Showing posts with label South Dakota. Show all posts
Showing posts with label South Dakota. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Female Members Growing Their Families and Parties

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Last spring, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) became the first serving Member of Congress to give birth in more than a decade. Now, Congress is going through a mini baby boom.

South Dakota Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D), and her husband, former Texas Rep. Max Sandlin (D), announced this week that they are expecting their first child in late December.

Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) just gave birth to her second child, a son, on May 15. McMorris Rodgers gave birth to her son in April 2007, and she was the fifth woman to have a baby while serving in Congress.

Each of the most recent moms has handled their political careers differently. McMorris Rodgers didn’t announce her pregnancy until after her competitive 2006 re-election.

After knocking off Rep. John Sweeney (R) last cycle, Gillibrand was initially regarded as one of the more vulnerable Democratic freshmen, but her fundraising and polling numbers have her in solid shape for re-election.

Herseth Sandlin is not in danger of losing re-election, but she is mentioned as a potential gubernatorial candidate in 2010.

Back in 1996, then-Rep. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) chose not to seek re-election, and she gave birth to twin boys in June of the election year. But she made a political comeback two years later, winning an open Senate seat.

New York Rep. Susan Molinari (R) gave birth to a daughter that year as well. And later that summer, the Congresswoman went on to deliver the keynote address at the Republican National Convention, mentioning her daughter in her conclusion. Molinari left Congress a year later, however, to pursue a career in broadcasting. She is now a Washington, D.C., lobbyist.

In 1995, freshman Rep. Enid Greene Waldholtz (R-Utah) gave birth to a daughter. But her political career was short-lived — her then-husband, Joe Waldholtz, who had managed her winning campaign, became embroiled in personal and campaign finance scandals, and Waldholtz — now known as Enid Greene — had to abandon her 1996 re-election campaign. She ran unsuccessfully for lieutenant governor of Utah in 2004, and also briefly served as chairwoman of the Utah GOP.

Former California Rep. Yvonne Brathwaite Burke (D) was the first woman to give birth while serving in Congress, when she had a daughter in 1973. She served in the House for five more years, losing a bid for California attorney general in 1978. But Brathwaite Burke remains in politics today, and has served on the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors since 1992. Now 75, she plans to retire when her term ends later this year.

This item first appeared on RollCall.com on July 24, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Tuesday, May 06, 2008

Open Season in 2010

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Democrats aren’t losing much sleep over their open seats this cycle. But 2010 may be a whole different story.

This year, Democrats control only seven of the 31 open seats in the House. They simply aren’t leaving Washington, D.C., the way the Republicans are, whether it’s due to excitement about the new majorities or peer pressure.

But it also could be due to a lack of opportunity. Along with no open Senate seats on the Democratic side, a mere 11 governorships are up this cycle (including only three open seats), and Democratic Members of Congress aren’t running for any of them.

Contrast that with 2010, when 36 governorships will be on the ballot, including at least 19 open seats. If Democratic House Members make the move, the Democratic Governors Association stands to benefit while the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee can only wait and prepare to defend.

“We are fortunate to have such a talented pool of possible 2010 candidates, and we are confident that Democrats’ interests are aligned,” said DGA press secretary Brian Namey. “The first step in building a long-term majority in Congress is electing Democratic governors.”

In South Dakota, Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D) is expected to run for the state’s open governorship. Her family has a long political history in the state that includes her grandfather, former Gov. Ralph Herseth, and grandmother, former Secretary of State Lorna Herseth. The Congresswoman’s father, Lars Herseth, was a longtime state legislator who lost his own gubernatorial bid in 1986. Herseth Sandlin could run in part to redress his loss.

Herseth Sandlin already represents the entire state in her at-large district, and would be a formidable gubernatorial candidate. But her seat will be a tough hold for the DCCC. She had the family history in the state and one statewide bid under her belt before winning under unusual circumstances.

She lost her first House race in 2002 to former Gov. Bill Janklow (R), earning 46 percent. But Janklow resigned the seat in January 2004 after killing a motorcyclist in a car crash and being convicted of second-degree manslaughter. Herseth Sandlin won the subsequent June special election with 51 percent over former state Sen. Larry Diedrich (R). She won a full term, 53 percent to 46 percent in a rematch five months later, and cruised to re-election in the previous cycle.

But South Dakota still is a Republican state, and Democrats will struggle to find someone to follow Herseth Sandlin in the House. President Bush carried the state 60 percent to 38 percent in 2004.

In Tennessee, Rep. Lincoln Davis (D) is mentioned as a potential gubernatorial candidate. If he chooses to run, he may face primary opposition from former Rep. Harold Ford Jr., the 2006 Senate nominee, or former Nashville Mayor Bill Purcell.

Bush did well in Davis’ 4th district, carrying 22 of 24 counties and winning it 58 percent to 41 percent. Davis initially won the seat in 2002, when GOP Rep. Van Hilleary decided to run for governor. The Blue Dog Democrat was elected with 52 percent that year and re-elected with 55 percent two years later in a district that stretches across central Tennessee from the Kentucky border south to Alabama and Georgia.

Republicans are trying to make some noise in the district this cycle with businessman Monty Lankford (R), but their best shot would be in an open seat. Democrats likely would need another socially conservative candidate to keep the open seat.

Rep. Artur Davis (D) is sitting on $881,000 in campaign cash without a serious 2008 race and is a potential gubernatorial candidate in Alabama next cycle. But his 7th district seat would not be at risk for a takeover. The district’s population is 62 percent black, and Bush received only 35 percent there in 2004.

Other Democratic districts could become competitive, particularly in a midterm election of a Democratic president, if Members vacate them.

Minnesota Rep. Tim Walz (D) is focused on re-election this cycle to his 1st district seat, but he’s also mentioned as a future gubernatorial candidate. Walz was swept in with the Democratic wave of 2006, defeating then-Rep. Gil Gutknecht (R) with 53 percent, in a district that Bush carried by 4 points. Former Sen. Mark Dayton (D) is also mentioned as a potential gubernatorial candidate in 2010.

Rep. Mike Michaud (D) won Maine’s 2nd district in 2002 when John Baldacci (D) vacated the seat to run for governor. Even though Michaud has had two easy re-elections, the district could be competitive once again. Sen. Olympia Snowe (R) used to represent the district, and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) won it by only 6 points in the 2004 White House election. Baldacci will be term-limited as governor next cycle and Michaud is mentioned as a potential candidate.

Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii) is also mentioned as a potential 2010 statewide candidate. The 69-year-old Congressman might be eyeing the governorship because it doesn’t look as if either of Hawaii’s Senate seats is opening up anytime soon. Abercrombie had close races in both 1994 (54 percent) and 1996 (50 percent), and Kerry won the district with only 53 percent in 2004. Under the right circumstances, the seat could become competitive.

Regardless of who runs for governor, the DGA is already preparing and planning for next cycle with its Project 2010. The committee is on pace to break its 2006 fundraising record in 2008, even though this year is considered an “off-cycle” for gubernatorial races. And with so few competitive races this year, the DGA will finish the cycle with money in the bank.

Of course, House Democrats aren’t the only ones eyeing governorships.

“If you’re a member of the minority, sitting in Congress today, you might take a gamble on becoming a chief executive,” said GOP consultant Phil Musser, the former executive director of the Republican Governors Association.

Oregon Rep. Greg Walden (R) is a potential gubernatorial candidate, and is already being attacked by the Oregon Democratic Party. But the National Republican Congressional Committee is not likely to have much trouble holding his massive 2nd district seat. Bush won the district with 61 percent in 2004 and the rural area is conservative, despite significant growth in the Bend area.

In New York, Rep. Peter King (R) is publicly exploring a gubernatorial bid. He’s represented the Long Island-based 3rd district since 1992, and Republicans would likely have some difficulty holding the seat in the current political environment. Bush won the district by only 5 points in 2004, and Empire State Republicans are becoming an endangered species in the Congressional delegation. King is publicly looking, but he may not actually make the jump next cycle.

Other Republican Members who are potential gubernatorial candidates include Candice Miller (Mich.), Zach Wamp (Tenn.) and Darrell Issa (Calif.), who was pushed aside during the 2003 recall of Gov. Gray Davis (D) but still contributed financially to the effort to oust Davis.

At this early stage, there look to be more Republican Senators seriously eyeing governorships. Sen. Sam Brownback (R) is a strong bet to run for governor of Kansas next cycle, simultaneously abiding by his term-limits pledge. He’ll be looking to replace term- limited Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D) who will, in turn, receive heavy pressure to run for Brownback’s Senate seat, creating a rare Democratic opportunity and National Republican Senatorial Committee headache in Kansas.

Georgia Sen. Johnny Isakson (R) is widely expected to run for governor in 2010, replacing Gov. Sonny Perdue (R). Isakson ran unsuccessfully for governor in 1990 and would need to get past state Insurance Commissioner John Oxendine (R), who has already announced for the race. At one point, Perdue was mentioned as a Senate candidate for Isakson’s seat, but that scenario may be in doubt.

Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison could be headed for a Republican primary for governor as well, where she could face off against incumbent Gov. Rick Perry and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst.

This story first appeared in Roll Call on May 1, 2008. Copyright 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Thursday, August 09, 2007

And the Senate Race Is On in South Dakota

By Stuart Rothenberg

I have had an almost-finished column sitting on my desk since the end of June. It’s not that I couldn’t finish it. I just decided to put it on hold, indefinitely.

But the recent coverage of National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Ensign’s (Nev.) statement that it’s time for Republicans to go after South Dakota Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson’s seat has caused me to defrost that piece.

Ensign’s comments, and the counterattack from Johnson’s spokeswoman, Julianne Fisher, actually were preceded by an editorial in the Rapid City Journal. The newspaper’s editorial board called for “more transparency” about Johnson’s condition and urged the Senator “to communicate directly with the media and the people of South Dakota.”

Last week, Roll Call reported that Ensign and the GOP were “no longer putting off mounting an aggressive campaign to unseat Sen. Tim Johnson.”

That announcement brought an unnecessary overreaction from Fisher, who called Ensign’s comments “a classless attack by a desperate chairman.”

“We don’t fear John Ensign and the national Republican hit men,” said Fisher, who apparently was taught that there is no need to use a match when a flamethrower is available.

“Classless.” “Desperate.” “Hit men.” My, my. I’m not sure which statement applies best: The lady doth protest too much, methinks, or, people who live in glass houses ... .

Anyway, let’s all take a deep breath and start over.

I, too, have been concerned about the fact that we haven’t heard directly from Sen. Johnson himself.

We all know the Senator’s world changed on Dec. 13, 2006, when an aneurysm in his brain because of a congenital condition put his life, to say nothing of his political future, at risk. The next day, Johnson underwent brain surgery at The George Washington University Hospital in the nation’s capital.

Slowly, the two-term Democrat is trying to change his life back to something resembling what it was. But the process has been difficult.

The Senator’s family and staff never sugar-coated Johnson’s prospects, but they also allowed precious little information out about his condition. Starting in March, we started to see photographs of the Senator, and, increasingly, his office has released statements from him.

The most misleading information to come out of the whole story probably came from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who, the day after surgery was performed on Johnson, said he had seen his colleague and “he looked great.”

“Mr. Reid declined to say whether he believed Mr. Johnson looked well enough to be able to return to the Senate, saying that anything he said would only raise more questions among reporters. ‘To me,’ [Reid] said, ‘he looked very good,’” according to a New York Times piece.

We now know the idea that Johnson might have looked well enough to return to the Senate some 24 hours after surgery was ridiculous. And while the South Dakota Democrat may have looked “great” to Reid, it’s hard to believe that most people would have described Johnson that way, since he apparently needed a full-time ventilator, had significant damage to the right side of his body and was in critical condition for weeks after the surgery.

Everything is relative, of course, and I’m not suggesting that Reid intended to be misleading. But it is clear that Johnson was not in great shape then. In fact, some close to Johnson were less than happy at Reid’s overly optimistic statements, believing they didn’t accurately reflect Johnson’s state at that time.

In mid-March, Johnson’s office released four photographs of the Senator. In a Rapid City Journal piece that included one of the photographs, staff writer Bill Harlan noted that “Johnson has not spoken to reporters” and that the Senator was recovering “at an undisclosed health-care facility” because “the family wanted Johnson to have privacy.”

Two of the photographs showed Johnson with a newspaper (one with his wife). Two others showed him outside with his wife and daughter.

Given the lack of contact between the Senator and reporters, the photographs easily could have been interpreted as an effort by his family to show that things were returning to normal for him. But, in fact, things were still a long way from normal for Johnson.

The heavily staged shots made it easy to disguise the fact that his right side continued to be very weak and his speaking skills were a far cry from what they had been before the aneurysm. Johnson, of course, was under no obligation to call attention to his physical limitations at that time.

On May 16, Johnson’s office posted a photograph of him standing with a physical therapist that presented a fuller picture of his condition.

Democrats close to the Senator told me in June that they wanted to wait until Johnson’s speech is virtually back to normal before re-introducing him to South Dakota voters and the national media. Their fear is that, while his cognitive abilities are back, a verbal stumble or two by the Senator would create a buzz about his abilities and create a media frenzy.

When I first heard the explanation, I was skeptical. Just put him in front of a camera with a fair reporter or even talking to camera so people can see and hear him, I thought. Virtually everyone will be sympathetic, knowing he has been fighting his way back from a serious medical problem. But the more I thought about it, the more I started to wonder if my initial reaction was wrong.

More and more journalists seem to be after controversy, and the prospect of dozens of know-nothing talking heads with titles such as “Republican strategist” and “Democratic strategist” pontificating on television about a subject they know little about got me to wonder if keeping Johnson out of the public eye until he was more fully recovered wasn’t the right thing.

But after the Rapid City Journal editorial, the Ensign comment and the Fisher reaction, I, too, think Johnson needs to come forward, at least by the time the Senate returns after Labor Day.

More than anything else, Fisher’s comments changed my mind. She came out of the gate like an attack dog in responding to a comment by Ensign that was both reasonable and probably unwise.

Her response reflected the current campaign mentality of attack, attack, attack. Combine that with the fact that the Johnson campaign has raised more than $1.2 million since his medical emergency, and it is hard not to conclude that the Senator or at least his friends want to be able to do political things while at the same time keeping Republicans from acting the same way.

Johnson ought not get a free pass this election anymore than any other Member of Congress who has had great personal misfortune should. The question now, as it should be next year, is whether Tim Johnson can do the job and whether he is representing his constituents effectively and as they wish.

Johnson can do part of his job from his home in Virginia but not all of it. I’m told he can get around and that his speaking is improving. He needs to return to public life if he is physically able to do so. And if he isn’t, his office needs to explain, and show, why he isn’t.

We all know the Senator has been through a terrible time. I don’t think anyone is expecting to see the same man we saw last year. But if he is raising cash, and if his staff is attacking the NRSC chairman because he said Republicans are going to try to defeat Johnson next year, the game is on.

Personally, I think Ensign was mistaken to bring up the South Dakota seat now. Why not wait until September, when the Senate has been back for a few days, to note that the campaign season has begun everywhere, even in South Dakota?

I strongly doubt Republicans can knock off Johnson next year if he comes back looking and sounding capable enough to do his job. But until we see Johnson, who knows?


This column first appeared in Roll Call on August 6, 2007. Copyright 2007 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.