20 key House recruiting priorities.

20 key House recruiting priorities.

On the whole Democrats are doing exceptionally well when it comes to House Challenger recruitment. By my count there are already 45 districts in which well-established challengers could potentially win.   Additionally Democrats have another five districts in which challengers are pretty close to declaring and if such challengers declared would also make these very competitive. This amounts to already 50 potential wins.  While this is very good news, I believe there are at  twenty more districts in which a Democrat could win if a proper challenger would emerge. With any luck we should be looking at 70 Republicans or more than 1/3 of the Republican House Caucus on the Run.  The twenty districts in need of a challenger are on the flip with brief explanations of each. It is also extremely important to remember challenger does not have to mean extremely well funded, well connected party insider or self-funder.  In 2006 we won with many first time , regular people who worked very hard. We need just as many Tim Walz’s, as Nick Lampson's

1.    PA 6
        This is the most surprising of  the districts to currently be without a challenger  in Jim Gerlach entire career in Congress he has never gotten above 52% of the vote. His district is only 1 of 8 remaining districts that voted for Kerry and in sending a Republican to Congress. I have heard in and out many names floated but as of yet have not heard of a declared challenger. I imagine that should not last long but still until it is rectified it is clearly the biggest problem district out there.

2.    IL 6
This district was  waiting on Tammy Duckworth decision of whether to run against Peter Roskam or not, now that the decision has been made. Democrats are in need of a new candidate.  Peter Roskam only got 51% in a district that only gave George Bush  53%. This could well be Obama territory and not having a House Challenger would be shame.
    
3.    DE AL
This district has been held extremely well held by Republican Michael Castle for a relatively long time and will be an extremely difficult get and yet it is the most Democratic district of any held by  a Republican. So far no credible challenger has emerged but if one does Mike Castle can be beat.

4.    IL 18
This newly minted open seat should be of considerable value, while it is a generally tough district giving Bush 58 percent of the vote.  Its Republican Members of Congress have been more moderate than most. We need  a strong candidate in  this race as we should in all under 60 Bush open seats.

5. MN 3
 Jim Ramstad is defiantly a slippery customer who has a tendency to vote correctly on a number of occasions, and yet his district in Minnesota, like  the one now held by Congressman Tim Walz, barely gave the Republican any margin with which to work. Another earnest Minnesotan can and should make this race a real fight.  At the very least a challenge will make Jim Ramstad do the right thing more often.

6.    MI 11
This district seems to be one of utmost importance, it was one of the five
seriously under targeted in 2006.  The criteria are those races in which an incumbent is held to less than 55% while spending less than $ 500,000. The other four all seem to have challengers in place.  This district simply can not be left to go unchallenged.  It also gave George Bush only 53% of the vote. Simply put. We can beat Thaddeus McCotter.
7.    FL 10
 Bill Young  is the type of incumbent who needs pushing into retirement, his district only voted for the President 2004 by an exceptionally small margin and yet he has been re-elected by very large margins over and over. He is however quite old and a strong and declared challenger could make him think twice about running for re-election. Plus given his age, he could lose even if he does run for re-election
8.    NJ 3
    Jim Saxton sometimes talks like a moderate but is many ways a conservative, he was held to under 60% against a very under-funded  challenger in 2006 and represents another just Bush  win with roughly 51%, in 04 but which Gore won by near double-digits.  I heard rumors of state-senator John Adler getting into the race but until I hear more than rumors, we need a candidate.
9.    NY 3
There are only  six New York State Republican House members left and already four have challengers, and three have very serious challengers. There are still sadly two who lack the kind of challenger they need. Peter King’s race is one of them. A very similar district to NJ 3 in that it went slightly for Bush in 04, but near double digits for Gore in 2000. All the other Long-Island district have fallen. A well place challenger should make this one fall as well.
10.    OH 12
The pattern should begin to be emerging, this is a district in which George Bush won by the slightest of margins with an incumbent who receive less than 60% in 2006. It was one of the better funded challenges though our candidate faced other obstancles. Given the still somewhat toxic environment for Republicans in Ohio, along with a Presidential year, Pat Tieberi is clearly vulnerable to the right kind of challenger.
11.    NY 13
    One of only Six Republican from New York, and one of only two without a challenger, this district showed a bigger Bush swing than NY 3, but also went for Gore by a similar amount. Vito Fossella represents Staten Island and Brooklyn. Steve Harrison on an extremely small budget held Vito to only 57% and therefore the right challenger should be able to win. New York could at the end of 2008 have no Republican left in the delegation and hopefully  with CT we can have a Republican free North East from New York to Maine.
12.    VA 2
    It is not the nature of the district but Thelma Drake’s mediocre performance that have landed her on the hot heat, after winning the seat initially in 2004 with only 55% of 3  points behind Bush’s take her 2006 performance of only 51% makes her in serious jeporardy  were a serious challenger to emerge. We need one, if only to help our 2008 VA Senate candidate.
13.    NJ 2
This is another barely won for Bush 2004, Gore much bigger Winner 2000, moderately Republican held districts, the reason it falls lower on the scale than NJ 2 is the Republican Frank LoBiondo holds up better than does Jim Saxton, and is also more politically strewed. Still a strong challenge here and it is a winnable race.
14.    Il 11
It is actually amazing to be that Jerry Weller is not considered more vulnerable given the fun he has with ethics and yet, his 55% win over very capable John Pavich indicated taking him out in a district that gave George Bush 53% will be difficult, but Illinois could be Obama country and the right challenger could have Weller’s number.
15.  OH 3
Mike Turner sits on the type of district that swung well in  2006. It gave George Bush 54% of the vote in Dayton Ohio. It is not an easy sell and yet Mike Turner is not a long time member having only been recently elected in 2002.  He also was held to under 60% against a very late declaring challenger after a debacle with our first candidate. It is the type of district that could swing and therefore should be challeneged.
16.   IL 13
Judy Biggert sits on a moderately Republican districts in generally suburban Illinois The district gave George Bush about 53% of the vote, she has not often been challenged though she did  dip below 60 in the most recent election despite nominally funded opposition.  Seats in Illinois that fit this profile must have viable challengers as a Democratic winning 60% of the vote there in the Presidential is a real possibility[if you doubt, the Dem and Green got 60% against the last Republican to hold statewide office, so 60% is clearly possible]
17.  MI 8
Mike Rogers faced down with 55% a pretty good challenger in 2006 election, and yet the 54% that Bush got in the District in 2004 means it could flip.  It  was these Suburban leaner districts that made for the last 10 of the Democrats House wins, this district and PA 4 seems to have a possible similarities, the point is that there is simply no reason to give up here.
18.  MI 6
Fred Upton usually wins big  but the district is relatively moderate, giving George Bush 53%, it isn’t a high priority but a challenger could win here.  If I had to guess I would say Both Stabenow and Granholm one this district. We need to compete here.
19. FL 18
One of the very few district in which the George Bush percentage dropped versus 2000, FL 18 is the most Democratic of the three Miami area Cuban district,  This district only gave George Bush 54% of the vote and while its Incumbent is well entrenched the right kind of challenger could move this district on the path to becoming Democratic.
20. MI 4
This district is mostly listed for the round number as Bush’s 55 here, along with 61% by Dave Camp in 2006, does not give me much grounds for getting too excited and yet, 55% is not so larger as to give up hope. Dave Camp could be defeated if  a very high quality challenger were to emerge.

By what margin will Bob Shamansky win?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

KY-Sen: Hunting Mitch

In the Senatorial elections of 1984, Senator Walter “Dee” Huddleston of Kentucky was the only incumbent Democrat to lose a Senate seat that year, despite the thrashing that Ronald Reagan delivered to Walter Mondale across the nation.  The upstart politician who upset Huddleston, Jefferson County Judge/Executive Mitch McConnell, employed a series of wildly successful TV ads featuring a group of bloodhounds trying to find the supposedly non-attendant incumbent Senator in Washington.

Kentucky Attorney General Greg Stumbo, himself waging an exploratory campaign against Senate Minority Leader McConnell this year, had the good sense to show up with a pair of bloodhounds at the annual Fancy Farm Picnic in the state this weekend.  “Hunting For A Real U.S. Senator”, indeed.  McConnell himself was at the can't-miss event, of course, supporting embattled and corrupt Republican Gov. Ernie Fletcher in his 2007 re-election campaign.  Just another reminder of the hopelessly out-of-touch Senatorial representation that Kentuckians continue to suffer with.

What goes around comes around?

UPDATE: DitchMitchKY’s Matt Gunterman gives his report from the event:

Third, and this was Shawn’s observation at Fancy Farm and I’m highlighting because I think it was a good one: anti-war Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul had an impressive organization at Fancy Farm. In fact, the campaign to “Support Our Troops / End the War” was extremely popular at the event. I was amazed to see 60 year old men and women asking 25 year old activists for every pro-end-of-war sticker and sign they could provide. It truly was an amazing sight. I’ve been at Fancy Farms since 1992, and I’ve never witnessed such a motivated and activist crowd. That’s one of the biggest stories to come out of Fancy Farm this year, quite frankly: even in rural Kentucky, the movement to end Bush’s endless and futile war is gaining in momentum. Senator Mitch McConnell was visibly shaken in his speech by the response.

(H/T: kilowat for the photo)

NY-29: Field Clears for Massa

According to the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, David Nachbar, one of the contenders for the Democratic nomination to take on “Shotgun” Randy Kuhl next year, has withdrawn his candidacy this week.  Nachbar cites workplace demands as the reason for folding his bid, but perhaps he also found that he underestimated the depth and breadth of support for rematch candidate Eric Massa within the 29th district.  For instance, it seems like not a day goes by where Massa's campaign doesn't put out another press release announcing the endorsement of a county or township Democratic committee (see the latest one here).

While Massa got off to a solid start, outraising Kuhl significantly in the second quarter ($158K to $68K) and reporting a higher cash-on-hand total, Nachbar had some deep pockets of his own that he was willing to tap into.  Coupled with New York's September primary, a contested nomination would have been a serious resource drain for the eventual nominee.  New York's 29th will not be one of the easier targets for Democrats in 2008, but Nachbar's termination could help ensure that Massa will make a decent second shot at it.

(H/T: DailyKos diarist ipsos

Weekly Open Thread: What Races Are You Interested In?

Which Republican crumb-bum do you most want to see go down in flames in 2008?

Also, anyone at YearlyKos right now?  Wish I could've made it this year, but Swing State Project godfather and netroots hero DavidNYC is proudly waving the site's banner in Chicago.  Did anyone get a chance to catch one of his panels on local blogging today?

Actblue: Who’s Hot? (August)

I enjoyed compiling the figures for this diary so much last month, that I’ve decided to turn our tracking of the twenty hottest House challengers on ActBlue.com into a monthly series.

Here’s the August installment:




















































































































































State CD Candidate Actblue Total Contributions
CO 2 Jared Polis $137,304 321
MA 5 Niki Tsongas $136,852 406
MA 5 Jamie Eldridge $113,154 694
ME 1 Chellie Pingree $103,785 247
CA 26 Russ Warner $74,840 232
IL 10 Dan Seals $71,073 234
MO 6 Kay Barnes $69,949 102
NY 29 Eric Massa $64,507 755
AZ 3 Bob Lord $59,440 163
TX 10 Dan Grant $58,220 145
NY 26 Jon Powers $54,117 288
FL 8 Mike Smith $49,825 73
CA 4 Charlie Brown $46,485 990
NM 1 Martin Heinrich $42,744 205
MD 4 Donna Edwards $36,828 612
NC 8 Larry Kissell $32,282 308
CT 4 Jim Himes $27,759 76
IL 4 Ricardo Muñoz $25,590 67
IA 4 Selden Spencer $18,855 123
MT AL Bill Kennedy $17,866 71

Certainly an exciting group of challengers. One guy I’ll be keeping my eye on his rematch candidate Selden Spencer, who raised under $500K in is 2006 challenge to Republican Rep. Tom Latham, which he lost by a 57-43 margin. Let’s see what he can do with an earlier start. (In the second quarter, he raised $88K.)

PS: Anyone wanna help put Charlie Brown over the top to 1000 contributions?

NH-02: Credit Where Credit is Due

Former Republican Rep. Charlie Bass’ service in Congress can be called many things (“disingenuous” and “Bush-enabling” being my top two), but you've gotta give the Bassmaster some credit where credit is due for some straight-up honesty:

Charlie Bass, who lost to Hodes last year after serving five terms, isn't sounding like a candidate for a rematch.

“Life after Congress is not bad,” said Bass, now executive director of the Republican Main Street Partnership, a Washington-based organization focused on getting moderate Republicans elected.

“I haven't ruled anything out, but, frankly, I think that if the election were held today, the outcome might be worse for me than it was last November. I'm not making any decisions at this point.” (emphasis added)

Couldn’t have said it any better myself, Charles.

(H/T: Dean Barker)

OK-Sen: Andrew Rice Will Challenge Inhofe

On Monday, the Run Andrew Run draft blog informed us that Oklahoma Democratic state Senator Andrew Rice was very likely to challenge crumb-bum extraordinaire Jim Inhofe in the state's 2008 U.S. Senate election:

After a few weeks on the road in Oklahoma and a whirlwind of meetings in Washington, D.C., it now seems likely State Senator Andrew Rice will soon be filing papers to challenge U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe in the 2008 election.

Since winning election to the State Senate from a diverse, inner-OKC district, Rice has already proven to be a skilled consensus builder who gets results. He offers a stark contrast to the right-wing curmudgeon, Jim Inhofe.

Rice still says he will make a formal announcement after Labor Day but fundraising prospects have surpassed his expectations and sources close to him say he may be “all in” within the next 10 days. He has received encouragement on this site and in meetings throughout the state. We also hear the DSCC now views Rice as a potential upset challenger in the style of a Jim Webb or a Jon Tester.

Rice lost a brother in the World Trade Center on 9/11 and believes that Bush and Inhofe took their eye off the ball by waging war in Iraq while Al Quaeda rebuilt its global terror network. Inhofe, who once called global warming a “hoax,” boasts of being “one of the last true conservatives left in the Senate”.

Earlier today, DailyKos diarist gypsy shared with us a letter that Rice is apparently distributing to his friends and supporters:

Andrew Rice for U.S. Senate
P.O. Box 1027
Oklahoma City, OK  73102
                                                       August 2, 2007
Dear Friends,

While I have deliberated during these past few months, I have also encouraged other, more widely-known Democrats to take up the challenge.  To date, none has done so.  I have also thoroughly discussed the pros and cons of running with my wife Apple and my family.

Today, I want you to know that I have decided to run and that I intend to win!

I want you to be assured that I will not have to vacate my State Senate seat in order to run and I will continue to make myself accessible and accountable to my constituents in Senate District 46.

I believe Oklahomans deserve a choice for U.S. Senate in 2008.

Washington is paralyzed by partisan bickering, and Jim Inhofe may be one of the most partisan Senators of all.  He even boasts of being the “most conservative” Senator.  In contrast, as a member in the evenly divided Oklahoma Senate, I have proven that I can work with both Republicans and Democrats to get results for our state.

Divisive politics is harming our country.  That’s not my style.  I have already met many Oklahomans from across the state.  They tell me that Washington no longer listens to them.

This will be a tough and expensive race.  In fact, I will need to raise several million dollars just to compete against Inhofe and the National Republicans who will stop at nothing to help him extend his 40-year career in elective politics. […]

Despite having a very lackluster approval rating for a senior senator in his third term (the last time that SUSA polled this race in November, he was at a 46% approval), more prominent names in Oklahoma’s Democratic cycles (and there are a few, including Gov. Brad Henry and four-term Attorney General Drew Edmondson) have not jumped at the chance to challenge Inhofe.  Perhaps the hesitancy stems from watching former Democratic Rep. Brad Carson’s surprisingly wide loss (42%-53%) in the 2004 open seat race against Tom Coburn–a candidate who nicely complements Inhofe’s nuttiness in the Senate.

There’s no doubt that Rice, a young progressive with a compelling biography, will face a tough climb in the state, especially in a Presidential year when Duncan Hunter carries the state by a 30-point margin (kidding).  Still, Inhofe is older, he has a tendency to say stupid shit, and the dynamic of a fresh face versus a doddery loon could be fun to watch, given a reasonable amount of funding in Rice’s campaign coffers.

With Jeff Merkley in Oregon and now Andrew Rice in Oklahoma, 2008’s Senate races are beginning to take more shape as we approach the fall.

On the web: Andrew Rice for Oklahoma (I’m assuming that this will be updated once Rice makes his official announcement)

Trading Away our Food Safety

 

What’s for dinner?

 

  • Fruit and Veggies laced with pesticides?
  • Oysters tainted with Listeria?
  • Shrimp sautéed with Salmonella?
  • Spinach with a side of E. coli?
  • Just plain filthy fish? 

 

Hungry yet? In the last couple months, I know many of us have thought twice while picking our food for our families at the supermarket, and we should. The CDC estimates that 76 million Americans suffer from foodborne illnesses every year, 325,000 are hospitalized, and 5,000 die.

 

While the mainstream media is happy to tell the public of the great threats to their health and safety, scaring them stiff into watching the evening news, they rarely ask why the flood of dangerous imports is happening and of our leaders, what can be done to stop it.

 

 A new report by Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch offers an answer to those questions. The report called “Trade Deficit in Food Safety: Proposed NAFTA Expansions Replicate Limits on U.S. Food Safety Policy that Are Contributing to Unsafe Food Imports” draws the link between the Bush administration’s damaging trade policies and our food safety problems.

 

Our food imports have increased sharply, almost doubling in value, since NAFTA and the WTO passed in the mid-‘90s. Seafood imports alone have increased 65 percent. For the first time in 2005, the United  States, formerly known as the world’s bread basket, became a net food importer, with a food deficit of nearly $370 million. 

 

There may not be anything inherently wrong with increasing the food imports into our country, but there is something inherently dangerous about doing so when our ability to inspect those imports is decreasing even more sharply than our increase in imports. In 1992, the FDA inspected 8% of all the food imports under its jurisdiction. In 2006, the inspection rate is now less than one percent, a staggering .6%.

 

NAFTA started this trend, and the Bush administration’s policy of free-trade-at-any-cost has made it worse. Under Bush, the U.S. has already expanded NAFTA to Central America and is now pushing for passage of NAFTA-expansion deals to Peru, Panama, Colombia, and South Korea. 

 

The real problem is that these so-called “trade” agreements do more than increase trade of goods between nations. Trade rules incorporated into the proposed FTAs with Peru, Panama, Colombia and South Korea limit food safety standards and border inspection. The agreements require the United  States to rely on foreign regulatory structures and foreign safety inspectors to ensure that food imports are safe. The agreements require that the U.S. food safety regulators treat imported food the same as domestically produced food, even though more intensive inspection of imported goods is needed to compensate for often weak domestic regulatory systems in some exporting nations.

 

Last November, Democrats won a much-needed and much-deserved majority in Congress, and trade issues played no small part in helping usher in new leadership. 37 supporters of our failed trade policy lost their seats to Democrats campaigning on fair trade. The food safety issue is just one aspect of the Bush administration’s trade policy that has hurt Americans, but it’s also an issue that Democrats can start fixing right now to make a real difference in people’s lives. While several Democratic leaders have proposed legislation to help mend our food safety regulatory system, none of those steps will suffice if our leaders keep passing these Bush administration trade deals. The first step that Democrats can take is to vote “no” to NAFTA expansions to Peru, Panama, Colombia, and South Korea. 

 

To read the report, sign a petition or find out what you can do to protect yourself from dangerous imports visit http://www.citizen.org/trade/food/ or read our blog, http://www.eyesontrade.org for continuing coverage of the unsafe food import crisis.

 

KS-03: Republicans Uniting Against Moore?

According to Roll Call (subscription required), the NRCC is getting giddy over the candidacy of state Senator Nick Jordan against 5th-term Democratic Rep. Dennis Moore:

House Republicans, long stymied by Rep. Dennis Moore (D) in Kansas’ GOP-leaning 3rd district, think they might have recruited the perfect candidate — state Sen. Nick Jordan (R) — to flip the seat back to the GOP.

In Washington, D.C., last week to participate in the National Republican Congressional Committee’s candidate school, Jordan is described as having the support of both the moderate and conservative wings of the GOP in the Jayhawk State’s 3rd district.

If true, this could prove crucial for a Jordan victory. That’s because Moore first won the suburban eastern Kansas district in 1998 — and has held it since — largely because Republicans have failed to unify behind their nominee in each of the past five elections.

“Both moderates and conservatives are pushing [Jordan] to run,” said a knowledgeable Republican operative based in Kansas. “This is the guy we’ve been waiting for.”

Jordan said in a brief interview late last week that he is “very likely” to run for Congress in 2008 and that he probably would announce his intentions sometime in August. […]

Republicans in D.C. and Kansas claim that Jordan’s position on social issues and his record on economic matters appeal jointly to the conservative and moderate wings of 3rd district Republicans. The two factions have warred with each other in the 3rd district at least since 1998 when Moore defeated Vince Snowbarger (R) for the seat — a split that reflects an intraparty rift plaguing the Kansas GOP statewide since the early 1990s.

Jordan is socially conservative, opposing both abortion rights and embryonic stem-cell research — which makes the conservatives happy. But he also has a lengthy record of championing business and economic development projects — and this makes the moderates happy.


It’s hard to blame Republicans for trying at an R+4.2 seat in a Presidential year, but I’m having a hard time seeing Moore as a particularly vulnerable incumbent, especially after looking at his steadily improving electoral track record:
































Year Moore (%) Republican (%)
1998 52 48
2000 50 47
2002 50 47
2004 55 43
2006 64 34

With a Presidential year bringing the base to the polls (we assume) and a more credible challenger than novice Chuck Ahner, who Moore beat by 30 points last year, Republicans may be able to hold the incumbent to a level more similar to his 2004 result than his 2006 blow out. Nick Smith may be a good recruit for Tom Cole’s NRCC (assuming he makes his bid final), but he strikes me as three or four cycles too late to catch Moore in a particularly vulnerable position.

CA-04: Doolittle Draws a Crowd in the Republican Primary

Confirming weeks of speculation, Iraq War vet Eric Egland announced today that he will challenge corrupt Rep. John Doolitte in the 2008 Republican primary.  Doolittle’s campaign team, however, is maintaining a “more the merrier” attitude:

Egland is the first to flatly declare for the Republican primary. Auburn City Councilman Mike Holmes also is exploring a primary run for Doolittle’s seat, and he said Monday he is moving closer to entering the race.

Doolittle’s campaign consultant, Richard Temple, said the congressman is not worried, and welcomed the competition.

“In this case, the more candidates the better,” said Temple. He said that because the congressman has a strong base of support, multiple opponents will only divide the disenchanted.

“Neither of them can beat him,” Temple said.

Temple makes a strong point, and 4th district Republicans interested in retaining this seat in the red column would be best served to confine Doolittle to a head-to-head match up.  (Holmes, as you may recall, collected less than 33% in the 2006 primary after spending just over $90,000 on the race.)  Conversely, Blue Majority candidate Charlie Brown’s best shot is if a badly wounded Doolittle crawls out of a three or four-way primary with a barely active pulse… assuming that he hasn’t resigned in disgrace by that point.