Schumer Considering Historic Third Term at Helm of DSCC

I was pretty stoked back in November 2004 when incoming Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid was able to cajole Chuck Schumer into keeping his eyes on the Senate and manning the helm of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. I was likewise pleased in November 2006 when it emerged that Schumer had agreed to stay on a second term at the committee, something done only once during the preceding 20-plus years. Now comes word from The Hill's Aaron Blake that Schumer is considering an historic third term as DSCC chairman.

In fact, things are going so well for Schumer that he won't even rule out doing it again for an unheard-of third term at the helm of the DSCC.

At the same time, he said he has "no desire" to be governor, even though he has weighed a run before and the seat is vacant in 2010 now that Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D) has resigned.

"People don't believe this, but I don't plan ahead ... We'll just cross that bridge when we get to it," he said. "I would say one thing: It's hard when you are running for office. The traditional wisdom is you shouldn't be in the DSCC [when running]."

Schumer is up for reelection in 2010.

To this point, only Wendell Ford of Kentucky has served three terms at the head of the DSCC, so were Schumer to take on the responsibility one more time he would indeed tie the record for longest tenure as the committee's chairman.

Schumer's run thus far has been marked by successes. When Schumer took the position in the wake of John Kerry's loss -- and, more importantly, the Democrats' net loss of four Senate seats, yielding the lowest number of Senate Democrats since after the 1928 elections -- few believed that the Democrats had much of any shot of retaking the Senate in the November 2006 midterms. However, Schumer was able to capitalize on the political environment and wisely used his committee's resources to help find the six pick-ups necessary for the Democrats to retake the Senate.

This time around, we obviously do not know what the ends are going to be. However, to this point, the metrics look really great. As Blake notes in the article, the Democrats have fielded credible candidates in more than half of the 23 seats being defended by the Republicans, and the Democrats have serious shots at winning more than a half dozen races (including five that are already rated "toss-up" or even "likely Democrat"). What's more, the DSCC has better than a $16 million net advantage in cash-on-hand over its rival, the National Republican Senatorial Committee.  

Of course this isn't to say that the Democrats are bound to pick up half a dozen or more seats -- or even a smaller number -- this fall. And it would be in the interests of all parties for a decision about the chairmanship of the DSCC for the 2010 cycle to be made. That said, as far as things look right now, I wouldn't have too much of a problem seeing Schumer at the helm of the DSCC one more time.

For more, check out the MyDD interview with Chuck Schumer from February 2007.



Display:


Re: Schumer Considering Historic Third Term at Hel (none / 0)

Schumer's run thus far has been marked by successes. When Schumer took the position in the wake of John Kerry's loss -- and, more importantly, the Democrats' net loss of four Senate seats, yielding the lowest number of Senate Democrats since after the 1928 elections -- few believed that the Democrats had much of any shot of retaking the Senate in the November 2006 midterms. However, Schumer was able to capitalize on the political environment and wisely used his committee's resources to help find the six pick-ups necessary for the Democrats to retake the Senate.

While I do agree that Schumer has been doing better than his predecessors, I think you have missed a very, very, very important part of the picture when it comes to giving credit for 2006...

Webb? Tester? Both were opposed by "establishment" Democrats that were the preferred choice of the DSCC, correct?

Perhaps a nod of the hat to Dean, The Netroots, and ActBlue?


by RedDan on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:53:46 AM EST

Re: Schumer Considering Historic Third Term at Hel (none / 0)

alright, I do not think it is possible to be the chair of the DNC and no be the establishment.

This is like saying the President is outside the beltway.

Plus, the strong leadership of Schumer and Emmanuel made Dean's lackluster finance a little less of a failure of his chairmanship.

MI & FL, though, that is nothing but a big steaming pile of Dean's fault. Terrible mismanagement.


by hctb on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:57:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hmmm... (2.00 / 1)

First things first...the DNC financial situation is pretty damned good, and has been for quite some time.

Second, the candidates were not the first choice of the party insiders, and were not, initially, supported by Schumer/DSCC.

Third, the Netroots, the "50 state strategy" and the ActBlue model of fundraising (which was pioneered and nurtured by Dean and Allies) was responsible for their success.

You know, all that stuff that the proprietor of this site wrote about, supported, and championed?

Fourth, MI and FL is a completely different story, irrelevant to this discussion, and, frankly, not Deans fault at all, considering that the DNC rules committee (including Ickes) voted in favor of the penalty ... which penalty was exactly similar to that threatened by Terry McCauliffe when he was DNC chair and faced with a similar proposed ditching of the Primary Calendar.

The topic was and is Schumer as DSCC chair - a position that he has handled very well.

My comment was to point out that the successes are not all his doing, that it is more complicated than that, and that there are some other big players that should get recognition.


by RedDan on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:06:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hmmm... (none / 0)

I do not think you are interested in looking objectively at the DNC under Dean, but instead are looking for evidence to support your view of the 'appropriate' method of political participation. I recognize that there is something appealing about the small dollar approach but not to the exclusion of continuing to cultivate major dollar support. Dean let that go fallow which only lead to the DS and DCCC to pick up the donors and major donor support. The donors are still in the system, just not under the control of Dean. This seems, to me, a mistake and weakened his control over the other committees.

Maybe things will change, but I am currently pretty disenchanted with the promise of these progressive actors--it seems simply a change in the small cabal of people who think they should control the party from the major donors to these movement leaders. This does not seem to be any great improvement but perhaps I will grow more optimistic when the progressives and "establishment" are not tearing each other apart in primaries.  

So,  yeah, I think Dean doesn't deserves nearly as much credit for the 2006 successes as he is frequently afforded here. ActBlue and the netroots, sure--this is a great way to mobilize and connect people, particularly at these lower level races. But I dont think this should be attributed to Dean and I have not encountered any evidence otherwise. Care to share?

And if disagreeing with Jerome is not allowed, forgive me. I dont play the lemming well, it is true.


by hctb on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 06:56:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have looked objectively at the DNC (2.00 / 1)

For example, this direct comparison between 2003 and 2005, from a MyDD diarist

And have shown that the DNC was and is being run just fine...differently than before, but just fine.

Same orders of magnitude of cash available, different model, different focus...

And better effects overall.


by RedDan on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:32:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Schumer endorsed Webb (none / 0)

Webb was endorsed by Schumer, Dodd, Kerry, Reid, and whole host of establishment. It was a weird DLC/netroots coalition that nominated Webb.


by Alice Marshall on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:50:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Schumer Considering Historic Third Term at Hel (none / 0)

I would be content seeing Schumer continue, but I'd be happier seeing Boxer or Dodd take over. They'd both be running for reelection in 2010, but they have fairly safe seats. Moreover, one or both might be considering retirement, and thus would not have to run. It would be a nice capper to either career, and a way to be very hands on in grooming your potential successor.

Another Senator who does not have that A type, gladhanding drive but is well-respected and deserves a higher profile is Jack Reed.


by along on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:17:33 AM EST

Re: Schumer Considering (none / 0)

Im sorry, but I just don't see Boxer as being a good choice for DSCC head.  I just don't think she has the toughness that the highly successful DSCC chairs like Bob Toricelli, Bob Mitchell, and Chuck Schumer have and had.  


by Toddwell on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:26:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Schumer Considering (none / 0)

I think she's tough enough. check out her putting Inhofe in his place: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/21/gore -boxer-inhofe/

I also think a woman should chair the DSCC at some point. Clinton would be great, but will likely become Majority Leader if she stays in the Senate.

That said, a really fantastic possibility would be Obama winning this fall, and then Blagojevich appointing Rahm Emanuel to his seat. Emanuel could then immediately begin planning his own 2010 race and the evisceration of Grassley, McCain, Vitter, Gregg, Murkowski, Martinez, Bunning, Burr, Bond, and more.


by along on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:19:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Schumer Considering (2.00 / 1)

If Obama does win, we should be looking to replace him with someone at least equally if not much more progressive, as Illinois is not going to send a Republican to the Senate under any imaginable circumstances.

My vote would be Jan Schakowsky, who is currently rated #7 in the House of Representatives by Progressive Punch and is probably well-connected enough to raise enough money in her first "re"-election effort to not become a drain on the limited amount of DSCC resources needed in other, more competitive states. She has a pretty good history as well, as she got her start in politics by advocating with other mothers for (something like) expiration dates on perishable food items.

Another interesting pick would be Jesse Jackson, Jr., who is rated #5 on Progressive Punch and showed at least initial interest in moving up to Mayor of Chicago last year.

Emanuel is rated in the 90s, and while that makes him one of our better Reps, his district is quite liberal and he could probably afford to be with us on more votes than he has been. Also, while there isn't that much difference between him and Jackson and Schakowsky in terms of the overall percentage, he is over 10 points back in the "chips are down" category.


Never separate the life you live from the words you speak. -Sen. Paul Wellstone (Minnesota)
by Max Fletcher on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 05:07:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Schumer Considering (none / 0)

If Obama wins the presidency.

I will include
US Representative Luis Guiterriez


by nkpolitics on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:22:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

by the way (none / 0)

I do like Emanuel as a character and think he's effective at what he does. I'm not trying to be disagreeable in any way--yours are the kind of comments this site needs to get back on track


Never separate the life you live from the words you speak. -Sen. Paul Wellstone (Minnesota)
by Max Fletcher on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 05:56:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: by the way (none / 0)

totally agree with your analysis, and push for more progressive representation. Emanuel is valuable where he is, and has a bright future of kicking ass as majority whip or leader someday.


by along on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:42:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Schumer Considering (none / 0)

Patty Murray was the chair in 2002 cycle.


by hctb on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 06:58:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Schumer Considering (none / 0)

Very interesting! I never thought about Rahm Emanuel getting Obama's seat. Now that I think about it, is there anyone else but him who would likely get appointed to it? It would be great.


by Cheebs on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:29:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

What Todd said (none / 0)

the people you mentioned are great dems and deserve leadership positions, just not the DSCC. THis is a job that needs someone who just does not twist arms, but breaks them.

Schumer is monster at this job, he can stay as long as he wants.

I was glad to see in the article he was excited about Slattery jumping for Kansas as well as his picks for surprise darkhorse races.

I hope Noriega and Rice make into great darkhorses later on.


by Trowaman on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:36:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Schumer Considering Historic (none / 0)

We should wait until the 2008 Senate races turn out before we talk about Schumer running again for the post.  The general rule is that if you don't gain seats, you lose the chairmanship for the next cycle.  


by Toddwell on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:41:25 AM EST

Re: Schumer Considering Historic (none / 0)

I think the general rule is that you only have to do it for one term.  This is more like hot potato than musical chairs.  You hope to not get stuck with the potato.

Schumer is doing a good job, but it probably helps that he only has to be better than Murray and Corzine for people to be pleased.  He is far batter than either.

I though Torch got someone at the DSCC indicted though?

Schumer has done a good job without too much fundraising scandal. Not sure we could hope for more from that shop.


by hctb on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:03:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Schumer Considering Historic (none / 0)

Torch was able to pick up seats in the Senate for Democrats in 2000 for the first time since 1990.  Almost every close Senate race(save for MT and VA) went our way in 2000 and this was mainly because of Torch's political instincts.  


by Toddwell on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:12:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Schumer Considering Historic (none / 0)

Oh, I agree that Torch did a good job. He banged the pavement and shook the trees for every resource he could get toward Senate races.

Despite his political skills, he is shady when it comes to collecting checks. I think it should be possible to build the party and expand our opportunities without skirting FEC laws and regs.


by hctb on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:04:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Schumer Considering Historic (none / 0)


Seems to me, something bizarre would have to happen for the Democrats to not gain seats in 2008.  

Only one Democratic seat is considered even a little bit vulnerable this time around, and that one is balanced by the all but certain pickup in Virginia.  After that, we have a dozen additional pickup opportunities, including some open seats in blue states, while the Republicans have nothing.

There's even some talk of achieving a 60-seat supermajority this year. That's a great stretch, but still within the realm of possibility, while no net change is pretty much the worst possibility, and would require some disaster that no one now foresees.


by admiralnaismith on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:08:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

open gov in 2010? (none / 0)

Does Patterson not get to run for some reason?  I mean, he wouldn't be running for re-election, per se, but he would be the incumbent.


by aaronetc on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:54:36 AM EST

Re: Schumer Considering Historic Third Term at Hel (none / 0)

Interesting that Blake (quoted in this post) would say, in an article on Sen. Schumer's ambitions:
"the [NY Governor's] seat is vacant in 2010 now that Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D) has resigned."

Well, actually, no.  David Paterson, just sworn in this week to thunderous applause and positive reviews, might well have his own plans. He ain't chopped liver.

Is this "inadvertence" in fact a trial balloon for Schumer's potential challenge of Paterson? Unless, of course, David were to swap seats with Chuck in 2010, thereby fulfilling an ambition of each.


by nycounsel on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:57:51 AM EST

keeps bad company (none / 0)

Schumer keeps very bad company. The constitution would be much better off in the hands of Dodd, Boxer, or someone cleaner than Schumer.


by Alice Marshall on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:53:01 AM EST

Re: keeps bad company (none / 0)

Nobody's proposing that Schumer become Majority Leader. The DSCC chair raises money and recruits candidates. That's it. Nobody's better at it than Schumer. So let him keep the job -- beg him to keep the job -- because if somebody other than Schumer had had his job in '06, Dodd wouldn't be chairing Banking and Boxer wouldn't be chairing Environment and Public Works.


by ConnecticutHack on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:00:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: keeps bad company (none / 0)

As long as Schumer is head of the DSCC very bad people will have influence.

We are winning because the Republicans are imploding. We have control of the Senate because of Siddarth, not Schumer.


by Alice Marshall on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:19:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: keeps bad company (none / 0)

Influence? Over what? Candidate recruitment?

He has a heck of a lot more direct influence over policy as Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee. If you want to check his influence there, go right ahead.

But, to reiterate, DSCC has only two functions: fundraising and candidate recruitment. At both, Schumer has excelled. And while that's increased his influence over the Democratic caucus, for sure, it has also empowered Democrats like Jon Tester and Jim Webb who wouldn't otherwise have had the resources to pull off their respective upsets.


by ConnecticutHack on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:00:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Schumer Considering Historic Third Term at Hel (none / 0)

Schumer: DSCC Chair for Life.

Maybe we should make him Tsar of the Senate?

The guy may be an asshole, but he's competent as all hell and -- most importantly -- he's our asshole.


by ConnecticutHack on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:57:50 AM EST

chuck shumer (none / 0)

Chuck has done a better job at the DSCC than he has done lately in the Senate.

How is Mukasey working out for you chuck?

Just another Bush lackey AG that doesn't actually care about the rule of law and is there to stall and support the illegal bush actions.

Chuck got taken in big time by Mukasey - big mistake chuck.

so much for torture, ilegal wiretaps and congressional oversight - all out the window with Chuck's choice of Mukasey.


by correctnotright on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 01:30:31 PM EST

Re: chuck shumer (none / 0)

Did Schumer really get taken in? Judging by the he hangs out with he doesn't have a problem with torture. That is why he shouldn't be head of DSCC. Heck, he shouldn't even be senator.


by Alice Marshall on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 02:18:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: chuck shumer (none / 0)

this is not about how schumer votes.

This is about whether he should continue to recruit and fund candidates like, Tester, Webb, Casey (who has been better than expected), McCaskill, Whitehouse, and Brown.

Do you want Udall, Udall, Warner, Franken, Shaheen, Hagen, Noriega, Rice, Slattery, etc. to have money to become senators or not?


by Trowaman on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 04:42:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Off topic (none / 0)

How do you post a video on MyDD? I've tried every possible search word on google, and searched the site. Nothing!!! Why isn't this posted somewhere, like the FAQs?
From those who have not, everything will be taken, even the little that they have. -Matthew 13:12
by Jacob Freeze on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 03:53:59 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.