Congressional Democrats, already reeling from dismal approval ratings, have a big problem on their hands: now “former” Congressman Eric Massa.

As one Congressional aide put it -

from the PRIsm Political Report:

 Texas Primary Results

Republicans and Democrats went to the polls yesterday to select their nominees for the fall races.  Gov. Rick Perry, running away with the race in the final laps of the campaign appears to have won renomination outright against US Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Wharton County GOP chair Debra Medina.  Perry captured 51.0% of the vote to Hutchison’s 30.4%.  Medina placed third with 18.6%.  Run-offs in Texas occur if no candidate receives 50% plus one vote.

 

The victory was huge for Perry, as he won nomination for a third full term as the Lone Star State’s chief executive.  He also finished George W. Bush’s final term as Governor, ascending to the top post from his post as Lt. Governor.  He is already the longest-serving Governor in the history of Texas, and will be a heavy favorite to win re-election in November in what is shaping up to be a strong Republican year in America’s second largest state. 

 

The results reflected a monumental collapse for Hutchison, who began the race early last year with a big lead over the Governor.  Her on again-off again resignation from the Senate, a lack of issues focus in her advertising, poorly delivered attacks on Perry for his failed Trans-Texas Corridor project, and highlighting her endorsements from liberal newspapers to one of the most conservative voting electorates in the country cumulatively proved to be a highly flawed campaign strategy, despite the presence of Bush advisor Karl Rove as one of her top consultants.  The endorsement of former President George H.W. Bush, ex-VP Dick Cheney, and most of the Republican congressional delegation also did little to help her. 

 

Perry successfully labeled Hutchison as a Washington insider who had lost touch with the people back home.  He lambasted her support of the Bush-Obama financial bail-out legislation, coining the nickname Kay “Bail-out” Hutchison.  Perry moved hard right, playing to the primary electorate, by claiming that President Obama was “punishing” Texas, and even mused that succession from the US might be a subject people would begin addressing if the federal government continued along its current path. 

 

The Governor now faces former Houston Mayor Bill White in the general election.  White easily won the Democratic nomination, notching 76.5% of the vote in a field of weak candidates.  It appears that under 5% of the registered voters will have participated in the Democratic primary when all of the votes are finalized.  White’s total vote of approximately 450,000, representing ¾ of the total Dem ballots cast, is still more than 250,000 votes under Perry’s total, and he had just half of the Republican vote.  Total turnout will break 15% — over 2 million voters — which is a very large number for a Texas primary.  In 2006, for example, combined total turnout was only 1.1 million.

 

Though Washington, DC was completely rejected in the Governor’s race, the members of the congressional delegation facing primary challenges all did very well.  For Republicans, Reps. Ralph Hall (57%), Kevin Brady (79%), Michael McCaul (82%), Mike Conaway (77%), Kay Granger (70%), Ron Paul (81%), Lamar Smith (81%), Kenny Marchant (84%), Michael Burgess (86%), John Carter (90%), and Pete Sessions (84%) all cruised to easy victories.

 

On the Democratic side, Reps. Ruben Hinojosa (85%), Sheila Jackson Lee (67%, though the vast majority of votes in this district remain uncounted), and Ciro Rodriguez (83%) likewise won comfortably. 

 

In races that could potentially become competitive in the general election, the 17^th district of Rep. Chet Edwards (D) and against Rodriguez in the 23^rd, run-offs will be held on April 13 to finally determine nominees in those two seats.  2008 nominee Rob Curnock (29%) and businessman Bill Flores (33%) will square-off for the right to face Edwards.  This race could quickly move into the toss-up category.  Former CIA officer Will Hurd (34%) and businessman Quico Canseco (32%) will duel in the Rodriguez seat.  The Congressman will be a decided favorite in the general election.

With House Republicans poised to seek a floor vote to remove Rep. Charlie Rangel of his Chairmanship of the Ways & Means Committee, House Democrats in potentially competitive races will be in a tough situation in the wake of the Ethics Committee’s findings that House rules were broken.

The Hill’s Susan Crabtree writes on their tenuous situation.  Key excerpts below:

Reps. Betty Sutton (Ohio) and Harry Mitchell (Ariz.) have joined the ranks of Democrats calling for the New York Democrat to relinquish his gavel in the wake of the ethics committee finding that Rangel violated House rules.

There are now seven Democrats who have publicly called and/or voted to have Rangel give up his chairmanship: Reps. Bobby Bright (Ala.), Travis Childers (Miss.), Paul Hodes (N.H.), Mitchell, Mike Quigley (Ill.), Sutton and Gene Taylor (Miss.).

Meanwhile, Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) is giving money Rangel donated to his campaign to charity while Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-Ariz.) is returning funds to the 79-year-old chairman.

In a release, Kirkpatrick said, “The bipartisan ethics committee has found that Congressman Rangel did not live up to the standards Members owe to their constituents with this matter and continues to look into other serious breaches. While I deeply respect his lifetime of service as a soldier and as a U.S. representative, I can no longer accept his support.�

According to CQ Money Line, other Democrats who have received funds from Rangel this cycle include Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.) and Reps. Dina Titus (Nev.), Eric Massa (N.Y.), Dan Maffei (N.Y.), Gary Peters (Mich.), Debbie Halvorson (Ill.) and Mike McMahon (N.Y.).

The ethics committee found that Rangel violated House gift rules when he accepted reimbursement for two trips to the Caribbean that were sponsored by corporations. House ethics rules Democrats passed in 2007 after they won the majority bar corporations that employ lobbyists from sponsoring travel that lasts more than one day.

This week in a National Journal interview, political prognosticator Charlie Cook views Republicans, “…on a trajectory,” to winning back the House of Representatives.

Cook: I’ve spent the last couple of days talking to some of the brightest Democrats in the party that are not in the White House. And it’s very hard to come up with a scenario where Democrats don’t lose the House. It’s very hard. Are the seats there right this second? No. But we’re on a trajectory on the House turning over….

In Nevada Senate news, the PRIsm Political Report give this analysis on recent survey results for embattled Majority Leader Harry Reid:

Liberal Poll: Reid’s Worst Numbers

 

Research 2000, the Maryland-based national polling firm who surveys the electorate for liberal organizations and newspapers, just completed a Nevada poll that reveals disastrous results for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.  The survey, for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), was taken over February 9-10 and interviewed 600 likely Nevada voters.

 

While Reid has routinely trailed the two top Republican candidates, former state GOP chair Sue Lowden and ex-Secretary of State candidate Danny Tarkanian — son of the legendary University of Nevada at Las Vegas basketball coach Jerry Tarkanian — this new data, commissioned by a source group friendly to Reid, is revealing leads for both Lowden and Tarkanian are well into double-digits.

 

Against Lowden, Reid trails 39-53% and has a huge 36-60% deficit among male voters.  The former Republican chair, 1973 Miss America contestant, and casino owner enjoys a 46-42% advantage among females.  Lowden is attracting 88% support among Republicans when paired with the Majority Leader, 20% from Democrats, and leads the all-important Independent category 58-32%.  Tarkanian’s numbers are similar.  He tops Reid 54-40% in the overall vote count; has the same 60-36% whopping advantage among men; and leads with women 48-44%.  He gets 89% support from Republicans; 21% among Democrats; and Independents split 59-34% in his favor.

 

Not surprisingly, Reid’s best support group is African American voters, where he clears 73% against both Republicans.  He also does well with Obama voters, which certainly stands to reason.  Of the respondents claiming they voted for Mr. Obama in 2008, Reid keeps 56%, but even within this sub-group, a full third (32% for Tarkanian; 34% pledging to Lowden) are saying they will vote Republican for Senate. 

 

By a margin of 53-29%, the respondents believe President Obama and the Democrats in Washington have not delivered on their campaign promise to “change” America.  The healthcare numbers, in fact the purpose for which the PCCC sanctioned the poll, are quite disparate.  Overall, by a margin of 34-58%, the respondents oppose the healthcare bill that was before the Senate.  Conversely, the split is 56-38% in favor of the federal government offering the choice to buy into a government-administered health insurance plan that would compete with the private sector.  They also would look more favorably upon Reid if he could pass such a plan (34-15% more likely to support).

 

Though the Majority Leader’s numbers are poor, and reminiscent of former New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine’s political position in early 2009 - a situation he never succeeded in reversing - there are some parts of the set-up equation that do play to his favor and don’t rule out a come back. 

Nevada has officially recognized the Tea Party as a statewide political entity.  This means the Tea Party has the right to field candidates for office and will likely nominate a U.S. Senate standard bearer.  If the race tightens, which is likely, the Nevada Tea Party’s candidate will presumably take votes away from the eventual Republican nominee, especially if it is Lowden, who many in the Tea Party movement term a “Republican in Name Only (RINO)”.  Secondly, Reid’s overwhelming ability to command campaign resources will certainly dwarf the Republican campaign dollar effort, but in a high profile race such as this, individual candidate and outside group spending becomes a bit less important.  Third, Nevada has been trending Democratic in the past few elections, meaning the state’s political and demographic trends are more beneficial to Reid and his party than the Republicans.

 

Another negative, however, concerns Reid’s own son.  Rory Reid is a Clark County (Las Vegas) Commissioner who is openly talking about running for Governor.  Though Republican incumbent Jim Gibbons is in deep political trouble, it is more likely that not he will be defeated in the GOP primary, assuming he even runs for re-election.  Any other Republican will be stronger against the Democrats, meaning the fact that both Harry and Rory Reid will be on the ballot could then become troublesome for both men.  Candidate filing closes on March 12^th, so the younger Reid has only several weeks to officially enter the race.  The Nevada primary is June 8^th. 

 

Heidi Przybyla and Kim Chipman, both of Bloomberg News, don’t say so explicitly, but in their article today about the just-announced retirement of moderate-Democrat Evan Bayh (D-IN) from the U.S. Senate, they do consider the possibility.

“Indiana Democrat Evan Bayh’s decision to retire from the U.S. Senate complicates his party’s efforts to retain control of the chamber at a time when public disapproval of Congress is at its highest level in 18 years,� write Przybyla and Chipman.

With Democrats still smarting from losing their 60-seat, veto-proof majority with the election of Scott Brown in last month’s Massachusetts shocker – combined with Congress’s 75% disapproval rating – there is growing worry among the Left that majority control of the self-proclaimed “most deliberative body� in the world may indeed be at stake this November.

Interested readers should CLICK HERE to read the full article from Bloomberg online.

President Obama has announced a bi-partisan health care summit. 

 

“I want to come back [after the Presidents Day congressional recess] and have a large meeting — Republicans and Democrats — to go through, systematically, all the best ideas that are out there and move it forward,� Obama said in an interview.

 

Although he has expressed frustration at Republicans for not wanting to “compromise,” the main battle brewing seems to be within the ranks of Obama’s Democrat party. 

 

Many have asked the question: Should the Republicans participate in the summit?  Public opinion polls show that American’s do not support the Democrat’s health care legislation, and this is reflected in President Obama’s approval rating on the matter.  Unless the President throws out the current House and Senate versions and starts over from scratch, the “summit” charade is meaningless based on the public’s dissatisfaction with the legislation.

 

While the American people do not support the current Democrat health care plans, they also don’t feel the Republicans have laid out a plan at all.  Sources tell me this is about to change. 

 

Congressional Republicans must decide whether the summit that the President is hosting is the proper venue for releasing the details of their health care reform plan.  Being that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other congressional Democrats have stated that certain aspects of the bill (portions that are the most unpopular with the American public) must remain, it’s highly unlikely that the President will allow the Republicans to upstage his own party at his own “summit.”  

 

Republicans must ask the President for 2 things if he wants their participation in the summit:

 

1) Totally scrap the current legislation and start over from scratch

2) Allow the Republicans to unveil their health care reform bill

 

If the answer to either is “NO,” the GOP would be better off taking a pass on the summit and releasing their plan on a different forum.

This is my first blog post on our site, and I could not think of a more appropriate time to discuss my area of expertise in the WRS world—Pennsylvania Politics—than now. Yesterday, the state of Pennsylvania’s longest-serving Congressman (by two days, no less), John Murtha, passed away unexpectedly at the age of 77. While I am not a huge fan of the late Congressman (and his pork-barrel spending), his death—and the special election that it creates—further cements the Commonwealth’s role as the most exciting place for Republicans in 2010.

One of the reasons why I believe that Pennsylvania is the most exciting place is because we have an exciting (and winnable) race at every level of government all over the Commonwealth. First, former Congressman Pat Toomey is favored to win the U.S. Senate Seat that has belonged to former-RINO Arlen Specter for three decades now. Both the Franklin and Marshall and Rasmussen polls conducted last month have Toomey up by more than 8 points. On the Democratic side, Specter—newly endorsed by the PA Democratic establishment at their conference—holds a 17-point lead over Congressman Joe Sestak in the May primary. In Harrisburg, Jim Gerlach’s decision to leave the Governor’s race and focus instead on keeping his Congressional seat red helps furthers our chances of winning back the Governor’s mansion in November. We can only hope that the Democrats continue to beat themselves up in the primary enough to ensure Corbett’s win this fall.

On a more localized level, every corner of the state now has a competitive Congressional race on their hands. The Southeast houses three of the most competitive races in the nation, with Gerlach’s re-election battle in the 6th, the open seat created by Sestak’s Senate run in the 7th, and now former Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick’s bid for his old seat in the 8th. All of these seats, located squarely in the Philadelphia suburbs, will cost millions of dollars to win and can change on the drop of a hat. While whoever wins the May primaries will have a significant effect on the ultimate course of the race, as of now they are all winnable by Republicans in November. Driving up the Northeast Extension 100 miles, the 10th and 11th Districts—currently represented by Democrats Chris Carney and Paul Kanjorski, respectively—are once again top GOP targets. With Hazelton Mayor (and anti-illegal immigration candidate) Lou Barletta running against Kanjorski, we can only hope that the third time is the charm. The GOP also has several candidates exploring a run in the tenth, a seat in which Republicans held for more than forty years before Carney’s 2006 victory. In the Western part of the state, the GOP is still licking its wounds from its surprise loss in the 3rd District last cycle (Kathy Dahlkemper), and the 4th (Jason Altmire) and 12th (Murtha) are becoming more and more interesting every day with the addition of new candidates and, quite frankly, unexpected deaths.

Obviously, the first race to be decided will be the 12th, which should be filled through a special election sometime this spring. Governor Ed Rendell has hinted that that this election will coincide with the May 18th primaries; however, it remains to be seen who will actually run now that it is an open seat. Before Murtha’s death, there was a full primary on both sides of the aisle, with 2008 nominee William Russell looking to lead the GOP pack. Now everyone under the sun, including former Lieutenant Governor Mark Singel, has been mentioned as a possible candidate in this race. Today, the Cook Political Report moved the seat into the “toss-up� category. I personally believe that depending on who the candidates are, the Republican shift of the voting electorate in the district (as it was the only district nationwide that voted for Kerry in 2004 and McCain in 2008) and the current political climate make this seat one that Republicans have a solid chance of winning.

It is funny—eight years ago, the State Legislature redistricted Pennsylvania to make it more Republican. Today, Democrats hold 12 of the state’s 19 Congressional Districts. Maybe we will learn our lesson before gerrymandering the districts in 2012, but until then, Pennsylvanian Republicans can look forward to 2010 with optimism and excitement.

National Democrats continue to lose sitting Members of Congress and top-tier recruits.  Rep. Marion Berry’s (D-Ark.) retirement and Beau Biden’s (D) decision not to pursue the US Senate came after Democrats said they expected the opposite. And now the Democrat party, which has said it doesn’t expect lots of retirements, is facing the possibility of several more.

And in a short time span, Republicans have taken a slight lead over Democrats on the “generic ballot” question of which party one would support in their vote for Congress. 

Let’s take a quick look at the Republican-scenario for taking back the House of Representatives.  Currently, the House stands at 257 Democrats and 178 Republicans; thus Republicans would need a net gain of 40 seats to obtain a 1-seat majority. 

As of today, various election analysts have the Democrats pegged at 174 safe seats.  Another 35 districts are considered “likely Democrat,” while 25 lean their way.  That gives them an advantage in 234 seats; a clear majority, but 23 under their current number.  Due to Republican recruitment efforts and Democrats retirements, the “likely” and “lean” categories continue to dwindle and it isn’t because they are moving into the “safe” category.

Republicans are safe or likely winners in 163 districts.  Another 16 seats lean their way for a total of 179 - 1 seat MORE than they control today.

22 districts are considered in the “toss-up” category, in which no party has a clear advantage to date.  But the “toss-up” number also continues to grow in a way where “lean Democrat” seats continue to move into this category.  The Republicans will virtually have to convert all of these toss-up districts to have any chance at winning the majority and then go onto beat 17 Democratic incumbents.

House Republicans needs to segment their gain objectives into three categories.  First, they must realistically break the 200 mark needed to regain relevance in the body’s legislative process.  This would require a net gain of 23 seats and, considering the way the 2010 turnout model appears to be unfolding, such a goal is realistic.  Second, is to exceed the 210 barrier, thus almost attaining parity with the majority party.  Such a move would require a net gain of 33 seats; the more retirements occur, the more possible this scenario is.  Finally, winning a bare majority as we mentioned previously, would require a gain of 40 seats, but the Republicans would need to exceed even this number in order to have a working legislative majority.  Therefore, the party must realistically look beyond 43 seats.  With re-elect rates for incumbent Congressmen exceeding 93% even in tumultuous years (the incumbent re-elect rates in 2006 and 2008, for example, were 95.1% and 94%, respectively), the degree of difficulty for the GOP to reclaim the majority in this one upcoming election remains high, but not impossible.

Currently, Republicans feel a momentum switch because they sense a general negative reaction to the Democrats’ new policy direction.  The elections for the House of Representatives may give us the best read of the people’s mood, since all voters will have the chance to express themselves in their local congressional elections.  In fact, this is the precisely the reason the founding fathers gave Representatives two-year terms — to keep them closely aligned with the people they serve, and allow the electorate to quickly signal a response to new legislation.

Nothing can possibly compare to the devastation caused by the massive 7.0 temblor, or the ensuing catastrophe, which has struck Haiti.  While much of the world, including U.S. Marines (despite the objections of Hugo Chavez), struggle to save the missing and protect the survivors, a quaking of another sort is going on to Haiti’s north.

Here in the U.S., following the landmark GOP win of Scott Brown in the special election to fill the open U.S. Senate seat of the late-Ted Kennedy, the rumbling which began in Massachusetts can now be felt from coast to coast.  What follows is a brief synopsis:

…A report released yesterday, according to the AP, found that home sales in December had plummeted by 17% last month, the largest single drop in four decades.  Analysts were quick to place blame on a recent act passed by Congress extending the deadline for home buyers to take advantage of a tax credit, but less cheery is the equally-strong notion that sales for homes were down in December for the same reason retail sales were down for the holidays: America is still deeply mired in a recession.  With the unemployment rate holding around 10% and the outlook for new job creation grim, fewer families are making long-term purchases – while conversely, record numbers of homes continue to be foreclosed.

…According to a report out of Wisconsin, divorce is rapidly on the rise.  The culprit?  Once again, blame rests on the economy.  As Jeff Starck reports, “[I]n a recession, financial stress affects almost every marriage.�

…Every quarter, analysts and subscribers to Bloomberg are surveyed as to their opinions on economic and political issues.  Among the noteworthy findings of the latest survey, 77% of respondents said they considered President Obama to be “too anti-business�.  Conversely, embattled Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke earned a 68% approval rating in the survey.

…Not surprisingly, President Obama’s approval ratings continue to suffer as a result of the ongoing economic turmoil.  According to Rasmussen’s latest tracking poll released yesterday, 25% of respondents strongly approved of the president’s job performance while 41% strongly disapproved, a “-16 score� on Rasmussen’s presidential index.

…Last but not least, President Obama isn’t the only politician on the hot seat.  Here in sunny Arizona, from where I report weekly, U.S. Senator John McCain appears to be drawing a noteworthy Republican primary challenger: conservative talk radio host and former congressman J.D. Hayworth.  In a state where Border Security ranks just behind the economy among issues important to the electorate, McCain has outraged many GOP voters with his steadfast support for legislation offering amnesty to illegal immigrants – as well as for his leadership on campaign finance reform and opposition to the Bush tax cuts.  Hayworth’s challenge will be to raise the resources to compete against McCain’s deep campaign coffers, but it may prove to be a surprisingly competitive race.

Anyone close, or far, from this campaign will have an opinion about what contributed to Scott Brown’s win tonight in Massachusetts.  The fact is that a number of things pushed voters to abandon their Democratic-leaning electoral history to elect the first Republican U.S. Senator from this state in more than 30 years.

First, the environment.  As I have mentioned over the past several months, voters are pissed off (pardon my bluntness).  They are angry at a government that is spending without consequence selling promises of better days ahead.  It has been my observation that voters are not accepting the amount of debt that the Democratic-led Congress is taking on in the name of economic stimulus without any measurable results.

Second, voters are offended at the entitlement argument.  They don’t like being told that something is already predetermined.  This is not “Kennedy’s seat,” nor is it a “Democratic seat.”  They especially hate when they are told that they don’t have a real voice in a decision they deserve to make.  This was the case tonight in Massachusetts.  Advertisements featuring various Kennedy family members were given thousands of gross rating points trying to convince voters that they dare not trade this seat to Republicans because of “temporary” frustrations regarding the country’s economic conditions.  But, these ads deepened the anger and were based on a set of falsehoods.  Kennedy faced several close races - most recently against Mitt Romney.   Senator Kennedy, while a true statesman, still didn’t attract the vote for a randomly nominated Democratic candidate based solely on his post-mortem endorsement.  This points to an electorate that is fatigued with a one-party system.  This also points to the natural ebb and flow of American politics.

Third, Coakley was outworked.  The Democratic machine thought that the only race they faced was the primary.  They didn’t think that a lowly state senator with minimal statewide name recognition would ever be competitive.  The failure of Coakley to campaign strongly until the last three weeks put them woefully behind.

Fourth, Brown was the man of the people.  Scott Brown campaigned in his truck, literally.  Until the last few weeks, the Brown campaign was a long-shot, small budget affair.  But, that didn’t stop them from working hard to push the message that Brown wasn’t the pre-ordained choice for this seat; instead, he was just another guy that, like them, worried about higher taxes, bills and the health and education of his children.  Independent voters ate this message up!  This is exactly what they wanted.

Finally, health care killed Coakley.  Everyone in Massachusetts has insurance coverage.  Scott Brown was able to convince many of these voters that a universal, federal government-run health care system would do nothing more than to tax them to pay for coverage of people in other states.  The recession helped drive home that message.

Brown’s win tonight is proof that voters are fed-up with the status quo.