Month: October 2009

• CO-Sen: Here’s an amateur-level mistake from the Bennet campaign: electioneering in the Denver public schools (where Michael Bennet used to be Supernintendo before being appointed Senator). The campaign sent mailings to a school asking for the principal’s support and fliers were given to principals at a district workshop.

• FL-Sen: The Kendrick Meek campaign is touting its own fishy poll that says that Meek leads Charlie Crist… among voters who know both of them. The lead is 45-43 for Meek among those 25% of the sample who know who the heck Meek is. In the larger sample, Crist is up 47-31.

• KS-Sen: Kansas Senate news three digests in a row? I’m as surprised as you are. Anyway, retired advertising executive and journalist Charles Schollenberger confirmed that he will run for the Senate. With seemingly no Dems higher up the totem pole interested in the race, Schollenberger may wind up carrying the flag.

• NC-Sen: It’s not quite confirmed, but the rumor mill is churning up stories that youthful former state Senator and Iraq vet Cal Cunningham is moving to formally jump into the North Carolina Senate race. SoS Elaine Marshall is already in the Democratic primary field.

• PA-Sen: There’s an unexpected fourth Democratic participant in the Senate primary all of a sudden: Doris Smith-Ribner, a recently retired Commonwealth Court (which apparently is one of two intermediate appellate courts in Pennsylvania; don’t ask me why there are two) judge for two decades. Her presence could prove nettlesome to Rep. Joe Sestak, by eating a bit into his share of liberal anti-Arlen Specter votes in what’s likely to be a close primary. (“Fourth,” you say? State Rep. Bill Kortz is running too, and has been for many months.)

• AZ-Gov: He was probably seeing the same terrible polls that everyone else was, and ex-Governor Fife Symington decided to put the kibbosh on a gubernatorial comeback. Instead, Symington endorsed not the current Governor, Jan Brewer, but one of her minor opponents, former state GOP chair John Munger.

• CA-Gov: Meg Whitman scored a victory of sorts with the publication of a story titled “Meg Whitman’s voting record not as bad as originally portrayed.” It turns out she was registered at several points in California in the 1980s and 1990s, but there’s still no indication that she actually voted during this period.

Meanwhile, Whitman’s primary rival ex-Rep. Tom Campbell may get a big leg up: rumors persist that he may get picked as California’s new Lt. Governor (once John Garamendi gets elected to CA-10). I’d initially thought that was a way of scraping him out of the gubernatorial primary and giving him a door prize, but it could give him a higher profile and bully pulpit to compensate for his vast financial disadvantage as he stays in the race. Campbell was Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Finance Director for a while, and they operate in the same centrist space, so maybe Ahnold would do him the favor? (Of course, he’d still have to survive confirmation by the Dem-controlled legislature, who might be reluctant to promote Campbell, who they rightly see as the most dangerous general election opponent.)

• FL-Gov: It had seemed like state Sen. Paula Dockery, who threatened repeatedly during the spring to run in the GOP gubernatorial primary, had faded back into the woodwork. However, she’s front and center again today, saying that she’s “leaning toward” running and giving herself a three-week timeline (she put off the decision because of her husband’s surgery this summer). Another minor embarrassment for her primary opponent, AG Bill McCollum: the co-chair of his campaign, former state GOP chair Alex Cardenas, had to explain that, no, he didn’t actually host a fundraiser for Democratic rival Alex Sink. (It was hosted by Democratic partners in Cardenas’s lobbying firm.)

• NJ-Gov: Jon Corzine and Chris Christie have sufficiently reduced each other’s statures that the state’s largest newspaper, the Newark Star-Ledger, took what may be an unprecedented step, and endorsed the independent candidate in the race: Chris Daggett. I still can’t see this giving Daggett the momentum to break 20%, but more Daggett votes are good, as they seem to come mostly out of the Christie column. Meanwhile, Chris Christie got an endorsement he may not especially want in the blue state of New Jersey — from the Family Research Council (who also just endorsed Conservative Doug Hoffman over Republican Dede Scozzafava in the NY-23 special election). Also, Christie is living large after getting an endorsement that may carry more weight, from the New Jersey Restaurant Association.

• VA-Gov (pdf): There’s one new poll of VA-Gov to report today: Mason-Dixon, and they come in with a 48-40 edge for Bob McDonnell over Creigh Deeds, closely tracking today’s Pollster.com average of 51-43. The poll finds Deeds getting only 81% of the African-American vote (with 9% to McD), far too little, especially in combination with what PPP‘s Tom Jensen is seeing, as he teases that he’s projecting abysmal black turnout of 12% in the coming election. At any rate, Deeds is now touting his underdog status in fundraising e-mails, and is alluding to more possible visits from Barack Obama in the stretch run.

• FL-20: Here’s an understatement: Republican candidate Robert Lowry, hoping to defeat Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz in this D+13 district, conceded it was a “mistake” to shoot at a target labeled “DWS” while at a Southeast Republican Club gathering at a gun range.

• MN-06: As state Sen. Tarryl Clark seems to be building a fundraising and labor endorsement edge, her primary opponent for the Democratic nomination, Maureen Reed, says she won’t follow traditional decorum and abide by the DFL endorsement. Reed (a former member of the Independence Party) says she’ll keep open the option of taking the fight all the way to the primary, a reversal of her position from months earlier (although from before Clark got into the race and Elwyn Tinklenberg left). (UPDATE: The Reed campaign writes in to say that the Minnesota Public Radio story that underpins this story is incorrect and that Reed never stated whether or not she would abide by the DFL endorsement.)

• NC-11: One reddish southern district where the Republicans are still at square one on recruitment is the 11th. Businessman Jeff Miller said that he won’t challenge sophomore Dem Heath Shuler.

• NY-15: As ethics allegations take a toll against long-time Rep. Charlie Rangel, he’s getting a primary challenge… from his former campaign director. Vince Morgan, now a banker, says “it’s time for a change.”

• OH-17: Republicans may have found someone to run in the 17th against Rep. Tim Ryan: businessman and Air Force vet Bill Johnson, who’s now exploring the race and will decide in December. Ryan probably isn’t too worried, as he’s won most of his races with over 75%, in this D+12 district.

• PA-04: Pennsylvania Western District US Attorney Mary Buchanan is reportedly considering running as a Republican against Dem sophomore Jason Altmire. (Hopefully she isn’t violating the Hatch Act too much while she considers it.) Buchanan was one of the USAs who weren’t fired in the Bush-era purge (in fact, she allegedly helped consult on the list of those who were fired). State House minority whip Mike Turzai has been reputed to be the GOP’s desired recruit here, but Buchanan’s flack says that Turzai is focused on winning back GOP control of the state House in 2010 instead.

• PA-11: Attorney and hedge fund manager Chris Paige is the first Republican to take on Paul Kanjorski (or Corey O’Brien, if Kanjorski goes down in the Dem primary). Still no word on whether Hazleton mayor Lou Barletta is interested in yet another whack at the race.

• Supreme Courts (pdf): News from two different state supreme court races? Sure, why not. In Pennyslvania, there’s another Dane & Associates poll out, of a hotly contested 2010 race for a state supreme court seat; Democrat Jack Panella leads Republican Joan Orie Melvin 38-35. Also, in Texas, Democrat Bill Moody, who came close to winning a seat in 2006 (better than any other Dem statewide candidate that year), will try again in 2010, and he has an interesting new campaign gimmick: he’s going to tour the state in a big orange blimp.

For those keeping track of House incumbents without declared challengers, it’s time to cross IA-01 and IA-05 off your list.

I learned from Sioux City Journal columnist Bret Hayworth that a Democrat has already filed Federal Election Commission paperwork to run against Representative Steve King in Iowa’s fifth Congressional district:

Mike Denklau has eyed the possibility of running in the strong Republican district since early 2009, and after traveling western Iowa recently he decided to go all-in.

On Oct. 15, Denklau will announce his candidacy 55 weeks out from the election in stops here in Sioux City, Council Bluffs and Des Moines. Denklau will turn 27 next month – he was raised in Blue Grass near Davenport and graduated from the University of Iowa with majors in political science and finance. He worked in New York for two banking firms through June 2009, including Lehman Brothers, until moving to Council Bluffs recently.

Hayworth notes that it’s not clear whether Rob Hubler, King’s 2008 opponent, will run again. Although Democrats cannot realistically hope to defeat King in a district with a partisan voter index of R+9, an energetic challenger may help drive up Democratic turnout across the district. There will be several competitive state legislative races in the 32 counties that make up IA-05.

Meanwhile, Craig Robinson reports at The Iowa Republican that Rod Blum of Dubuque is ready to challenge Representative Bruce Braley in the first Congressional district.

Blum has strong eastern Iowa roots. He graduated from Dubuque Senior High School in 1973, earned a bachelor’s degree from Loras College (Finance) in 1977, and received a Masters in Business Administration from Dubuque University in 1989. In 1989, Blum was one of the initial employees of Dubuque-based Eagle Point Software. In just five years, Eagle Point Software went public on NASDAQ and had 325 employees. In 2000, Digital Canal was created as a result of a leveraged buyout of Eagle Point Software. Digital Canal is a leading provider of home building and structural engineering software. Blum was also named the Iowa Entrepreneur of the Year in 1994.

While Blum has never run for elected office before, he has been making his political views known in eastern Iowa since 2001 as the Dubuque Telegraph Herald’s conservative columnist. Blum’s writings for the Telegraph Herald will be helpful for a couple of reasons. First, having a regular column in the local newspaper helps build credibility and name ID. Secondly, writing a political column means that he has well thought out positions on many of the issues facing our country today, something many first time candidates lack.

He’ll need more than conservative ideology and name ID in the Dubuque area to unseat Braley. Robinson notes that Republican Jim Nussle represented IA-01 before the 2006 election, but Nussle’s position as chairman of a House budget subcommittee helped him hang on in a Democratic-leaning district. That’s different from a Republican challenger trying to swim against the tide in a district with a partisan voting index of D+5. Republicans currently hold only two House disticts with that much of a Democratic lean: Delaware’s at-large seat, which the GOP will lose when Mike Castle runs for U.S. Senate next year, and Louisiana’s second district, which was a fluke in 2008 because of the Democratic incumbent’s apparent corruption.

Braley is a rising star and effective legislator with a spot on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. He won re-election with more than 64 percent of the vote in 2008. Even if 2010 turns out to be a Republican year, Braley’s not losing in a district with 35,000 more registered Democrats than Republicans.

To my knowledge, Republican Tom Latham (IA-04) is Iowa’s only incumbent in Congress with no likely challenger yet. Steve Rathje and probably Mariannette Miller-Meeks will run against Dave Loebsack in IA-02, while Dave Funk and Pat Bertroche are challenging Leonard Boswell in IA-03. I don’t expect either of those districts to be competitive in 2010.

Using Dave’s Application, I have drawn a redistricting plan for Oregon.  The state will either keep the current five seats or may gain one seat in 2012.  This plan is drawn for six seats.  I have seen several other proposals for a six-seat Oregon plan; however, those plans were either quite gerrymandered and/or were drawn to elect four Democrats and two Republicans.

In this plan, the districts are very compact and the plan is designed to elect five Democrats and one Republican.  County lines are used as the demarcation for districts to the fullest extent possible.

MAPS:

DISCUSSION OF DISTRICTS:

District 1 – Portland and Coastal Oregon

New district: Obama 63%, McCain 35% (current district: Obama 61%, McCain 36%)

David Wu lives in Portland, and about 45% of his new district is in Multnomah County.  He currently represents areas of west Portland.  Additional parts of Portland are added (a southern area currently a part of OR-5, and parts of north and northeast Portland currently a part of OR-3).  The remainder of the new district includes Columbia and Clatsop Counties, which Wu also currently represents, as well as all of Oregon’s other coastal counties (Tillamook, Lincoln, Coos and Curry), coastal communities of two inland counties (Florence in Lane Co. and Reedsport in Douglas Co.), and Josephine Co. in southern Oregon.  The Democratic percentage goes up a notch, and Wu is set to go.

District 2 – eastern Oregon

New district: Obama 41%, McCain 56% (current district: Obama 43%, McCain 54%)

This district is designed to remain the one Republican district in the state.  The new district includes 18 counties in their entirety (17 voted for McCain, while Obama won Wasco with 52%) as well as the most GOP parts of Clackamas County.  The incumbent, Greg Walden, lives in Hood River, but that 64% Obama county is no longer in the district.  The Republican percentage here goes up a notch.

District 3 – Portland and environs

New district: Obama 70%, McCain 28% (current district: Obama 71%, McCain 26%)

Earl Blumenauer’s Portland-based district remains largely intact.  67% of the new district is in Multnomah, while the rest includes all of Hood River Co. and part of Clackamas (the southern boundary of the new OR-3 in Clackamas corresponds very closely to the current southern boundary of OR-3).  The Democratic percentage goes down ever so slightly, but remains at a very comfortable 70% Obama level.

District 4 – Eugene and southern Oregon

New district: Obama 54%, McCain 43% (current district: Obama 54%, McCain 43%)

The new OR-4 contains Lane, Douglas and Jackson Counties, almost in their entirety.  The only discrepancy is that coastal communities in Lane and Douglas become part of OR-1 — this works out perfectly in terms of making each district equal in population and also in terms of keeping all coastal communities together.  Btw, does anybody know why coastal communities like Florence and Reedsport are part of otherwise inland counties, it doesn’t seem to fit the pattern of other coastal areas in Oregon which form their own counties, but I’m sure there are historical reasons (?)  The new district is almost exactly the same as the current one in terms of partisanship (and just like the current OR-4, went barely for John Kerry in 2004).  Not sure if Peter DeFazio is running for re-election, but if he does, he is set to go.  If not, other Democrats should be very competitive here.

District 5 – Salem and Willamette Valley

New district: Obama 54%, McCain 43% (current district: Obama 54%, McCain 43%)

The new district includes Marion, Benton and Polk Counties in their entirety as well as suburban parts of Clackamas Co. south of Portland (Lake Oswego, West Linn, Oregon City and Canby home of incumbent Kurt Schrader).  The new district is exactly the same as the current one in terms of political preference.

District 6 – Washington and Yamhill Counties

New district: Obama 58%, McCain 39% (current district does not exist)

The new OR-6 corresponds almost perfectly to Washington and Yamhill Counties.  To make the population perfectly equal, two precincts in Multnomah are added.  Apparently this area has experienced high population growth over the last decade, and if Oregon gains a seat in 2012, it can easily be drawn here.  The new district, if created here, would be one that is quite Democratic.  The territory here is currently represented by David Wu, but the new OR-1 is designed for him; not sure who could run in the new OR-6 (?).

That’s my plan for Oregon.  As always, I welcome comments and suggestions.  Thanks.

Mason-Dixon for the Las Vegas Review-Journal (10/6-8, likely voters, 8/17-18 in parens):

Harry Reid (D-inc): 43 (38)

Danny Tarkanian (R): 48 (49)

Harry Reid (D-inc): 39 (40)

Sue Lowden (R): 49 (45)

(MoE: ±4.5%)

Hm, you mean that parading around the state with Sarah Palin’s father didn’t result in any Tarkmentum? That’s a head-scratcher. But maybe that sort of thing will play better in the GOP primary:

Sue Lowden (R): 23 (14)

Danny Tarkanian (R): 21 (33)

Sharron Angle (R): 9 (5)

Bill Parson (R): 1

Robin Titus (R): 1

Mike Wiley (R): 1

Undecided: 44 (47)

(MoE: ±6%)

Oh, I… guess not.

Anyhow, the general election numbers speak for themselves. But at least Harry has company even further down the barrel: while his 38-51 favorable rating is bad, at least it’s not John Ensign bad (23-43) or Jim Gibbons bad (14-51). In fact, it’s too bad that Ensign’s term isn’t up next year, because Nevadans apparently can’t wait to kick his sorry ass to the curb: his re-elects are at an abysmal 22%, with 44% saying they’ll vote to eject him from the Senate.

And how about that gubernatorial race? Mason-Dixon looked at a number of scenarios for that contest, too:

Rory Reid (D): 49 (47)

Jim Gibbons (R-inc): 37 (35)

Rory Reid (D): 33 (32)

Brian Sandoval (R): 50 (49)

Oscar Goodman (I): 36

Rory Reid (D): 27

Jim Gibbons (R-inc): 24

Oscar Goodman (I): 33

Rory Reid (D): 25

Brian Sandoval (R): 33

In the GOP primary, Sandoval beats Gibbons by a 41-20 margin. It’s hard to imagine Gibbons finding a way to claw back from oblivion, but it may be amusing to watch him try.

At this point, though, Democrats might be better off asking Goodman, the colorful mayor of Las Vegas, to enter the Democratic gubernatorial primary. He’s the most popular pol in the state (or more accurately, the most popular dude tested by Mason-Dixon), with a surprising 49-9 favorable rating. Rory Reid, meanwhile, is saddled with a 21-29 rating off the starting blocks — which is no match for Sandoval’s shiny 38-7. Yet, Democrats seem content to let Rory take a crack at bat, even when the evidence suggests that Harry is displeased with his son’s efforts to climb the ladder at such an inopportune time. I don’t think it would be too much of a challenge for Goodman, or anybody else with talent, to dispose of Rory in a Democratic primary. Unfortunately, no hypothetical Dem primary match-ups were tested this time around.

Joe Wilson’s campaign is reporting he raised $2.7 million in the 3rd quarter from 50,000 contributions.  The FEC website doesn’t have his Q3 report up yet, though.

And after all the buzz online, Rob Miller’s ActBlue page is not even at $1 million (though he obviously raised more than that from non-ActBlue places).

WTF, people?  I’m thinking it’d be really bad form to lie about how much money you raised, so I’ll assume Wilson really did raise $2.7 million in Q3.  Does this mean just about every teabagger donated to him?  Are we underestimating this movement to our peril?

By: Inoljt, http://thepolitikalblog.wordpr…

Democratic candidates in Utah must feel as if they’re facing an impossible task. The state is often considered the most far-right Republican stronghold in the United States. Winning Utah is akin to slaying a mighty dragon with only a bow as one’s chosen weapon.

Like all dragons, however, Utah has a weak spot. The year 2012 may be a ripe time for Obama to shoot an arrow through it.

The majority of Utah’s voters are Mormon; the religion is a heavy influence on daily life in the state. The vast majority of Mormons are also conservative, because Mormonism is an inherently conservative beast. In every presidential election so far, Mormons have proved to be strongly Republican.

Mormons like to think of themselves as average, normal Americans. They’re good people. They help with the community. They love their children and teach them traditional values. Nobody cares if they have a different religion.

Except many people do care very much indeed, especially the type of person who tends to vote Republican. Many would never vote for a Mormon.

Imagine the following scenario, below the flip.

Mitt Romney decides to runs for president in 2012 and starts as the front-runner. The race quickly narrows down to Romney and another Republican – perhaps a Huckabee-type figure. Romney’s Mormonism becomes a strong undercurrent and then explodes into the media spotlight, much like race did in the 2008 Democratic primary. It becomes clear that Romney is losing support because of his religion; eventually he loses the primary and ends up faintheartedly endorsing the Republican nominee. The good folk of Utah, angered by Romney’s treatment, turn out in drastically reduced numbers during the general election. Many vote for Obama – enough that, in an election he’s winning by 10% or so – he barely takes the state.

An unlikely scenario? Not really. First, Romney seems nearly certain to run in 2012; even now he is running a shadow campaign. In 2008, Mormonism was a strong undercurrent; Romney even gave a speech on his religion. There is no reason to think why it wouldn’t be in 2012. I doubt Mitt Romney will win the nomination in a competitive race; apart from his Mormonism, he is a terrible politician who lost all the important states in the 2008 primary (except for Michigan, which he won by promising to bring back jobs that will never come back).

On the other hand, its not certain that the media will pick up on the Mormon issue. And Republicans are strong enough in Utah that they might still win the state, even if all the above did occur.

Then again, Obama won Indiana when everybody said it couldn’t be done. Moreover, in 2008 he made strong gains in Utah, improving by 18% from John Kerry’s performance. Partly, this is probably because Obama is very popular in the West.

And maybe, just maybe, the Mormon factor had something to do with it.

This is my first redistricting diary. I’ve used Dave’s redistricting before for other states; I’ve just never cared to post it. I chose to do Massachusetts, which is poised to lose one seat in 2010. Barring a Republican win at the state house (which is increasingly unlikely with the candidacy of Tim Cahill), Democrats should be able to push through a liberal gerrymander. Here were my goals:

1. Take out Stephen Lynch: Lynch is the very definition of a DINO. He represents a D+11 district, but votes like a Blue Dog. I don’t know a single progressive in Massachusetts that doesn’t have sweet  dreams about primarying him.

2. Make sure that all representatives continue to live in the district they represent: This, I knew, would be hard, considering that 4 representatives live in Middlesex county alone, but it remained important to maintain the Democratic machine

3. Make the state look less gerrymandered: This, for reasons described above would also be hard, but I hoped that I could, at the very least, make my map look better than this:

4. Give Boston a compact district: Just personal, for me. I want the best city in the country to basically have a district all to itself

Here’s what I came up with:

State Map:

Boston area:

District 1-Blue-John Olver(D): I know that others who have redistricted MA decided to take out Olver, because of his age, but, again, my goal is to send Lynch packing.  This district loses some territory in Berkshire and Worcester, but gains in Middlesex and Norfolk (this was to allow other representatives to eat up Lynch’s strongholds in center-east Norfolk). Olver retains his home base in Amherst (assuming he runs). Looks a little gerrymandered, but it isn’t too bad, in my opinion.

District 2-Green- Richard Neal(D): This district just changed to take in more population. Gains territory from District 1 in Berkshire and Worceter.

District 3-Purple-Jim McGovern(D): Out of all the districts, this one probably looks the most gerrymandered. I had to make sure that McGovern kept his home base in Worceter (the city) while still gaining most of Frank’s territory in Bristol  (so that Frank was free to eat up the bulk of Lynch strongholds). McGovern will be very happy with this district, since he’ll probably be even safer than he was before (if that’s even possible)

District 4-Red-Barney Frank(D): Yeah, I know, Frank isn’t going to exactly be thrilled about this district, but I had to make do. He loses strongholds in exchange for Lynch territory (which is obviously less progressive) in Norfolk. But he retains his home in Newton and a stronghold in Taunton, and he also picks up territory in the city of Brockton, which is decently progressive. Frank’s margins may go down, but it won’t be my much. He’ll be fine.

Note: Theoretically, since this district contains a lot of his old strongholds, Lynch could run here, but I doubt he’d want to go head up against Frank.

District 5-Yellow-Niki Tsongas(D): Not much going on here, really. Tsongas loses some territory in Essex and gains some in Middlesex, at the expense of Markey. Her margins shouldn’t change at all, and she ratains her base in Lowell.

District 6-Turquoise-John Tierney(D): I decided to make this more compact, putting almost all of it in Essex. I did, however, have to give Tierney the town of Melrose to avoid splitting Methuen between two districts and retain population equality. Looks a bit prettier than before, and Tierney should have an easier time when he is essentially responsible for one county.

District 7-Gray-Edward Markey(D): This will be the Boston suburb district. It contains every town and city adjacent to Boston except for Newton (where Frank lives) and Somerville (where Capuano lives). Markey keeps his home in Malden, and should be happier with this more compact district

District 8-Light Purple-Stephen Lynch (D) vs. Michael Capuano (D): This district contains all of Boston, as well as Capuano’s home in Somerville and a small bit of Norfolk. I’m hoping that something like this will put Lynch in a rage, since he loses all of his old district in the moderate parts of Norfolk and Plymouth and now has to deal with the entire city of Boston. Given that this is urban and the most liberal district in the state (indeed, it would rank pretty high nationwide, I’d imagine), I’d expect Capuano to be favored on his merits (he should also win the labor backing), though things could get interesting if Lynch is still ahead in the money column. Another thing: at only 53% white, this district is almost minority-majority, and could very well be in a decade or so.

District 9-Teal-Bill Delahunt(D): I knew that Lynch might try to be clever and run in this district with this map (even though he lives in Boston), so I had Frank’s district take up as much of Norfolk as possible. Now this district is just Quincy (Delahunt’s home base), a small bit of Lynch’s old territory, and the Cape, where Lynch isn’t accustomed to.

[Update 10/13 3:41 PDT: the Hispanic data for California, Kentucky and Wisconsin was incorrect. I’ve now uploaded the correct data. Thanks to CalifornianInTexas and nico for noticing.]

Now in Daves Redistricting!

My time coming, any day, don’t worry about me, no

…

California, preaching on the burning shore

California, I’ll be knocking on the golden door

Like an angel, standing in a shaft of light

Rising up to paradise, I know, I’m gonna shine

I added the data for California to the server last night. I had to make a little modification to the code to handle the new format for block group data. Both these states use block groups because no shapefiles for voting districts were provided to the Census Bureau.

Warning: for California, the Assign Old CDs operation took 10 minutes on my desktop machine (3 year old dual core AMD chip, 2.2GHz chip speed, 2GB RAM, Windows XP — CPU bound operation). But it works!

I haven’t totally verified that everything is correct, but the population numbers look right and the assigned old CDs look reasonably close.

[Updated] All states with more than 1 CD are now supported. (OK and RI fixed!)

Enjoy!

It’s time to get things started.

When Republican power-brokers formed the Draft Branstad PAC last month, I assumed that the entity was a political action committee, as implied by the name “PAC.” However, the Draft Branstad PAC registered with the Iowa Ethics & Campaign Disclosure Board as a 527 committee. The distinction is important, because unlike PACs, 527 groups do not have to disclose their donors and are not allowed to advocate for candidates.

Today the Iowa Democratic Party caught the folks in charge of the Draft Branstad effort running their 527 group like a PAC.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

October 9, 2009

DRAFT BRANSTAD GROUP IGNORES IOWA ELECTION LAW

DES MOINES, IA -The political action group called Draft Branstad, formed to promote Terry Branstad’s candidacy for Governor before he became a declared candidate, is ignoring Iowa ethics law and engaging in express advocacy for Branstad, who became a candidate on Wednesday, Iowa Democratic Party Chairman Michael Kiernan said Friday.

• FACT: Last night Draft Branstad hosted an event at Graze restaurant in West Des Moines.  The event included Branstad campaign paraphernalia and free drinks.  It was paid for by Draft Branstad and apparently the materials came from the same group.

• FACT: Draft Branstad continues to advertise on conservative websites.  Screen captures made Friday showed activity on multiple sites.

“This Draft Branstad group has spent funds directly benefiting the Branstad campaign,” Kiernan said Friday.  “That’s a blatant violation of Iowa campaign ethics law.”  Iowa election law prohibits 527 groups from engaging in express advocacy on behalf of any candidate or candidate’s committee.  

“Branstad should either embrace the spending of this group, since it’s a group designed by him to promote his candidacy, or publicly disavow it,” Kiernan said Friday.

Iowans know better.  They aren’t confused by the tactics being used to avoid both the letter and the spirit of campaign ethics law.  They know Branstad was behind the “movement” to draft him – and he knows why.  This campaign-that’s-not-a-campaign is a mockery of our system of democratic government and a slap in the face to Iowa’s bipartisan tradition of clean elections.

Now, we call upon Terry Branstad to:

1 Call upon the Draft Branstad group to cease and desist public statements and representations in his favor;

2 Disavow any expenditures already made by the Draft Branstad group after Tuesday, Oct. 6;

3 Call for the immediate disbanding of the Draft Branstad group based on Branstad’s decision to become a candidate on Wednesday, Oct. 7.

The leaders of the Draft Branstad PAC should know better than to make this kind of mistake, and Iowans should know better than to elect Terry Branstad again.