Baron Hill, rematch addict
I've been starting to talk with some of the Blue America-endorsed candidates about running again in 2012. First-time candidates rarely win but they sometimes manage to make it on the second try. Donna Edwards is a great example of an "impossible" candidate with "no chance" who wound up defeating an entrenched incumbent backed by the Establishment and by the financial interests he had served so loyally. But it took two cycles. I'm getting every conceivable answer-- from "I'm broke and my wife will divorce me if I try that again" to "I'm thinking about it" to "You bet!"
This year there were
a lot of rematches. Some worked out well for the challengers-- mostly, though not exclusively, Republicans-- and some worked just fine for incumbents, of both parties, trying to hold onto their seats. Before we look at some of them, remember the classic congressional rematch story is between Indiana Blue Dog Baron Hill and former GOP fringe loon Mike Sodrel. Sodrel shook up Hill, a 3-term incumbent in 2002, 51-46%. In 2004 Sodrel edged him by 1,500 votes. Two years later Hill came back at Sodrel and won 50-46%. And, yes, Sodrel was back again in 2008 but lost badly, 58-39%. Sodrel tried to challenge Hill again this year but he came in third in the GOP primary, which was won by Todd Young who went on to beat Hill last week pretty decisively, 52-42%.
Also in Indiana, a Hill acolyte, and one of the only Blue Dogs in a Democratic district consistently voting with the GOP on core, substantive contested issues, to have managed to save his seat last week is Joe Donnelly. His opponent, teabagger Jackie Walorski, hinted Donnelly will be
facing a rematch in 2012.
If Walorski does decide to run in 2012, it won't be the first time a candidate in north-central Indiana lost his or her first bid for Congress and gave it another try two years later.
Donnelly lost to incumbent Republican Chris Chocola in his first congressional campaign in 2004, then beat Chocola in 2006.
Chocola was first elected in an open race in 2002, two years after losing to incumbent Democrat Tim Roemer.
On Tuesday night, some in the crowd at the West Side Democratic Club laughed, applauded and waved goodbye as they watched Walorski's concession speech live on television just before 9:30 p.m.
Democrats, however, shouldn't assume Walorski is gone for good. The firmer grip Republicans secured Tuesday on the Indiana Statehouse could help her chances of a 2012 victory.
Using new census data, Indiana lawmakers next year will take up the once-per-decade task of drawing new boundaries for the state's legislative and congressional districts. And, with a new 58-42 Republican majority in the Indiana House, a 37-13 hold on the Senate and Mitch Daniels still in the governor's office, the GOP will be able to direct the process at every level.
The 2nd District in particular could be reshaped significantly, said Andrew Downs, director of the Mike Downs Center for Indiana Politics at Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne.
The simplest move for Republicans, Downs said, would be to add Kosciusko County to the 2nd District and remove the southern part of the district around Kokomo.
Kosciusko is currently in the 3rd District, which Republican Marlin Stutzman won Tuesday with 63 percent of the vote. About 74 percent of Kosciusko voters supported Stutzman in the election.
"Kosciusko would tilt (the 2nd District) toward the Republicans without costing them much of anything," Downs said. "Quite frankly, the 3rd District is such a Republican district it can afford to take the hit."
The move would also make the 2nd District more compact, which is supposed to be one of the goals when drawing legislative boundaries. Plus, Kosciusko was part of north-central Indiana's congressional district until Democrats removed it during the redistricting process in 2001.
"It's an easy way for Republicans to make that district a very, very winnable district for them," Downs said.
It would have been great for the progressive agenda to see the end of Joe Donnelly instead of an Ohio Democrat who faced a brutal rematch and lost, Mary Jo Kilroy, one of the few dedicated liberals to be defeated in the Blue Dog tsunami last week. She didn't deserve to lose, let alone to a creepy bank lobbyist and corrupt Boehner crony, Steve Stivers. After a close 50/50 decision in 2008 (139,582-137,271)-- for an open seat (and with Obama taking 54% in an Ohio that earnestly bought into the Hope & Change message)-- Stivers benefited from huge, shady third party outside spending and beat Kilroy 137,441-93,578. As you can see, almost all his 2008 voters came out and voted for him again while 46,000 of her voters just didn't show up at the polls.
Just southwest of Kilroy's Columbus-based district, Steve Driehaus was suffering a similar fate in Cincinnati. There former incumbent-- another Boehner crony-- Steve Chabot, who Driehaus had beaten in 2008 155,089 (52%) to 140,469 (48%), was turning the tables and won 101,691 (52%) to 87,394 (45%). Even though Chabot isn't well-liked and had a relatively large voter fall-off, Driehaus' voter base pretty much evaporated the same way Mary Jo Kilroy's did.
There are stories of rematches like Dreihaus vs Chabot and Kilroy vs Stivers all across the country. In 2006 Patrick Murphy managed to beat Republican freshman Mike Fitzpatrick in PA-8 (Bucks County, northeast of Philly) 125,667 to 124,146. Fitzpatrick didn't run in 2008 and Murphy beat his GOP opponent handily and looked like a rising star inside the Democratic House caucus. A moderate Blue Dog, he played a role as an intermediary between the Republican-leaning extremists and the normal Democrats. This year he was just wiped out in the tsunami when Fitzpatrick came back for a rematch and beat him 126,404 (54%) to 109,157 (46%). In 2008 over almost 198,000 voters had pulled the lever for Murphy. Almost 90,000 just disappeared this year.
Frank Kratovil was a much worse Blue Dog than Murphy. Murphy tended to vote with the Democratic majority on most important issues and certainly identified himself with reform and with progress. Kratovil almost always took a reactionary stand and voted with the Republicans far more than with the Democrats. His Progressive Punch score is a sickening 34.96, slightly worse than Heath Shuler's, slightly better than Jim Marshall's-- while Murphy had a more centrist 63.33 score. After extreme right-wing state Senator Andy Harris beat mainstream conservative incumbent Wayne Gilchrest in 2008, Kratovil was able to win a narrow victory in the general election (with an endorsement from Gilchrest). Although McCain bested Obama here by 19 points, Kratovil managed to win, albeit by just 2,700 votes. This year the rematch was a blowout for Harris with Kratovil's two years of pandering to the Republicans bringing him just 41% of the vote.
Among the other Blue Dogs who alienated their Democratic supporters by voting consistently with the Republicans and then suffering the same fate as Kratovil in rematches were
Harry Mitchell in Arizona, whose 53% win over David Schweikert in 2008 shrunk to a 43% loss against him this year, and
Mike Arcuri in upstate New York, whose 52% (10,000 vote) win over Richard Hanna in 2008 turned into a 53-47% (10,000 vote) loss this year. Arcuri's pandering to the right didn't convince any Republicans to vote for him; they had their own candidate. But it did discourage Democrats from coming out to the polls.
Unfortunately, the ability of the Blue Dogs to have watered down the Democratic agenda, ruining the effectiveness of landmark legislation like health care reform, Wall Street reform, the Stimulus, etc, and ruining the Democratic brand in the process, also contributed to losses for decent non-Blue Dog Democrats in tough rematches. One of the most tragic was Mark Schauer's defeat by right-wing fanatic and ex-Rep. Tim Walberg, who will be back in Congress next year, a 7,500 vote Schauer win in 2008 turning into a 10,500 vote loss last week. Down in Florida when moderate Democrat Ron Klein was challenged by right-wing fanatic Allen West in 2008 he turned him away by 10 percentage points (almost 30,000 votes). This year, with massive financial help from shady outside groups, West-- who was even more extremist and psychotic in his campaign-- won by 9 percentage points and around 18,000 votes.
Obviously, not even in a wave election will all rematches overturn previous elections. Shelley Berkley beat crackpot Republican challenger Kenneth Wegner in 2006 65-31%, beat him again in 2008 88-28% and when he came back for more this year, a tough one for Nevada Democrats, she still beat him 62-35%. Similarly, liberal icon Maurice Hinchey was challenged by reactionary Republican George Phillips in 2008 and beat him 168,556 (66%) to 85,126 (34%). This year Hinchey still won the rematch but by a much tighter 90,613 (52%) to 82,385 (48%). Notice how virtually all Phillips' 2008 voters were back, while Hinchey only turned out
half of his! In 2008 Northern Virginia's blue-trending 11th CD was an open seat and Gerald Connolly beat Keith Fimian handily-- 55-43%. This year a rematch resulted in a virtual 49-49% tie, with Connolly holding a 920 vote lead as the race goes up for a recount.
Traditionally, the first incumbents to be challenged are those who were elected with less than 55% of the vote. Both congressional party committees will be very busy in the run up to 2012. I noticed that in her concession speech last week, Mariannette Miller-Meeks, a wing nut Dave Loebsack had defeated by 18 points in 2008-- but only by 6 points this year (51-46%)-- she hinted
she would try again in two years. And with Obama ineffectually playing to the center and further confusing people about what-- if anything-- Democrats stand for, 2012 won't necessarily be a comeback year for loyal Democrats like Dave Loebsack or Maurice Hinchey. If you missed
Jerry Nadler's political assessment yesterday, let me repeat it for you today:
[A] reasonable jury would probably find [Obama] "guilty of political malpractice in the first degree," both for allowing himself to be negotiated into a stimulus that was "far too small" and too tilted toward unstimulative tax cuts, and also for his "extended use of Hooverite rhetoric to assure people that the economy is improving when it obviously isn't improving."
Mr. Nadler said that if unemployment stays high-- as he predicted it will, given that the additional stimulus he said was needed to reduce it is now "politically impossible"-- the consequence will be a Republican Senate and a Republican president in 2012, to be followed by a Democratic takeover of Congress in 2014.
Mr. Nadler said that given that "the gambling casino on Wall Street wrecked the economy," the financial regulation bill passed by Congress was "exceedingly mild" and probably not adequate to prevent the next crisis.
As for the agenda looking forward, Mr, Nadler declared that "cap and trade is dead, obviously." He said that while Republicans were unlikely fully to repeal ObamaCare, they might "sabotage it by refusing to fund" it-- and he said that was in their power to do, even if they controlled just the House. He also said Republicans might try to "destroy the enforcement budgets" of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Securities and Exchange Commission.
And that will sound very sweet for Republican freshmen like Charlie Bass (NH) who managed to win with 48%, Chip Cravaack (MN-48%), Randy Hultgren (IL- 51%), Nan Hayworth (NY- 53%), Sean Duffy (WI-52%), Paul Gosar (AZ-50%), Ben Quayle (AZ-52%), Jaime Herrera (WA-53%), Scott Tipton (CO-50%), Bill Johnson (OH-50%), David McKinely (WV-50%), Quico Canseco (TX-49%), Martha Roby (AL-51%), Kristi Noem (SD-48%) and lots of others who know their narrow wins will make them automatic targets in 2012.
Labels: 2010 congressional races, 2012 congressional races, rematches
