Cuomo Endorses Castle?

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Doing a little spring cleaning this week, I came across New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo’s book, Crossroads: The Future of American Politics, written and edited in the wake of Cuomo’s primary loss in the 2002 gubernatorial race.

Since he is the heavy favorite to win the Empire State’s governorship this fall, I decided to crack open the book to try to uncover some hidden gems.

“I have asked forty-one of the nation’s most thoughtful citizens to address the current state of American politics,” Cuomo wrote in the book’s introduction. One of those citizens is Republican Congressman and candidate for the U.S. Senate Mike Castle of Delaware.

The introduction to Castle’s chapter is even more glowing as it describes the Republican’s ideology as “focusing his efforts on finding pragmatic, bipartisan solutions to some of the most pressing problems facing the nation.”

Those are kind words, but not something Castle will want to take to a Tea Party. It doesn’t look like Castle will need to dust off the quotes in his race this year, but you never know.

Cuomo is up big in his own race this year, but he may be interested in helping Republicans recruit a top tier candidate.

“I believe in checks and balances and the two-party system,” Cuomo wrote in 2003. “Each party serves the nation better when faced with stiff opposition from the other party. The old adage is true: your game is only as good as the person on the other side of the net. To that end, a vigorous debate between two viable parties (at a minimum) is essential.”

Of course that was written at a time when Democrats were on their heels and in the minority. Cuomo might have a different definition of checks and balances today.

Looking back, Cuomo compiled an interesting collection of “thoughtful citizens” that demonstrates how people’s profiles change over time. Former Sen. John Edwards was an aspiring presidential candidate who is now known for his marital problems and then-Gov. Gray Davis (D) was recalled by California voters within the same year that the book was published. On the other hand, then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi ascended to become the Speaker of the House.

Plus 10 in the Senate? Republicans Certainly Not There Yet

By Stuart Rothenberg

Having seen victories by Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama, the 1994 Republican and 2006 Democratic Congressional sweeps, and Sen. Scott Brown’s (R) recent Massachusetts victory, I’m not inclined to rule out unexpected outcomes — especially nine months before an event.

But the recent explosion of talk of Republicans gaining 10 seats in the Senate is simply premature. Right now, the GOP has an opportunity to net as many as eight Senate seats. That’s a huge number, especially considering that Democrats have 18 seats up this fall, but it is well short of control.

The new political landscape has resulted in an improved environment for the GOP, including the very real possibility that the party can retain all four of its most vulnerable open seats, in Missouri, Ohio, Kentucky and New Hampshire.

For the moment, let’s assume the GOP avoids losing any of its own seats.

Republicans have the advantage in four Democratic-held Senate seats — North Dakota, Delaware, Arkansas and Nevada. In addition, they are no worse than even money in four others — Indiana, Illinois, Colorado and Pennsylvania.

So, any chance of gaining 10 seats would require Republican candidates to win at least two of the following four states: Connecticut, California, Wisconsin and Washington.

Early polling in Connecticut shows state Attorney General Richard Blumenthal ahead of both former Rep. Rob Simmons and businesswoman Linda McMahon, the two Republicans most likely to be the eventual nominee.

Simmons is a quirky ex-legislator who built a moderate record while representing eastern Connecticut in the House. McMahon is a wealthy, self-funding first-time candidate whose claim to fame and wealth, professional wrestling, is widely seen as crude and violent.

Sen. Chris Dodd’s (D) exit from the race hurt Simmons, whose main argument has been substance and electability. He is now an underdog for the GOP nomination. McMahon’s wealth (she has promised to spend tens of millions of dollars), outsider persona, poise and relatively conservative positioning makes her stronger than Simmons in a primary and potentially more of a threat to Blumenthal.

Still, both Republicans start far behind Blumenthal, in the polls and in handicapping. A four-term statewide officeholder, Blumenthal is a smart Democrat in a Democratic state. He’ll raise plenty of cash and begins with a clear advantage in the race.

In California, voters aren’t particularly enthusiastic about Sen. Barbara Boxer (D). She’s a polarizing political figure and running at or below 50 percent in ballot tests against either Assemblyman Chuck DeVore or businesswoman Carly Fiorina, two of the leading Republicans in the race.

Still, DeVore doesn’t have the breadth of appeal or money to defeat Boxer, while Fiorina has plenty of baggage.

Boxer’s prospects would take a hit, of course, if California Republicans were to nominate former Rep. Tom Campbell, a moderate who would have considerable statewide appeal — if he could accumulate the resources for an expensive statewide race. But Campbell’s past fundraising isn’t encouraging.

For now, Boxer’s weakness does not yet translate into a serious Republican opportunity.

In Wisconsin, some polling has shown Sen. Russ Feingold (D) having trouble in a race against former Gov. Tommy Thompson (R). The only problem is that Thompson isn’t now running for the Senate, though he is considering it. And Feingold, who voted against the Troubled Asset Relief Program, is a savvy politician who has developed a reputation for independence.

The main Republican contender currently is Terrence Wall, a prosperous real estate developer who put $300,000 into his campaign but hasn’t paid state taxes in nine of the past 10 years. Democrats apparently have other tax ammunition to use against Wall.

When I interviewed Wall recently, he refused to give his date of birth. He only offered the year of his birth (and his age), apparently because he is concerned about identity theft. Wall, in other words, has a long way to go before he is a serious threat to Feingold, even in a bad year for Democrats.

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) is another smart politician, and while Republican insiders hope to recruit someone who can test the Senator, they don’t have a formidable challenger yet. Until they do, there isn’t any reason to see Washington as a GOP takeover opportunity.

Obviously, Sen. Evan Bayh’s (D-Ind.) sudden announcement Monday that he will not seek re-election improves GOP prospects in that state and therefore nationally.

While some polling showed the Democrat at risk, a recent Research 2000 poll for the liberal Web site the Daily Kos showed him leading former Sen. Dan Coats by 20 points. Bayh’s political savvy, strong connection to Hoosier voters and $13 million bank account would have made him a formidable foe for any Republican challenger, so his exit automatically improves GOP prospects, especially given the overall landscape of the election cycle.

Bayh’s retirement puts an eighth Democratic seat at considerable risk, forcing the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee to be even more on the defensive than it was. But in another sense, it doesn’t change things fundamentally. For even after Bayh’s retirement, a Republican gain of 10 seats is more hype than reality.

This column first appeared in Roll Call and on CQPolitics.com on February 16, 2010. 2010 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved.

Dangerous Dozen Open House Seats

By Stuart Rothenberg

A little more than 10 years ago (Jan. 17, 2000, to be exact), I began writing my “Dangerous Dozen” columns about open House seats, and the recent flurry of retirements means there finally are enough to fill a list for the 2010 cycle.

The fact that so many of the districts on this list are currently held by Democrats reflects how strongly the political landscape is tilting toward the GOP. As always, races toward the top of the list are the most likely to change party control, but every race on this list is a serious possibility to flip.

Tennessee’s 6th. With few Democratic officeholders downballot in this Middle Tennessee district that went 62 percent for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in 2008 and 60 percent for President George W. Bush in 2004, you can already put retiring Rep. Bart Gordon’s (D) seat into the Republican column. The GOP primary will select the district’s next Member of Congress.

Louisiana’s 3rd. The field hasn’t really started to develop in the race to succeed Rep. Charlie Melancon (D), but the fundamentals look terrible for Democrats in a midterm election year with President Barack Obama in the White House. Bush carried the district in 2004 with 58 percent, and McCain won it with 61 percent four years later. Only a Republican screw-up could keep this district blue.

Delaware’s At-Large. Rep. Mike Castle’s Senate run is a double-edged sword for Republicans, since the party will have a hard time holding his House seat. It isn’t impossible, of course, but they’ll need an unusually strong nominee (and a strong political wave) to beat the likely Democratic nominee, former Lt. Gov. John Carney.

Kansas’ 3rd. For Democrats, this looks like a bad cycle for Rep. Dennis Moore to retire and this seat to come open. The party is not competitive in the two big statewide contests this year, so both national and state dynamics favor the GOP. Both primary fields are wide open, though the early favorite on the Republican side may be the party’s 2008 nominee, former state Sen. Nick Jordan. Of course, another ideological split within the local GOP could get Democrats back into the picture.

Tennessee’s 8th. Rep. John Tanner (D) is retiring, and Democrats got a solid candidate in state Sen. Roy Herron, a strong fundraiser and veteran officeholder. But Tennessee could be a giant headache for Democrats, and being a longtime Democratic state legislator may be more of a liability than an asset in 2010.

Hawaii’s 1st. The yet-to-be-scheduled special election to fill Rep. Neil Abercrombie’s expected open seat could be another rude surprise for Democrats. Without a runoff, Honolulu City Councilman Charles Djou (R) could sneak past multiple Democratic hopefuls to give Republicans another seat — and a major public relations victory before the midterms. Democrats need to figure out a way to keep the number of their candidates to a minimum.

Arkansas’ 1st. Bush carried this conservative northeast Arkansas district with 52 percent, but McCain drew a solid 59 percent four years later. Plenty of Democratic officeholders are looking to succeed retiring Rep. Marion Berry (D), while Republican options appear fewer. The key question mark is the size of the GOP wave and how disastrous the cycle is for Democrats in Arkansas.

Illinois’ 10th. If the seat held by Rep. Mark Kirk (R) had come open in 2006 or 2008, it would have been a slam-dunk for Democrats. But the environment is very different. The outlook for November depends somewhat on Tuesday’s primaries, but there is no doubt that Democrats see this as a rare takeover opportunity this cycle.

Arkansas’ 2nd. Retiring Rep. Vic Snyder’s (D) central Arkansas district went narrowly for Bush in 2004 and voted 54 percent for McCain in 2008. Former U.S. Attorney Tim Griffin gives the GOP a solid nominee, but a number of serious Democrats are looking at the race.

New Hampshire’s 2nd. Oh how different things looked in New Hampshire a year ago. Democrats finished up their near sweep of the Granite State, and the GOP’s fortunes there suddenly looked like any other New England state. But the national mood has changed, and GOP optimism has soared. Former Rep. Charles Bass leads a large GOP field, while Democrats have a primary of their own to succeed Rep. Paul Hodes (D).

Pennsylvania’s 7th. The ranking of the last two races depends on whether you are making a selection based on where the race is now or where it may be in the fall. Former U.S. Attorney Pat Meehan gives the GOP a serious likely nominee. The district no longer leans Republican — Bush won 47 percent in 2004 and McCain only 43 percent in 2008 — and Democrats have a top-tier candidate of their own in state Rep. Bryan Lentz. Still, in a strong Republican year, Democrats have to be nervous about losing Rep. Joe Sestak’s district.

Washington’s 3rd. Retiring Rep. Brian Baird’s (D) open seat performed slightly better for McCain than for Bush in 2004 (and better than Pennsylvania’s 7th did for the same Republicans). But the nomination won’t be decided until the fall, and Democrats have a slew of bigger names looking at the contest. Still, if the GOP gets the right candidate and a partisan wave builds, this district could move up the list as a takeover opportunity.

This column first appeared in Roll Call and CQPolitics.com on February 1, 2010. 2010 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Stu Talks IL, DE Senate on Newshour

Stu talked about the Illinois and Delaware Senate races last night on the Newshour. You can watch the video below or click on this link.

From the Archives: Obama, Biden Seats in Danger?

With Democratic Attorney General Beau Biden (D) officially out of the race, the Democratic hold on Vice President Joe Biden's Senate seat is slipping away very quickly. Here is a piece I wrote in July on the scenario that Democrats could lose both the President's and Vice President's former seat.

Friday, July 31, 2009
Obama, Biden Seats in Danger?
By Nathan L. Gonzales

Lost in the focus on President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden’s history-making move down Pennsylvania Avenue to the White House in January was the fact that Republicans have a historic opportunity to pick up the pair’s former Senate seats.

Over the past century, half of the dozen seats vacated by a new president or vice president have switched partisan control in the next election.

In 2010, Republicans have open-seat opportunities in Illinois and Delaware and could win both seats vacated by a president and vice president in the same cycle for the first time in U.S. history. Click here for the rest of the story.

30-Somethings Aim for Aging Senate

By Nathan Gonzales

Illinois state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias (D) was 4 years old when Rep. Mike Castle (R) was elected lieutenant governor of Delaware. But come 2011 the two men could serve together in the Senate.

Giannoulias, 33, is one of a handful of young candidates running to become a member of what is now the oldest — in terms of average age — Senate in history. Kentucky Secretary of State Trey Grayson (R), 37, and former Florida state Speaker Marco Rubio (R), 38, are among the other under-40 Senate candidates whose 2010 bids have gained some national attention.

But while next year’s midterm electorate is likely to be older than in a presidential year, there’s no indication that being a younger candidate will be an obstacle for any of the 30-something crowd running.

“No one has said, ‘You’re too young to be a Senator,’” Grayson told Roll Call.

Indeed, it will be difficult to take issue with the secretary of state’s youth and inexperience because he’s in the middle of his second term in statewide office and the other three main candidates in the race aren’t that much older than he is.

Giannoulias and Rubio aren’t political newcomers either. The Illinois Democrat was elected statewide in 2006 at the age of 30 while Rubio was first elected to the state House when he was 29 and was Speaker by age 35.

With their political backgrounds, Giannoulias, Rubio and Grayson are in good company. Nine current Senators were elected before the age of 40 and all of them had previous experience in elected office.

Sens. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Max Baucus (D-Mont.) all served in the House. Sens. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) and Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) held statewide office, and Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) served in the state Legislature.

Then-Chittenden County State’s Attorney Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) was elected to the Senate in 1974, before Giannoulias was even born. Leahy was elected at 34, the youngest current Senator at swearing-in.

Until this year, that distinction was held by now-Vice President Joseph Biden, who was elected to the Senate from Delaware at age 29 and turned 30 before being sworn in in January 1973.

The late Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) was elected to the chamber at age 30. In fact, the governor of the Bay State appointed a placeholder after Sen. John F. Kennedy (D-Mass.) was elected president because Ted Kennedy was then too young to serve.

According to the Senate Historical Office, the average age of Senators at the beginning of the 111th Congress was 62.7 years. The average age of Senators in the 1st Congress was 47 and stayed in the 40s for all but three of the first 30 Congresses. More recently, the average age of Senators has increased steadily every Congress over the past decade, and the last three Congresses have been the chamber’s oldest.

This cycle’s crop of young Senate candidates is balanced out by some political veterans such as former Association of Trial Lawyers of America President Roxanne Conlin (D), 65, who is running in Iowa, and Castle, 70, who is running in Delaware. He’ll likely face state Attorney General Beau Biden (D), 40, who is spending time with his family after coming home from active duty in Iraq before making an official decision.

For younger candidates, the greatest challenge may be balancing life on the campaign trail with their young families.

“With a wife and four children at home, running for Senate can be especially tough,” explained Rubio. “When it’s 11:30 at night and there are two hours left on the drive home, sometimes it’s difficult.”

He added: “But I remind myself that I’m running to be a voice for my children and their generation.”

Grayson echoed those sentiments.

“The challenging part is that I’m away from them a lot,” Grayson said about his two young children. “But they’re able to do more in this campaign because they’re older. It’s fun having them on the trail in the parades.”

Grayson believes his age is an asset because he’s more familiar with the technology of the day than the average Senate candidate and better able to communicate with college students and young professionals. “I have the ability to relate to them because not too long ago, that was me,” Grayson said.

Neither Rubio nor Giannoulias nor Grayson is guaranteed election next year. All of them face competitive primaries and general elections, but their age isn’t likely to be their downfall should they come up short.

If the most recent presidential contests are any indication, the American electorate isn’t turned off by youth. The younger candidate has won four out of the last five races, and the last three presidents have come into office at fairly young ages: Bill Clinton was 46, George W. Bush was 54, and Barack Obama was 47 when first elected.


This story first appeared in Roll Call on November 30, 2009 and on CQPolitics.com on November 28, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Rothenberg’s Dangerous Dozen House Seats for 2010

By Stuart Rothenberg

Regular readers of this column know that I’ve been rating the most vulnerable House seats — open and incumbent — for years. It’s that time again, and since there aren’t yet enough competitive open seats to rate by themselves, this list includes the dozen most vulnerable seats in the House.

There are two caveats that go with the list. First, there are strong arguments for including at least half a dozen other districts on the list. So, not being on this list doesn’t mean a contest is not extremely competitive. Second, since the midterm elections are still almost a year off, this list is likely to change significantly before November.

Louisiana’s 2nd: Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao, the only Republican to vote for the House’s health care reform bill, had no business winning this majority-black district. He won only because of the timing of the 2008 elections and the unique problems of then-Rep. William Jefferson (D). This time, Democrats are likely to have an unindicted nominee, which should end Cao’s service in Congress at one term. Two state Representatives have already announced they are running. Expect a turnover.

Delaware’s At-Large: Rep. Mike Castle’s decision to run for Senate was great news for the National Republican Senatorial Committee but bad news for House Republicans. Former Lt. Gov. John Carney (D) was already running when Castle made his announcement, so Democrats have a serious candidate in the race. Since the state leans Democratic, Republicans will need to find a formidable nominee even to contest the seat seriously.

Louisiana’s 3rd: With Rep. Charlie Melancon (D) running for Senate, this open seat gives the GOP an excellent takeover opportunity. The district gave President Barack Obama only 37 percent of the vote in 2008, so the Republican nominee should benefit from normal midterm dynamics. Of course, with a late August primary, the race won’t shake out for months.

Virginia’s 5th: Freshman Rep. Tom Perriello (D) seems more interested in doing what he thinks is right than getting re-elected. That’s the only way to explain his votes supporting House Democrats’ cap-and-trade and health care reform bills. State Sen. Robert Hurt (R) is expected to challenge Perriello, and the Congressman is in deep, deep trouble. Obama’s 48 percent showing last year in this district understates Perriello’s challenge next year.

Maryland’s 1st: Unlike Perriello, Rep. Frank Kratovil (D) has voted as if he is trying to be re-elected. But he barely scraped by Republican Andy Harris in an open-seat contest last time, and the midterm electorate will make his re-election bid more difficult. He has a chance to win another term, but the odds aren’t in his favor. Obama drew only 40 percent of the vote in the 1st in 2008.

Kansas’ 3rd: When Rep. Dennis Moore announced his retirement last week, Democratic prospects tanked. While Obama won this district with 51 percent, it generally leans Republican, and the open seat during a midterm election looks like a juicy GOP target.

Ohio’s 1st: Rep. Steve Driehaus (D) knocked off then-Rep. Steve Chabot (R) last year, and now Chabot is trying to return the favor. Expected lower turnout among Democratic core groups, especially younger voters and blacks, places this district at great risk even though Obama won it with 55 percent.

Ohio’s 15th: Freshman Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy (D) has many of the same problems — and the same challenges — that confront Driehaus in the state’s 1st district. Unlike Driehaus, Kilroy faces a rematch against an opponent who has never won district-wide. But former state Sen. Steve Stivers (R) should be a formidable foe.

Florida’s 8th: Rep. Alan Grayson (D), another freshman, has gone out of his way to be partisan and inflammatory. That’s a good way to raise money and attract the fawning admiration of liberal activists, but it isn’t the best way to get re-elected in this Republican-leaning district that went for Obama with 52 percent. The GOP doesn’t yet have a “name” challenger, and the party may never get one. But given Grayson’s recent behavior, they may not need one to take back this district after a single term.

New Mexico’s 2nd: Rep. Harry Teague faces former Rep. Steve Pearce (R), who gave up his seat in 2008 to run for Senate. Teague has tried to vote his district, but he isn’t being helped by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Obama, who drew 49 percent of the district’s vote in 2008. Definitely a midterm problem for Democrats.

New Hampshire’s 2nd: The Granite State has swung strongly Democratic of late — probably too strongly considering the state’s fundamentals. This open seat, and the likely candidacy of former Rep. Charles Bass (R), should give Republicans at least an even money chance of winning back the district during the midterm elections. But attorney Ann McLane Kuster, the early favorite for the Democratic nomination and the daughter of a former liberal Republican state legislator, should be a formidable standard-bearer for her party.

New York’s 23rd: Special election winner Rep. Bill Owens won his seat with less than 50 percent of the vote, and if Republicans find a nominee who can appeal to both conservatives and moderates, Owens will find himself in trouble. His first vote was for the House health care reform bill.

This column first appeared in Roll Call on November 30, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Delaware Senate: Race Is Turned Upside Down by Castle’s Entry

By Stuart Rothenberg

Count me as at least moderately surprised that Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) announced on Tuesday that he will run for the remaining four years of now-Vice President Joseph Biden’s Senate term.

Castle, who served eight years as Delaware’s governor, from 1985 to 1993, has had plenty of opportunities to run for the Senate. Each time, he took a pass, even though Republican strategists drooled at the thought that he might be a candidate.

But when the Congressman, who turned 70 earlier this year, announced his Senate candidacy, he turned a layup for Democrats into an exceedingly competitive contest, assuming that state Attorney General Beau Biden (D) enters the race.

Castle “spent his entire summer moving up and down the state and talking to people,” said one GOP insider close to the Congressman. “He loves Delaware. He loves policy. He likes to campaign. It’s what he does. So in the end, I wasn’t shocked.”

Castle is the only Republican in the state who could give the GOP a chance of winning the Senate seat, currently occupied by appointed Sen. Ted Kaufman (D), who was widely seen as a place holder for Beau Biden, the son of the vice president.

Castle was first elected to the state House in 1966. Since then, he has served in the state Senate, as lieutenant governor (under Republican Gov. Pete du Pont), as governor and, since 1993, as Delaware’s lone Congressman. That means that he has run statewide 12 times during the past 30 years.

Castle won re-election (admittedly against nominal opposition) 61 percent to 38 percent last year and 57 percent to 39 percent in 2006 — two of the worst election cycles in recent memory for Republicans.

Still, there is no doubt that Delaware, once regarded as a swing state, has swung reliably into the Democratic column. The state has gone Democratic in the past five races for governor, president and Senate, and Democrats hold solid majorities in both chambers of the state Legislature. Castle and state Auditor R. Thomas Wagner Jr. are the only Republicans elected statewide.

A press release from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee issued minutes after Castle’s announcement shows a number of lines of attack that the party will direct at the Congressman.

After noting Castle’s “four decades in politics,” the release hit the Congressman for having “built-up a record of supporting ... George Bush’s economic policies, including tax cuts for the super-wealthy, that drove Delaware’s economy into a ditch — and now won’t support any of the Obama-Biden plans to fix it.”

Democrats hope to portray Castle as the past and Beau Biden, 40, as the future, something they did at least somewhat successfully in 2000, when then-Gov. Tom Carper (D) defeated longtime Sen. Bill Roth (R).

Efforts to paint Castle as an extension of George W. Bush, however, won’t be easy, since the Congressman is widely regarded as one of the few moderate Republicans left in the House.

As CQ’s Politics in America 2010 notes, Castle “was one of only three House Republicans to vote for all six of the new Democratic majority’s signature bills at the start of the 110th Congress,” and he has supported embryonic stem cell research, Amtrak reauthorization and legislation to combat global warming.

Beau Biden has far less political experience and demonstrated vote-getting ability than Castle.

Beau Biden worked as a federal prosecutor before joining a Wilmington law firm in 2004. Two years later, he ran for Delaware attorney general, winning narrowly, 53 percent to 47 percent. A member of the Army National Guard, he recently returned from a tour in Iraq and has not yet announced his political plans.

Since Delaware’s attorney general is up for election next year, Beau Biden would be risking his current office by jumping into a difficult Senate race against Castle.

Democratic insiders acknowledge that Castle will be a formidable nominee and they hope that Beau Biden will run for the seat, even though a loss to Castle would be embarrassing to the vice president.

“If Beau doesn’t run and Republicans win the seat, the vice president hasn’t saved himself from embarrassment,” one Democrat argued, noting that the national media certainly would take note of a Republican victory regardless of whether the Democratic nominee was named Biden.

“Ultimately, the pressure is on Joe to produce the strongest possible candidate to save the seat,” agreed one Republican observer with extensive knowledge of the state’s politics. “And that means Beau Biden.”

Republicans now have credible candidates in both President Barack Obama’s former Illinois Senate seat and Biden’s Senate seat, and the uneven track record for the incumbent party in similar cases has to be a cause for concern among party strategists (See Obama, Biden Seats in Danger?, July 29).

Both Castle and Biden are likely to be well-funded, as outside groups certainly would spend heavily on the race in the expensive Philadelphia and inexpensive Salisbury, Md., media markets.

It would be easy to rate the Delaware Senate race as a tossup, and that certainly would not be an unreasonable place to put it. But Castle begins ahead in the early polling conducted on a hypothetical Castle-Biden contest, and the overall cycle currently looks to favor the GOP nationally. Moreover, until Biden actually announces his candidacy, he could still decide against taking on Castle.

Even given the state’s Democratic bent, that’s enough reason to give Castle a slight edge. And that’s more than enough reason to give the DSCC indigestion and the vice president’s office a severe migraine.

This column first appeared in Roll Call on October 8, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Number of Appointed Senators Growing but Not Nearly a Record

By Nathan L. Gonzales

With four appointed Senators seated and at least one, if not two more, on the way, a growing number of unelected officials are going to have a significant voice in major legislation in the 111th Congress. But even though six appointed Senators is nowhere near the most to ever serve together, it would be the largest number in more than 40 years.

Earlier this year, Sens. Roland Burris (D-Ill.) and Ted Kaufman (D-Del.) were appointed to fill the vacant seats of President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden. And Sens. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) took office when Sens. Ken Salazar (D) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D) left for President Obama’s Cabinet.

On Friday, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R) selected George LeMieux as the appointee to replace Sen. Mel Martinez (R), who initially announced he would not seek re-election and recently announced he would be resigning. LeMieux is a former Crist chief of staff.

Now, after the death of Sen. Edward Kennedy (D), it appears that the Massachusetts Legislature is ready to change the law to give Gov. Deval Patrick (D) the authority to appoint a successor to serve until a special election can be held early next year, instead of having the seat remain vacant until the election.

Six appointed Senators would be the most since 1961-1962, when seven appointed Senators served in the 87th Congress. That class included Sen. Benjamin Smith (D-Mass.), who was appointed to fill the seat vacated by John F. Kennedy when he was elected president. Smith was just a placeholder, and Ted Kennedy won the seat in 1962.

Thirteen appointed Senators served in the 79th Congress, spanning 1945-1946, which is the largest number, according to the Senate Historical Office. Ten appointed Senators served in both the 65th (1917-1918) and 83rd (1953-1954) Congresses. In the first half of the 20th century, appointed Senators were much more common, with an average of six from 1913 through 1954.

Between the six appointed Senators in the 87th Congress and this 111th Congress, the average number of appointed Senators in a Congress has been two. Part of the reason is that the chamber is growing younger. There were nine deaths in the 83rd Congress and seven in the 87th.

In some cases, the large number of appointments is adding to a growing slate of Senate races in the 2010 cycle. And both parties’ campaign committees are facing an expansive and expensive set of races

The Obama, Salazar, and Martinez seats were already scheduled to be up for election for next year, but the seats formerly held by Biden and Clinton will have special elections next November to fill out the remainder of their terms, growing the total number of seats up in 2010 from 34 to 36.

Even if Gov. Patrick is allowed to appoint a replacement, there will still be a special election, likely in early 2010, to fill out the remainder of Kennedy’s term, which expires in 2012.

And there will also likely be a special election in Texas next year if, as is expected, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R) resigns in order to focus on her gubernatorial run. That vacancy would be filled by special election and not appointment.

Thirty-eight Senate seats would be the most in a cycle since 1962, when 39 Senate seats were in play.

A race in Texas adds another costly contest to go with expected races in expensive advertising states such as Ohio and Pennsylvania, as well as potentially competitive races in Florida, California and New York.

While Republicans may very well take a pass on the Massachusetts special because of the Democratic nature of the state and circumstances surrounding the vacancy, Texas will be a must-win for National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (Texas).

The NRSC had $4.43 million in the bank at the end of July and no debt. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee had $7.15 million on hand but is still carrying $3.33 million in debt from last cycle.

This story first appeared on RollCall.com on August 28, 2009 at 11:57am. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Sizing Up the 2010 Senate Contests in the Summer of 2009

By Stuart Rothenberg

Six months ago, the 2010 Senate battlefield looked relatively bare, with a few obvious skirmishes mostly in states with GOP incumbents. Three months later, the outlook had brightened dramatically for Democrats, largely the result of a number of GOP retirements and solid Democratic recruiting on those open seats.

But now, as the dog days of summer begin, the landscape has shifted again, this time improving significantly for Republicans.

Democrats no longer have the momentum they once possessed. Even more important, signs of some Democratic vulnerability have appeared, giving the National Republican Senatorial Committee opportunities to shoot at, rather than forcing it to play an entirely defensive game, as it has the past two cycles.

Fifteen months before the midterms, Democrats have major problems in two states — Illinois and Connecticut — while a third, Nevada, remains a potential headache. Republicans, on the other hand, have serious vulnerabilities in four states — Kentucky, Missouri, New Hampshire and Ohio — and potential problems in two others. But of late, even those Republican vulnerabilities look less daunting than they once did.

The announcement by Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan (D) that she will seek re-election rather than run for the Senate (or governor) immediately boosted Republican prospects in what remains a very difficult state for the GOP. But Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) should be a formidable candidate, while Democrats have a field that is less than intimidating.

And in Connecticut, veteran Sen. Chris Dodd (D) has aired multiple TV ads in an attempt to remind Constitution State voters what he has accomplished and what he stands for — an open acknowledgment that he has work to do to repair his image. Republicans now worry that Dodd, who just announced he will have surgery for prostate cancer, will retire rather than seek re-election, thereby damaging their prospects of winning the seat.

Democrats have two formidable candidates in Kentucky, while Republicans recently received a gift from Sen. Jim Bunning (R) when the endangered two-term incumbent announced that he would not seek a third term. That means Secretary of State Trey Grayson will likely be the GOP nominee, dramatically increasing the chances that Republicans can retain the seat.

Former New Hampshire Attorney General Kelly Ayotte (R) is moving toward a Senate bid in the Granite State’s open-seat contest, and while she is not yet a proven campaigner, insiders who know her speak effusively about her abilities and appeal. Democrats once viewed their likely nominee, Rep. Paul Hodes, as a solid favorite to win the seat, but the race now looks like a tossup, at best, for Democrats.

Meanwhile President Barack Obama’s sliding popularity is at least a troubling sign for Democrats in both Missouri and Ohio, where Republican Senate candidates may benefit from the public’s growing concerns about federal spending, possible tax hikes and bigger government.

Republicans still lack a top-tier challenger to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), and Sen. John Ensign’s (R-Nev.) recent personal troubles certainly don’t boost Republican prospects next year. Still, as the president’s point man in the Senate, Reid simply makes himself a juicy target in the midterm elections.

Democrats have potential opportunities in North Carolina and Louisiana, but they still have work to do in both. The party has not yet recruited a serious threat to Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), and while Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-La.) is widely rumored to be leaning toward a challenge to Sen. David Vitter (R), the state’s fundamentals and the midterm environment raise questions about the viability of the challenge.

Republicans have three longer-shot opportunities that shouldn’t yet be completely discounted — Arkansas, Colorado and Pennsylvania — though in each case the Democratic incumbent has a considerable advantage. Pennsylvania, in particular, is intriguing, since a truly nasty Democratic primary seems likely and the GOP nominee, former Rep. Pat Toomey, is not without appeal.

Eleven Republican and 12 Democratic Senate seats up next year now look safe. But if Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) decides to run for the Senate, as some GOP insiders now believe he will, another of those safe Democratic seats suddenly becomes a tossup.

Republicans would be wise not to celebrate just yet. Their diminished vulnerability is, in part, the result of Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter’s leaving the GOP, which cost them a seat that they probably were going to lose next year. And with Democrats controlling 60 of the Senate’s 100 seats going into next year’s elections, any additional Republican losses would add to the party’s existing woes.

The widely expected resignation of Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) in the fall, which will lead to a special election in the first half of 2010, also creates some uncertainty. While Republicans will have a strong nominee and the NRSC will spend what it takes to hold the seat, the special election is at least a major distraction for the national GOP.

If politics is about momentum and message, then the outlook for ’10 has changed considerably over the past couple of months. Democrats still have a wealth of opportunities and some advantages, but Republicans now have momentum and an improving issue mix. For the first time this cycle, I can imagine a scenario where Democrats do not gain Senate seats in 2010.

This column first appeared in Roll Call on August 3, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Obama, Biden Seats in Danger?

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Lost in the focus on President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden’s history-making move down Pennsylvania Avenue to the White House in January was the fact that Republicans have a historic opportunity to pick up the pair’s former Senate seats.

Over the past century, half of the dozen seats vacated by a new president or vice president have switched partisan control in the next election. Click here for the Senate chart.

In 2010, Republicans have open-seat opportunities in Illinois and Delaware and could win both seats vacated by a president and vice president in the same cycle for the first time in U.S. history.

The last time a newly elected president and vice president gave up their Senate seats the same year was in 1960. Democrats held President John F. Kennedy’s Massachusetts seat in the next election, but the party lost Vice President Lyndon Johnson’s Texas seat when appointed Sen. William Blakley (D) narrowly lost a 1961 special election to John Tower (R).

“Obviously people see these as elected [not appointed] offices,” said former Sen. Dan Coats (R-Ind.), who was appointed to fill the vacancy in 1989 when Sen. Dan Quayle was elected vice president. “That’s why the first election is so critical.”

Democratic chances of holding Obama’s seat improved when appointed Sen. Roland Burris (D-Ill.) decided not to run next year. Burris’ tenure has been overshadowed by fallout from his controversial appointment by then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D), who has since been indicted and impeached. But after Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan (D) took a pass on the Senate race and Rep. Mark Kirk (R) jumped in, Republican chances improved dramatically.

In Delaware, former Gov. Ruth Ann Minner (D) appointed longtime Biden aide Ted Kaufman (D) as a placeholder to fill the vice president’s Senate seat. State Attorney General Beau Biden (D) is expected to run for his father’s seat once he returns from active duty in Iraq. Meanwhile, political operatives on both sides of the aisle are waiting for Rep. Mike Castle (R) to make a decision on the race. With Castle, who has represented the entire state both as Congressman and governor, this race might be one of the best GOP takeover opportunities in the country. Without him, it’s not even competitive.

Over the past 100 years, three Senate seats vacated by a president-elect or vice president-elect have been filled with placeholders (not including Kaufman).

In 1948, Democrats held the seat vacated by Alben Barkley (D-Ky.), who was elected vice president under Harry Truman. When appointed Sen. Garrett Withers (D-Ky.) did not run in 1950, Earle Clements defeated Charles Dawson (R) to keep the seat in Democratic hands. Clements lost re-election six years later.

After Kennedy’s election in 1960, Benjamin Smith II (D-Mass.) was appointed to his Senate seat until the election in 1962, when the president’s brother, Edward Kennedy (D), was old enough run and serve.

More recently, Republicans took over the seat vacated by then-Sen. Al Gore (D-Tenn.) after he and Bill Clinton were elected to the White House in 1992. Appointed Sen. Harlan Mathews (D-Tenn.) didn’t seek a full term, and Fred Thompson (R) defeated Democratic Rep. Jim Cooper 60 percent to 39 percent in the Republican wave of 1994.

The political environment was a critical factor in many of these Senate races.
“Some of these things are beyond the candidate’s control,” former Sen. Rudy Boschwitz (R-Minn.) said in a recent interview. “Dynamics come up that are quite beyond you.”

Boschwitz was elected to the Senate in 1978 when he defeated Democrat Wendell Anderson, who had been appointed to fill the vacancy created when then-Sen. Walter Mondale (D-Minn.) was elected Jimmy Carter’s vice president. Republicans netted three seats in the Senate and 15 in the House that cycle, but the appointment became an issue as well.

Anderson had resigned as governor in order to be appointed to Mondale’s seat by the new governor. Self-appointments are rare and can be politically trickier to explain to voters. In Minnesota, Anderson’s maneuver became an issue, the midterm cycle turned against the Democrats and Boschwitz took issue with Anderson’s absenteeism, resulting in a 17-point victory. Boschwitz held the seat until he lost to Democrat Paul Wellstone by two points in 1990.

The stock market crash helped George McGill (D) defeat appointed-Sen. Henry Allen (R-Kansas) in 1930, who was appointed to the seat vacated when Charles Curtis (R-Kansas) was elected vice president under Herbert Hoover two years earlier. McGill was the last Democrat to represent Kansas in the Senate.

Historically, appointed Senators who follow a president or vice president into office and then run for a full term have had nearly equal odds of winning or losing in the next election.

Before Anderson in Minnesota, Mondale was appointed to the seat in 1965 when Hubert Humphrey was elected vice president under Johnson. Mondale was elected in his own right in 1966 with 54 percent and served until he was elected vice president.

“The election is a way of ratifying or denying that appointment,” Coats explained. “Ninety percent of Indiana didn’t know who I was, so I thought I better get in front of them.” After his appointment to Quayle’s seat, the former Congressman defeated Democrat Baron Hill with 54 percent in 1990 and was elected to a full term in 1992 with 57 percent.

After Sen. Richard Nixon (R-Calif.) was elected vice president under Dwight Eisenhower in 1952, appointed Sen. Thomas Kuchel was elected to the remainder of Nixon’s term in 1954 and served until 1968.

Along with Allen in Kansas, the Blakley loss in Texas in the 1960s and Anderson’s loss in the 1980s, Democrats lost Harry Truman’s Missouri Senate seat, the only presidential Senate seat to immediately switch party hands in the last century.

Frank Briggs (D) was appointed in Missouri after Truman was elected vice president under Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1944. But when Roosevelt died a few months later, Truman ascended to the presidency. Then in 1946, Briggs lost to James Kem (R), who was known as a staunch Truman opponent. Kem served only one term before he lost re-election to Stuart Symington (D).

Surely, the White House doesn’t want to fuel Republican confidence or give the party a rallying cry by letting Obama’s or Biden’s Senate seat fall into GOP hands.

Republicans lost Vice President Gerald Ford’s Michigan House seat in a February 1974 special election at a time when Nixon’s approval was sagging. The race also foreshadowed larger GOP losses that would come that fall.

Democrat Richard Vander Veen’s special election victory was remarkable since the Grand Rapids-area district hadn’t elected a Democrat since 1912 — and hasn’t elected one again since 1974.

Ford’s seat is one of two House seats that have been vacated by an incoming vice president.

Speaker John Nance Garner (D-Texas) left Congress when he was elected vice president under FDR in 1932. Milton West kept Garner’s 15th district seat in Democratic hands for seven terms, but Garner may have been a bit jealous since he famously described his new job as “not worth a bucket of warm piss.”

This story first appeared in Roll Call on July 29, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission. Some updates made to original.

Beyond Congressional Battleground, Close Gubernatorial Races Lurk

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Even with the tightening of the presidential race and renewed GOP excitement, Democrats are still widely expected to gain seats in the House and the Senate in November. But Republicans could actually see a net gain of seats in this year’s small crop of gubernatorial races.

Only 11 states are electing a governor this year, and really only four of those races are up for grabs. The competitive races are divided evenly between the two parties, with the most likely outcome ranging from Democrats gaining a governorship to Republicans gaining one.

North Carolina is proving to be a battleground up and down the ballot. Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) are battling for the Tar Heel State’s electoral votes, and Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R) is in the fight of her political life for a second term.

Meanwhile, Lt. Gov. Beverly Perdue (D) and Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory (R) are locked in a tight race to replace outgoing Gov. Mike Easley (D). Poll results over the past three weeks range from each candidate being up by a couple points to a dead heat. Historically, Republicans aren’t usually in this position.

Perdue won the Democratic nomination by a convincing margin over a well-financed statewide officeholder. McCrory got into the race late, but he overtook the underwhelming GOP field with high name identification and a large geographic base.

North Carolina has had only two Republican governors in the past 70 years, but if McCrory can put together the money to compete in a state with expensive TV markets, he could make this a race until the end.

In Missouri, Republicans caught a break when unpopular Gov. Matt Blunt (R) decided not to run for a second term. Rep. Kenny Hulshof (R) subsequently won a bitter primary, and Republicans are still healing their wounds.

State Attorney General Jay Nixon (D) has yet to put the race away, despite a divided GOP and the fact that he’s been running for more than two and a half years. An Aug. 13-17 Public Policy Polling (D) survey and a July 29-31 SurveyUSA poll showed Nixon with an identical advantage over Hulshof, though he was leading with less than 50 percent. Nixon still has the edge, but it looks to be a close race in a state McCain should win.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) made some unpopular decisions during his first term as governor, and he once looked like a prime Democratic target. His Democratic opponent, former Rep. Jill Long Thompson, narrowly won her primary (50.6 percent to 49.4 percent) against a wealthy opponent, but she’s having difficulty keeping up with Daniels in the polls and in fundraising.

An Aug. 29-30 Howey-Gauge poll had the governor ahead 53 percent to 35 percent. Almost two weeks earlier, SurveyUSA showed Daniels up 52 percent to 38 percent. And a July poll for the governor’s campaign had him up by 18 points. He’s not out of the woods, but Daniels is a good campaigner and it will be tough for Thompson to set the tone without more resources.

Meanwhile in Washington, Gov. Christine Gregoire (D) can’t shake her 2004 opponent, former state Sen. Dino Rossi (R). The two battled to a near draw four years ago, with Gregoire prevailing by 133 votes. Almost four years later, the race remains virtually unchanged.

Gregoire and Rossi were within 3 points of each other in all but one of six public polls since July. And because of Washington’s new “top two” primary, the two faced the voters on Aug. 19. Of course, Gregoire edged out Rossi, 48 percent to 46 percent.

Rossi outspent the governor in August, but Gregoire should enjoy a financial advantage during the stretch run. Obama is expected to carry the state easily, but Rossi is certainly still in the game, and that’s all Republicans could hope for at this point.

Finally, in Delaware, state Treasurer Jack Markell proved that “change” is still a potent message. His opponent, Lt. Gov. John Carney, had the support of outgoing Gov. Ruth Ann Minner (D), organized labor and most of the establishment. But Markell prevailed in Tuesday’s Democratic primary and is the heavy favorite in November.


This story first appeared on Roll Call.com on September 12, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Some Bellwether States Losing Their Status

By Nathan L. Gonzales

The presidential campaign of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has vowed to compete in all 50 states this fall. While he should perform better than Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) in some traditionally Republican states, he’s not going to achieve a Reagan-esque 1984 sweep.

If he defeats Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Obama’s path to victory will be different from the most recent Democratic Presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, who came from the South. And an Obama victory will likely jeopardize the bellwether status of some Southern states. Even so, some of the 11 traditional bellwethers remain.

Missouri. Arguably, the champion of all bellwethers, the Show Me State has chosen the presidential winner in each election since 1904, with the exception of 1956. This year, Missouri remains a battleground, and the two vice presidential nominees will face off in St. Louis for the official debate. An Aug. 13-17 Public Policy Polling survey showed McCain ahead 50 percent to 40 percent.

Ohio. One of the most hotly contested states in recent years, Ohio remains a significant battleground. The Buckeye State voted for Richard Nixon in 1960 and has gotten it right ever since. The McCain campaign would like to challenge in Michigan, but it can’t afford to lose Ohio. An Aug. 31-Sept. 2 CNN/Time poll had Obama leading 47 percent to 45 percent, and an Aug. 17-24 Quinnipiac University poll gave the Democrat a similarly narrow edge of 44 percent to 43 percent.

Florida. After the 2000 fiasco, Florida will always get a significant amount of attention. The state has only two knocks against it since 1960, voting for George H.W. Bush in 1992 and Nixon in 1960. An Aug. 25-26 Mason-Dixon poll showed Obama with a 45 percent to 44 percent lead, while Republican firm Strategic Vision (Aug. 22-24) and Quinnipiac University (Aug. 17-24) give McCain 7- and 4-point leads, respectively.

Nevada. Nevada has picked the presidential winner every time since 1960, except for 1976. According to an Aug. 24-26 CNN/Time poll, Obama led 49 percent to 44 percent in a state that is experiencing a tremendous amount of population growth.

New Mexico. Since 1960, voters in the Land of Enchantment have voted for the presidential winner, except 1976 and 2000. President Bush prevailed in 2004 in one of the closest races in the country. New Mexico should be a battleground once again, although an Aug. 24-26 CNN/Time poll showed Obama with a significant 13-point lead.

North Carolina. Tar Heel State voters went for George H.W. Bush in 1992 and Bob Dole in 1996, but have a great presidential track record beyond that. Recent polls have shown McCain with a slight advantage — he had a 45 percent to 42 percent edge in an Aug. 20-23 Public Policy Polling survey — but he can’t take this one for granted. If Obama is on the verge of winning North Carolina, he’s probably already won Virginia and well on his way to the Oval Office.

Arkansas. Since 1960, the Natural State has voted for every presidential winner, except for 1968, when it was one of five states to go for third-party candidate George Wallace. Today, Arkansas is one of the last to receive attention from the Obama campaign, after losing the state 70 percent to 26 percent in the primary to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), the former first lady of Arkansas.

Kentucky. In 1960, the Bluegrass State went for Nixon, who lost to John F. Kennedy, but the state has supported the presidential winner ever since. Kentucky is another Southern state where Obama performed poorly in the primary (30 percent).

Tennessee. Obama did slightly better in the Volunteer State primary (41 percent). But the Democratic nominee is not expected to carry the state in the general election, even though Tennessee has picked the last 11 presidential winners.

Louisiana. This state has only gotten it wrong twice (1964 and 1968) at the presidential level since 1960. McCain is favored to carry the state this fall.

Delaware. The First State has a great track record for choosing the presidential winner since 1960. But Delaware is trending Democratic, voting for the unsuccessful Democratic nominee in the last two presidential elections, and the presence of native son Sen. Joseph Biden (D) on the ticket makes the state neither a battleground nor a bellwether this year.

This item first appeared on RollCall.com on September 4, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.