Recently Congressional Quarterly changed its race rating for the 4th Congressional District based on the following reasoning:
Higher voter registration in Bridgeport and its sizeable African-American population.
As a resident of the district I had to wonder why CQ though Bridgeport would be the decisive factor in this race. Historically, Bridgeport has had low voter turnout. True it may have a higher number of registered voters than any other town in the district, yet when it comes to participation, Stamford, not Bridgeport, produces more voters. Let’s look at just some of the numbers:
This year 33% of all registered Democrats in Bridgeport voted in the Democratic Presidential primary. How did the other towns do?
Fairfield – 56%, Greenwich – 63%, Norwalk – 49%, and Stamford – 58%.
Sure voter registration is up in Bridgeport, yet it is up everywhere statewide, an increase which actually began when the Lamont-Lieberman battle was ensuing. However, voter registration since 2000 has increased 100% or more in Fairfield, Greenwich, and Norwalk. Bridgeport increased 70% and Stamford 57%. An additional factor which hinders turnout in Connecticut is the process.
There is no early voting, nor can just anyone vote absentee (you must have sufficient reasoning). Quite frankly I believe that it’s time for Connecticut to go to an all mail in ballot process (we’re one of two states with no county government, therefore numbers on election night are slow since they are reported by individual towns). For any candidate to be successful here you need to rely on turnout. Which cities have been consistent with turnout? Fairfield, Greenwich, and Stamford. In fact, more people in Stamford have voted in past elections, than in Bridgeport (Stamford and Bridgeport are almost equal in population).
So while Congressional Quarterly believes their own argument that voter registration in Bridgeport is sufficient reasoning in changing their race rating from Leans R to Toss Up, I believe that turnout, not registration, will be the ultimate factor. Sure Bridgeport has a sizeable African-American population, yet Stamford (which also has an African-American population, yet not as large) had more voters in the Democratic Presidential Primary this year. While CQ waits for Bridgeport’s numbers on election night, I’d be more interested in Fairfield, Greenwich, and Stamford.
As for any Obama factor here I would say it is fairly low, Obama won Stamford by 12 votes. In addition, the population here (outside of Bridgeport) is very educated, 60% or more with college degrees. To somehow think that voters are going to vote based on race alone here is ridiculous. In fact, Obama’s best performance was in super rich white towns, such as Darien and New Canaan.
Shays has never relied on Bridgeport for two reasons: he understood that turnout there was low and he knew that any deficit he had in Bridgeport could be made up in the super rich towns of Darien, New Canaan, Ridgefield, and Wilton. However, Shays should be concerned with Fairfield this year (Fairfield University). Greenwich, while Republican on the local and state level, has begun to tread Democratic on the federal level (however Shays will still carry the town). Finally, Stamford (which has the highest numerical voter turnout statewide) has been drifting away from Shays in the past two elections (Shays carried Stamford in 2002, yet Farrell took 53% of the vote in 2004 and 2006). Any of these three towns will ultimately decide whether Shays survives or Himes become a likely one-termer, however, Bridgeport will not be the decisive factor.
Please note: I strongly believe that Himes is too liberal for the district. However, I have changed my rating on this race for a reason other than Bridgeport or Himes overall appeal. This had more to do with the growing Hispanic population in Norwalk and Stamford (which Shays has managed to alienate with his radical anti-amnesty agenda), Himes ability to fundraise, and him finally introducing himself to voters within the district (thereby breaking the unknown factor). However, if Himes is elected he will certainly face strong opposition come 2010 from any of the following “strong” competitors:
– State Senator McKinney of Fairfield (son of Shays predecessor)
– Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele of Stamford
– Former First Selectman of Greenwich Jim Lash
– New Canaan Selectwoman Judy Neville
– State Senator William Nickerson of Greenwich
– State Senator Judith Freeman of Westport
– State Representative Toni Boucher of Wilton
– State Representative Livvy Floren of Greenwich
– State Representative Lile Gibbons of Greenwich
Then, of course, if Republicans simply wanted to allow Himes to remain until 2012 redistricting (which I doubt they would) then they could nominate any of these following:
– Soon to be State Senator Scott Frantz of Greenwich (a Mitt Romney supporter who is conveniently buying his way into office)
– Norwalk mayor Richard Moccia (unable to control crime in his city, yet elected because unions were upset that the former Democratic mayor wouldn’t give into their whimpering)
– Stamford Board of Finance member Joseph Tarzia (correct on his assessment of overtaxation and overspending, yet a little extreme in all other areas)
– State Representative Claudia Powers of Greenwich (way too extreme)
– House Republican Leader Larry Cafero of Norwalk (way too extreme – pushing a repeal of the gas tax at a time when a budget deficit is expected. Of course, cut taxes and create deficits. That’s what a real Republican does after all.)
– State Budget Director Robert Genuario of Norwalk