MyDD :: Continuing to Push for 434

Continuing to Push for 434

by Chris Bowers, Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 07:34:51 PM EST

Already in 2006, Democrats have filed to challenged Republicans for more seats (385-395) than they did in 1998 (380). We are looking very good to break the recent record of 419, held by Republicans in 1994. Today, North Carolina become another success in our recruiting goals, as all thirteen districts now have a Democratic challenger.

Even with all of our successes, a lot of work remains to be done. The next six weeks are perhaps the most crucial we have ever faced in our push for 434. Here are the remaining 40 districts where there is definitely no Democratic challenger, and the 10 districts where there may or may not be a Democratic challenger. As you can see, most of them need to file in the next six weeks:

Texas. Filing deadline has passed. TX-11, the district that shall live in infamy.
Mississippi, 3/1. MS-01, MS-03. Gotta come through tomorrow.
Pennsylvania, 3/7. Unsure: PA-05, PA-09
California, 3/10. CA-21. Unsure: CA-22, CA-42
Iowa, 3/17. IA-04.
Utah, 3/17. UT-01, UT-03
Missouri, 3/28. MO-07, MO-08
South Carolina, 3/30. SC-02, SC-04
Arkansas, 4/4. AR-03.
Tennessee, 4/6. TN-02
Alabama, 4/7. AL-01, AL-02, AL-03, AL-04, AL-06.
New Jersey, 4/10. NJ-04
Virginia, 4/14. VA-04, VA-06, VA-07.
Georgia 4/28 . GA-09, GA-10, GA-11. Unsure: GA-03
Florida, 5/12. FL-12, FL-14. Unsure: FL-07
Michigan, 5/16. MI-03, MI-06.
Oklahoma, 6/7. OK-01, OK-03.
Arizona, 6/14. AZ-06.
Wisconsin, 7/11. WI-06
New York, 7/13. NY-03, NY-13. Unsure: NY-26
Minnesota, 7/18. Unsure: MN-03
Delaware, 7/28. Unsure: DE-AL
Washington, 7/28. WA-05.
Louisiana, 8/11. LA-04, LA-05, LA-06, LA-07.

We are getting close now. With 20-24 districts to fill before tax day, our hopes of a sweeping realignment rest significantly in fielding challengers in these districts. I am very worried about Mississippi tomorrow. I am also worried about CA-21, and the two Utah seats. I feel pretty good about our chances to fill that seat in Iowa.

Realignment requires many factors, and challenging every seat is one of them. Big congressional ballot leads, low approval ratings for Bush, the generic advantage, voters knowing that Republicans control congress, fundraising, and big state level opportunities are all among the factors, but so is leaving no seat uncontested. 2006 will not be our 1994 unless every single one of these and other factors are in place. We have to make this happen.

Tags: Fifty state strategy, House 2006, realignment (all tags)

Permalink :: 41 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Continuing to Push for 434 (none / 0)

I'm from FL-12. I really, really hope someone runs against Putnam. He's now in the #5 spot in Rep leadership. He's young and can do a lot of damage for a long time. We need someone! It frustrates me because I'm in college and not home able to go to meetings and convince someone.

Sigh.

I hope someone steps up!

"No government has the right to tell its citizens whom to love. The only queer people are those who don't love anybody." - Rita Mae Brown

by auboy2006 on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 07:46:37 PM EST

MO-07 (none / 0)

Roy Blunt's district. He raises a lot of money for other Repubs, so it is crucial that someone tie him to his own ground. Besides, this is good place to work on ridding Washington of the culture of corruption.

by Arthurkc on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 07:51:53 PM EST

Re: MO-07 (none / 0)

It really doesn't make a difference in the 7th district. It is a genuinely conservative place. The people there just are conservatives. They are essentially intractable.

I was born and raised in Springfield. It's not just Roy Blunt's district, but also the home of John Ashcroft.

Check the election results from the past 10 elections of so and see if a Republican has won by less than 60%.

by Reece on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 10:34:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MO-07 (none / 0)

Mel Hancock had a close re-election there once.

Granted, that was in 1990.

Filing began today in Missouri.

MO-7 candidates so far

Two Republicans, neither one of them is named Roy Blunt.

Roy loses out on the top line of the ballot too.

Mitchell E. Potts (R-Springfield) has written in to Buzzflash about his anti-war protests.

Clendon L. Kinder (R-Joplin) is pretty much anonymous in the eyes of the internets.

Congratulations to Mitchell Potts for being listed first on the ballot for the 2006 Republican primary in the 7th district.

by RBH on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 10:45:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MO-07 (none / 0)

Roy will be on the ballot, and the outcome won't be close, regardless of who's at the top. I wish Mitchell Potts good luck, but I doubt he'll be selected in the primary.

In 2004, Blunt took 71% of the vote in the general election, and that was considered a good showing for the Dem.

by Reece on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 12:16:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MO-07 (none / 0)

I read an interesting article about Potts in the Springfield News-Leader on Friday...

And by the way, I also found her website at pottsforcongress.com

Here is the article:

Published Friday March 3rd, 2006

Activist files to run against Blunt

MISSOURI

A local transgender activist has filed to run against Roy Blunt in the Aug. 8 Republican primary for Missouri's 7th District U.S. representative.

Midge Potts, whose legal first name is Mitchell, has been living as woman for more than two years. She has asked to be listed as Midge on the official ballot.

A self-described fiscal conservative, Potts said she is comfortable running as a Republican and listed small federal government, balanced budgets, deficit reduction, states' rights and individual freedom as other platform issues.

Potts said Blunt no longer represents local interests and should be replaced, but said he agrees with Blunt on at least one issue.

"I believe in term limits," Potts said, promising to introduce such legislation if elected. "I believe that was a good platform Roy Blunt ran on in 1996."

A Thursday night call to Blunt representatives was not returned immediately.

by BiPartisan on Mon Mar 06, 2006 at 12:06:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MO-07 - Anything IS possible! (none / 0)

Nobody thought that Cynthia McKinney would get defeated in the 2002 primary... but somehow, she did lose. Remeber how that happened?

* WINK WINK * NUDGE NUDGE *

by BiPartisan on Mon Mar 06, 2006 at 11:53:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Effect of SCOTUS TX redistricting decision (none / 0)

I've not kept up with the paperwork, and haven't seen the point dealt with anywhere:

What happens if SCOTUS rules the TX redistricting as unconstitutional? Presumably, the court-devised scheme snaps back into place.

But the decision is likely to come after the primaries (including any run-offs) have been concluded (April 11).

Presumably, if the decision applies to the 06 elections and strikes down the GOP plan, there must be new primaries for the old districts.

Does that mean (here I get to the point!) the filing deadline for TX will be reopened? They surely couldn't say that only those who filed within the original deadline can run in elections based on the court-devised districting plan?

(I'm pretty sure that there's a ready answer to this. Just that I don't have one!)

by skeptic06 on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 07:58:42 PM EST

Re: Effect of SCOTUS TX redistricting decision (none / 0)

Easy. That exact situation occurred in 1996.

What happened was this: the Court ruled in Vera vs. Bush that the map was unconstitutional and that therefore the primaries had to be overturned. Instead, the election was Louisiana-style. The court drew a new map. The filing deadline was extended into the summer, and instead of a primary everybody ran in an open primary on Election Day in November. In districts where nobody got a majority of the vote, the top two had a runoff in December.

It's fairly simple. So if the map is overturned and they return to the old 2002 map, you will probably see a Louisiana-style open election in Texas.

My ActBlue page

by Ament Stone of California on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 09:45:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Effect of SCOTUS TX redistricting decision (none / 0)

I had no idea things could get so interesting!

Presumably, if it happens, all bets are off, and it's musical chairs for Dems and GOP alike.

Perhaps the media might even start covering the election...

by skeptic06 on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 11:06:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

CA--03 has a wonderful candidate (none / 0)

I read this recently, Bill Durston has filed to run against Dan Lungren in CA-03. Add another fighting Dem to the list if this is true. I did see he has filed with the SOS office.

by LeftRoaster on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 08:12:24 PM EST

Oklahoma (none / 0)

Should read OK-01 and OK-04 I think. OK-03 does have a challenger, OK-04 is lacking.

by mike20169 on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 08:46:56 PM EST

Re: Continuing to Push for 434 (none / 0)

Pennsylvania, 3/7. Unsure: PA-05, PA-09

If John Peterson in PA-05 has a challenger, it will be his first. Ever.

So how about it, Chris? I know State College is a ways outside Philadelphia, but there isn't a district residency requirement to run for congress.

How about setting an example here? Saying "I've got better things to do" doesn't cut it, because everyone has better things to do than embark on a suicide run against an entrenched incumbent.

by Jay on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 09:10:23 PM EST

Re: Continuing to Push for 434 (none / 0)

I don't own a car. And I'm trying to get on the ballot in PA, but for antoher district. I honestly don't have time to go up this weekend and collect the signatures.

by Chris Bowers on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 09:51:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No candidate in NY-13?! (none / 0)

Sweet Buddha chained to a wheel and rolled down a hill!

That district covers Staten Island and part of Brooklyn, and is home to good ol' Vito Fossella, an heavily anti-union congressman in the district with the highest percentage of union households in the country.

I worked for the Dem running against Fossella in 2004, and despite a chronic lack of funding and some of the most incompetant consultants on the face of the planet ("Hey, our constituents are a bunch of blue collar, socially conservative union members who care about things like the minimum wage and outsourcing! So let's make one of the main themes of our campaign... GUN CONTROL!"), we still managed to hit 40%.

A well funded candidate could really give Vito a run for his money, especially with both Spitzer and Hillary essentially running unopposed (which is bound to drive down Republican turnout.)

And yet, in the heart of one of the most liberal cities in the country, there's no candidate. No wonder the local Dems keep getting their tuchas' handed to them in the mayoral races...

by JesseLman on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 09:28:41 PM EST

Re: No candidate in NY-13?! (none / 0)

Whoops. Shoulda done a bit of research before I blew my top.

Then again, maybe not.

The two people who most of the people expected to challenge Fossella in 2006 were Vincent Gentile and Mike McMahon, City Council members representing the Bay Ridge section of Brooklyn and the North Shore of Staten Island, respectively. Both areas are in NY-13, and both councilmen are fairly well known.

Except both of them have ducked out, leaving Brooklyn attorney Steven Harrison, whose apparent claim to fame was getting blown out by Gentile in a 2003 special election, with both Gentile and the second-place getting a little over 3200 votes and Harrison pulling a meager 781.

He doesn't even have a website set up yet.

So, in theory, there's a challenger, although he hasn't been officially nominated yet.

I'm not exactly bursting with optimism, though.

(Most of this info came from http://ny13.blogspot.com/ , so credit where credit's due.)

by JesseLman on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 09:40:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No candidate in NY-13?! (none / 0)

Stephen Harrison hasn't filed yet, like many other things. He is rumored to be running around to local clubs on SI. Once I hear he is official I will update everyone. Thanks for the reading NY13 and sharing.

NY-13

by jonahinnyc on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 09:28:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Continuing to Push for 434 (none / 0)

CA-42 is Gary Miller. You'll need a atomic blast to remove him and the party is nearly non-existent.

While my own Insurgent Campaign preaches just this kind of district to use to rebuild the Party the time and labor commmitments are just awful when faced with these odds. Money is non-existent just because most know it is such a lost cause...and the rest have to be convinced there is enough value in contesting the race, and therefore building party structure and size, to make it worthwhile.

A true 435 contested map is not only unrealistic but undesirable if the people filing to run don't know how to do it. It turns into just another Democratic cluster-whatever....

Or so I see it...and I live in the District. All three you mention in CA fit the same description. It would be a three cycle (6 year) effort just to put together a real Party that could make a real challenge.

just a red meat eatin' Democratic Dawg frontpaging at The Democratic Daily...

by BigDog on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 09:32:39 PM EST

Re: Continuing to Push for 434 (none / 0)

PS: CA-21 is R-Bill Thomas.....super atomic blast....5 cycles to build an organization.

HOLD EVERYTHING......... Late breaking news has it that Thomas may announce his retirement next week. Still a Republican District...but an OPEN Republican District...hold your breaths....

just a red meat eatin' Democratic Dawg frontpaging at The Democratic Daily...

by BigDog on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 09:38:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Continuing to Push for 434 (none / 0)

There are 10 days left to file.... If he waits to the last second...we have to have someone in place who would be really competitive for the seat. No one has been even thinking about it.

just a red meat eatin' Democratic Dawg frontpaging at The Democratic Daily...

by BigDog on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 09:40:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Continuing to Push for 434 (none / 0)

According to nationalatlas.gov CA-21 is Devin Nunes. Am I missing something? Either way, it is Fresno and Tulare counties which, I imagine, would be difficult without a lot of infrastructure already in place.

by cthulhu on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 02:31:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Continuing to Push for 434 (none / 0)

Big Dog,

You're breaking my heart that we can't get rid of this Gary Miller guy. He's a prime example of the Republican "culture of corruption":

"What's the problem with earmarks? Here's a good example. A recent investigation by the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin found that a local member of Congress, Rep. Gary Miller (R-CA), financially benefited from $1.28 million in earmarked federal funds for street improvements. As a member of the key congressional committee that drafted the recently passed transportation bill bill, Rep. Miller was well positioned to obtain this earmark.

"Rep. Miller and a top campaign contributor teamed up to finance a 70-acre Diamond Bar Village development. The earmarked street improvement funds are for right in front of the planned housing/retail center he co-ows. With out a doubt the improvements increase the value of Rep. Miller's investment, which will feature a Target store, 70 single-family homes, 110 condominiums, and two restaurants."
http://www.yubanet.com/cgi-bin/artman/ex ec/view.cgi/10/30649

I would be thrilled to walk precincts and work phones for anybody that would oppose this guy. He has really got to go.

by Brujo on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 02:05:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

How is GOP filing going? (none / 0)

Anyone know how they compare to us so far?

by bogun on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 11:07:33 PM EST

Re: How is GOP filing going? (none / 0)

Filing has closed in IL, TX, KY, WV, OH, IN, and NC.

Total seats in those 7 states = 100

Seats with at least one Democratic party candidate = 99

Seats with at least one Republican party candidate = 92 (Everywhere except 5 districts in Texas, 1 district in Illinois, 1 district in Ohio, and 1 district in NC)

But, i'm sure the deficit will widen a bit soon.

by RBH on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 11:35:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How is GOP filing going? (none / 0)

Add in New Mexico where we filed in all 3 districts. So far, it is 102 of 103. As you said, we are ahead of the GOPers on the filing.

by David Kowalski on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 04:57:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Continuing to Push for 434 (none / 0)

Alabama's 6th District hasn't had a Democratic candidate for the last two elections. And getting someone to run who has little chance in a heavily Republican district is not enhanced by the $3,200 filing fee the state party charges. The fee is based on a percentage of the first-year salary of the office being sought.

But I guess the Alabama party would rather have no one running.

by Quaoar on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 11:38:13 PM EST

Re: IA-04 (none / 0)

This is one of those frustrating districts. On paper, it leans Republican but looks like we should be competitive. In practice, we had strong candidates the last two cycles and didn't even come close. The incumbent, Tom Latham, is a total Republican clone and has been since his election in 1994. He is never in the media. When interviewed by the Des Moines Register in 2004, he was asked to give an example of an issue on which he voted differently from the Republican leadership in the House. He couldn't think of a single one!

Latham keeps his head down and does what he is told, and for some reason the voters of the 4th district reward him for it. As I said, it's a tough district for Dems but shouldn't be out of reach if we had the right candidate in a tidal wave year. Frustrating that no one has filed yet. We have a candidate in IA-05, which is a ridiculously Republican district where we would never, ever have a chance.

John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."

by desmoinesdem on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 11:46:00 PM EST

Re: IA-04 (none / 0)

Odd that Latham is so easily reelected even though Kerry got like 49% in IA-04.

Like the way Jim Nussle always won in IA-01 so easily even though he is a conservative in a district where Kerry got 53%. Thank God he's leaving, now we can finally wage a real battle for that seat.

And of course, some day Jim Leach will retire and we can take IA-02, which is rightfully ours.

My ActBlue page

by Ament Stone of California on Tue Feb 28, 2006 at 11:58:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: IA-04 (none / 0)

Got a message on this today.

"Dr. Selden Spencer from Ames is strongly considering the race and is moving forward with nomination petitions."

Wahoo!

by Susan in Iowa on Thu Mar 02, 2006 at 01:00:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: IA-04 (none / 0)

"I feel pretty good about our chances to fill that seat in Iowa."

I'd like to know why. I've heard that lots of people have been asked and they've all said no, including John Norris and Paul Johnson, who each ran credible campaigns against Latham in 2000 and 2004. Issues: late start, money, incumbency, not wanting to be the sacrificial lamb.

I would love to see someone run against Latham, and it would be my pleasure to get out and bust chops for him/her. But so far I haven't heard that anyone is willing to get in.

by Susan in Iowa on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 12:57:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: IA-04 (none / 0)

The Des moines Register has listed Gary Kinkel, a college professor, as a possible for months now in Iowa-4. As we get closer to the deadline, as you say, it starts to look like Kinkel or nothing. He's a professor of religion at a small school and does not seem to have a political background. Web look ups show journal articles in his academic area.

by David Kowalski on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 04:49:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Mississippi (none / 0)

Joe Forsythe announced he was running in MS-01 last weekend.

by UKLIB on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 12:51:38 AM EST

Re: Mississippi (none / 0)

Well, at least we have one out of two.

Is Forsythe that 78 year-old plumber dude? Maybe I'm wrong on the plumber part, but he IS old, right?

Swing State Project: Campaign & Election News - Covering Key Races Around the Country

by HellofaSandwich on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 01:20:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Mississippi (none / 0)

Yep, you're right although he's 75. At least he's a name on the ballot.

by UKLIB on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 02:59:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

435 (none / 0)

If the Supreme Court declares the Texas redistricting scheme unconstitutional, filing deadlines would have to be reopened no matter what scheme is adopted. TX-11 might have a Democratic challenger after all.

Texans, keep looking for a candidate.

Progress is Personal | Connie Brennan | My opinions are mine alone

by msnook on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 01:27:27 AM EST

Re: 435 (none / 0)

Well, TX-11 would indeed have a Democrat: Chet Edwards, the current incumbent in TX-17. If the old map was returned, he would be running in the old TX-11.

My ActBlue page

by Ament Stone of California on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 11:00:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

SC-02 (none / 0)

If someone will let me crash with them in the district, I'll run. I'm only a few miles outside of it. Joe Wilson is a big name here and I have essentially zero chance in the SC Bible Belt (yes, even more conservative than the standard issue conservatives around here), but hey, I've got nothing else going on.

by TallyInsider on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 09:28:16 AM EST

NY-26 (none / 0)

Jack Davis is running again, and this time he's doing it right. He's reached out to the local Party, he just hired a top-notch campaign manager, and he's prepared to spend serious bucks ($2 mill plus) to knock off Reynolds. Given that he took 44% last time running a seat-of-the-pants campaign, this could be a fun sleeper race.

by Trapper John on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 12:52:03 PM EST

Re: NY-26 (none / 0)

Is he running as a Democrat? Any idea why his website has gone down?

by UKLIB on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 03:01:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: NY-26 (none / 0)

1) Yes, and I anticipate he'll also be on the Working Families line.

2) He got cybersquatted, probably because he wasn't sure if he was running again. I'm fairly certain they'll have a site again in the very near future.

by Trapper John on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 04:05:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: PA-05 and PA-09 (none / 0)

Don Hilliard is running in the 5th. He's listed on politicspa.com and I've spoken to him as well. He has votehilliard.com (but it's just s placeholder right now... hopefully he's busy gathering ballot signatures).

The DCCC has two dems running in the 9th, Paul Politis and Stanley Hetz. I spoke with Paul last summer and he said he wasnt running, but maybe he's changed his mind.

In other words... by this time next week we hope to see a full Congressional slate confirmed for the November ballot!

Eric Loeb
GoodWorks-PAC.org

by Eric Loeb on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 08:32:41 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.