehlers wouldn’t win that anyways….

Minnesota

Regardless of whether the state ends up with 7 or 8 CDs, the objective of Minnesota’s redistricting plan (if Dems control, and I think they will) will be to get rid of Michele Bachmann. The only difference being how you do it. If there are 8 CDs, you simply draw a 6th that is is close to even and friendly to State Senator Tarryl Clark. If there are 7, slam her into an uber-GOP (Sherburne, Wright, Carver,Scott and the most GOP friendly parts of Dakota, Anoka, and Hennepin)  district with John Kline.

The big question here in either case is whether the DFL goes after the 3rd by swapping some of the more Democratic suburbs like St. Louis Park and Hopkins for GOP friendly stuff like Edina.

Missouri

Dems have to pray that Missouri holds onto its 9th CD so they can simply play incumbent protection and draw a more friendly 4th CD along the I-70 corridor from KC to Boone County. If Missouri goes to 8, I’m almost certain that Skelton’s district is toast.

Ohio

If Dems control redistricting and Ohio loses 2 seats, here’s some possibilities

-The basic premise is to pack the GOPers into 4 ultra GOP districts: the 4th, 5th, 7th and 8th while creating a Dem Dayton district, cracking the 14th into 3, and the 2nd into 3 parts plus creating a Democratic leaning mashup of the 18th and 12th designed for Zack Space.

-Create a Democratic 3rd by combining Montgomery County with Oxford and the most Dem friendly turf you can find in Greene.

-Eliminate Jean Schmidt’s 2nd with the Dem parts of Hamilton going to the 1st, the GOP suburban stuff splitting between the 7th and 8th CDs and the Dem leaning Ohio River Counties into the 6th.

-Drop the GOP parts of the 15th into the 4th, 5th, and 7th and pick up Dem friendly turf in Franklin. However be careful because….

-To protect Zack Space, try and take what’s left of Franklin and mate it to the friendliest portions of the 18th while dropping as much of the GOP stuff into the 7th as possible.

-Finally, crack Steve LaTourette’s 14th into 3 between Marcia Fudge’s 10th (as much of Geauga  as you can get away with), Tim Ryan’s new district (which would be something like half of Lake and what’s left of Geauga, Astabula, Trumbull and the most Dem parts of Mahoning with some Dem strength going to Boccieri in the 16th), Finally, put the other half of Lake into Kucinich’s 10th by connecting it along Lake Erie.

Pennsylvania

As I remarked in another diary, Tim Murphy is almost certainly toast because the map is likely to be redrawn by a judge due to the split in the state legislature. Flat out, there is no way that any sane judge would draw something similar to Murphy’s one step short of fictitious 18th CD that he has now. He’ll either wind up running against Murtha (and will lose) or will end up in something similar to Frank Mascara’s old 20th (which he’d lose as well).

Wisconsin

I think the best target for Wisconsin Dems, should they control the trifecta, would be to go after Paul Ryan rather than Tom Petri-its much easier to play mix and match with the heavily Democratic 2nd and 4th than it is with Petri’s 6th. Ryan’s also waaaay to conservative for his district as it is, and Petri is something of an institution in his district anyways, even if on paper it is slightly more Democratic.

• DE-Sen: Wilmington News-Journal writer Ron Williams seems convinced that Rep. Mike Castle will be running for the open Senate seat in 2010 and will announce next month, based on his chats with unnamed “high-ranking Republican operatives who know Castle’s moods and inclinations.” He also points to Democratic “rumblings” that AG Beau Biden may pass on the race, to avoid a career-damaging defeat. The Hill tried to get confirmation on this and didn’t get any new information out of Castle, so take with as much salt as needed.

• FL-Sen: This is about the last thing anyone could have predicted: billionaire gadfly Tom Golisano, who ran three races for NY-Gov as an independent and was last seen pulling levers behind the curtain in the New York Senate semi-successsful-coup-type-thing has a new idea: running for Senate in Florida. Either on the Independence Party line (which does in fact exist in Florida, although barely)… or as a Democrat. Despite the fact that he just became a Florida resident a few months ago because he hated New York’s high taxes. Sounds like the kind of thing that’ll last until he’s distracted by another shiny object.

• MN-Sen: While we’re trafficking in thinly-sourced rumors, here’s one more: there are plans afoot for the “pre-concession BBQ” for Norm Coleman staffers.

• NH-Sen: AG Kelly Ayotte is reportedly “close” to deciding to run for Senate. (If you haven’t already read Laura Clawson‘s takedown last week of the circular rationale for the Ayotte boomlet, do it.)

• NV-Sen, NV-Gov: GOP Reno mayor Bob Cashell decided he didn’t really mean to endorse Harry Reid last week; he had co-hosted a fundraising reception for Reid but had done so as a “non-partisan mayor.” He probably noticed that having endorsed Reid wouldn’t help his chances in the Nevada governor’s GOP primary next year. (Although this article says that he’s also considering running for Governor as an Independent.) Meanwhile, Nevada’s other Senator, John Ensign saw his approval numbers take a huge hit with the allegations about his affair with a staffer: the Las Vegas Review-Journal finds him at 39/37, down from 53/18 last month. Still, he’s the most popular guy in Nevada, compared with Harry Reid‘s 34% approval and Gov. Jim Gibbons’ 10% approval in the same poll.

• CA-Gov: Antonio Villaraigosa will announce later today on CNN whether or not he’s going to run for California governor, which seemed likely even a few months ago but has gotten called into doubt recently. He can’t be encouraged by a recent LA Times poll, which polled only Los Angeles city voters on the Dem primary. Although Villaraigosa maintained a 55% approval as mayor, he only beat ex-Gov. Jerry Brown and SF Mayor Gavin Newsom by 38-32-13 on his home turf, with a plurality opposing his entry into the race.

• IL-Gov: Little-known state Senator Matt Murphy is getting in the Illinois governor’s race. He joins two other state Senators in the field: Bill Brady and Kirk Dillard. Murphy has only been in the Senate since 2006, but may have a geographical advantage against presumptive frontrunner Brady, in that Murphy is from Palatine in the Chicago burbs while Brady is from downstate.

• ME-Gov: Somehow this eluded me (and everyone else) last week, but it’s indicative of how little press the open Governor’s seat in Maine is getting. Steve Rowe, the Democratic former House speaker and Attorney General, has filed his campaign paperwork. The likely Dem frontrunner will have his formal kickoff “at a later date.”

• NJ-Gov: Chris Christie has some splainin’ to do to Congress: he agreed to testify before the House Judiciary subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law, regarding who Christie chose to award no-bid federal monitoring contracts to when he was US Attorney. Christie also looks to be waddling toward the center for the general, as last week his team scrubbed the “Shared Values” portion of his website that was up during the primary, in which he talked about opposition to abortion and gay marraige. Meanwhile, the discovery of an extra $625 million or so under the couch cushions in the state’s tax amnesty program may help Jon Corzine’s chances a lot; with that extra money, Dems may be able to restore the popular property tax rebates that were on the chopping block.

• NY-Gov: Rudy Giuliani gave a timeline of sorts for deciding whether or not to run for Governor, saying “it’s something I have to decide sometime this year, but I haven’t really focused on it very much right now.” Also, like clockwork, another Siena poll (pdf) showing David Paterson’s dire straits just came out (although numbers have been stable for several months now): he loses the primary to Andrew Cuomo 69-16 and the general to Giuliani 57-27. Cuomo beats Giuliani 49-40, and has his highest-ever approval ratings at 71%.

• FL-08: Rep. Alan Grayson likes to keep ’em guessing. One of the most outspoken liberals in the House, the freshman rep. plans to appear at the next Orlando-area teabaggers’ event on July 4. Apparently he’s there to tout support for a bill to audit the Federal Reserve, a topic where he and the Paulist wing of the GOPers have common cause.

• FL-13: More insight into the campaign finance shell game that GOP Rep. Vern Buchanan allegedly had going on, that’s been the subject of investigations: a bankrupt registered Democrat explained his $8,800 contribution to Buchanan in that he was reimbursed for the contributions by his partners in a trucking company, one of whom is one of Buchanan’s biggest backers.

• OH-02: David Krikorian, who’s going up against Rep. Jean Schmidt in this dark-red district, has put out an internal poll showing him within striking distance, down 44-39. Those numbers may have a lot to do with the DCCC‘s surprising recent decision to list OH-02 as one of their eight best shots at a pickup.

• Redistricting: The presentations from the NCSL’s first Redistricting Seminar are available online. They include topics like the Census and “How to Draw Maps That Will Stand up in Court.” (D)

Today, in a very unexpected ruling, the Supreme Court upheld Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires certain covered jurisdictions to seek “preclearance” from the Department of Justice before making any rule changes that affect voting. Adam Bonin explains:

[M]any conservatives have believed that the rigors of Section 5 preclearance exceeded Congress’ 15th Amendment authorization, given how much time has passed since the days of Bull Connor, and they thought they had their ideal plaintiff in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One (“NAMUDNO”), created in 1987 to provide waste collection and other public works services to about 3,500 residents.  Before 2004, elections for its board were held in private homes or garages; they wanted to move the elections to public places like elementary schools.  Because they’re in Texas, Section 5 applied, even though there was no evidence that NAMUDNO itself had ever discriminated on the basis of race.

And many liberals feared, especially after oral argument (PDF), that this Court’s 5-4 conservative majority would use the opportunity to gut Section 5, especially given its disparate treatment of Southern jurisdictions, with the Chief Justice asking the NAACP’s counsel “So is it your — is it your position that today southerners are more likely to discriminate than northerners?” and Justice Scalia noting, “Wasn’t Virginia the first State in the Union to elect a black governor?”

Today, however, the bullet was dodged, albeit on somewhat technical grounds.  In an 8-1 opinion authored by the Chief Justice, with only Justice Thomas dissenting, the Court effectively rewrote parts of the Voting Rights Act to allow NAMUDNO to apply in federal court for a permanent “bailout” from the preclearance provisions based on a documented record of behaving itself in this realm, a remedy previously allowed only for states and counties as a whole, and chose not to reach the larger constitutional question.

Leaving aside all the questions about how this ruling came about despite Roberts’ apparent hostility to the VRA, or what its narrow technical nature means for future rulings on the same subject, Rick Hasen explains the political ramifications:

The key political point is that Section 5 will remain in place during the next round of redistricting, and it will be redistricting supervised by the Obama Administration’s DOJ. We have already seen that the Obama Administration appears more protective of voting rights than the Bush Administration’s DOJ. So this will matter a great deal for the next decade of politics in terms of minority electoral success, even if Section 5 is struck down next decade.

In other words, while Justice Roberts and his conservative brethren might dismantle Section 5 at some point, this is a very good ruling for us with the census and the start of redistricting just a year away.