Redistricting 2012 - MA - Picking and Choosing Who Stays in Congress and Who Goes – Will the Dead Rise to Save Seats?

Should I Stay or Should I go Now? (Clash for obvious reasons) Olver and Neal Square off to Retain Seats - image Masslive.com


With the 2010 census released and redistricting committees across the nation drawing new lines down to the individual city precincts and wards, there will be occasions when those states controlled by a majority of Democrats, and with or without an “independent redistricting panel”, will have to make tough choices as to who stays and who goes in Congress. An article today in Politico: “California redistricting may pit Dem vs. Dem” speaks to the obvious – when cutting seats from Congress due to losses in population, or, as in the case in California, shifts in population end up combining a district and creating new districts, resulting in a similar scenario – there will be winners and losers – the fact remains that the total number of seats in Congress remains the same, however, the makeup of the districts and how they are drawn by committees can result in “gerrymandering” – whereby lines are drawn to include pockets of population that are either heavily Democrat or Republican, forming in effect a guarantee that a specific party will remain in power in these states until the next census.

The biggest losers in the quest for political power on both the state and national level are: New York and Ohio (losing 2 Congressional seats each), Iowa, Illinois, Missouri, Michigan, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Massachusetts (all losing one seat). For the most part, these are states that tend to trend Democrat (source: Washington Post House Seat Changes by State ). The biggest winners are: Texas with 4 seats, Florida with 2, Georgia, South Carolina, Arizona, Utah, Nevada and Washington all picking up one House Seat.

In general the redistricting must be in place for the 113th congress, or by the 2012 elections. In Massachusetts, as ward and precincts bosses struggle to maintain an advantage over their own City or Town council seats, the bigger question arises as to which Congressional Democrat will no longer be walking the Halls of Congress? In the latest round, all eyes are on Western Massachusetts where the population has always been lower, given the greater land mass and lack of highly populated municipalities. A meeting in early June in with “officials”, noted that in order for the 1st Congressional District to avoid being swallowed by the second and/or third, they would need to come up with 80,000 additional residents.(WAMC) This is no mean feat, considering that moving vans out of Massachusetts are the norm given the state’s high tax rate and lack of incentives for employers. Therefore, logic follows that either John Olver in the 1st District or Richard Neal in the 2nd will be forced to retire as districts are merged - both the 2nd and the 3rd districts (seat currently held by McGovern), need an additional 60,000 plus bodies in order to remain a qualified Congressional District. In order for Democrats to maintain control over the remaining two districts, larger population centers from the 2nd district would be merged into either the 1st and or the 3rd in order to maintain balance. As hard as either Neal or Olver lobby to stay in power (or more appropriately, keep the seats they have held for a multitude of terms), it is apparent that those on the State Redistricting Committee, are not looking East in order to slice and dice a district west of Worcester.

Republicans in Massachusetts (yes, they exists) who may be considering a run for Congress, considering the incredible showing in the 2010 elections (minus the dead and missing voters), are patiently waiting to see how these lines will be drawn and which remaining Congressional Democrat will be the target of a challenge. In the 2010 elections, there were several hotly contested seats: the 2nd, 4th and 10th specifically. In the 2nd district, Richard Neal, incumbent Democrat, was expected to win by a landslide, and although win he did, it was not without a lot of help from last minute voter drives, coupled with robo calls from Bill Clinton, and a lot of dinners for Senior citizens. Originally predicted by the New York Times to maintain his seat with a 75% advantage over the Republican Candidate, Tom Wesley, an entirely different scenario occurred, Wesley garnered over 40% of the vote. In fact, looking at the interactive map here courtesy of the New York Times it appears that the biggest winner was in the Western Part of the State was Olver, who won by a margin of 60 to 34.9%,. Other big winner were: McGovern in the 3rd by 59 to 39%, Markey in the 7th by 66 to 33%, and Stephen Lynch by 58 to 26%. However, the balance of the districts with the exception of one which went unchallenged, were more competitive: the 2nd Neal: 57 to 43%, Tierney, 56 to 43, Tsongas in the 5th, 54 to 43, Barney Frank 54 to 44, and the 10th district, Keating 46 to 42%. (NYTimes) Given the fact that these races were all predicted to be “blowouts” for the incumbents, and that the challengers were all first time challengers, the results are stunning.

Further, in the 2009 special election, whereby Scott Brown won over Martha Coakley by 5 points, all eyes were on Massachusetts, in the 2010 election, literally no one was keeping an eye on the polls; What is troubling in this aspect is that Secretary of State, Democrat William Galvin, had refused to remove an estimated 116,000 dead voters from its rolls which if one were to look at the math comprised enough ballots to push those incumbents over the top. What is most interesting is that Galvin, , when pressed, refused to remove those ineligible voters from the rolls.

This was prior to the special election, again, but not without understanding that over 217 Republicans were running for city, state and federal office, an historical first, in the 2010 elections. Therefore, one wonders, when will Massachusetts clear its voter’s rolls of the dead and missing (those moved to other states)? Also is this endemic to Massachusetts or would other states where certain parties feel that perhaps their power might be threatened by a change of voters hearts (specifically in states like Massachusetts where 51% of the voting block is independent, or unenrolled, literally outnumbering both the Democrats and Republicans), keep those dead and missing on record, an insurance policy so to speak.

That said, in Massachusetts, should it come down to a split between the 1st, 2nd and 3rd, one would except that Neal will maintain his seat, alongside McGovern, although given the previous vulnerability, if one were a Democrat, one would be thinking, maybe not – give it to Olver and McGovern who guarantee (based on 2010 election results) an easy victory.

As this must be completed, later this year, in time for campaigns to form and for voters to be informed of changes to districts, and wards and precincts (where one might vote), it should be announced fairly soon. None of the aforementioned (specifically Barney Frank and Richard Neal, who both held fairly high positions in the U.S Congress, and Frank, who was, in partnership with one Senator from Connecticut (retired) Dodd, on the Fannie and Freddie meltdown, (the cause of our current economic crisis), are now, well, an afterthought – still managing to get press and bring the occasional dollar home (i.e. spending taxpayers’ dollars), however, with the current historical GOP control, and the promise (given the makeup of the other states that picked up seats) they will continue to be in the minority – it’s math not rocket science or the media saying otherwise. (I.e. wishful thinking that Congress will be returned to Democrat control anytime within the next say decade.

For more information on the Process from the State of Massachusetts visit: www.malegislature.gov/District/Committee One should noticed those that will be making the final decision, are not necessarily bi-partisan.

Obama in Boston, Fundraiser Bound - $5,000 Plate Dinner To Support Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee

Obama will spend the day in Boston MA, education and fundraising priority - image chicagodenfender

The Boston Globeis reporting that President Obama will make two stops in Boston today, one at a public school funded by Bill Gates, the other, a fundraiser for the Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee at the at Boston’s Museum of Fine Arts.

The $5,000 a plate fundraiser, in one of the “Bluest States”, is part and parcel of the job the President performs as head of his political party. Normally, a sitting President is seen as the titular head of the political party he or she represents, and Obama is no exception. Massachusetts, according to a recent Gallup Poll,is one of ten states where the President’s approval rating is above 50%, at 52.2% the lowest of the top ten. His highest approval ratings are in DC and Hawaii, rounding out the balance of the ten are: Maryland, New York, Delaware, Rhode Island, California, Connecticut and Illinois.

These were based on 2010 job approval ratings, prior to the surge of gasoline prices at the pump and the crisis in the Middle East.

In the last mid-term elections, the Massachusetts Democrat Congressional Delegation, managed to maintain their district seats, but not without the need to campaign for the first time in decades, some of those with considerable war chests, were kept busy on the home front defending their turf against first-time runners – including Barney Frank (MA4) and Richard Neal (MA2). With redistricting about to take place in Massachusetts, where one Congressional Seat will be lost, speculation regarding which Congressional Representative will be “retired” is ongoing.

Massachusetts Redistricting Games Begin – Democrats Would be Best Served by Merging 10th and 4th Districts – Analysis

Odd man out? 10th District Newly Elected Bill Keating (D-) - Photo DCCC.org


In what the Boston Globe is dubbing”a game of survival” between the Massachusetts Congressional Delegation one name that does not pop up in the initial articles regarding the loss of one U.S. House seat in the Bay State, is that of newly elected 10th District Representative, Democrat Bill Keating. In the 2010, 9 of the 10 Congressional districts were challenged, with Keating invested in the most competitive race in the State; he narrowly won victory over Republican Challenger, Jeff Perry. Although Richard Neal (D-MA2) and Barney Frank (D-MA4) had to campaign for “their” seats for the first time in decades, they managed to garner a 10 point lead over their challengers, Republican newcomers, Tom Wesley and Sean Bielat respectively. (The anticipated outcome by the New York Times for the MA2 district was Neal 71%/Wesley 26%, with the actual results of Neal 57% to Wesley’s 43%. The highest percentage of returns went to Olver (MA1) 60%, Markey (MA7) 67%, and Lynch (MA) with 68%. The most vulnerable and holding the smallest district in size and population appears to be Keating – the 10th District, which is also known to be stronger for Republican’s, encompasses Cape Cod, and would, therefore, be an easy and natural merger with the MA4th. The Democrats do benefit from a bit of extra press, in all the posturing, Neal and Olver have received more press in the Local Media over redistricing than they did during their 2010 campaigns.

Democrats could easily “kill two birds with one stone” by merging the 4th and 10th, adding the larger Democrat friendly urban areas of New Bedford and a large section of Fall River to the smaller towns and villages on the Cape. One, they reduce the political opportunities for a challenger to the Democrat Controlled Seat, and would save the nation’s highest profile Congressional Representative, Barney Frank, from extinction.
Although rumors of Frank’s retirement have been constant over the past few election cycles, the legislator fought tooth and nail in 2008, and would, one would gather, be the last one of the current delegation to retire. Frank is a Democrat Icon, revered by the Progressives, and the target of Conservatives would focus on Frank in any upcoming election, essentially taking the heat off Representatives such as Tierney (scandal: his wife made the 5 top political scandals list for her indictment in a mob related money laundering schemeduring the 2010 campaign). Niki Tsongas (D-MA5) would be safe as the “token” woman, (Massachusetts being such a stalwart champion of women’s rights under Democrat rule.)

Deval Patrick, Democrat Governor, is still, according to CBS3 Springfield MA holding to the myth that the Democrat Congressional Delegation from Massachusetts will continue to have clout in the Congress, even with the redistricting. Although Massachusetts is somewhat of an “island unto itself”, and therefore, many who hold higher office may have missed the fact that the balance of the 49 states (with few exceptions), elected a majority of Republicans to the Congress, and almost managed to take the Senate in 2010. Those Congressional Representatives who survived in Massachusetts, including the Govenor, did so with either narrow margins (Patrick did not win a 2nd term by mandate, he won over Baker, by 3 points, (see addition of 3rd candidate, Democrat turned independent, turned Democrat, Tim Cahill in Governors Race), or with a lot of help from unions and community service organizations getting out the vote in a massive 13 hour attempt, as it appeared that an extra 20,000 voters were needed here and there in order to maintain the total Democrat advantage.

The Massachusetts Democrats, who pulled out of these races, went to a lame duck session of Congress only to find that the clout they once had, appears to have disappeared. Neal, (D-MA2) who was vying for the Chair of the Ways and Means, and then after the loss of Democrat Power, was vying for ranking member – lost that honor to Sander Levin of MI. Both Neal and Olver, however, are reliable progressive votes. Therefore, it would appear that the only reason one would consider eliminating a Western Massachusetts District over a merger of the 4th and 10th Districts, would be that one currently holds a seat out towards Boston, and Boston traditionally treats Western Massachusetts as a source of tax revenue, nothing more, nothing less.

That said, according to an article from PBS station, WBUR, it is Washington who will have the final say, not Beacon Hill. If that is the case, then the new Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi will have some input into the decision as to which seat to “cut”. Considering how close the former Speaker is to Frank and Neal and Olver, it is doubtful that, if this is correct, any one of those aforementioned would be added to the unemployment rolls.

Therefore, as the Boston Globe and those East of the Worcester Line, begin to eye two Western Massachusetts Districts, for more taxes and a Congressional seat, they may want to take a look at the new kid on the block, and the advantages of a 4th and 10th district merger.

What else is in involved in a redistricting effort? There are state representatives that will lose “careers” regardless of which District is merged or redrawn, and this is where Beacon Hill comes into play. With the Governors ties to the Administration, as strong as they are, his stated “minimal” involvement in the process versus State Legislators slated to redistrict the Commonwealth, one would gather that his input from Washington as to who stays and who goes in Congress would trump any fights on Beacon Hill for state representatives positions.

Of note: Secretary of State William Galvin (D), has called for an independent counsel to decide the redistricting according to the Globe and was summarily told where that idea might be shelved by Massachusetts Senate President Therese Murray and Massachusetts House Speaker DeLeo. Incidentally, the Senate President hails from Plymouth which is part of the 10th District.

David Axelrod on CNN on Deval Patrick – Lowering Expectations for the Massachusetts Governor

In a CNN video posted to Real Clear Politics David Axelrod, White House Advisor, and reported Obama’s campaign manager for reelection in 2012, reviewed the mid-term elections. The Headline ”Axelrod Suggests Dem Upset: "Stay Up For The Full Night" suggests, according to CNN that Axelrod appears somewhat misleading, as Axelrod rambles through questions posed by CNN’s John King noting: “as I said, I think you're going to see an -- an election where, you know, people win who perhaps you didn't expect to win, people lose who -- who, perhaps, you didn't expect to lose on -- on both sides.”

However, the interview begins with a discussion on which races Axelrod will be watching, and the East Coast is discussed first, specifically, Axelrod’s former client and alleged test for Obama’s 2008 victory,Deval Patrick. Paraphrased from the video below: “Deval, an old client of mine, spectacular person, Massachusetts has elected Republican governors for 16 years before he arrived, so that’s a competitive race.”…

After that quip, Axelrod goes into the discussion regarding surprises the night of the election and highlights the California Governor’s race as an example. Axelrod suggests that spending $200 million dollars might just clinch the deal for Democrat Jerry Brown against Meg Whitman. That’s apparently all he has right at the moment.

Meanwhile, back in the Bay State, the three man race for the Governor’s seat is in its final two weeks, with Democrat turned Independent, Tim Cahill going to the 10 point range, in the latest poll from Suffolk University. The poll released on October 14th and taken between the 10th and 12th of September, suggests that the electorate was far from a commitment on any candidate. On question 17: where do you stand on the race at this point, one finds Patrick at 44%, Baker at 37% and Cahill at 10% (with the balance either undecided, Green Party, etc.). On Question 18 however, when those leaner’s are asked who they would vote for if the election were held today? – There is a startling difference: Patrick receives 6%, Baker 12%, and Cahill 2%, with a whopping 49% refusing to answer or not sure. The results of the poll which were released were the combination of the two questions, gives Patrick a somewhat artificial edge. That said, with a pollster that repeatedly includes 8% of it staff (Suffolk University) in the mix, one has to ask, how accurate can this poll be? Consider it is doubtful that 8% of the Massachusetts electorate resides on the Suffolk campus. (See screen shot below).


Section of Marginal from Suffolk Poll showing larger percentage of undecideds only two weeks away - deduct 8 points for Suffolk only participants - click to enlarge


It is more than likely that internal polling on the Patrick team suggests the gig is up, which is why Axelrod was softening the “blow” so to speak when reviewing the Massachusetts Electorate. One can bet the House (literally) that he will also have his eyes on the Bay State’s 9 Congressional races, which, as of this point, don’t appear to be heading in a direction pleasing to Axelrod and Company. Axelrod, who is certain that Mitt Romney will run in 2012, could not have missed that Romney’s PAC recently endorsed certain Congressional Candidates, including Sean Bielat, running against Barney Frank and Tom Wesley, running against Richard Neal. The move on Romney's Part can be viewed in two ways:one, the man is a businessman first, and would not waste a dime, and two; it goes toward building political capital for the future.

As races either tighten up or completely blow out in normally “Blue States” such as Illinois and Massachusetts, one has to begin to realize that the electorate, in larger measures (according to a WSJ/NBC pollwould prefer to elect a candidate that has not held office before, that would, perhaps explain why seasoned politicians, such as Nancy Pelosi and Richard Neal, have ducked debates, and have become almost invisible in their home districts, even though they were responsible for taking a break to campaign and not voting on the extension of tax cuts. Axelrod is a smart man, and looks more pained than confident in this particular CNN clip.

Axelrod on CNN

Desperate Dems Invoke “Karl Rove” in New Ad – Axelrod Challenged by CBS’s Bob Schieffer – “Is That All You’ve Got?” – Incumbents Avoid Debates

David Axelrod (left) invokes the name of Karl Rove (right) in weak attempt to rally base - image: Reuters

White House Advisor, David Axelrod, on this Sunday's CBS’s “Face the Nation” was chastised by journalist, Bob Schieffer for a recent DNC advertisement that offers an outright fabrication regarding Karl Rove, former George W. Bush advisor, Republican’s in general and the Chamber of Commerce taking foreign monies to finance campaigns. Schieffer categorized the assertions as “Peanuts” and when pressed for details, Axelrod came up empty. Schieffer queried “Is that all you’ve got?” (Video clips below)

The UK’s Telegraph offered: “Epitaph for Barack Obama's Democrats: 'Is that the best you can do?'”, an excellent article outlining the latest attempt by Democrats to salvage the Mid-Term elections.

Axelrod may be thinking that anything goes in campaign finance due to the Obama campaigns use of then

"Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor's identity, campaign officials confirmed."

(Washington Post 10/28/2008 article)

Democrats, who apparently will not defend the legislation passed by the Congress, nor campaign on issues due to the aforementioned legislation, are now digging deep into the well in the latest attempt to rally the base by accusing Rove and “Big Business”.

The simple fact that Democrat Incumbents are avoiding Debating opponents nationwide is telling. (Google Democrats avoid debate and find countless articles) Apparently, when one cannot stand on one’s record, entering the debate forum is a risk.

Not all Democrats, however, are adverse to risk nor concerned about the Debate forum, as Massachusetts Barney Frank,(D-MA4) who is “continuing to lose ground”(AP) to Republican Sean Bielat, entered the arena yesterday twice, once on WRKO and a later debate on NECN (clip below). After watching the debate on NECN (three segments available here, one understands why Democrats are not eager to face their Republican opponents. Bielat trounced Frank in both debates, calling the long-term incumbent out on occasion for Frank’s usual refusal to acknowledge statements made on any given subject, regardless of a mountain of evidence to the contrary.



Meanwhile, in the Hamdpen 2nd, the Richard Neal campaign has issued a press release that notes they have agreed to two debates, however, however, the release features no date of release nor offers a clue as to when the debates might take place. The first is allegedly tentatively scheduled for October 15th at 7:30 pm on WGBY Springfield (the local PBS station). Neal was also asked to participate in “Town Hall Style Debates” and is said to have declined.

With Congress convening in order for the House and Senate Democrats to hit the campaign trail (while allowing Bush Tax Cuts that affect every single taxpayer) to expire, one would think they’d find the time and take the opportunity to get out and face their opponents head on. (Especially in Massachusetts and the 8th District in California (Pelosi) That said, they may fear constituents response might be similar to that of Bob Schieffer’s: “Is that all you’ve got?”

John Kerry (D-MA) – Believes Voters are Clueless – MA (D) Congressional Incumbents Threaten to Quite if GOP wins House.

The Globe's Support for Coakley went to the bitter end: this election eve "test" goes to denial image: Michelle Malkin

The Senior Senator from Massachusetts who will be up for reelection in 2014, has once again, stuck a large foot in his mouth. Apparently, Senator Kerry, known to be somewhat on the clueless side himself, uttered this gem at the Boston Medical Center where he was "on tour":

“We have an electorate that doesn’t always pay that much attention to what’s going on so people are influenced by a simple slogan rather than the facts or the truth or what’s happening,”

(Boston Herald)

Kerry then went on to blame the, you guess it, Republicans.

The last single slogan the “people” fell for was the rehashed “Yes We Can”, first used by Deval Patrick, to put his special brand of incompetence to work in the Bay State: then exported nationally by Barack Obama, in order to do the same damage on a larger scale to the nation. That has to be where he got the impression that the general public was easily fooled. That said, an old adage applies: “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me”. Barack Obama’s approval ratings indicate “we won’t’ get fooled again” (Borrowing from The Who).

The simple fact of which Mr. Kerry is apparently unaware, historically the electorate is engaged more than any time since the foundation of this nation (see Tea Party, rise of internet news sites, the Gallup Poll Trust in Institutions which places traditional news media outlets right above dead last Congress) and unfortunately for John Forbes Kerry, they are informed.

Senator Kerry has to drag himself out of the 1970’s and into the digital age, where news and quotes are accessible to the “general public” in a heartbeat, by internet, cable television, radio and email. Back when Senator Kerry was just thinking about a career as a U.S. Senator, information to the public was controlled by the Big 3 networks (CBS, ABC,NBC), and Walter Cronkite basically told the public his version of events. Now, the masses have access to multiple versions, including video, audio and 8 X 10 color glossies as events happen – what’s a Beltway Democrat to do?

101 things one can do with simple Duct Tape.

#1: Insure that the Senior Senator from Massachusetts is not capable of insulting his constituents.

At times, it is embarrassing to admit one is from Massachusetts – unfortunately, that embarrassment stems from words, and deeds (while in office) of our elected officials. John Kerry heads the list, but there are others, Congressional Representatives, that are equally out of tune.

Take, for example, a Boston Globe article dated September 26th. This article warns the electorate that if the Republican’s take control of the House, then the Massachusetts Congressional Delegation (all Democrats) may quit! Many of these Congressional Representatives are, according to the Boston Globe’s standards, extremely important:

“Representative John Olver, Democrat of Amherst, is part of an elite club of members known in the House as “cardinals,’’ because he holds a subcommittee chairmanship on the Appropriations Committee.”

“Representative Richard Neal, Democrat of Springfield, has been angling to become the next chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, one of the most powerful positions in Washington.”

And this “gem” from the 3rd Districts own Jim McGovern:

I’ll have to up my medication,’’ quipped Representative James McGovern, Democrat of Worcester, who is second in seniority on the Rules Committee. “Obviously it’s better to be in charge than not. I don’t even want to speculate what it would be like to lose the House.

(Above source Boston Globe)

Therefore, should the Republicans be victorious and take control of the House, the Democrats from Massachusetts would either loose their lofty positions and or quit outright. The thoughts of say Barney Frank and Richie Neal losing Chairs of Committees that have anything at all to do with our nations finances is not necessarily a “bad idea” to a portion of the Massachustts electorate. Although the Globe is certain that all of the House Seats will remain firmly in the hands of the Democrats currently viewed as unmovable (by the Globe – and Washington based media/pundits), reality may once again rear its ugly head.

Running without national or even state Republican support is nothing new to those Republican’s who dare to try and unseat the powerful, or, for that matter those who are trying to rest a seat that was thought to belong to a certain Democrat family. Massachusetts Republicans running against deeply entrenched Democrats have to rely on those “clueless” voters that Senator Kerry speaks highly of, and the Globe dismisses out of hand.

Two races, in particular, involving one of the aforementioned (the other menioned in the Globe articles also rediculous) considering quitting if they can’t have the top jobs, are more competitive than the Globe, national media, or local district media believe: The 4th District, where Barney Frank is being challenged by one Sean Bielat, and the Hampden 2nd, where Richard Neal is being challenged by one Tom Wesley.

What has to happen in these two races is for the “interest level” to rise to a certain point (unknown) before they are given notice and funds. Ever fiscally conservative, the GOP will not throw “good money after bad”, especially in Massachusetts. Therefore, Republican’s running in Massachusetts, like Sean Beilat and Tom Wesley, must garner support both on a retail/grassroots level, and on a national scale (donations) in order to gain any traction.

There are ten Congressional incumbents, nine of which are facing opposition in the Bay State, and one fact that is not being considered, is that Scott Brown was the beneficiary of an early surge in anti-incumbency that began in Massachusetts - Nothing more, and nothing less. Is this to say that all races are competitive, no – however, there are more than a few which are – and the Globe, (with like minded media) will do their utmost to stick their heads in the sand in order to hold up their preferred candidates until the last minute. (See Boston Globe special election Coakley wins over Brown Internet “test” image)

Although no crystal ball is employed, one can with certainly state that the 2010 mid-term and the 2012 general election will be met by a better informed constituency and many of the incumbents nationwide, (even in Massachusetts), will be writing memoirs of their “careers” in the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Senate.

2010 Election Recession - Pelosi and Democrat Leadership Begs Lawmakers for Unpaid DCCC Dues – Pelosi’s Last FEC Filing Cash On Hand Only $214,046?

Politico: Democrat House Leadership, lead by Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has written a letter “to lawmakers beseeching them to either pony up their unpaid dues to the DCCC or commit to raising more money for the party from their own donors.” the letter went on to imply that unless members pay their dues, the leadership will be forced to choose which incumbents to aid in the upcoming election. The article closes with the fact that several house members have millions in reserves, which could be shared in an attempt to keep the four year old Democrat majority in the Congress.

That said, with a 9.6 unemployment rate going into September and employers across the country implementing hiring freezes and reductions in benefits it may be difficult for any politician to raise funds needed to spend the millions on advertising deemed necessary to win an election.

Even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s “war chest” has fallen to a cash on hand of $214, 046 based on the last Federal Election Commissions data available. The last data filed for the California 8th district, appears to be from June of 2010, therefore, there may be some changes with filings that were due as follows: the July (Quarterly)filing, due the 15th of July and or the August filing, due August 20th (Monthly).




In either event, going into a general election, as Speaker of the House, Ms. Pelosi’s finances should be as healthy as some of her troops noted in the Politico article:

As of their latest filings with the Federal Election Commission, Rep. Frank Pallone of New Jersey had $4.1 million, Ed Markey of Massachusetts had $3.4 million, Allyson Schwartz of Pennsylvania had $3.3 million, Lloyd Doggett of Texas had $3.2 million, Richard Neal of Massachusetts had $3 million, Brad Sherman of California had $2.8 million, Jerry Costello of Illinois had $2.5 million, Bennie Thompson of Mississippi had $2.1 million, and Carolyn Maloney of New York had $2 million. (Maloney, for her part, is locked in a contested primary on Manhattan's Upper East Side.)

(Note: Richard Neal cash on hand actual $2.9 Million, with a mere $177,067.20 received and reported in the third quarterly. Neal, who is also facing a tough re-election, is also lobbying for the Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee (should the Democrats hold the house, which, as of today, appears unlikely). For a powerhouse like Neal to “rake in” under $200,000 in one quarter is telling. In addition, there has been little news since July of Democrat icon, President Bill Clinton coming into Springfield, MA to stump for the endangered Neal )

The fact that House Leadership under the Democrats are also those who approve the administration’s policies and literally “write the checks” for projects, and implement taxes, the state of the economy lays directly with the Congress and those who have held power since 2006 (Democrats).

With funding down, perhaps those that are up for reelection, such as Pelosi, Frank, Neal and the balance of the Democrats (and Republicans) up for reelection will have to go door to door, the old fashioned way, to convince voters that they deserve to keep their jobs. There may be good reason way some of those, such as Neal, who have sizable “war chests” are holding onto them – they may need them to try and regain seats lost this year.

Democrats – Cannot Help Every Incumbent - Party looking to save Least Vulnerable – Where does that leave Frank, Neal, McGovern and Tsongas?

Soon to be unemployed? Photo Boston Globe - Eight of the 10 MA Congressional Reps with Gov. Deval Patrick (also on the retirement train)

The Democrats believe that they may have a plan to save the house, or at least a portion of their members as outlined in an articlevia the Oakland Tribune (Inside the Bay Area’s) One has to understand that in the interest of moral, those that are the powers that be, must put on good face and continue to say “Democrats Won’t Lose the House” while looking less certain by the second.

According to this article, Democrats are going to assess which party members are most vulnerable, and abandon them completely in favor of easier pickups, perhaps a weak Republican candidate or an incumbent with weak opposition. Unfortunately, this is going to leave a lot of their top leaders out of luck, or perhaps they feel that the 2 to 3 million in cash is going to be enough to save: Pelosi, Frank and Rangel’s protégé Richard Neal.

What has happened, especially in Massachusetts, and one can suspect elsewhere, is that the tactics have changed for the RNC. They are, in a word, campaigning like Democrats, only they have more money, and a better ground game – one that includes independents as well as Democrats who are so fed up with the economy that they are willing to “take back their party” by voting for a Republican.
Therefore, with the :30 second commercials (radio and television), one not only has flyers in the mail, one also has real live volunteers calling their houses (along with those robocalls) and best of all, the troops are knocking on doors. This is something new for the average Republican in Massachusetts – who at first knock looks warily out the window, making sure that some Religious Group hasn’t found their way to their doorstep!

Herein lays the problem – there are incumbents in districts who are, on pundit and analyst paper (or web) completely safe. Therefore, why funnel money into say – Massachustts? Surely Barney Frank, Richard Neal, Nikki Tsongas, John Tierney and all 9 of the incumbents are “safe Democrat”. The 10th seat is open and being Massachusetts, it follows, should go to the Democrat running against what-ever Republican is on the ballot. That was pre-2008 think – This is 2010. Simply stated, aside from those venerable institutions that have long standing intelligence on the ground (and can’t see the forest through the trees) the Democrats somehow really believe that these seats are safe, or they are prepared to lose them (based on internal polls). They have thrown a proverbial dog a bone, so to speak – In the Hampden Second, it was understood by media reports, that Richard Neal was going to get help from the most popular Democrat alive: Bill Clinton. The question remains, can even Bill Clinton save Neal? Or would it be a wasted trip?

When one goes to the Massachusetts Secretary of State’s website, one can find the candidates on the primary ballots, both Democrat and Republican. The story here: there are more competitive Republican primaries than Democrat primaries, with the exception of the 4th District. In the 4th District, Barney Frank (Incumbent – Democrat) faces one Rachel Brown (D).

What most political parties bank on during primaries is twofold, the individual state and local committees support and advertising (i.e. favorable media coverage or actual advertisements be it direct mail, electronic or print.) Herein lays the problem: Local city and town committee may endorse a candidate, but the rank and file (regardless of party) most likely cannot name who is on that particular committee. The candidate that relies solely on committee endorsement laurels, so to speak, is in huge trouble – for two reasons: 1) the ordinary Democrat or Republican voter does not pay attention or missed the 2 paragraph note on page 35 of the local paper announcing that endorsement, or they are desperately seeking alternatives due to the current economic climate.

Therefore, this election is going to go down in history as a “free for all” – basically it is up for grabs, regardless of party, primary and or general outcome of both. It is, for lack of a better word, the taxpayers revenge about to be visited upon anyone that individual feels will not work, or has not worked for their personal best interest. Unfortunately, the majority of those politicians’s fall under the Democrat mantle.

In reviewing the latest date from Real Clear Politics, a website that covers all political races, and uses a methodology that combines all pollsters for any given race, it appears that as time progresses, it appears that “chaos” rules the day. (Note: There have been no polls on any of the Massachusetts Congressional, other than internal polls taken by mostly Democrats (see Richard Neal’s Bill Clinton Star Power tour), showing an uphill battle for the first time in decades. One can assume that there are other states where it is similar, including California. For example: the map here depicts the current races across the country that are deemed competitive or “safe”. At present, the Republicans have 206 seats, the Democrats 194, with 35 seats considered “toss ups”. Of those represented, the most conspicuously absent is the CA8th district, or the district that is home to one Nancy Pelosi. In addition they have two Massachusetts Seats listed, one the 10th is open, and considered a tossup – the other, the Mass 5th, is considered “Safe Democrat”. Both of those seats are assumed safe, based on the Obama won theory, or the past voting history of the district. This methodology, without polls, cannot be considered viable, regardless of the “political intelligence” on the ground (mostly Democrat and Republican operatives), one must look to the climate overall.

The latest unemployment figures are now at 9.6% and the President’s Approval has dropped to 42% and the taxpayers are about to bail out yet another bank in Afghanistan (NYTimes), although the White House is denying the later, when has the nation heard that before?

Given the aforementioned, even with pounds of cash (or what is left of the pounds of cash), party star power, and or the SEIU out in force, the face of the Congress and the Senate, will change dramatically this November - with a freshman crop of Senators and Congressional Representatives that may not necessarily have graduated from Yale or Harvard, may not be lawyers, but businessmen, doctors, and regular men and woman who were so disgusted with the direction this country has taken that they’ve dropped lucrative careers, put their lives on hold and went forth as patriots to campaign for seats in both Houses. It is what the founding fathers envisioned, and will be a refreshing change of pace. One can also expect the local newspapers will all endorse the Incumbent running due to their “experience” and the “ability to bring dollars to the various districts”. Missing the point entirely that these two “pluses” by editorial standards, are nothing more than “minuses” in the minds of “today’s voter”.

MA 4th District Congressional Candidate, Sean Bielat, Get’s Boost from Conservative Pundit Michelle Malkin – Implications for Massachusetts

Fox News Commentator, Best Selling Author and Conservative Political Pundit, Michelle Malkin, recently weighed in on a Massachustts Congressional Race – the Race for the 4th District against incumbent Barney Frank. Yesterday, Ms. Malkin put the following post up on her website, Michellemalkin.com: Boot Barney Frank: Support GOP challenger Sean Bielat”

In most election years, Conservative Republicans from Massachusetts, have had to fight tooth and nail to even get notice in the local paper, let alone national media – Ms. Malkin’s decision to highlight Mr. Beilat speaks to the understanding by those outside of the Commonwealth of Massachustts that incumbent Democrats are extremely vulnerable and finally, supporting Massachusetts candidates is not a “waste of time or treasure”.

Mr. Beilat, a marine, family man, and perhaps most critical to his electability, a former Democrat who had recently decided enough was enough, not only switched parties, but moved into Barney Frank’s district to run for Congress. Mr. Bielat has had a long history with Congress, dating back to his days as a Congressional Page. He comes from a long-line of Democrats, and in all likelihood, did not make the decision to change political affiliation easily. It is, with those who have family members of that particular political affiliation, who are treated as somewhat “treasonous” if one deviates from the chosen family ideology. That said, Mr. Beilat’s background as a former Democrat will, undoubtedly, appeal to those 4th district Democrats and Independents who lean Democrat, and are thinking: “Where’s the candidate we can vote for and identify with? – Other than Barney Frank?”

Now they know – which makes the 4th District Race extremely interesting, and Ms. Malkin’s support essential as it will garner much needed cash to wage the final battle against a deeply entrenched Barney Frank.

Other races that are of interest that should be receiving national exposure in Massachusetts are:

The Hampden second, Richard Neal’s District: Dr. Jay Fleitman and Mr. Tom Wesley will square off in the September 14th Primary. Although it is obvious that this blog endorses Dr. Flietman (for reasons previously stated here), the race for the Hampden 2nd is perhaps more imperative than the 4th district, and therefore, its candidates, both accomplished, deserve recognition as they go forward in their battle against Charles’ Rangel’s chosen successor: Congressman Richard Neal. How much trouble is Neal in? Bill Clinton is allegedly coming in to bail him out. Past President visiting this neck of the woods (Western Massachusetts) for any reason are rarities.

Other districts deserving of national interest: The MA 3, the MA 5, the MA6, and the MA 10th. There are six districts in the Commonwealth that offer the nation competitive races. Therefore, a Thank you Michelle Malkin, for highlighting a Massachusetts Candidate as viable, and here’s hoping like-minded pundits will do the same for the other races, specifically the Hampden 2nd, where Richard Neal is slated for retirement.

More on Dr. Jay Fleitman: Jayfleitman.com

More on Tom Wesley Tomwesley.com

Election 2010 - Massachusetts - How Many Long Held Democrat Congressional Seats will be Held by Republicans come November?

There is a change in the political think of the voters in the Bay State, and as stated before, this was in evidence prior to Scott Brown’s run at the Senate. Once that run was successful, those districts that had one or two Republicans who had stepped forward to run for Congress suddenly had multiple candidates vying for primary win. In addition, where there had been no opposition previously, opposition did develop. The question one has to ask is how viable are those “predictions of Massachusetts, deeply entrenched, Democrats being defeated in November?” or for that matter, all districts as “Safe Democrat” – In reality, there are several seats where it is more than possible, and heading towards highly probable that they are in play – this based on limited access to internal polls, as well as a general angst of the people in the Commonwealth over the Party in Power. Although there has been this type of voter emotion before, which allowed Ronald Regan to claim the Bay State twice, one has to understand the Congressional and Senate seats remained in the hands of the Democrats.

What has changed? Several points to consider: this is a mid-term not a general election where the focus is more on the Presidential candidates than on those running for Congress, the aforementioned angst which is fueled by high deficits, and unemployment, as well as a “brand” gone bad – sets the stage for an electorate that is ready to try something different. (Which has happened, although, admittedly rarely.)

The make-up of the Bay State’s electorate is considered in the equation as the majority of the electorate is “unenrolleds” (50 plus percent), and although the Republican Party in Massachustts has the lowest registration of the two major parties, it is being now being boosted by those Green Party, Libertarian and unenrolleds and yes, Scott Brown Democrats, who, as national polls indicate, are not buying slogans.

Lacking any public polling, which may or may not take place until after the September 14, primary, it is difficult to call a specific race, but one can, based on the aforementioned, make a prediction.
Over at Wicked Local (Gatehouse Media) a guest op-ed piece by Robert E. Kelly opines that “Single Party Reign Could End in Massachustts. Mr. Kelly then goes on to rate which districts he feels are in jeopardy – basing his predictions on the outcome of the Brown/Coakley Senate Race, and including the caveat that that voter angst must stay the same to see these predictions come to fruition.

If anything, as of this writing, Massachusetts voters are more a) interested in politics earlier in the game, and especially who is running against whom, and b) the angst is increasing daily. To read the entire article visit: Wicked Local, Swansea News Opinions

Mr. Kelley’s Predictions with this blogs comments:

On District 1, Mr. Kelly feels this may be in play – a point where this blog departs. The reasoning, that district (using Mr. Kelly’s model) was 99.9% for Coakley against Brown, and Congressman Olver is Massachusetts version of Robert Byrd. Is it possible, yes, anything is possible, but probable? Unless there is a huge turn in voter angst (pitchfork level), the Challenger, one William Gunn, will have his work cut out for him.
District 2- Incumbent Richard Neal as vulnerable – this is agreed. Neal is extremely vulnerable – to the point where he has called in Bill Clinton to stump for him in the districts largest population centers: Chicopee and Springfield, where Neal has the biggest problems. Odds are on the winner of the Republican Primary to go to Washington – This district should be polled come October 1st.

District 3 – McGovern – agreed also endangered – Worcester Country has become somewhat of a red streak in the Middle of the blue Bay State for the past few election cycles. This District should be polled.

District 4 – Although incumbent Barney Frank is probably the most high profile target of the angst felt in the Bay State and elsewhere, within his own district, he has the distinction of being likeable – at least up until this year. In order for a challenger to unseat Barney – whichever Republican emerges from the Primary must have a) scads of cash to counter Frank, and boots on the ground, specifically in the larger population centers where the ground game needs to be focused.
What makes this race interesting is that there does exists a schism in the Democrat Party itself, where Rachael Brown is running against Frank, coupled with rumors of Frank’s retirement. Therefore, this district is one where anything can happen, and it makes for extreme political entertainment. Frank can be bested, by a Republican but the effort will have to be herculean – and then, it may not be Frank rather a Democrat by the name of Rachel Brown facing the Republican in November - Until the primary – this is anyone’s best guess.

District 5- Niki Tsongas – agreed – this district is in play, District 6 – Agreed Safe (for now), District 7 – Markey is one of the powerful players in this Democrat Congressional Delegation– somewhat possible, but not probable. District 8 – Stephen Lynch – disagree with the assessment – Lynch is safer than most and District 9 – Capuano – running virtually unopposed – safe. Finally, District 10 – Free-for-All, seat will go to a Republican – agreed.

Therefore, although looking at these races, sans national polling data, but based on voter angst, electorate make-up and (in the case of Mr. Kelly) the Brown-Coakley outcome) one can get a better picture of the Commonwealth’s political make-up and possible representation after the November 4th mid-term. In any event, the Commonwealth should be one of the more interesting states to watch in October, as several of these races are definitely in play.




MA Congressional District Predictions As of August, 2010 - (This is illustrative - understanding blogger has no graphic skills)

Democrats Counseled To Avoid Direct Contact with Constituents Going Into the 2010 Midterms - Fear and Loathing of Democrats trumps Courage

TheNew York Times ran an interesting piece on yesterday on incumbent Democrats and Town Hall Meetings – apparently, most Democrats won’t be holding any meetings this summer where they may run into too many constituents. According to the article, there are 255 Democrats who spent last week in their home districts, most of which attended closed “meet and greets” with “party leaders” advising them to hold events in “controlled settings”. Apparently, the party that promoted dissent when the proverbial shoe was on the other foot prefers to stifle dissent if it is aimed in the direction of an incumbent Democrat.
One is reminded of the old Ostrich with its head stuck in the sand, the premise, if one can’t see the danger it does not exist. That strategy may work as far as keeping those incumbents from the reality of the looming November elections.

Massachusetts, which was known as the “bluest state” when it came to all levels of government is experiencing shocking change. The Massachusetts Democrat Convention, held in Worcester this past weekend, attracted 3,500 attendees, or shockingly only 400 more than those attending the Massachusetts Republican Convention held in April.(source: Boston Globe). In addition, the Republican Party in Massachusetts has 37 out of 175 state and federal candidates, vying for nine of the 10 Congressional Seats in Mass. It will be the first time many of the Democrat Incumbents have had to actually campaign for their seats, and true to form, they are not sticking their necks out to meet with the general public. In addition, the Globe article reporting on the number of Republican Challengers, noted that:

“The nonpartisan Cook Political Report considers nine of the state’s 10 congressional seats “solid D’’ in its most recent round-up, updated May 24. Only Delahunt’s former seat is labeled a toss-up.”

One problem with the Cook Political Report’s analysis is that the designation of “solid D” is based on past performance and district makeup – that was then, this is now. Polling the voting public might produce a different scenario, and with the sudden interest in constitutions reported on by local district newspapers, by near invisible Congressional Representatives such as Richard Neal, Barney Frank and every representative with the exception of Capuano (who is unchallenged), one can bet there have been internal polls telling them there is a problem in River City. As September and the primary challenges are past (some Representatives such as Barney Frank, face competition from within their own party as well as from the Republican Party), the heat in the kitchen is going to increase. At that point, as it was with the Scott Brown/Martha Coakley Race, one will most likely see national polling take place when it becomes glaringly apparent that all is not well for the Democrats in the State of Massachusetts. Polling on the Brown/Coakley special election was not even a national consideration until three weeks prior to the polls, when Rasmussen jumped in and blew a hole in the Boston Globe Poll giving Coakley a 15 point lead. This was followed by polling from Public Policy Polling, which confirmed Brown was neither down nor out - and still, both the Boston Globe and the Democrats continued to believe - until Brown's 5 point lead held steady from the morning till the final precinct reported.

Massachusetts is not an anomaly, with all fifty states in play, in both the House and the Senate, as the administration with a Congress in concert, leads the nation further into debt, while the unemployment figures continue to trend near 10%, with only a point or two variance from month to month. In the last report for the month of May, only 41,000 private sector jobs were created, versus the 400,000 public sector jobs. The nation may not score the highest globally in math and science scores, but it does not take a genius to conclude that 41,000 private sector jobs cannot, in taxes, support 400,000 public sector jobs – ergo, the nation must go deeper in debt.

It is the anxiety that is present and the fear of the current administration and its congressional minions, being unable to fix the problem, (or the gulf oil crisis, which is now being counted in days, reminiscent of the Carter Iran crisis) that is going to translate into a changed political field in 2010 and going forward into 2012. Perhaps it was right to counsel those incumbents to avoid reality, at least for the time being.

Addendum:

Charlie Cook of the Cook Report has taken the time to correct the characterization of the Cook Report's Congressional Surveys used in this blog: Noted: The house editor, David Wasserman, analyzes all of the Congressional races, in fact, there were 25 races rated and updated since April 15th. The individual race analysis is by subscription only. The opinion formed by this blog was based on the “free” information available to the general public. This is not to say that this blog agrees with Mr. Wasserman’s analysis of the Massachusetts Congressional races.