TX17: New GOP Poll Has Bad News for Chet Edwards

By Stuart Rothenberg

A new Republican poll obtained by the Rothenberg Political Report shows ten-term Democratic Congressman Chet Edwards (Texas 17) trailing challenger Bill Flores (R) by a dozen points. But Edwards, who isn’t releasing his own survey, remains confident that he can turn the contest from a referendum on President Barack Obama and national atmospherics into a choice between the two candidates.

The new survey of 400 likely voters, conducted May 2-3 by OnMessage Inc, a GOP firm, shows Edwards remains popular in the Republican-leaning district, with a name I.D. of 53% favorable/38% unfavorable.

But when matched against challenger Bill Flores, who recently won a run-off to become the Republican nominee, Flores holds a 53%-41% lead over Edwards. Flores’s name identification is just 37% favorable/10% unfavorable.

GOP observers argue that the data demonstrate that the race isn’t now about either Edwards or Flores. Instead, it’s about the larger political environment. President Obama’s job rating in the district is 33% approve/66% disapprove, according to the survey.

“There are a whole bunch of Republican voters who like Congressman Edwards. They say that they voted for him in the past, but they aren’t going to do it this time. This election isn’t about Chet Edwards,” says GOP pollster Wes Anderson of OnMessage, Inc.

An August 2009 OnMessage, Inc. survey found incumbent Edwards leading Flores in a hypothetical general election ballot by eight points, 44% to 36%.

The Congressman’s problem is the fundamentally Republican nature of his district. According to OnMessage, Inc. surveys, the district’s Congressional generic vote has moved from 45% Republican/28% Democratic in August to 51% Republican/27% Democratic now.

Edwards points out that he has always run – and won – in a Republican district, and the challenges he faces this year are not all that different than those he faced in the past, including in 2004, when he won a very competitive race by almost four percentage points.

“Republicans have repeatedly released poll numbers showing I shouldn’t be in Congress, and the National Republican Congressional Committee has consistently predicted I would be defeated,” Edwards noted correctly when asked about Republican optimism that they can defeat him in the fall.

During an interview, the Congressman made it clear that he would seek to make the Congressional contest a choice for voters between himself and Flores, rather than a referendum on the national Democratic Party.

“I have my toughest time against a generic Republican who isn’t well-known,” said Edwards, adding, “By the end of this race, Bill Flores will not be a generic Republican.”

Republican observers say that they can already see Edwards moving more aggressively to define Flores, and the Congressman does not dispute that.

“I intend to demonstrate by the end of this race that my values reflect this district better than his do,” said Edwards, who referred to Flores as “someone selected by Washington insiders, a former CEO of a Houston oil company and someone who never cast a vote in the district.”

GOP pollster Anderson agrees that Edwards has in the past succeeded in “getting Republicans who think that he isn’t a Washington Democrat,” but he notes that the OnMessage Inc. poll shows many of those voters are now gravitating to Flores.

Will Edwards be able to “localize” the race, discredit Flores and win reelection? Or will national atmospherics – including a midterm election in a district that gave John Kerry 30% and Barack Obama 32% -- cause voters to ignore the combatants and instead go to the polls to send a message about their anger with the country’s direction?

That question is likely to be asked in dozens of districts this year, and the answers will determine whether Democrats will retain control of the House in November.

While acknowledging that he has a tough fight on his hands, Edwards thinks that his focus as a candidate, his campaign’s strong opposition research and his deep roots in the district will help him win another term.

“He’s spitting into a hurricane,” responds Wes Anderson of Edwards’s efforts to localize the contest and demonize Flores.

Don’t Hold Your Breath for an Anti-Incumbent Election

By Stuart Rothenberg

Voters are angry, especially at Washington, D.C., and with politicians. They are unhappy with both parties. All that is generally true.

But voters’ dissatisfaction with those in charge doesn’t mean that November is likely to be an “anti-incumbent election.” In fact, it almost certainly won’t. We never, or almost never, have true anti-incumbent elections, as I have noted before.

If Republican incumbents have problems, it will be in their primaries.

In Texas, Gov. Rick Perry looked to have enough momentum to pull away from his GOP primary opponent, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. But that hasn’t happened. The Senator hasn’t been a scintillating candidate, but she is still very much in the game against the governor, according to knowledgeable insiders.

Perry won re-election four years ago with only 39 percent of the vote in a four-way race. While conservatives have rallied behind him, there are many in the Republican Party who don’t like his smugness and his shoot-from-the-hip style.

Arizona’s GOP governor, Jan Brewer, who became the state’s top officeholder when her predecessor joined the Obama administration, faces a roomful of primary challengers in her bid for a full term, and her prospects are uncertain. She inherited a terrible budget situation and was forced to select from a number of unappealing choices.

Indiana Rep. Dan Burton, South Carolina Rep. Bob Inglis and Utah Sen. Bob Bennett also face challenges that have developed to a stage that make them worth watching.

Nonincumbent Republicans who have the mantle of the establishment are also vulnerable given the current environment.

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, who is running for the state’s GOP Senate nomination, is the most obvious example. He faces a very difficult fight against former state Speaker Marco Rubio (R), who is running as the insurgent despite his previous position.

The same dynamic is taking place in New Hampshire, where conservative Ovide Lamontagne and two businessmen could give former state Attorney General Kelly Ayotte a migraine in the Republican Senate primary.

And in Kentucky, Rand Paul, son of Texas GOP Rep. Ron Paul (a former presidential candidate), is running as an outsider for the Republican Senate nomination against Secretary of State Trey Grayson, the favorite of virtually the entire state and the national Republican Party. GOP insiders think Grayson can win the primary, but they are far from certain about the outcome.

But if those incumbents (and establishment-backed nonincumbents) get past their primaries, they will then benefit from the public mood, which currently looks likely to punish Democrats at the ballot box.

A rash of recent polling, much of it paid for by liberal Web sites Daily Kos and Firedoglake, show Democratic incumbents in horrible shape — about where Republicans were in 2006 and 2008.

Surveys over the past couple of weeks have shown former Rep. Mike Sodrel (R) ahead of Rep. Baron Hill (D-Ind.) by 8 points, Andy Harris (R) leading Rep. Frank Kratovil (D-Md.) by 13 points, former Rep. Tim Walberg (R) leading Rep. Mark Schauer (D-Mich.) by 10 points and former Rep. Steve Chabot (R) leading Rep. Steve Driehaus (D-Ohio) by a whopping 17 points.

In addition, Rep. Tim Bishop (D-N.Y.) leads unknown challenger Randy Altschuler (R) by only 2 points, while controversial Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) is drawing 55 percent in an early ballot test against state Sen. Tarryl Clark (D).

Even if only most of these results are close to being accurate, they suggest that other Democratic House incumbents are seeing significant erosion in their numbers from what those same numbers were even a year ago.

Over in the Senate, Democratic numbers are equally terrible.

Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln and Nevada Sen. Harry Reid are sitting with unfavorable ratings larger than their favorable ratings. Former Rep. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), who would be crushed if this year’s political environment resembled that of the 2006 or 2008 cycle, is running even or ahead of his potential Democratic opponents, and Democratic prospects over the past year have deteriorated in Ohio and Missouri.

Polling in North Carolina is particularly instructive. Recent surveys continue to show roughly equal numbers of respondents approving and disapproving of the job Sen. Richard Burr (R) is doing. But even with those mediocre numbers, Burr is holding clear (if unintimidating) leads over his potential general election opponents.

The bottom line on all of this seems pretty clear: Voters are not enamored of incumbents of either party, and GOP incumbents or “establishment” candidates facing strong “outsider” primary opponents could be in for more rough sledding than they would normally need to expect.

But when the general election rolls around, unless there is a significant change in the national mood, voter dissatisfaction will be aimed overwhelmingly at the candidates of one party. And that is why Democratic insiders are privately raising their own estimates of party losses.

This column first appeared in Roll Call and on CQPolitics.com on January 25, 2010. 2010 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

The 2010 Elections Are Closer Than You May Think

By Stuart Rothenberg

For political junkies everywhere, and particularly for those who like reading electoral tea leaves, the midterm elections start in less than a month — Jan. 19, to be exact, when the special election in Massachusetts to fill the late Sen. Edward Kennedy’s (D) seat will take place.

While even the thought that state Sen. Scott Brown (R) might upset state Attorney General Martha Coakley (D) is probably too much for anyone to consider, true political junkies will be keeping their eyes on Coakley’s margin.

Does Coakley pile up a “normal” win, or does Brown do better than expected? Given Democratic problems last month in Virginia and New Jersey, a disappointing showing by Coakley, even if she were to win the election, would certainly set off another round of Democratic grumbling and media tongue-wagging.

Over the past decade, Democratic nominees for president have been carrying Massachusetts with about 60 percent of the vote, while no Republican has come close to the 40 percent mark since President George H.W. Bush drew more than 45 percent of the total vote against then-Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis in 1988.

Last year, for example, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) drew 36 percent against then-Sen. Barack Obama (D), about the same showing that President George W. Bush had against Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) in 2004.

Democratic Senate candidates have also been rolling up big numbers for years. The last GOP Senate nominee to draw at least 40 percent of the vote in the state was former Gov. William Weld, who drew 45 percent against Kerry in 1996.

If Brown can crack the 40 percent mark against Coakley, it would be noteworthy.

In February, Illinois voters will head to the polls to nominate a slew of candidates.

Democratic strategists have been arguing that Republican primaries — and particularly the ideological split within the GOP — will severely hurt Republican prospects in the midterm contests. But a solid win in his party’s Senate primary by Rep. Mark Kirk (R) could undermine that Democratic message.

Attorney Patrick Hughes, a first-time candidate, is generally regarded as Kirk’s main challenger from the right, since he has been endorsed by Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly, the Joliet Tax Day Tea Party and a long list of “movement conservatives.”

Through Sept. 30, however, Hughes had raised less than $129,000 from individuals and political action committees (plus put in $250,000 of his own), far less than Kirk’s $2.9 million raised at the same point.

If Kirk wins convincingly, he can undercut the Democratic argument. But if Hughes gets uncomfortably close to the Republican Congressman, his showing will both provide further talking points to Democrats and embolden conservative insurgents who care more about making a statement than winning an election.

The Democratic Senate race is also worth watching. State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias is the clear favorite for the Democratic nomination, but he faces two primary opponents, former Chicago Inspector General David Hoffman and former Chicago Urban League President Cheryle Robinson Jackson. How the three place — and how well the state treasurer does in the balloting — will affect how the general election is viewed.

Of course, observers are certain to compare the relative showings of Kirk and Giannoulias in their respective primaries.

Primaries in two Illinois Congressional districts are also worth watching.

In the open-seat contest to succeed Kirk, Republican voters will choose from two wealthy conservative businessmen, Dick Green and Bob Dold, and state Rep. Beth Coulson, who is much more in the Kirk mold. Democrats will select either state Rep. Julie Hamos or Dan Seals, who made credible but unsuccessful races against Kirk in 2006 and 2008.

In the state’s 14th district, Republicans must choose a nominee to take on Rep. Bill Foster (D). Ethan Hastert, son of the former Speaker Dennis Hastert (R), faces state Sen. Randy Hultgren for the GOP nomination.

Foster narrowly defeated businessman/investment guru Jim Oberweis in a 2008 special to replace Dennis Hastert, and later that same year he polished off Oberweis again, though more comfortably. Now, with the national mood having shifted and Republicans likely to be more united behind their 2010 nominee than they were behind Oberweis, Foster is likely to face a more difficult challenge.

Finally, early March brings the Texas primaries, and all eyes are sure to be on the Republican battle for governor. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R) is challenging Gov. Rick Perry (R), and while she began her bid with strong personal ratings and upbeat poll numbers, her prospects now look more uncertain.

Democrats hope that the bitter GOP primary will give their likely nominee, outgoing Houston Mayor Bill White, a shot to win a high-profile statewide office for the first time since 1990, when Democrat Ann Richards beat Republican Clayton Williams to become the state’s last Democratic governor. No Democrat has won a U.S. Senate, gubernatorial or presidential election in the Lone Star State since then.

This column first appeared in Roll Call on December 21, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved.

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.

Another Election Cycle, Another Couple of Polls to Consider

By Stuart Rothenberg

For some reason, campaign managers and press secretaries never tire of distributing press releases and campaign polls that they apparently assume will be taken at face value and regurgitated by political observers.

We’re six months into the 2010 election cycle, and I have already received a pair of press releases about polls that set off alarms, though for very different reasons.

One of the press releases that I received came from the campaign of Texas Senate hopeful Florence Shapiro, a Republican state Senator.

Shapiro is running for the seat held by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R), who may resign her Senate seat in order to focus on her quest for the GOP gubernatorial nomination next year.

The mid-April press release crows that “Shapiro has highest name ID among announced GOP candidates,” which is a little like saying that Shapiro has the highest favorability ratings when her immediate family was surveyed.

The poll was conducted from March 30 to April 1 by Global Strategy Group, a Democratic firm not in any way connected with Shapiro’s Senate bid. The sample included 603 voters likely to participate in a special election.

The Shapiro campaign’s release cited the Democratic survey and proclaimed that the state Senator’s name identification is more than twice the ID of the “next best known Republican currently running or exploring a campaign for U.S. Senate” and that she “enjoys a +8% net favorability rating,” which is “higher than any other Republican candidate who has taken public steps toward a Senate run.”

The only problem is that none of the other three Republicans who “have taken steps toward a Senate run” — former Texas Secretary of State Roger Williams and state Railroad Commissioners Elizabeth Ames Jones and Michael Williams — is regarded as among the frontrunners in the race, once the field eventually forms.

Most Texas observers expect either Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst or Attorney General Greg Abbott to enter the Senate race if and when Hutchison’s seat becomes vacant.

The Global Strategy Group poll did include Dewhurst in its questionnaire, and the results showed more than twice as many voters familiar with Dewhurst’s name than with Shapiro’s. Dewhurst’s net favorable rating was three times Shapiro’s. Abbott apparently was not tested in the survey.

Shapiro’s press release conveniently left out the Dewhurst numbers, since they weren’t flattering to the state Senator.

The Shapiro press release’s focus on the candidate’s “net favorability rating” advantage over the other announced candidates is also misleading, since it is a net +8 while the largely unknown Jones’ is a statistically identical +5, even though her total name ID is just 8 percent.

The Shapiro release, and the claims contained in it, makes the entire campaign look amateurish.

The other poll and press release comes from the campaign of Congressional hopeful John Garamendi (D), who is running in the expected special election in California’s 10th district, assuming Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D) is confirmed to a State Department post.

As far as I can tell, there is nothing wrong with the survey of 400 likely special election voters conducted in early May by JMM Research for Garamendi, or with the polling memo written by Jim Moore. It’s the breathless press release that accompanied the polling memo and the implication that Garamendi has a huge advantage in the contest.

The reason that Garamendi, the state’s lieutenant governor, leads the race now is that he has been on the ballot frequently for the past 30 years. In fact, Garamendi was on the ballot in California in every even-numbered year between 1974 and 1994, with the exception of 1978 and 1992 (when his wife ran unsuccessfully for a seat in Congress).

He has run for state Assembly, state Senate, state insurance commissioner, state controller, lieutenant governor and governor. Shortly before he released his Congressional poll, he was running in a different race — for governor.

Of course, name ID is important, and Garamendi’s name identification advantage certainly is worth noting. But name ID at the end of a campaign is much more important than before the race has even begun.

And Garamendi’s 11-point advantage over the second-place finisher in the hypothetical ballot test isn’t all that substantial given his name identification advantage.

The sitting lieutenant governor has a name ID of 80 percent but is drawing only 24 percent on the hypothetical Congressional ballot. That means that a large chunk of voters who say they have heard of Garamendi aren’t automatically drawn to him.

The Garamendi folks might also take a moment to consider what happened to Jim Tedisco, a well-known New York Republican state legislator who had been in politics for years. He held an early special election lead over an unknown Democratic opponent — who got known quickly once he went on TV and who overtook the longtime legislator when all the votes were counted.

Garamendi certainly is a very serious contender for this seat. It’s fair to call him the frontrunner. He’s been in politics far longer than his opponents, and that has given him name ID and connections. But the early poll is of limited predictive value, and the lieutenant governor’s campaign staffers might want to note that political longevity isn’t what it was once cracked up to be. Just ask President Barack Obama.

This column first appeared in Roll Call on May 14, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

DCCC on Offensive in GOP Open Seats

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Despite having a majority of seats in Congress, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is on the offensive this cycle, with plans to pour money into dozens of districts represented by Republicans.

On Thursday, the DCCC dropped two more direct-mail pieces in a pair of GOP-held open seats.

In New Jersey’s 7th district, the latest mail piece has a graphic of a confidential file folder labeled “Leonard Lance’s 17-year record in Trenton,” with the flip side pointing out the Republican state Senator’s “Record of Campaign Cash, Pay Raises, and Special Favors for Big Oil and Insurance Companies.”

This is the DCCC’s second mailbox attack in the last five days against Lance, the GOP nominee in the race to replace retiring Rep. Mike Ferguson (R-N.J.). An Aug. 9 direct -ail hit sounded the same themes, highlighting “Leonard Lance’s Trenton Values.” The front of the piece read, “For State Senator Leonard Lance? A 40% Pay Raise. For You? Higher Property Taxes.”

In total, the independent expenditure arm of the DCCC spent $26,221, paid to American Mail Direct Inc., on the two pieces. Neither piece mentioned the Democratic nominee, state Assemblywoman Linda Stender, or even mentioned that Lance is a Republican.

The DCCC also spent $41,117 in direct mail over the last five days in Illinois’s 11th district, where state Senate Majority Leader Debbie Halvorson (D) is facing off against concrete contractor Marty Ozinga (R) for retiring Rep. Jerry Weller’s (R) seat.

“Which candidate for Congress is going to bat for us?” asks the direct-mail piece that was dropped Thursday. “Debbie Halvorson always steps up to the plate for middle-class families.” In contrast, “Marty Ozinga plays ball in the ‘Bush League.’”

Last week’s DCCC-funded mail piece featured a large picture of an ambulance on the front and asked, “Which candidate for Congress thinks a trip to the ER is a solution to our health care crisis? ... Marty Ozinga thinks a trip to the ER means you have health care,” while “Debbie Halvorson is leading the fight for affordable health care in Illinois.” Both pieces were produced by MSHC Partners.

The DCCC also spent $2,142 on phone banking (paid to the Clinton Group) and extended its television ad buy by $39,288 in the 11th district. The committee also spent $43,845 extending its media buy in Texas' 22nd, where it is defending Rep. Nick Lampson (D).

This item first appeared on RollCall.com on August 14, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Where, Oh Where Are the Top House GOP Opportunities?

By Stuart Rothenberg

Not a single Democratic House seat switched to the GOP in 2006 while Republicans were losing 30 Congressional seats.

Could Democrats pitch another shut-out this year? It’s possible, though unlikely, even given the poor Republican poll numbers, the desire for change and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s financial advantage over the National Republican Congressional Committee.

After all, Democrats won a handful of reliably Republican districts in 2006 that they will struggle to retain, and no party has been shut out of taking over seats from the opposition in consecutive elections, at least since World War II.

So where are the best GOP chances?

Tier 1 Opportunities

Texas’ 22nd District, Nick Lampson (D). If only one Democratic seat switches to the Republicans, it’s likely to be Lampson’s. Lampson, of course, was defeated for re-election in 2004 (in a different district) only to come back and win Republican Tom DeLay’s open seat in 2006.

Although DeLay dropped his bid for re-election, the Republican nominee was unable to get her name on the ballot and was forced to run as a write-in candidate. Even then, Shelley Sekula Gibbs drew 42 percent of the vote.

Sekula Gibbs almost won her party’s nomination again this time, but she was defeated handily in the runoff by Pete Olson, a former aide to Sen. John Cornyn (R), who was generally regarded as the stronger general election candidate.

Lampson’s district gave President Bush 64 percent in 2004, a reflection of its Republican bent. While Lampson has built a much less liberal record than he did during his first service in the House, he is still a Democrat in a very Republican district. And that makes him the most vulnerable House Democrat in 2008.

Louisiana’s 6th District, Don Cazayoux (D). Cazayoux, a relatively conservative Democrat, is a reasonably good fit for his northeast Louisiana district. Despite that assessment, the reality is that he owes his seat in Congress to Woody Jenkins, the unelectable GOP nominee in the special election held earlier this year.

Cazayoux has a reasonable chance to win a full term in November, but if the Republicans nominate state Sen. Bill Cassidy, who has announced his candidacy, the freshman Democrat will have his hands full. The district definitely leans Republican, and a strong GOP nominee automatically becomes formidable. Republicans caught a rare break when Jenkins decided not to run again.

Tier 2 Opportunities

Kansas’ 2nd District, Nancy Boyda (D). Boyda upset then-Rep. Jim Ryun (R) last time, and the Republican nature of the district (Bush won it by 20 points in 2004) guarantees a serious contest. Ryun faces state Treasurer Lynn Jenkins for the Republican nomination.

Alabama’s 5th District, open seat. Rep. Bud Cramer’s (D) retirement opens up a conservative Southern district that will see stiff competition and should be a GOP target. But the likely Democratic nominee, state Sen. Parker Griffith, looks strong, while the frontrunner for the Republican nomination, Wayne Parker, lost to Cramer twice.

California’s 11th District, Jerry McNerney (D). Freshman McNerney rode the Democratic wave and help from the environmental community to beat Republican Rep. Richard Pombo two years ago, but he isn’t an ideal fit for his Republican- leaning district. The GOP nominee, former state Assemblyman Dean Andal, looks to be a serious threat.

Pennsylvania’s 10th District, Christopher Carney (D). Carney beat a scandal-plagued Republican in a solidly Republican district, and the question is how long he can hold onto the seat. His GOP challenger, businessman Chris Hackett, hasn’t united Republicans following a nasty primary. Still, Carney is in the kind of district that he can never take for granted.

Florida’s 16th District, Tim Mahoney (D). Much like others on the list, Mahoney would not have won last time except for a GOP scandal, but he has been a strong fundraiser and won’t be an easy target for Republicans, who won’t pick a nominee until late August. Still, the GOP is likely to have a credible nominee in this Republican-leaning district.

Other Districts to Watch

Pennsylvania’s 11th district, Paul Kanjorski (D). Democrats are nervous about veteran Kanjorski, who has received his share of negative publicity. The early campaign of Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta (R) has been underwhelming, but that may not matter by the time November arrives. Polling suggests that this may well be a top-tier GOP takeover opportunity by November.

New York’s 20th district, Kirsten Gillibrand (D). Freshman Gillibrand is a fundraising phenom, and she will be very hard to beat in 2008. But former state GOP Chairman Sandy Treadwell has plenty of personal resources and is running in a reliably Republican district that a flawed Republican lost two years ago. The district’s fundamentals alone make this a Republican opportunity.

Wisconsin’s 8th district, Steve Kagen (D). Republican John Gard narrowly lost this Republican open seat last time, but the presidential year should bring out more voters and freshman Kagen hasn’t had the smoothest term.

A handful of other Democratic seats could also produce GOP upsets, including two in Arizona (Rep. Harry Mitchell’s and Rep. Gabrielle Gifford’s), Rep. Carol Shea-Porter’s in New Hampshire and Rep. Jim Marshall’s in Georgia.

No matter what happens, Democratic losses will be few and the party can expect a substantial net gain in November.

This column first appeared in Roll Call on July 14, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

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.

Even in Bad Environment, NRCC Finds Willing Candidates

By Stuart Rothenberg

The national political environment looks pretty crummy for Republicans these days, and I’m not at all sure that it will improve between now and the time voters go to the polls next November. But that hasn’t stopped a handful of potentially strong GOP challengers from launching their bids against Democratic incumbents.

I recently met five GOP House candidates who are running for Congress and attended a National Republican Congressional Committee candidate school, and I was impressed.

Two of the hopefuls, Sandy Treadwell (New York’s 20th) and Tom Rooney (Florida’s 16th), face primary opposition before they can claim to be their party’s general election nominees, while the three others — David Cappiello (Connecticut’s 5th), Quico Canseco (Texas’ 23rd) and Nick Jordan (Kansas’ 3rd) — currently are without major primary opposition.

Treadwell is a former New York secretary of state and state GOP chairman, and he has the look and thoughtful style of a Senator. He is running for the right to take on freshman Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand (D) in a very Republican, upstate district that fell because the sitting Republican Congressman, then-Rep. John Sweeney, embarrassed himself one too many times.

Rooney, an attorney, Army veteran and former assistant attorney general in Florida Gov. Charlie Crist’s (R) administration, is low-key and extremely earnest. He hopes to be his party’s nominee against freshman Rep. Tim Mahoney, who won by riding the Democratic wave — and the embarrassing resignation of the district’s incumbent Republican Congressman, then-Rep. Mark Foley — to victory.

Cappiello, a state Senator from Danbury, is feisty and a critic of the Iraq War. A moderate on social issues, he has proved to be a hard worker and appears to be extremely comfortable in the role of candidate. He hopes to oust Democratic Rep. Christopher Murphy, a young former state Senator who defeated veteran Rep. Nancy Johnson (R) by a surprisingly comfortable 12 points last year.

Canseco is a wealthy businessman who hopes to win back the district lost by former GOP Rep. Henry Bonilla in a December runoff. An attorney and banker, he has been active in state GOP politics and he oozes optimism — maybe a bit too much optimism at this point in the cycle — about his chances of knocking off Rep. Ciro Rodriguez (D), who now is serving his second tour of duty in the House.

State Sen. Nick Jordan may have the toughest road of the five Republican challengers, since he faces five-term Democratic Rep. Dennis Moore, who has benefited from deep divisions between social conservatives and moderates in the local Republican Party. Jordan, a businessman who was appointed to his seat in 1995 but elected the next year, somehow must bridge that chasm.

One reason these Republicans are optimistic is that they are all running in either competitive or Republican-leaning districts.

In 2004, President Bush drew 57 percent of the vote in Texas’ 23rd, 55 percent in both Florida’s 16th and Kansas’ 3rd and 53 percent in New York’s 20th. The only one of the five districts that he lost was Connecticut’s 5th, which Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) carried by just five-tenths of a percentage point.

On paper, of the five hopefuls, the ones with the best shot at winning a seat in Congress initially appear to be Treadwell and Rooney, which probably is why they are the two who have primary opposition right now.

In both cases, GOP incumbents self- destructed in the previous cycle, giving long-shot Democrats the rare opportunity to both ride a partisan wave and contrast themselves with personally damaged Republican officeholders (or, in the case of Foley in Florida, a former officeholder).

Republican strategists point out that an uptick in turnout because of the presidential year will bring out new voters who didn’t participate in the midterm election and therefore never could have voted for the new Democrats in these districts.

But incumbency has proved to be a sizable advantage over the years, and Gillibrand, Murphy and Mahoney have two years to make a connection with voters, as Moore has done in a Republican-leaning district. Indeed, Moore is not alone. Even with the 2006 Democratic wave, eight Republicans continue to represent districts won by Kerry, clear proof that incumbency still has some benefits.

Finally, it’s important to remember that five credible, personable challengers better be only the tip of the iceberg for the NRCC if the committee hopes to have a good 2008. The Republicans need to field dozens of top-tier hopefuls if they are going to make significant House gains next year, and they must hope the candidates will be able to make their races local contests, not referendums on Iraq and the Bush presidency.

Anyway, remember the names Treadwell, Rooney, Cappiello, Canseco and Jordan. They all have potential, and they could well be involved in some of the more competitive races this cycle.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on August 2, 2007. Copyright 2007 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Watts Video Shows He Has a Ways to Go in Texas

By Stuart Rothenberg

Having watched thousands of campaigns over the past couple of decades, I have come to understand that the candidate you meet in July of the off-year is not always the same person you see again 15 months later. Candidates, and their campaigns, often improve with experience, and they start to look better if and when their opponents start to fade.

Texas Senate hopeful Mikal Watts is getting plenty of attention these days because he has committed to putting as much as $10 million behind his bid for the Democratic nomination (against state Rep. Rick Noriega, a favorite of some in the party’s net roots) and his challenge to incumbent Sen. John Cornyn (R).

A number of weeks ago, I noted my skepticism about whether Cornyn is beatable next year, and I’m not yet ready to change that tune. Yes, the Senator’s job rating in one June survey wasn’t intimidating, but most Republicans, and more than a few Democrats, have seen their numbers slide as a result of the public’s dissatisfaction with the state of the nation. We don’t yet know what the situation will be like next October.

But my doubts about Democratic prospects in the race don’t mean I am ignoring the contest. Being a handicapper requires that I re-evaluate and reassess. And if, at some point, I’m convinced Cornyn is in serious trouble, I’ll be more than happy to note it.

I haven’t yet met Watts, so I have little to judge him by except for his campaign bank account — currently standing at more than $4 million — and his Web site.

His money obviously is impressive. But money rarely is enough. If it were the only thing that mattered, Michael Huffington (R) would have been elected to the Senate from California in 1994, Al Checchi (D) would have been elected governor of that state in 1998 (or at least won the Democratic nomination), Blair Hull (D) would now be a senator from Illinois and Tony Sanchez (D) might have come close in his Texas gubernatorial bid in 2002.

So Watts’ wallet gets my attention, but where do I look after that? His video is one of the few things on his Web site, other than a bunch of photographs of early campaign events, a bio and a donation form. So I watched it.

The first half of the four-minute, 15 second video is straightforward enough. Watts introduces himself and talks about his education, his parents, his own family and his interest in public service. He’s a trial lawyer, so it’s not surprising that he’s poised, articulate and polished.

The second half of the video probably is the silliest, most transparent attempt to deliver a message I have ever seen.

Watts wants us to know that he is a “fighter” and a “leader,” and he apparently thinks that viewers of his video are a little dense. You’d either have to be in a coma or not understand English to miss Watts’ message. The Democratic hopeful uses a form of the word “fight” 11 times in the last two minutes and 15 seconds of the video. And he uses a form of the word “leader” another eight times during that same period.

In one section of the video lasting 37 seconds, Watts uses the word “fighter” six times — an average of once every 6.17 seconds:

“I have been a fighter my entire career, fighting for the rights of average, working families here in Texas. And I have proven that I will stay in that fight and give it my all until we win. Texans are looking for a Senator who is a leader, who will fight for them. Someone who will fight for families here in Texas rather than special interests there in Washington. I am certain that as we travel around the state and see more and more good Texans, that my message of real leadership and real change in Washington is a message that is going to hit home here in Texas. I am confident that Texans will join me in this fight.”

There are plenty of attributes that voters want in their candidates. They certainly want leaders and, at least now, forces for change. I certainly wouldn’t criticize Watts or any candidate for mentioning them. It’s the way he talks about them that is so aggravating. It sounds as if he thinks he’s the first guy to run on those buzzwords.

And there are other things in the video, such as his statement, “I have traveled around all portions of Texas, and I have talked to hundreds of Texans — hundreds and hundreds of them actually.”

The 2006 U.S. Census Bureau estimate of the population of Texas was 23,507,783. Watts says that he has spoken to “hundreds and hundreds” of Texans. He might have waited until he had talked to at least “thousands and thousands” of Texans before deciding that he had an idea what people in the state want.

Then there is his comment that Texans have “come to expect leaders” like Lyndon Johnson, not “partisans like John Cornyn.” Well, Cornyn may very well be a partisan, but Johnson wasn’t one? Is he kidding?

I’m not certain whether Watts’ rhetoric is classic political boilerplate or an effort to neutralize the positioning of Noriega, a state legislator and veteran of the war in Afghanistan. If and when I meet Watts, I may have a completely different view of him and his prospects. But for now, I’d suggest that he re-do his video, making it more professional and more thoughtful.

This column first appeared in Roll Call on July 30, 2007. Copyright 2007 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

New Print Edition: Missouri 6 & Texas 22

The new June 22, 2007 print edition of the Rothenberg Political Report is on its way to subscribers. The print edition comes out every two weeks and the content is not available online. Subscribers get in-depth analysis of the most competitive races in the country, as well as quarterly House and Senate ratings, and coverage of the gubernatorial races nationwide. To subscribe, simply click on the Google checkout button on the website or send a check.

Here's a brief sample of what's in this edition...

Missouri 6: Royal Ruckus
By Nathan L. Gonzales

Democrats insist that voters in the suburbs all across the country are moving in their direction, and they’ll have a chance to test that hypothesis against Cong. Sam Graves (R) in Missouri’s 6th Congressional District.

Even though it’s early in the cycle, Democratic strategists are excited about their recruit and likely nominee, former Kansas City mayor Kay Barnes (D). Barnes just finished her second term as mayor, and the city’s suburbs make up a significant portion of the congressional district.

On its own, the district still leans Republican, but it’s too early to tell whether President Bush and the war in Iraq will continue to drag down GOP incumbents who would normally win rather easily. For the rest of the five-page story, you must subscribe.

Texas 22: Top of the List

The 22nd District of Texas is arguably the best Republican takeover opportunity in the country, but don’t count out Cong. Nick Lampson (D) just yet. In the wake of former Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R) and his trail of troubles, Republicans are still sorting through a field of potential candidates for the right challenger to try and pull this seat back into their column.

A number of the usual names like Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace and Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt have taken a pass, but that doesn’t mean the GOP is struggling to find a candidate who can win next November.

The filing deadline isn’t until January, but now that the state’s legislative session is over, there should be some movement in the candidate field. Shelley Sekula Gibbs, who served the remainder of DeLay’s term in Congress last year, is running again, but she certainly won’t have the field to herself.

Meanwhile, Lampson is serving in the majority for the first time and working to solidify himself to avoid a repeat of 2004, when he lost reelection after DeLay’s mid-decade redistricting plan. Staying in office would be the ultimate source of revenge.

Instead of the wind at his back, Lampson will face a strong test with the Republican presidential nominee likely to do very well in the district. For the rest of the story, you must subscribe.

Cornyn and Dole: Two (Vulnerable) Peas in a Pod?

By Stuart Rothenberg

Democrats are not so quietly passing the word: Republican Sens. John Cornyn (Texas) and Elizabeth Dole (N.C.) are vulnerable in 2008. Should we believe them, or are the two GOP incumbents so safe that they aren’t really worth watching?

Cornyn was elected to the Senate a little more than four years ago, obliterating Democrat Ron Kirk by a dozen points, 55 percent to 43 percent. The Republican had been elected twice to the Texas Supreme Court before he was elected the first Republican state attorney general since Reconstruction.

Dole defeated Clinton White House Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles (D) by 9 points, 54 percent to 45 percent in 2002. Dole’s previous bid for elective office had been as a candidate in the 2000 Republican presidential race, which she exited months before the Iowa caucuses.

On the basis of their previous races, neither Dole nor Cornyn automatically seem to be prime targets. In other words, we aren’t talking former Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) here, a veteran who has flirted with defeat in the past and automatically could face a stiff test against a top-tier challenger.

Both Kirk and Bowles were treated as top-tier candidates who could appeal to ticket-splitters and raise the necessary money to compete. Both were running in open seats. The scenario for a Kirk win was enhanced, according to Democratic strategists at the time, by the fact that the party’s “dream ticket” for Texas’ top three races included a mega-wealthy Hispanic businessman for governor (Tony Sanchez), a politically moderate and popular Anglo former state comptroller for lieutenant governor (John Sharp), and a black mayor with strong ties to the Dallas business community for Senate (Kirk).

But this time, the Democratic case in both states is based on polling that undoubtedly was intended to recruit challengers against the two Republicans.

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has noted that a recent Survey USA poll showed Cornyn’s job approval rating sitting at 43 percent, while 40 percent disapproved of his performance. Moreover, a Hamilton Beattie & Staff survey conducted in mid-April for the DSCC found Cornyn leading a generic Democratic opponent by only 9 points, 47 percent to 38 percent.

In the North Carolina race, a February Garin-Hart-Yang Research Group survey for the DSCC showed Dole’s job rating at 49 percent excellent or good and 46 percent fair or poor. Only 35 percent of those surveyed said she should be re-elected, while 23 percent said she should be replaced.

So who is vulnerable?

Under the right circumstances, Dole might be at risk, but it’s impossible to take the Cornyn stuff seriously at this point.

Although the two states are similar in that neither one has been carried by a Democratic presidential nominee since Jimmy Carter in 1976, there is a world of difference, politically, between Texas and North Carolina.

While Matt Angle, a savvy political operative and former executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee under then-Rep. Martin Frost (Texas), has tried to resuscitate the Texas Democratic Party and lob grenades at the state GOP, Texas Democrats still have a long way to go before they can hope to knock off a sitting Republican Senator.

Saying the party’s bench for a high-profile statewide race is thin is an understatement. In 2006, the Texas Democratic gubernatorial nominee was Chris Bell, a former one-term Congressman who lost a bid for renomination and whose underfunded gubernatorial campaign drew 30 percent of the vote in a four-way race.

The last Democrat to win a statewide federal race in Texas was Lloyd Bentsen, who won his last Senate re-election in 1988. The state’s last Democratic governor was Ann Richards, who was elected in 1990 and was defeated four years later when she sought a second term.

In contrast, Democrats have won the past four gubernatorial elections in North Carolina, and the party last won a Senate seat in 1998. While Republicans hold all of the most high-profile statewide offices in Texas, Democrats hold the top offices in North Carolina. And while Republicans hold both chambers of the Texas state Legislature, Democrats have solid majorities in both chambers of the North Carolina Legislature.

Not surprisingly, there are no top-tier Democratic challengers mentioned as possible opponents for Cornyn. The names being floated include Rep. Nick Lampson, who was elected in 2006 when Republican Tom DeLay resigned his seat late in the election cycle and Republicans were unable to put another name on the ballot. Lampson is mentioned primarily because few insiders believe that he will be able to hold the very Republican seat in next year’s Congressional elections.

Houston state Rep. Rick Noriega and San Antonio trial lawyer Mikal Watts also are mentioned as possible candidates, which gives you a general idea about the Democrats’ chances of knocking off Cornyn.

On the other hand, Rep. Brad Miller and North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper reportedly are considering a challenge to Dole, and Tar Heel State Democrats are in a far stronger position to recruit a candidate against the Republican Senator.

Democrats can huff and puff all they want about giving Cornyn a run for his money, but they don’t have a realistic chance yet of knocking him off. Dole isn’t much more vulnerable until Democrats get a formidable candidate in the race, but if and when they do, the state’s dynamics, at the very least, offer them a scenario for success.

North Carolina, therefore, bears watching. Texas, barring a macaca-like blunder, doesn’t.

This column first appeared in Roll Call on May 10, 2007. Copyright 2007 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.