Tag: PA-04

Public Opinion Strategies for Melissa Hart (8/17-18, likely voters):

Jason Altmire (D-inc): 49

Melissa Joan Hart (R): 44

(MoE: ±4.9%)

Hart held this district for three terms before the socially conservative, economically moderate Altmire took the shine out of her rising star in 2006. Despite the close margin, it’s hard for me to imagine the voters of this R+2.6 district deciding that they made a mistake in firing her, especially with Hart getting badly beaten in the money race so far.

Bonus finding: The poll shows McCain smacking Obama by a 52-39 margin in this district. Bush beat Kerry by 54-45 here in 2004.

SSP rates this race as Lean Democratic.

Just when the GOP is starting to catch some small breaks in the Senate, the situation in the House is rapidly deteriorating. As many had predicted, a growing number of Republican representatives do not find the prospect of life in the minority appealing and are calling it quits. Unfortunately for Republicans, a large majority of them represent competitive districts. The latest retirement were particularly shocking because they were completely unexpected — especially Rep. Ferguson’s in NJ-07. Democrats have golden opportunities to pick-up all of these seats, especially if the environment continues to favor them. But this also means Republicans will be forced to play defense and will not be able to contest that many Democratic-held seats, no matter how vulnerable they might be.

The situation is made much worse for Republicans by the awful financial situation they are in. As of the end of October, the NRCC is still a million in debt, while the DCCC has 27 million dollars. That’s nearly a 30 million dollar gap, which will have a significant impact on next year’s results. The RNC will have to concentrate on the presidential elections and will have a limited ability to help the NRCC out. This means that the DCCC has the ability to play offense in many seats, expand the map, and protect its own seats — while the Republicans will probably end up having to concede some of their open seat and choose which select Democratic seats they are going after.

As a result, many of the freshmen Democrats who looked very vulnerable last year are likely to survive, though the GOP will no doubt be able to claim some of its very conservative seats back, starting with FL-16 and TX-22; they also got some good news this month when the Democratic challenger in MT-AL withdrew, as unpopular Rep. Cubin retired in Wyoming, and as they made Indiana’s 7th district much more competitive. But six of the seven race that are rated more vulnerable this month are Republican, underscoring the steady stream of bad news for the GOP.

I have only written full descriptions of seats that have made news over the past month. For detailed descriptions of the other races, check last month’s rankings. Only a few seats saw their rating change in the past month. I indicated upgraded or downgraded next to them to indicate whether they became more vulnerable or less vulnerable for the incumbent party. Here is the quick run-down:

• Less vulnerable: CT-2, NY-19, WY-AL
  
• More vulnerable: AK-AL, IL-06, IL-11, IN-07, KY-02, NJ-07, OH-05
  

Outlook: Democrats pick-up 7-12 seats.

The October ratings are available here.

Republican seats, Lean take-over (5)

• AZ-1 (Open)
  
• CA-4 (Rep. Doolittle): Republicans might finally be getting what they want here, as some rumors are starting to circulate that ethically (very) challenged Doolittle might be finally ready to announce his retirement. If he does, this race will significantly drop down the rankings; but if Doolittle stays in the race, this is a sure a pick-up for the Democrats’ Brown.
  
• IL-11 (Open, upgraded): The filing deadline has already passed in Illinois (it’s the first in the country), and Republicans did not manage to recruit a top-tier candidate. They are fielding the Mayor of New Lenox and an ex-Bush White House official; both could be good candidates and make the race competitive, but Democrats have to be considered slightly favored since they convinced a reluctant Debbie Halvorson, the State Majority Leader, to run.
  
• NM-1 (Open): 2006 nominee Patricia Madrid announced she would not run again, making Albuquerque councilman Heinrich the likely Democratic nominee. Republicans are confident that their nominee, sheriff White, is strong and will run much stronger than other Republicans would. If that is confirmed by independent indicators and polls, the race will be downgraded, but the fact that the district is naturally competitive (it narrowly went for Kerry in 2004) combined with the sour national environment for Republicans makes Heinrich the early favorite.
  
• OH-15 (Open): The GOP finally got some much needed good news in this race. Democrats had united behind their 2006 nominee Mary Jo Kilroy, but all Republicans who might have made this race competitive declined to run one after another, making this the top pick-up opportunity in the country for Democrats. But the GOP finally convinced a strong candidate who had initially passed on the race to get in: state Senator Steve Strivers. They ensured that the race remains competitive; but given that OH-15 is very tight in the first place, that the environment is toxic for the GOP and that Kilroy came within a few thousand votes of unsitting an entranced incumbent in 2006, Democrats are still favored.
  

Democratic seats, Lean take-over (1)

• FL-16 (Rep. Mahoney)

Republican seats, Toss-up (14)

• AK-AL (Rep. Young, upgraded): A new poll shows just how disastrous Young’s approval rating has become as he is involved in a corruption probe that has claimed many other Republican congressmen. Democrats have a few candidates, and an October poll showed former state Senator Ethan Berkowitz leading Young.
  
• CO-4 (Rep. Musgrave)
  
• CT-4 (Rep. Shays)
  
• IL-10 (Rep. Kirk): A recent primary poll has Dan Seals crushing Footlik in the Democratic primary for the right to take on Republican Kirk, who sits on a  very competitive district. Seals got 47% in 2006 with the national party paying little attention, but he will receive lots of help from the DCCC this time.
  
• MN-03 (Open):
  
• NC-8 (Rep. Hayes)
• NJ-03 (open): In the first New Jersey surprise, Rep. Saxton announced he would not run for re-election in early November giving a major opening to Democrats in a district that Bush won by only 3% in 2004. Democrats were already excited about this race before Saxton’s retirement, and they believe that state Senator John Adler is a very strong candidate who will carry the district. Republicans do have a solid bench here though, and are looking to get state Senator Diane Allen in.
  
• NJ-07 (open): Rep. Ferguson’s retirement was perhaps the biggest surprise of this year’s House cycle. He opens up a very competitive district that Bush won with 49% in 2000 and 53% in 2004. Democrats appear united behind state Assemblywoman Linda Stender who came within a point of beating Ferguson in 2006. The GOP is having a harder time at recruitment, as its three top choices (especially Tom Kean Jr.) announced they would not run within a few days of Ferguson’s retirement. Republicans better find a good candidate fast, or they will be looking at a certain Democratic pick-up.
  
• OH-1 (Rep. Chabot)
  
• OH-16 (Open):
  
• NY-25 (Rep. Walsh)
  
• PA-6 (Rep. Gerlach)
• VA-11 (Rep. Davis): Whether or not Tom Davis retires, this race is sure to be very competitive. Davis’s wife Jeannemarie massively lost a re-election race to the state Senate last month in a contest that cost millions of dollars, proving that Davis will have a very tough fight on his hand next year if he runs again in a region that has been rapidly trending their way. If Davis retires (and he was supposed to run for Senate and leave the seat open until about a month ago), this will automatically jump up to the top of the Democratic pick-up list. Does his wife’s loss make him more or less likely to run again?
  
• WA-8 (Rep. Reichert): Democrats are clearly confident they can take Reichert down in a rematch of the 2006 race against Demcorat Burner. They recently filed an FEC complaint over Reichert’s fundraising, hoping to get the incumbent in ethical trouble. They did not manage to tie him quite enough with the GOP brand in 2006.
  

Democratic seats, Toss-up (11)

• CA-11 (Rep. McNerney)
• GA-8 (Rep. Marshall)
• IL-8 (Rep. Bean)
• IN-7 (Rep. Carson, upgraded): This is a very Democratic district, that Kerry carried with 58%. But Rep. Carson has had health problems and has rarely been in the House in the past few years — nor has she campaigned very actively. Her 2006 re-election was surprisingly narrow, and Republicans have recruited state Rep. Jon Elrod, who they believe will be the ideal candidate to take down Carson. This race could be an unlikely pick-up for the GOP if Carson runs for re-election; if she retires, it could be easier for Democrats to hold.
  
• IN-09 (Rep. Hill): Rep. Hill and Republican Sodrel are running against each other for the fourth straight time. Voters know both of them at this point, and there is little they can do this early to change the dynamics.
  
• KS-2 (Rep. Boyda)
  
• NH-1 (Rep. Shea-Porter): Republicans are preparing for a primary between ousted 2006 congressman Bradley and the former HHS commissioner; but if Shea-Porter won last year with no money and no national attention, how vulnerable could she be now as an incumbent.
  
• OH-18 (Rep. Space)
  
• PA-4 (Rep. Altmire)
  
• PA-10 (Rep. Carney)
  
• TX-22 (Rep. Lampson): This race is deemed by many the most vulnerable seat held by a Democrat. But the strongest Republicans passed on the race, giving at least some pause to those who have long predicted Lampson is a one-timer. They might very well be right, but we shall wait until the GOP field yields its nominee to reassess the situation.

The race of the rankings, including all the “lean retention” and “potentially competitive” rated seats, is available here, at Campaign Diaries.

The new Representatives from PA, elected with slim majorities, have a problem, but there’s a solution.

Problem:

We all know what’s happening with congress and fundraising.  It’s become a frequent news story: no sooner are members of the 110th Congress in office than they are required to raise millions for their reelection.  It’s just a question of math: raise as much as possible or you’ll lose, because your opponent will be doing the same thing.  I wrote about Jason Altmire’s experience (D, PA-4) earlier. 

This Tuesday, The Philadelphia Inquirer had a story on the problem Patrick Murphy (D, PA-8)faces:

There’s no such thing as a governing period now? It’s one campaign into the next.  It’s really two full-time jobs – being a congressman and being a candidate.

Jason Altmire and Patrick Murphy are just two vulnerable freshmen who need to raise money to stay in office, from day one.  To win the next election, they are already in full campaign mode, 24/7.  There’s a tension between having time for policy making and raising enough money.

Even though he won in 2006, Altmire was outspent almost 2 to 1.  Murphy raised $2.4 million, a huge sum, but Michael Fitzpatrick had over $3 million at his disposal and that race was decided by 0.6% of the vote (1,521 votes).  Clearly each had a strong message that worked with voters.  Still, with such slim majorities they would have a better chance of securing their reelection if they could spend the next 20 months legislating and communicating their work with constituents without the huge workload of raising several million dollars.

Meanwhile, the Inquirer highlighted another PA congressman’s dilemma.  Joe Sestak (D, PA-7) said:

I know fund-raising is important? but more important is outreach and getting people to know me.? Voters are like sailors.? They want you to look them in the eye, to grasp their concerns, to know you care.

As the paper points out, the former 3-star general knows how to lead and inspire, if he’s given the support and resources to do it.

Solution:

This morning the Philadelphia Daily News endorsed legislation for public financing of congressional elections introduced on Tuesday by a bicameral, bi-partisan team featuring Sens. Dick Durbin and Arlen Specter, and Reps John Tierney, Todd Platts and Raul Grijalva.

The Daily News, The Baltimore Sun, Adam B (on Daily Kos) and a host of other bloggers and journalists are endorsing public financing at the state and national level.  This is great news for the state of the nation, and we need to make sure the momentum grows.

Under public financing, the 2008 races could be spent talking to constituents door-to-door and at town hall meetings, instead of at high-dollar events with a handful of people who are already convinced to vote for them.  In fact, Durbin’s proposals encourage candidates to choose grassroots campaigning because they can qualify for public funds with small donations of $5 from average citizens.  Under public financing, Jason Altmire, Joe Sestak and Patrick Murphy would both have been given matching funds to level the playing field.  How many more voters could they reach in November 2008 with that kind of freedom?

This is my first posting on Swing Space Project.  I’m here not only because I care about the outcome of elections – I do – but because how we elect them matters, and what they stand for matters too.

And I’ll come right out and say it: while it’s exciting that a new wave of members of Congress just swept into office in 2007, I’m worried that the way campaign finance works and the rigors of fundraising will keep them-and their colleagues in Congress and in statehouses-from realizing their full potential as representatives.  So I’m here to voice my concern.  We need “clean elections,” or the full public financing of elections, as a way to restore faith in the political process and to make sure that a wide range of folks can run and win.

Jason Altmire in PA-04 was featured in a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette story on February 5th describing his fundraising prowess since November 7. 

Just three months after his victory over incumbent Melissa Hart, U.S. Rep. Jason Altmire is keeping a brisk fund-raising pace.

Sounds like he’s no slouch-and that’s critical if he wants to remain in his seat in a battleground district.

The Post-Gazette continues:

The freshman Democrat from McCandless collected more than $74,000 between the Nov. 7 election and the end of the year, according to campaign finance data released last week.

But note the juxtaposition, because then he said this:

I’d support and work hard to pass any bill that takes money out of politics.

And he did this:

Mr. Altmire signed onto the “Voters First Pledge” of the Public Campaign Action Fund, Common Cause (where I work), Public Citizen and other groups who argue that public financing of elections would allow politicians to spend less time raising money and more time tending to the concerns of constituents.

Altmire is far from the only one.  So many of the Democrats who ran and won seats in November campaigned on the issues of corruption and the need to restore transparency and trust in the government.  Meanwhile, Rahm Emanuel is giving all the freshmen the $1 million homework assignment: Rep. Tim Walz (MN-01) said Mr. Emanuel told him

Start raising money now… And here’s your goal. Have $1 million in the bank by the time this race gets ready next time.

So which are they supposed to do, legislate or fundraise?  And similarly, when they’re on the campaign trail, do they talk to voters or big donors?  The answer, eight hours out of 10, is the latter.  I don’t blame them – in fact, I trust Altmire when he says he wants to take money out of the process – but I’m fed up with this system where the Jason Altmires of the world (and the Patrick Murphys and the Tim Walzs and the Jerry McNerneys) have to raise boatloads of money instead of going in there and actually cleaning up.

Luckily there’s momentum to pass this sort of fundamental campaign finance reform for Congress, led by Sen. Dick Durbin and Rep. John Tierney, but it’ll still take some pushing from the rest of us.  Just putting progressive-minded folks in office isn’t the last step – it’s making sure our system doesn’t prevent them from working towards the changes that they want, that all of us – not just the deep-pocketed donors – need.

This diary has been cross posted on CommonBlog.com

The Hill published an article highlighting some of the fundraising efforts of freshmen Democrats in the House.  Apparently, many are doing quite well.  David Loebsack (IA-02) has raised about $71,000.  Kirsten Gillebrand (NY-20) has raised $65,000 in PAC money alone.  Earl Perlmutter (CO-07) has raised $79,000.  Charlie Wilson (OH-06) has raised $34,000.  Paul Hodes has raised $35,000.  Jason Altmire (PA-04) and Patrick Murphy (PA-08) have both raised $50,000 in PAC money alone.  Zack Space (OH-18) and Steven Kagen (WI-08) have both raised $35,000 in PAC money.

As far as simple financial numbers go, this is good news.  All of these candidates are vulnerable to some degree.  So, if all of these House members are already off to good starts, they may be able to force out potentially strong challenges early on.

But the article also has some worrying relevations.  For one thing, Nancy Boyda (KS-02) has raised only $13,000.  Considering the presidential vote in her district (Bush won it by 20 points), Boyda is probably one of our top five most vulnerable Democrats.  Plus, she will not have Sebelius’ coattails helping her and will instead have to contend with the Republican tide at the top of the ticket from the eventual Republican nominee and Senator Pat Roberts. Finally, she will possibly face a rematch against Jim Ryun. More over the flip…

However, the thing that is more disappointing to me than Boyda’s numbers (it’s early, give her some time) is where the other candidates are getting there money.  First, relying heavily on PAC money does not give the best image.  But beyond that, it’s a question of which PACs they’re getting donations from.

Both Gillebrand and Perlmutter have taken money from Altria, which represents the makers of Marlboro cigarettes. Loebsack and Perlmutter have received contributions from the American Bankers Association PAC while Perlmutter also has donations from Comcast and JP Morgan and Loebsack has donations from the American Association of Realtors.

It’s unsettling to see any elected officials taking money from cigarette makers.  It’s worse to see Democrats, liberal Democrats at that, doing that.  And while Comcast, et al. aren’t the scourge of Satan, I also don’t like the image of elected Democrats at their beg and call.

http://www.thehill.c…

My suggestion for anyone else who feels the way I do, is to donate through the Netroots and other liberal PACs like MoveOn and Democracy for America.  The more candidates and elected officials can get from the Netroots, the less they have to rely on PACs whose goals are sometimes/often/always contrary to the goals of progressives/working people/middle class/etc.

One should also note that Netroots heroes Jerry McNerney (CA-11), Carol Shea-Porter (NH-01), John Yarmuth (KY-03), Joe Sestak (PA-07), John Hall (NY-19), and Tim Walz (MN-01) are not mentioned in the article.  We need to act now to keep these people a)in Congress by making sure they have adequate resources to be re-elected and b)from becoming corrupted by negative interests.