Tag: 2010 Elections

It’s been a while since I posted a diary here about the Iowa governor’s race, so I’m catching up today after the jump.

Governor Chet Culver said this summer that he’d be “cranking up” his campaign operations soon, and last week the governor hired Andrew Roos to run his re-election campaign and Jesse Harris as deputy campaign manager. Jason Hancock has background on Roos and Harris at Iowa Independent.

Republican candidate Christian Fong, a Cedar Rapids flood recovery leader, claims Culver hasn’t done enough on flood recovery (more on that here). Illogically, Fong also opposes the I-JOBS state bonding program, which has allocated $45 million to flood recovery projects in Linn County alone. (Click here and here for a more detailed look at the Obama-like campaign narrative Fong is building.)

The Republican front-runner (for now), Bob Vander Plaats, held a few events around Iowa on Labor Day to officially announce his candidacy. In keeping with his tendency to advocate unworkable policies, he pushed another off-beat idea. Instead of just criticizing Culver’s I-JOBS state bonding program, like every other Republican does, Vander Plaats says that if elected, he would try to pay back the bonds during his first term (you can read the Vander Plaats press release here). State Treasurer Michael Fitzgerald, a Democrat, and State Representative Chris Rants, a rival Republican gubernatorial candidate, agree that the Vander Plaats idea is unworkable.

Meanwhile, Vander Plaats is promising not to balance his ticket with a less-conservative running mate:

“I’m not looking to balance the ticket with somebody who’s moderate or liberal or who doesn’t believe in those core values like I do,” he said. The core values, he noted, include believing in a right to life and that marriage should be between one man and one woman.

He didn’t mention former Gov. Terry Branstad, but the inference was clear – the former governor chose pro-choice Republican Joy Corning as his running mate.

Lest anyone get too impressed by Branstad’s ticket-balancing, Rekha Basu reminded me recently that Branstad endorsed the inept Jim Ross Lightfoot over the highly capable Corning in the 1998 GOP gubernatorial primary. Also, when one of Lieutenant Governor Corning’s annual diversity conferences included a workshop on workplace discrimination, Branstad sided with an anti-gay crusader who attacked the workshop.

Establishment Republicans have been trying to recruit Branstad since two Republican-commissioned polls taken in July showed him leading Culver in a hypothetical matchup. The Iowa Republican blog’s poll, in the field the first week of July, had Branstad ahead of Culver 53-37. Hill Research Consultants did a poll for the 527 group Iowa First Foundation later in July and found Branstad ahead of Culver 53-34.

Branstad has said he’ll announce in October whether he plans to run next year, but it looks increasingly likely that he’ll jump in. Since he’s not a candidate yet, he can’t raise or spend money on the race. Enter the “Draft Branstad” political action committee that former State Representative Sandy Greiner launched at the beginning of September. They’re collecting signatures on a petition at draftbranstad.com. They’ve been advertising on The Drudge Report, one of the highest-traffic conservative websites. Draft Branstad flyers were distributed at Saturday’s Iowa/Iowa State football game. They’re running a 60-second radio ad statewide. Among other things, the flyers and radio ad praise Branstad for his “fiscal discipline” and balancing the budget. That’s quite the revisionist history lesson.

I’m enjoying the @draftBranstad Twitter feed, which periodically reprises the great one’s profound words: “My passion for our state has grown with every day I have served it.” Branstad 1/13/98″; “This spirit of neighbor helping neighbor is as Iowan as the tall corn we grow.” -TEB 1/9/96

Des Moines Register Marc Hansen wrote last week that “coming back could be the biggest mistake of [Branstad’s] life.” Highlights:

The best Branstad could do in 1994 against fellow Republican Fred Grandy was talk about how Rep. Gopher wasn’t a real Iowan. […]

The further removed from office he gets, the more popular he becomes. In February 1997, not long before Branstad reaffirmed his decision not to run for a fifth term, the Iowa Poll said 55 percent of Iowa adults believed Branstad should not seek another term in 1998. Thirty-five percent said he should. The other 10 percent were unsure.

The minute he wasn’t running, his numbers started climbing.

I don’t even want to get into Richard Johnson, the state auditor who supported Grandy in ’94 because of the way he said Branstad was keeping the books.

Incidentally, Richard Johnson is co-chairing the Vander Plaats campaign. We’ll probably be hearing more from him if Branstad enters the gubernatorial race, as most political observers now expect. For a preview of other arguments rival Republicans are likely to make against Branstad, see here and here.

Branstad didn’t turn up at the Iowa Family Policy Center Action’s fundraiser on September 12, but four others in the Republican field attended. For some reason, State Senator Jerry Behn wasn’t there, despite recently forming an exploratory committee for a gubernatorial bid. Iowa Senate minority leader Paul McKinley didn’t attend the Iowa Family Policy Center’s event either, but that’s par for the course for him since he claimed to be “aggressively” exploring a campaign for governor.

Vander Plaats was on friendly turf at the Iowa Family Policy Center event, easily winning the straw poll with 63 percent of the votes. (Fong and Rants finished a distant second and third.) The Vander Plaats plan to stop gay marriage on day one as governor is a hit with that crowd. Vander Plaats also also promised not to expand gambling and to put representatives for parochial schools and home-schoolers on the State Board of Education.

Rants usually talks about the budget and taxes in his stump speeches, but he adapted his pitch for the Iowa Family Policy Center event, referring to moments of personal prayer as well as his efforts to bring a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage to the Iowa House floor. Rants also

acknowledged that there’s not a lot of space separating Republican candidates on the issues.

But honesty will be important, he said. That might be difficult in the primary, he said, noting that some of the things he’s said in the past few weeks have made some people uncomfortable. He did not give more explanation, but in the past few weeks, he’s called into question Bob Vander Plaats’ portrayal of himself as a CEO who’s been a turnaround artist. Rants released tax returns that appear to show deteriorating finances at a nonprofit organization that Vander Plaats led.

“If we’re going to ask Iowans to trust us,” candidates have to lead by example, he said.

I can’t see any way Rants gets the nomination. I don’t even know of another state legislator who’s endorsing him, which is remarkable given that he used to be Iowa House speaker until the GOP lost the majority in the 2006 elections. That said, Rants is smart enough to know that there probably will be room for only one other candidate if Branstad enters the race. So, he’s been going after Vander Plaats for bad policy ideas as well as his record as CEO and board president of the non-profit Opportunities Unlimited. (I recommend reading the whole comment thread under this story.)

Fong tried to inspire the Iowa Family Policy Center crowd:

Too much debt and too-high taxes are problems; so are abortion and other major issues, he said. But “the critical issue for our cause” is spiritual, he said.

Christ-like leadership is needed, with integrity and compassion, he said. It’s service above self. Voters are hungry for something greater than government and politics, he said.

“A hurting Iowa” needs that leadership, he said.

He called for leadership based on the “political philosophy of Jesus Christ himself.”

State Representative Rod Roberts claimed to have the right leadership qualities for a governor:

He’s been asked, “Rod, Aren’t you too nice to run for governor?” He replies: His two favorite Republican presidents are Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan. They were friendly, civil and respectful, but they also knew what they believed, stood their ground and knew where they were going, he said.

“That’s what leadership is about,” he said.

“A leader is someone who knows the way, goes the way and shows the way,” he said.

Before the gubernatorial candidates spoke, Iowa Family Policy Center head Chuck Hurley previewed his group’s efforts to pass a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

“If they don’t see the light, maybe they’ll feel the heat,” said Hurley, who urged supporters of a constitutional amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman to seek more information at luviowa.com on how to get involved. […]

The goal of the group’s effort is to get all 150 state legislators on the record where they stand on the marriage issue and then “to pressure middle-of-the-road legislators who said they believe in one-man, one-woman marriage to vote that way in January and February,” Hurley said.

He also made a special point to let the audience know that three of the seven Iowa Supreme Court justices who overturned the state’s 1998 defense of marriage act will be up for retention votes on the 2010 ballot. Hurley said it was the justices’ “rogue decision” to allow “counterfeit marriage” that now requires a vote of the people to “rein-in” the judicial malpractice and to “rebuild the moral and legal culture that respects and strengthens marriage rather than tears it down.”

It looks like Hurley’s group is not focusing on the quickest way to amend the constitution: urging voters to approve the ballot initiative calling for a Constitutional Convention. That’s going to be on the November 2010 ballot anyway and, if approved, could lead to amendments being drafted in 2011. Social conservatives may be afraid that Democrats would end up controlling a Constitutional Convention, but if stopping same-sex marriage is such an urgent need for them, they should be pursuing all legal avenues to do so.

I didn’t see whether anyone at the Iowa Family Policy Center’s event mentioned the September 1 House district 90 special election. The Republican Party and conservative interest groups went all-in for that race but came up 107 votes short. Craig Robinson thinks the GOP erred in letting staff from Iowans for Tax Relief run the campaign of Republican Stephen Burgmeier. The Iowa Family Policy Center also delegated a staffer to work on Burgmeier’s campaign.

Share any thoughts or predictions about the gubernatorial campaign in this thread. If you follow Delaware or Virginia politics, feel free to share your thoughts about Andrew Roos.

I am looking forward to the next Selzer poll for the Des Moines Register, which will probably come out during the next month.

Last year all five Iowa incumbents in the House of Representatives were re-elected by double-digit margins. The main challengers failed to win even 40 percent of the vote against Democrats Bruce Braley (IA-01) and Dave Loebsack (IA-02), as well as Republicans Tom Latham (IA-04) and Steve King (IA-05).

I’ve long assumed that none of Iowa’s Congressional districts would be competitive in 2010. Although Republicans have put Leonard Boswell (IA-03) on their long list of House targets, several other analysts share my view that Boswell is safe for next year. To my knowledge, the only declared candidates against Boswell are the little-known Dave Funk and Pat Bertroche. Boswell’s 1996 opponent Mike Mahaffey is thinking it over too.

Isaac Wood and Larry Sabato released new House race rankings, and they included IA-03 among 47 Democratic-held districts that are “likely” to remain Democratic:

The “likely” category is reserved for those competitive races where one party has a distinct advantage over the other. Most of these races feature either strong challengers or weak incumbents, but not a combination of the two that would warrant a more competitive designation. Consider these races as a watch list which could turn into heated battle with a single misstep by an incumbent or positive fundraising report.

I could see Iowa’s third district becoming competitive, but only if the economy is in terrible shape next fall and Republicans fund a well-known candidate with a base in Polk County (the population center of the district).

I question Wood and Sabato’s decision to put Loebsack’s district in the “likely” category as well. So far right-winger Steve Rathje is definitely running against Loebsack (he narrowly lost the 2008 GOP primary for U.S. Senate). Mariannette Miller-Meeks is also considering a rematch. She’s an impressive woman, but I frankly can’t imagine this district becoming competitive in 2010. IA-02 has much stronger Democratic voting performance than IA-03, which tracks closely with the nationwide vote in presidential elections.

Iowa City-based blogger John Deeth, who’s lived in IA-02 for a long time, also thinks Loebsack is rock solid for 2010.

Share any thoughts or predictions in this thread.

P.S.: Any idea when SSP’s 2010 House race ratings will be released?

UPDATE: From Deeth’s blog:

MMM’s case (other than her admittedly interesting biography) was attacking Loebsack as a solid vote for Speaker Pelosi and the Democratic leadership — as if that was a BAD thing in a Democratic district. She also had trouble keeping her own party united behind her, with anti-choice forces within the GOP sent out late attacks and fed the rumor mill.

Only thing I can think of is that Sabato just looked at the Loebsack percentage of just a hair under 60. The Green and independent candidates account for that; in Johnson County at least MMM’s percentage almost exactly matched McCain’s, and Loebsack trailed Obama by almost exactly the third party vote.

Looks to me like Sabato just threw every 2006 and 2008 upset winner (Space, Shea-Porter, Walz, etc.) on the “Likely” list. Like I was saying even BEFORE the 2006 election, the real fluke is that Jim Leach held the seat as long as he did.

Yes, this is my first diary about my home state and my second diary not involving redistricting. I have noticed many of you (including myself) believe that Democrats will gain seats in the California State Senate, State Assembly and in U.S House Representation. Even though the Democrats are falling nationally, they should not be falling in California. If the Republicans cannot reach out to Hispanics (a Survey USA poll on July 25th showed that 73% of California Hispanics approve of Obama’s job,) Democrats should have a good year in California, especially southern California. It should take an election or two to have Californians vote more Democratic at a statewide level. So a 50% for McCain win in a State Senate district would probably rank Lean Republican, not a Toss Up. Here is an analysis of the first ten State Senate Districts up for reelection (in 2010, only the even numbered districts are up for reelection.) I will post a diary about the other ten (eventually.) Overall, Democrats should gain 1-2 seats. Here is a link to the map of the California State Senate districts.

http://www.sen.ca.gov/~newsen/…

This link is for the California State Assembly Districts

http://www.legislature.ca.gov/…

State Senate District 2 Pat Wiggins (D)

We are lucky that her district is not trending Republican anytime soon. Here is a basic overview of Wiggins: July 13th, State Senate passes bill introduced by Wiggins to help rid Sonoma County of domestic violence.  On June 22nd, the State Senate passed a Wiggins bill that supports expanding Marine Sanctuaries off the coast of California. On June 3rd, the State Senate passed two Wiggins bills that expanded solar power opportunities and production. We should not lose her until 2014. Her district voted 69% for Obama. The demographics as of 2000 are 5% Black, 7% Asian and 16% Hispanic.

Status is Safe Democrat.

State Senate District 4 Sam Aanestad (R)

Aanestad’s website says that his main priorities are protecting Northern California water and rural health care. He will not fight for those issues for long. He is term limited out in 2010.  Two Republicans are lined up to take his seat. They are Rick Keene and Doug LaMalfa. Rick Keene is the former Assemblyman from the 3rd district and he lives in Chico. He supports low taxes and is a big supporter of North State water rights (since the water is shared with other parts of the state and reservoirs are low, water rights are a big issue in North State. ) Keene also promises to fight for “Conservative values.” Those include deregulation and getting rid of environmental burdens. I would not vote for Keene. LaMalfa seems to be a favorite. His website is more organized because he has the endorsements page up while Keene’s says “endorsements coming soon.” LaMalfa endorsements are influential and they include most of the sheriffs and district attorneys of the 4th district. Also, the State Senate Republican Leader Dennis Hollingsworth and the Assistant Leader Mimi Walters support LaMalfa. LaMalfa was in the State Assembly and represented the 2nd district. He is against high taxes but he is inconsistent on his views like some “Libertarians.” His website says quote, “Doug LaMalfa’s firm beliefs are that government should do no harm and that limited government means government should do only what people cannot do for themselves, in the most efficient manner possible,” unquote. Yet his website also says quote, “Doug helped lead Northern California efforts to protect marriage on both Proposition 22 and Proposition 8 that reaffirmed marriage is only between one man and one woman,” unquote. He can campaign for the government’s right to prevent people from marrying who they love as much as he wants. He should at least remove the line about supporting small government off his site! Something people CAN do for themselves is marry so why should LaMalfa interfere? Besides an endorsements page, his volunteer page is more developed and he has people sign up for email alerts, unlike Keene’s website. That leads me to believe that LaMalfa will win because he has better organization. No clear Democrat has emerged yet. His district voted 54% for McCain. The demographics are 4% Asian and 12% Hispanic. Status is Safe Republican.

State Senate District 6 Darrel Steinberg (D)

Steinberg is the President Pro Tempore of the State Senate. He succeeded Don Perata who carried a concealed gun due to death threats from anti gun control advocates. Steinberg hit the news for filing a lawsuit against Schwarzenegger because some of the budget cuts may be unconstitutional. He will be President Pro Tempore until he reaches term limits. Obama won 64% of the vote in his district. Demographics are 14% Black, 15% Asian and 18% Hispanic. Status is Safe Democrat.

State Senate District 8 Leland Yee (D)

Yee has a spotty background but at least he works hard in the State Senate. On August 17th, the Assembly approved SB 242 which Yee authored. SB 242 says that people cannot be denied a job based on the language they speak. Yee should not worry about a Republican challenge. He may worry about Tom Ammiano, a State Assemblyman from San Francisco. Ammiano was elected in 2008 but he is active in San Francisco. He ran for mayor in 1999 and was a San Francisco Supervisor. Ammiano is very Liberal, even for San Francisco. I expect that Ammiano may pass on this seat to wait for 2014, when Yee and he are term limited out of their seats. If he ran for 2010, I do not expect him to win. The reason is that Yee’s district is more working class and not as ultra Liberal as Ammiano’s Assembly district. Ammiano will definitely run to the left so I do not see him winning. Yee appears safe because he has a large presence in the area. He was elected to the State Assembly in 2002. Obama won 76% of the vote here. Demographics are 16% Hispanic and 35% Asian. Status is Safe Democrat.

State Senate District 10 Ellen Corbett (D)

Corbett is fighting hard to prevent a NUMMI plant in Fremont from being closed. On August 21st, she rallied with workers at the plant. No Republican has a shot at winning this district because it is too Democratic. She has had a presence in this district for more than 10 years. With no looming baggage, she should have an easy ride through 2010. Obama won 71% of the vote here. Demographics are 7% Black, 21% Hispanic and 32% Asian. Status is Safe Democrat.

State Senate District 12 Jeff Denham (R) Term Limited Out!

If Democrats want to gain a 2/3 majority, they have to pick up seats such as Denham’s. With a Republican incumbent gone, Democrats have a great shot at it with a 13% registration advantage and 46% Hispanic population as of 2000. State Assemblyman from Modesto Tom Berryhill (R) might look at the race. He does not live in it but as we learned from carpetbagger Tom McClintock, people can just move to a suitable district and run. If I were him, I would probably stay in his safe district containing Republican parts of Modesto and the Sierras. He is term limited out in 2012. Possible Democratic candidates include Anna Caballero from Salinas. She is not term limited out until 2012. She said is interested in running but has not formerly announced yet. Her background includes chairing the Youth Violence Prevention Committee and representing unions in a strike. Other candidates include Luis Alejo (D), an attorney from Watsonville. Jamie De La Cruz (D) will run if Caballero does not run. Francisco Dominguez (D) from Gilroy has worked on a school board for 12 years. He will run if Caballero decides not to run. He said, “I’m very frustrated, just like other folks, about what’s happening in Sacramento – not being able to resolve the budget and deliver to residents,” he said. “There needs to be more cooperation in the legislature. My style is to resolve conflict.” Rick Rivas (D) was Caballero’s campaign manager in 2006 so I assume he will run if Caballero decides not to run. The last candidate is Eugenia Sanchez (D) who is the mayor of Hollister and served on Hollister’s School Board. It is too early to tell who will win if Caballero runs. If someone from the Central Valley jumps in, that person could sweep the Central Valley while the other candidates split the Coastal area. If Caballero runs, the other candidates may defer to her. If they do not, I still believe she should win. The reason is that all the other candidates are Hispanic; they will split the Hispanic vote while Caballero sweeps the white vote. A Hispanic candidate would have a better chance to win this district because he or she could generate a large Hispanic turnout. The primary could damage the Democrats but it looks like the Democrats should win. Obama won 58% of the vote here. The Demographics are 46% Hispanic and 42% White. Status is Lean Democrat.

58%

State Senate District 14 Dave Cogdill (R)

Cogdill was the Senate Republican Leader from April 2008 to February, 2009. He seems to be in touch with his district because he supports cleaner air quality, low taxes and agricultural groups. One bill he proposed would cut red tape for agricultural vehicles but also protect the environment. He appears to be Conservative on most issues but moderate on others. He joined Darrel Steinberg and Schwarzenegger to campaign for the May 19th budget propositions. Since he is term limited out in 2014, he should be reelected in 2010. McCain won 56% of the vote. Demographics are 28% Hispanic and 5% Asian. Status is Safe Republican.

State Senate District 16 Dean Florez (D)

Florez appears to be sitting in the light of power. He became Senate Majority Leader in 2008 and will run for Lieutenant Governor in 2010. His grandparents are farm workers and he fights for farm worker’s rights in the Senate. One main priority of Florez’s is speaking out against using the Central Valley as a big dump for waste. Other accomplishments include sponsoring SB 700 which made farmers follow the Clean Air Act and supporting bills to make farm worker vans safer.  Possible candidates for replacement include Danny Gilmore (R) of the 30th Assembly district and Juan Arambula (I) of the 31st Assembly district which covers Hispanic areas in the southern Central Valley. Gilmore won against Fran Florez (D), the mother of Dean Florez in 2008. Gilmore was a former marine. He may run because he has a shaky hold on the 30th district. I expect due to the district’s large Hispanic population, a Hispanic Democrat will win in 2010. Even though it should be a Republican year, Gilmore was the Joseph Cao of California. He was Cao because he won an upset in a heavily Democratic district that will go back to normal by 2010. Arambula used to be a Democrat but switched parties in June 2009. Seeing an open seat, he may leap for the seat and because he is Hispanic, I see him winning. Obama won 59% of the vote here. Demographics are 63% Hispanic, 7% Black, and 6% Asian. Status is Likely Democrat.

State Senate District 18 Roy Ashburn (R)

Republicans may be dwindling in California. They still have this area as a stronghold. The 18th district contains Republican parts of Kern, Tulare, Inyo and San Bernardino counties. This totals up to a McCain win with 61% of the vote. Even though Ashburn represents the most Conservative district in California, he is fairly moderate. During the budget crisis, he voted with the Democrats to increase taxes to help the economy. His constituents were furious so his political career should be finished. Voters will not have a chance to prove it because Ashburn is term limited. A possible candidate to replace him is Republican Jean Fuller. She represents the 32nd State Assembly District which is centered in Bakersfield. She was the former Superintendent of Bakersfield schools until she became a state legislator in 2006. Like Ashburn, she is not a Tom McClintock Conservative. She supports allocating more money for education. Besides Fuller, Republican Bill Maze will seek the seat and so will Democrat Carter Pope. Maze formerly represented California’s 34th State Assembly District which covers Tulare County and some rural areas in Inyo County. In the Assembly, he was on numerous committees such as the Select Committee for Foster Care. Maze appears more Conservative than Fuller and he represented the 34th district for six years. The race should be a duel between Kern County and Tulare County.  Maze has a better chance to win because he is more Conservative and he is more entrenched. I expect the race will split about 53%-47% or even closer. Democrat Carter Pope appears to have no legislative experience or political experience so he is should lose. The demographics for this district are 27% Hispanic. Status is Safe Republican.

State Senate District 20 Alex Padilla (D)

Like San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom, Padilla is a young rising star. Apparently, Newsom agrees with me because he appointed Padilla to chair his gubernatorial campaign calling Padilla, “One of the brightest and most accomplished rising stars in the country.” Even if Newsom’s poll numbers depict his as a falling star, Padilla is not falling. The Hispanic Business magazine named him one of America’s most influential Hispanics. He spearheaded a tobacco tax bill last August and is trying now to get a fire protection bill passed. The San Gabriel Mountains near his district are on fire, why am I not surprised?  Other projects include starting the Children’s Museum of Los Angeles. Since he was elected in 2006, he sponsored 29 bills.  Would he be LA Mayor Villaraigosa’s replacement when Villaraigosa retires? Anyway, he should not worry about reelection. Obama won 72% of the vote here and the demographics are 61% Hispanic, 9% Asian and 23% White. Status is Safe Democrat.  

The Bean Walker, Iowa’s copycat version of The Drudge Report, was thrilled to link to the latest approval numbers from Survey USA yesterday:

Iowa

Pres. Obama: 45 / 51

Sen. Grassley: 54 / 34

Sen. Harkin: 49 / 38

Gov. Culver: 36 / 51

This statewide poll of 600 adults was conducted on August 26 and 27 and is said to have a margin of error of 4 percent. It’s the first time any pollster has found the president below 50 percent approval in Iowa, and the first time any pollster has found the governor’s approval in the 30s. For more details about various demographic groups in this poll, you can find Culver’s chart here, charts on Harkin and Grassley here, and Obama’s chart here.

Looking at Survey USA’s trendlines for Culver since he took office, I noticed that Culver’s disapproval number is basically unchanged this summer, but his approval number has dropped significantly from 42 percent in June and 44 percent in July to 36 percent in late August.

Before anyone panics, note that Survey USA’s approval numbers for Culver tend to run low compared to other pollsters. In early July, the poll commissioned by The Iowa Republican blog found Culver’s approve/disapprove numbers to be 53 percent/41 percent. Later the same month, Hill Research Consultants’ poll for the Iowa First Foundation found Culver’s favorability at 52 percent. (The Iowa First Foundation did not release the governor’s approval number from that poll, but you better believe they would have if the number had been in the 30s or even the low 40s.) Meanwhile, Survey USA pegged Culver’s approval at 44 percent on July 20.

Survey USA’s numbers for Obama, Harkin and Grassley are also noticeably down in the latest poll. Obama is at a record low in Iowa. Grassley’s approval of 54 percent is the lowest Survey USA has found in at least four years. I couldn’t find a similar graph for Harkin’s numbers, but it’s been a very long time since I can remember seeing his approval rating below 50.

Of course, it’s possible that the recession and the health care debate have affected Iowans’ view of all political leaders. Still, I would like to see these numbers confirmed by some other pollster. Even with the best sampling techniques, approximately 1 in 20 polls is wrong just by chance.

I also agree with Steve Singiser that if Culver were this unpopular in Iowa, Democrat Curt Hanson would not have won yesterday’s special election in Iowa House district 90 (a swing district). The Republicans ran at least two television ads linking Hanson to Culver (see here and here).

I’m looking forward to the next Selzer and Associates poll for the Des Moines Register, which probably will come later this month or in early October.

Share any relevant thoughts in this thread.

UPDATE: Bleeding Heartland user ragbrai08 noticed this:

The sample composition:

D-28

R-34

NP-35

Obviously, if considering registered adults, the D/R fractions should be reversed. However, back in July, they used:

D-38

R-24

NP-34

so the Dem fraction was too high back then. Conclusion? Perhaps the July survey was a bit too favorable, and perhaps this one a bit too unfavorable.

In an off-year election, turnout among no-party voters is likely to be lower. Even with a demoralized Democratic base, I’d be surprised if Iowa’s electorate next year was comprised of 28 percent Democrats and 34 percent Republicans. Right now Democrats have a voter registration advantage of about 100,000 over Republicans.

After months of speculation and predictions, it appears, according to multiple sources, that former Governor John Kitzhaber (D), creator of the Oregon Health Plan, will run for a third-term as Oregon governor in 2010 (The Constitution bars anyone from running for more than two CONSECUTIVE terms, legendary governor Tom McCall (R) tried to run for a third-term in a similar fashion but lost the 1978 Republican primary to future Governor Vic Atiyeh (the last Republican to hold the office).

Needless to say, this announcement has fundamentally changed the race for Oregon governor and instantly upped the ante.  My analysis is below.

Cross-Posted from Loaded Orygun: http://www.loadedorygun.net/di…

One of several sources reporting Kitzhaber will join the race is Oregon’s top political reporter Jeff Mapes in this blog post: Kitzhaber nears gubernatorial announcement.

Quote:

Former Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber appears poised to jump into the governor’s race.

The former two-term Democratic governor made several calls to top elected officials in Oregon on Monday and word swept through the state’s political community Tuesday that Kitzhaber planned to file paperwork launching his campaign within the next few hours.

The following post will briefly describe Kitzhaber’s record and analyze the impact his entry will have on the race.

Who is John Kitzhaber?

John Albert Kitzhaber is a 62-year old former emergency physician originally from Colfax, WA, although he grew up in Eugene and practiced in Roseburg (southern OR for those that don’t know).

In 1979 he ran and was elected to the Oregon House, serving one term before becoming an Oregon State Senator in 1981 and Senate President from 1985 to 1993.  In 1994, Kitzhaber was one of few Democrats nationwide who avoided the GOP tide as he narrowly won a first term as governor but was easily reelected four years later in 1998.  Upon leaving office in 2002, Kitzhaber worked on health care, founding the  Archimedes Movement in 2006 to help organize his health care reform efforts.

Kitzhaber is certainly best known as the creator of the Oregon Health Plan, Oregon’s medicaid plan made famous for its then-innovative approach to health care, based on the idea of prioritizing treatment so that the most critical treatments were funded first.  Although changed significantly since its creation in the early 1990s, this “prioritized procedures list” remains a key part of the plan to this day.

Kitzhaber’s other main accomplishment is the Oregon Salmon Plan, the hallmark of his second term, which successfully managed to maintain and in many cases increase salmon populations that were at the time collapsing.  Combined with his staunch refusal to sign any bills forwarded by the then-Republican controlled legislature that weakened the state’s environmental and land use policies, as well anything else (earning him the nickname “Dr. No” from critics), Kitzhaber became known as an environmental champion.

Impact on the Race:

Kitzhaber’s entry has profound impact on the race.  Here is how I would now rate it, assuming the announced candidates run on both sides.

Democratic Primary:

Main Candidates: Kitzhaber, Former SOS Bill Bradury, State Rep. Brian Clem (Salem).

Analysis: Kitzhaber should easily beat both these candidates.  Nothing against either of these fine public servants, whom I respect and may actually vote for but Kitzhaber is just way too well known and respected to lose the primary.

Rating: Leans/Likely Kitzhaber.

Republican Primary

Main Candidates: Former Pixelworks CEO Alan Alley, State Senator Jason Atkinson (Central Point, which is in Southern OR).

Analysis: Atkinson should win this race but it will be close.  Alley probably needs one more conservative candidate to jump in to split Atkinson’s support so that he can do what Ron Saxton did in 2006 and squeak through.  None has emerged as of yet.

Rating: Leans Atkinson.

General Election:

Assuming Kitzhaber (D) v. Atkinson (R).

Analysis: Jason Atkinson is another Republican who looks nice but is not the greatest politician in the world.  He is also WAY too conservative for many Oregon voters.  Given that Kitzhaber is not a “Portland candidate” (and trust me this matters), I don’t think Atkinson will be able to pull it out.  Still, it could be close so I’ll rate it that way for now.

Rating: Leans Kitzhaber.

Let me know what you think.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee and Democracy for America have produced a new television commercial, which asks which side Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa is on:

Click here to donate to help keep this ad on the air in Iowa and Washington, DC.

Speaking of which side Grassley’s on, Monday’s Des Moines Register reports on his massive campaign contributions from health industry interest groups. Thomas Beaumont’s story was based on numbers compiled by Maplight.org.

Meanwhile, Representative Bruce Braley confirmed on Friday that he is running for re-election in Iowa’s first Congressional district (PVI D+5). I consider him likely to run for U.S. Senate when either Grassley or Tom Harkin retires. (Harkin comes up for re-election in 2014.)

Rumors persist that a prominent Democrat will join Bob Krause and Tom Fiegen in challenging Grassley next year. Some people have been talking about Barry Griswell, the retired CEO of the Principal Financial Group. It was news to me that Griswell is even a Democrat; he has donated to politicians from both parties in the past. Al Swearengen of The Iowa Republican blog speculates that Fred Hubbell is the mystery candidate. Hubbell currently chairs the Iowa Power Fund Board, to which Governor Chet Culver appointed him. From his official bio:

Fred S. Hubbell was a member of the Executive Board and Chairman of Insurance and Asset Management Americas for ING Group. Mr. Hubbell retired from ING Group’s Executive Board effective April 25, 2006. Mr. Hubbell was formerly Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Equitable of Iowa Companies, an insurance holding company, serving in his position as Chairman from May 1993 to October 1997, and as President and Chief Executive Officer from May 1989 to October 1997.

Like Griswell, Hubbell could be a self-funding candidate, but unlike Griswell, he has a consistent history of supporting Democrats. Charlotte Hubbell, Fred Hubbell’s wife, serves on the state’s Environmental Protection Commission.

UPDATE: Hubbell told Iowa Independent he’s not interested in running against Grassley.

Just a quick hit diary to pass along this Politico report by Jonathan Martin:

Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle has told associates he will announce this week that he won’t seek a third term in 2010, POLITICO has learned. […]

Doyle’s office did not respond to POLITICO’s inquiries, but subsequently issued a one-sentence statement to Wisconsin reporters indicating that the governor would make an announcement Monday about his intentions.

With Doyle retiring, a slew of Wisconsin Democrats are likely to consider the race. That list is topped by Lt. Gov. Barbara Lawton, who has already indicated she would run if Doyle does not and who would be the state’s first female governor.

Martin goes on to speculate that Lawton may be able to run as an incumbent if President Obama brings Doyle into the administration. Doyle endorsed Obama during the primaries.

So, what does everyone think? Is this going to be an easier hold with Doyle out? He wasn’t our most endangered incumbent governor by any means, but there were some worrying signs. Last month Swing State Project downgraded this race to lean Dem.

Less than three months after saying he would not run against Governor Chet Culver next year, former four-term governor Terry Branstad (1983-1999) now tells the Des Moines Register he is “not ruling it out.” Moreover,

Branstad is accepting invitations to meet with party activists. Two weeks ago, he met with about 50 political and business leaders at the Alden home of Bruce Rastetter, an influential Republican fundraiser and ethanol industry executive.

New calls for Branstad’s candidacy, and encouraging words from key donors such as West Des Moines developer Gary Kirke, underscore a growing feeling in his party that Democrat Gov. Chet Culver is vulnerable as he finishes his first term and that the emerging GOP field lacks a contender who can beat him.

A recent poll commissioned by The Iowa Republican blog found Branstad leading Culver 53-37, while Culver leads the other two best-known Republican gubernatorial candidates. Culver brings a lot of strengths to the re-election campaign, and his approval and favorability numbers weren’t bad in that Republican poll, but Branstad appears to be a stronger candidate than the declared contenders.

Branstad isn’t guaranteed a smooth path to the Republican nomination, though.

A Branstad candidacy would force some of the lesser-known Republicans from the race, but the current front-runner Bob Vander Plaats is signaling that he would stay in. He plays to the social conservative constituency that saved Branstad’s bacon in his tough 1994 primary against then-Congressman Fred Grandy.

I think there would be a niche for a third candidate who might emphasize Vander Plaats’ poor general election prospects and Branstad’s record of fiscal mismanagement as governor. When voters are reminded that Branstad kept two sets of books to enable him to run deficits, he will look less appealing as an alternative to Culver, under whom Iowa has a gold star bond rating.

Many Iowa Republicans deeply distrust Doug Gross, the 2002 gubernatorial nominee who was a top aide to Branstad and has been shopping for a candidate to support all year. An opinion poll Gross commissioned on behalf of the Iowa First Foundation in March sparked the Branstad for governor rumors.

Businessmen Bruce Rastetter and Gary Kirke, who are fueling the Branstad recruitment efforts, are big Republican players but not without controversy in Iowa GOP circles either. Rastetter gave a lot of money to Republican candidates in 2008 and may have been involved in a group running ads against Culver. But he also gave Culver’s campaign committee $25,000 in 2007, as did Kirke. Rastetter gave the maximum allowable contribution to Rudy Giuliani’s presidential campaign, and we all remember how highly Iowa Republicans thought of Rudy.

I do not think that rank and file Republicans are going to sit back and let these kingmakers choose Branstad as their candidate against Culver. Then again, I still think Branstad is not going to run for governor, so I could be proven wrong.

In other news on the GOP race for governor, Jason Hancock wrote a good piece for Iowa Independent on the pros and cons of a competitive Republican primary. I tend to agree with Republicans who think a tough primary will help the GOP by generating media buzz and starting to close the voter registration gap with Iowa Democrats (now around 114,000). On the other hand, there’s a chance that harsh infighting could damage the eventual nominee. The most disastrous outcome for Republicans is still John Deeth’s dream of Vander Plaats winning the nomination at a state convention. A Branstad candidacy would eliminate that possibility.

Share any relevant thoughts in this thread.

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.

When Ellen Tauscher announced she was headed for the State Department it seemed there would be no shortage of Democrats running to replace her in this safe district, including California’s Lt. Gov, John Garamendi, who ducked out of the race for governor when he got no traction and decided not to contest Republican held CA-03.  Recently though, CNN’s Campbell Brown (bleck!) interviewed a candidate I hadn’t heard anything about until now, and after watching the clip I walked away impressed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…

Anthony Woods is impressive for many reasons.  Raised by a single mother, he went on to serve his country in two tours in Iraq, receive an education at Harvard and a Master’s degree from the Kennedy School of Government.  He was a co-recipient of the Robert F. Kennedy Public Service Award and organized missions to help rebuild hurricane-ravaged New Orleans.  Hell, he spent a summer bicycling across the country to raise money for Habitat for Humanity.  But all that wasn’t good enough for his government.  Woods wanted to serve his country on a third tour of Iraq, but was discharged simply because he is gay.

Woods comes off as a very polished speaker, and he clearly knows from his interview with Brown how to avoid putting his foot in his mouth.  What’s more, the guy is well rounded, having worked as an economic policy advisor, giving him credibility on what is probably always the number one issue in a campaign.  Personally though, I’m excited about the possibility of sending a victim of DADT to Congress to give the LGBT community a voice and a face there for this unjust policy that Obama has, frankly, failed us on.  What’s more, Woods would be the first black-LGBT person elected to Congress and could potentially work to build bridges and initiate dialogue between two communities that don’t always see eye to eye.

The iceing on the cake???  Woods is a self-described progressive Democrat.  He’s a clear underdog in this race with plenty of big names and established politicians, but Woods has a lot of personal qualities that hint at the possibility of an upset.  Clearly, he’s someone we need to watch.

http://www.anthonywoodsforcong…