|
Bleeding Heartland
It's what plants crave.
|
DCCC
Fri Jan 08, 2010 at 08:08:56 AM CST
|
|
I expected 2009 to be a relatively quiet year in Iowa politics, but was I ever wrong.
The governor's race heated up, state revenues melted down, key bills lived and died during the legislative session, and the Iowa Supreme Court's unanimous ruling in Varnum v Brien became one of this state's major events of the decade.
After the jump I've posted links to Bleeding Heartland's coverage of Iowa politics from January through June 2009. Any comments about the year that passed are welcome in this thread.
Although I wrote a lot of posts last year, there were many important stories I didn't manage to cover. I recommend reading Iowa Independent's compilation of "Iowa's most overlooked and under reported stories of 2009," as well as that blog's review of "stories that will continue to impact Iowa in 2010."
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 5197 words in story)
|
|
Thu Jan 07, 2010 at 14:56:38 PM CST
|
|
Following up on the diary I posted this morning, this post compiles links to Bleeding Heartland's coverage of national politics from July through December 2009. Health care reform was again the number one topic. I wish there had been a happy ending.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 3389 words in story)
|
|
Thu Jan 07, 2010 at 07:52:32 AM CST
|
|
It took me a week longer than I anticipated, but I finally finished compiling links to Bleeding Heartland's coverage from last year. This post and part 2, coming later today, include stories on national politics, mostly relating to Congress and Barack Obama's administration. Diaries reviewing Iowa politics in 2009 will come soon.
One thing struck me while compiling this post: on all of the House bills I covered here during 2009, Democrats Leonard Boswell, Bruce Braley and Dave Loebsack voted the same way. That was a big change from 2007 and 2008, when Blue Dog Boswell voted with Republicans and against the majority of the Democratic caucus on many key bills.
No federal policy issue inspired more posts last year than health care reform. Rereading my earlier, guardedly hopeful pieces was depressing in light of the mess the health care reform bill has become. I was never optimistic about getting a strong public health insurance option through Congress, but I thought we had a chance to pass a very good bill. If I had anticipated the magnitude of the Democratic sellout on so many aspects of reform in addition to the public option, I wouldn't have spent so many hours writing about this issue. I can't say I wasn't warned (and warned), though.
Links to stories from January through June 2009 are after the jump. Any thoughts about last year's political events are welcome in this thread.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 3702 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Sun Dec 20, 2009 at 14:34:15 PM CST
|
Josh Kraushaar reported for the Politico on Friday that the "National Republican Congressional Committee is getting clobbered by their Democratic counterparts on the fundraising front":
The DCCC raised $3.65 million for the month, and ended November with $15.35 million cash-on-hand. It still holds $2.66 million in debt from last election cycle.
The NRCC only raised $2.34 million in November, and spent $2.16 million, hardly adding to their overall cash total. The committee now has $4.35 million in its account, while still owing $2 million in debt.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Democrats lose 20 to 30 House seats nationally next year. That said, if the NRCC can't build up a decent war chest now, with unemployment high and support for health care reform sinking, they may not be able to convert favorable conditions into a huge wave. NRCC officials have talked about targeting dozens of seats, but they're a long way from having the money to fund that many challengers.
The five Republicans competing in a primary to face seven-term incumbent Leonard Boswell should assume that they won't get much help from the NRCC during the general election campaign. Iowa's third Congressional district is not among the most vulnerable Democratic-held House seats. That's not to say Boswell couldn't lose, especially if Iowa's employment market remains weak throughout next year. But I agree with David Wasserman of the Cook Political Report, who told the Des Moines Register, "I think it's fair to say if Democrats are losing any of their seats in Iowa next year, they'll be suffering large losses across the country."
If Boswell looks like he is in trouble next year, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee will certainly spend money on his behalf. Boswell is in the DCCC's Frontline program.
Speaking of the GOP primary in IA-03, I got a kick out of Dave Funk criticizing Boswell for securing $750,000 in federal funds for the renovation of the former Des Moines Public Library building (which is now owned by the World Food Prize Foundation). Somehow I doubt third district voters will be outraged that Boswell obtained some federal help for this $30 million project in downtown Des Moines.
|
|
Discuss
:: (2
Comments)
|
|
Wed Sep 02, 2009 at 16:21:15 PM CDT
|
Not to be a wet blanket after yesterday's great special election victory, but the latest Pew Research Center poll should set off some alarm bells at the DCCC and DSCC:
Americans are extremely displeased with Congress, and there are already some signs that this could take a toll on the Democrats in the 2010 midterm elections. Currently, 37% express a favorable opinion of Congress, while 52% hold an unfavorable view. Positive opinions of Congress have declined by 13 points since April and are now at one of their lowest points in more than two decades of Pew Research Center surveys.
At the same time, intentions to vote Democratic in the next midterm election are markedly lower than they have been over the past four years. Voters are about evenly divided when asked how they would vote if the election for Congress were being held today: 45% say they would vote for a Democratic candidate in their district, or lean Democratic, while 44% say they would vote for a Republican or lean Republican. At about this point four years ago, Democrats led in the generic congressional ballot by 52% to 40% and went on to win a majority of the popular vote and regain control of Congress the following November.
Meanwhile, the Research 2000 polling for Daily Kos finds the Democratic lead on the generic Congressional ballot down to 6 points, with Democratic intensity "lagging badly":
With Independents potentially sitting this next election out (as the numbers hint at), we're in bad shape in a base election. Core Republicans are engaged and solidly home. Democratic constituencies are wavering (look at those African American numbers). The only key Democratic constituency to have moved more Democratic are young voters -- from +30 Democratic to +37, but only because they are abandoning Republicans at a bigger rate than Democrats. And even those gains are threatened by the (non) geniuses in DC seriously contemplating a health care mandate without cost controls (like the public option).
At current rates, any 2010 losses would not stem from any resurgence in conservative ideology -- Republicans are simply not making any significant gains anywhere -- but in a loss of confidence in Democrats. There's a way to change that dynamic -- deliver on the promises made the last two election cycles. Failure to do that would make cynics out of too many idealistic political newcomers, while turning off base activists who do the hard on-the-ground work of winning elections.
But why deliver on campaign promises when President Obama can score points with the Beltway wizards by backing away from a strong public health insurance option?
I'm not saying next year's elections will be determined solely by whether the Democrats deliver on health care reform. The condition of the economy will obviously play an important role too. But Obama has less control over the economic recovery than he has over whether he sells out the Democratic base. The correct choice is clear, especially when you consider that a stronger public health insurance option would make it easier to pass the bill through the budget reconciliation process in the Senate.
|
|
Discuss
:: (4
Comments)
|
|
Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 09:00:00 AM CDT
|
|
As you've probably heard, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was in Des Moines Saturday to raise money for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (minimum donation $2,500). She also tacked on a public event to discuss stimulus spending on education in Iowa.
The occasion gave us a glimpse of cutting-edge Republican strategery.
First, there was the obligatory cheap shot comment to the press:
Republican Party of Iowa Executive Director Jeff Boeyink said he's surprised any Iowa congressional Democrats would want to appear with her. [...]
"We don't think her values are Iowa values," Boeyink said.
True to state party chairman Matt Strawn's promise to get the Republican message out using social media, the Iowa GOP highlighted the report with Boeyink's quote on their Twitter feed.
Trouble is, Democrats still have a wide lead on the generic Congressional ballot. Since Iowa votes fairly closely to the national average, I'll bet the Republican House leadership is more out of touch with Iowa values than Pelosi.
On Saturday, GOP chairman Strawn claimed Pelosi is for a "national energy tax", which would have a "devastating impact" on farmers. Not surprisingly, this sound bite doesn't reflect the content of the American Clean Energy and Security Act. (Click here for detailed bullet points on the draft bill to address climate change.) But who cares, if scare-mongering about tax hikes can lead Iowa Republicans out of the wilderness?
Meanwhile, the National Republican Congressional Committee paid for robocalls bashing Pelosi in the three Democratic-held Congressional districts in Iowa. Scroll to the bottom of this post at Iowa Defense Alliance to listen to all three versions of the call. Or, you can read the transcript that Blog for Iowa's Trish Nelson posted after receiving the Loebsack version on Friday night. Its warnings about taxes, Pelosi's "liberal agenda" and "San Francisco values" give it a "back to the future" flavor.
Wake me up when the Party of No comes up with some message that's not 25 years old.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Tue May 12, 2009 at 04:00:00 AM CDT
|
|
Yesterday Taniel at the Campaign Diaries blog posted about 68 Democratic-held U.S. House seats that could potentially be competitive in 2010. Iowa's third Congressional district is not on that list.
IA-03 did not make Stuart Rothenberg's list of competitive House seats for 2010 either.
The National Republican Congressional Committee released a list of 51 targeted Democratic-held House districts in January. Lo and behold, IA-03 is not on that list either.
I realize that Boswell only won the district with 56.3 percent of the vote in 2008, but I don't hear any chatter from Iowa Republicans about recruiting a candidate to run against him. The focus is on the governor's race and the Iowa House.
I bring this up because the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has kept Boswell on its list of "Frontline Democrats" for 2010. John Deeth recently noticed that Boswell is "by far the senior member" of the 41 Frontline candidates. Almost all of them were first elected to Congress in 2006 or 2008. The others with more terms under their belt represent districts significantly more conservative than IA-03 with its partisan voter index of D+1.
For Deeth, this is yet another sign that IA-03 deserves better than Boswell. I view it as a sign that the DCCC is wrong. Boswell definitely needed to be in the Frontline program the first five times he ran for re-election, but he was a safe six-term incumbent in 2008, and there's no reason to believe he won't be a safe seven-term incumbent in 2010.
According to the Iowa Secretary of State's office, Iowa's third district had about 433,000 registered voters as of May 1, 2009. Of those, about 399,000 were "active voters." More than 156,000 of the active voters in IA-03 are registered Democrats. Only about 118,000 are registered Republicans, and about 124,000 are registered no-party voters.
Why should you care if the DCCC erroneously classifies Boswell as vulnerable? Frontline Democrats are exempt from paying DCCC dues, which are used to support Democrats in competitive races across the country.
Look, I would still prefer to elect a new Democrat to IA-03 in order to avoid a potential matchup of Boswell and Tom Latham in 2012. But since Boswell has no plans to retire, let him pay his DCCC dues just like every other House incumbent whose seat is not threatened next year.
On a related note, Deeth recently cited Progressive Punch lifetime ratings as an argument for replacing Boswell. It's worth noting that Boswell's voting record in the current Congress is much better than his lifetime Progressive Punch score suggests. (For instance, he was not among the Blue Dogs who voted against President Barack Obama's budget blueprint.) Yes, IA-03 should be represented by a more progressive Democrat than Boswell, but I'm cutting him slack as long as he's not casting egregious votes in the current Congress.
I see no reason to keep him in the Frontline program, though. We will genuinely be playing defense in dozens of House districts next year. Until there is some sign that Republicans are making a serious play for IA-03, Boswell should pay his DCCC dues.
|
|
Discuss
:: (2
Comments)
|
|
Tue Apr 21, 2009 at 23:38:31 PM CDT
|
|
Last October, Representative Michele "Crazy as Steve King" Bachmann (MN-06) disgraced herself on "Hardball" and sparked a ridiculously successful fundraising drive for her Democratic opponent, El Tinklenberg. I was impressed by the enthusiasm and kicked in a few bucks for Tinklenberg myself, but I was dismayed to see bloggers continue to help him raise money even after he'd raised more than $750,000 and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee had promised to spend an additional $1 million in his district. Within a few days of Bachmann's notorious comments, Tinklenberg had more money than he needed to run a solid media and GOTV campaign during the final two weeks before the election.
Since most Congressional races against incumbents are longshots, I wanted to see the netroots expand the field by raising $50,000 or more for a large number of unheralded challengers.
A fellow Iowa blogger sent me this piece from CQ Politics about how Tinklenberg's campaign committee was the largest donor to the DCCC in March, giving a total of $250,000:
You may recall that his Republican opponent was Rep. Michele Bachmann, whose mid-October comment that Obama "may have anti-American views" angered Democrats nationwide and spawned an avalanche of contributions to Tinklenberg in the waning days of a campaign that Bachmann won by 46 percent to 43 percent, with a third-party candidate taking 10 percent.
Apparently the money was coming in too fast for Tinklenberg to spend completely: he raised $3 million for his campaign, of which $1.9 million came in after October 15, and had $453,000 in leftover campaign funds at the end of 2008 and $184,000 at the end of March.
I'm not saying it wasn't worth getting behind Tinklenberg. Bachmann is among the worst Republicans in Congress, and this district rightly seemed winnable. However, the netroots clearly funneled way more money to Tinklenberg than he could spend effectively.
What if a million of the dollars we sent to the MN-06 race had been spread around 10 or 20 other districts? A bunch of the candidates I wanted to support as part of an expanded field got blown out by large margins, but an extra $50,000 could have made the difference for Josh Segall in AL-03, or for several candidates who weren't on my radar, such as Bill Hedrick in CA-44.
The netroots rally for Tinklenberg started out as a good cause but took on a momentum of its own. It didn't help that Tinklenberg sent fundraising e-mails to his new donors every day or two during the home stretch, even after he had more than enough money to close out the campaign.
Maybe the majority of blog readers who gave $10 or $20 or $50 to Tinklenberg wouldn't have given to some other longshot Congressional challenger. Maybe people need an emotional trigger before they are willing to open their wallets. But in future election cycles, we need to be smarter about how we focus our energy and our fundraising efforts during the final weeks of a campaign. There's no shortage of wingnuts worth targeting. Also, a fair number of good incumbent Democrats will probably need our help in 2010, depending on how the economy looks 18 months from now.
Any ideas or suggestions on how to raise money effectively during the next cycle would be welcome in this thread.
|
|
Discuss
:: (13
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 08:37:54 AM CST
|
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee announced that 40 Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives will be in the "Frontline Program," which seeks to protect incumbents in potentially vulnerable districts. Once again, Leonard Boswell of Iowa's third district will be a Frontline Democrat. Here's what the designation means:
The Frontline Program is a partnership between the DCCC and Members which lays the ground work for the 2010 cycle by supporting and expanding their fundraising and outreach operations. Frontline Members must sign a memorandum of understanding, strengthened this cycle to reflect the challenging political environment, that requires Members to meet aggressive fundraising goals, accelerate volunteer and recruitment efforts, and increase their online networking.
The DCCC's Frontline Program is a proven success. Frontline Members and the DCCC did its work effectively and early in the 2008 cycle. As a result, the DCCC's independent expenditure campaign made a significant investment in only 10 of 34 Frontline districts - approximately 15 percent of the IE's budget.
I've put the DCCC's press release after the jump. Most of the others named to the Frontline list appear to be in more vulnerable districts than Boswell. Republicans targeted Boswell during his first five re-election campaigns but did not make a serious challenge in IA-03 in 2008. Boswell defeated Kim Schmett by 56 percent to 42 percent in November.
Here's an interesting fact from the DCCC's statement, which underscores how the Republican Party has become increasingly uncompetitive in large parts of the country:
There are 83 Democrats in districts that President [George] Bush won in 2004, while there are only six (6) Republicans in seats that Senator [John] Kerry won.
Presumably a significant number of those 83 districts swung to Barack Obama in the 2008 election, as Iowa's third district did. But the final presidential election results by Congressional district have not been calculated everywhere in the country.
I would be very surprised if the DCCC had to spend resources defending Boswell in the next election. Many House Democrats are in a more precarious position. Unfortunately, the irony is that re-electing Boswell in 2010 could make IA-03 a very tough hold for Democrats in 2012.
The DCCC is staying on offense as well, launching robocalls this week in the districts of 12 potentially vulnerable House Republicans. A few weeks ago the DCCC ran radio ads in 28 Republican-held House districts, including Iowa's fourth district. Tom Latham is not being targeted in the current robocall effort, however. It's just as well, since IA-04 does not appear to be among the top Democratic pickup opportunities for the next cycle.
|
|
There's More...
:: (5
Comments, 674 words in story)
|
|
Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 11:20:22 AM CST
|
Didn't see this one coming. I learned via Iowa Politics that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is running radio ads in 28 Congressional districts held by Republicans, including Iowa's fourth district:
The ads focus on the Republicans out of step priorities by putting bank bail outs and building schools in Iraq before the needs of the Americans in the struggling economy. The Putting Families First ads begin airing on Tuesday morning during drive time and will run for a week.
In addition to the strategic radio ads in 28 Republican districts, the DCCC will also begin a grassroots initiative which includes targeted e-mails to 3 million voters and nearly 100,000 person-to-person telephone calls.
House Republicans just don't get it. They celebrate being the party of no and status quo, while more than 2.6 million Americans have lost their jobs, the stock market has plummeted wiping out nearly $7 trillion stock market wealth and endangering thousands of investors' nest eggs, and one in 10 homeowners was delinquent on mortgage payments or in foreclosure this fall.
"These are serious times, hard working families are worried about keeping their jobs, health care and homes - they want action, not House Republicans cheering about doing nothing," said Brian Wolff, Executive Director of the DCCC. "Republicans' champagne wishes and caviar dreams simply don't connect with middle class families struggling to make ends meet and furious that their tax dollars are going to bail out banks, build schools in Iraq, or send American jobs overseas. The Putting Families First campaign is only the first step, we will continue to go district by district to hold Republicans who continue to vote in lockstep with party leaders and against the folks in their districts accountable."
There are several versions of the ad (click here for transcripts). This transcript of an ad running in a Michigan representative's district is apparently comparable to what the DCCC is running in Tom Latham's district:
Did you know Congressman Thad McCotter opposed over $526 million to modernize crumbling Michigan schools, but supported building new schools in Iraq? Times are tough, tell Thad McCotter to put American jobs first.
If you've heard any of these radio ads, please post a comment or send me an e-mail (desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com) to let me know what issue it covered.
There is a lot of overlap between the 28 districts where DCCC ads are running and this list of the 20 most vulnerable House Republicans going into 2010, which Crisitunity compiled at Swing State Project last month. However, there are a handful of Republicans on Crisitunity's list who are not (yet) being targeted by the DCCC's ad campaign.
Conversely, the ads are running in some districts where the incumbents may not seem vulnerable at first glance. Latham did not make Crisitunity's list after he won re-election by more than 20 points in November, despite the fact that Barack Obama carried IA-04. However, the DCCC clearly has not ruled out making a serious play for this district in 2010.
Remember, Iowa's Bruce Braley is now the DCCC's vice chair responsible for "offensive efforts including recruitment, money, and training."
Taking out Latham in 2010 would make it highly likely for Iowa Democrats to hold three out of the four Congressional districts we will have after the next census. Even if we don't beat him in 2010, running a strong campaign against Latham could bring down his favorables and improve our chances of holding IA-03 if that district includes Story County in 2012.
UPDATE: Brownsox demolishes Fred Hiatt's criticism of this ad campaign.
|
|
Discuss
:: (3
Comments)
|
|
Wed Jan 07, 2009 at 20:40:43 PM CST
|
|
Representative Chris Van Hollen, who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, has appointed two out of the DCCC's three vice chairs. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida is the DCCC Vice Chair for incumbent retention. Bruce Braley of Iowa will be responsible for "offensive efforts including recruitment, money, and training."
The third vice chair, yet to be named, "will seek to increase House member participation in DCCC efforts," which presumably means getting more safe Democratic incumbents to pay their DCCC dues.
That's going to be a big job, since the DCCC ended the 2008 campaign some $21 million in debt.
The debt has reportedly been reduced to $13 million, with the help of a $3.5 million transfer from Barack Obama's presidential campaign. But that is still a large debt, especially since Democrats have a lot of one-term and two-term representatives to defend in 2010, which will probably be a less favorable political environment.
According to Politico,
Democrats are gearing up for a tougher, more defensive cycle. While Democrats want to take advantage of Obama's bank account, party officials are anxious about getting out of the red and are telling members and donors to pay up - quickly.
Democratic leaders put the squeeze on last month, asking each member in a memo for $35,000 before Christmas. The memo also listed, by name, those who had paid their committee dues and those who hadn't.
Shortly before the election, Chris Bowers spearheaded an effort to put grassroots pressure on safe Democratic incumbents who had not paid their DCCC dues. We all have a lot on our plate this year, and Bowers is recovering from a broken arm, but the netroots need to assist the DCCC vice chair for member participation once that person has been named. We should not wait until a few weeks before the 2010 election to start pressuring incumbents who are delinquent on DCCC dues. The sooner the DCCC retires its debt, the easier it will be to recruit strong challengers and build a healthy bank balance for the next campaign.
If you are willing to help with this effort in any way (such as compiling a spreadsheet showing who has not paid and how to contact those representatives), please post a comment in this thread.
|
|
Discuss
:: (4
Comments)
|
|
Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 21:32:04 PM CST
|
Bruce Braley was elected to Congress in 2006 with the support of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's "Red to Blue" program. In 2008 he helped manage the DCCC's Red to Blue efforts. For the next election cycle, he's been promoted again:
The DCCC today named the second of its three Vice Chairs - Congressman Bruce Braley (D-IA) will serve as Vice Chair for candidate services, responsible for the DCCC's offensive efforts including recruitment, money, and training.
DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen said, "The DCCC will stay aggressive this cycle and continue to challenge Republicans who are out of step with their districts. As a former chair and former member of the Red to Blue program, Bruce Braley knows first hand what it takes to be a successful candidate; his battle tested leadership will be a real asset to our candidates facing tough elections."
Congressman Bruce Braley brings his experience as chair of the DCCC's successful and effective 2008 Red to Blue Program and as a former member of the Red to Blue Program.
Vice Chair Bruce Braley said, "I'm looking forward to continuing my work at the DCCC in this new leadership role. It's critical for us to continue assisting our candidates with the money, messaging and mobilization they will need to get elected in the 2010 election cycle. I will work hard to help our candidates win their races."
Congressman Bruce Braley will serve as Vice Chair for candidate services. The DCCC's candidate services include recruiting, money, and training. A Vice Chair focusing on Member participation will be named at a later date.
Last month, Van Hollen named Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida the DCCC Vice Chair for incumbent retention. Given her refusal to endorse three Democratic challengers to Republican incumbents in south Florida, it was appropriate for Van Hollen to remove her from a leadership role in the Red to Blue program.
The third vice chair "will seek to increase House member participation in DCCC efforts," which presumably means getting more safe Democratic incumbents to pay their DCCC dues.
So Braley's niche will be finding and capitalizing on opportunities to pick up Republican-held seats. 2010 is likely to be a more challenging environment for Democratic candidates than the past two cycles, but it's good to know the DCCC is planning to remain on offense as well. We have a chance to achieve a political realignment, given the Democratic advantages with certain demographic groups in recent elections. Building on our success in 2006 and 2008 will require the DCCC to do more than protect our own vulnerable incumbents.
Good luck to Representative Braley in his new role. He'll be quite busy the next couple of years, with a seat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee and a Populist Caucus to lead.
|
|
Discuss
:: (3
Comments)
|
|
Fri Oct 24, 2008 at 11:30:00 AM CDT
|
|
Chris Bowers of Open Left has officially launched the Use It or Lose It campaign to get safe Democratic incumbents to pay their dues to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. He developed a spreadsheet showing dues owed by 54 House Democrats, along with contact information for their campaigns.
Iowa's own Dave Loebsack is on the list. Apparently, he owes $125,000. Contact information for his campaign:
319-351-3283 (phone)
info@loebsackforcongress.org (e-mail)
Bowers gives good advice here:
We will ask for the members of Congress to pay all, or at least some, of their remaining dues in order to build a larger Democratic majority. We will be polite, and we will call their campaign offices, as it is inappropriate to ask for campaign money when calling a congressional office.
Leonard Boswell is not on Bowers' spreadsheet, and I'm trying to find out whether that's because he has paid his DCCC dues. Bowers removed names of members who've paid, but also took off those designated by the DCCC as "frontline Democrats." Boswell was put in that category during the third district primary campaign, but he obviously is not facing a serious challenge during the general election. If he hasn't given to the DCCC, he should be added to the Use It or Lose It effort.
If all 54 Democrats on the spreadsheet pay their dues, the DCCC would have an additional $6.5 million to spend in the final week. That would support a lot of ad buys in a lot of districts where we have good challengers.
If you live in the second district, please call Loebsack's campaign and politely ask him to give to the DCCC. Then post a comment reporting what you've been told, or send me a confidential e-mail (desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com).
|
|
Discuss
:: (11
Comments)
|
|
Tue Oct 14, 2008 at 12:04:54 PM CDT
|
|
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee likes what it's seeing from our candidates in Iowa. Today the DCCC moved Becky Greenwald from the Emerging Races list to "Red to Blue," and also moved Rob Hubler from the "Races to Watch" list to "Emerging Races."
I'll have more on this later today, but here are some of the reasons I think Greenwald can beat Tom Latham in IA-04.
Here is my case for why Hubler can beat Steve King in IA-05. For more on why Hubler can win, see this piece by DemocracyLover in NYC and this piece by 2laneIA.
But don't just sit there reading. Volunteer for and/or donate to Hubler's campaign or Greenwald's campaign.
We can sweep the Republicans in Iowa this year just like they swept us in the 1994 House races.
UPDATE: Here's the release from the Greenwald campaign:
Waukee, IA -- The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee today added Becky Greenwald to its "Red to Blue" program. Becky earned a spot in the competitive program by establishing significant local support and skillfully showing Iowa's voters that she stands for change and will represent new priorities.
The Red to Blue program highlights top Democratic campaigns across the country, and offers them financial, communications, and strategic support. The program introduces Democratic supporters to new, competitive candidates in order to help expand the fundraising base for their campaigns.
"We are thrilled to have the complete backing and support of the national Democratic Party," said Becky Greenwald. "Today, I challenged Tom Latham to debate me on television after the 14-year incumbent attacked me for the first time in this race. His campaign must be sensing the strong support for my campaign. This election is too important not to debate the issues facing our working families in front of a television audience."
DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen said, "Becky Greenwald is running a solid campaign and is committed to making things easier for middle class families in their districts. With less than 21 days to make her case for change to voters, the Red to Blue program will give Becky the financial and structural edge to be even more competitive in November."
Red to Blue was a proven success in the 2006 cycle. In 2006, the Red to Blue program raised nearly $22.6 million for 56 campaigns averaging $404,000 per campaign. Red to Blue was also responsible for solidifying the structure of dozens of campaigns and making a real difference for Democrats across America.
It's great that the DCCC will devote more resources to IA-04. Latham may already have sensed the race is tightening. On Monday he went negative, issuing this statement blasting Greenwald's support for the recent bailout package.
Greenwald responded by challenging Latham to a televised debate. The two candidates have debated twice on the radio. Latham declined one invitation to debate on television and is dragging his feet on rescheduling a joint appearance on Iowa Public Television, which was postponed while Congress was considering the bailout.
After the jump I've posted the statement that followed a press conference today featuring Greenwald and First Lady Mari Culver. Key quote:
"The writing is on the wall in this race," said First Lady Mari Culver. "I have been following politics for a long time, and if an incumbent is comfortable with their lead, they do not attack their challenger. From his attacks, it seems Congressman Latham is seeing the growing support for Becky's campaign."
|
|
There's More...
:: (2
Comments, 520 words in story)
|
|
Thu Sep 25, 2008 at 14:46:34 PM CDT
|
|
I haven't written much about Leonard Boswell since the Democratic primary for the third Congressional district, because there hasn't been much to say. He hasn't been campaigning much, nor has he needed to. IA-03 is not a competitive House district according to any of the people who follow Congressional races closely (for instance, Swing State Project, the Cook Report and Open Left).
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) spent money to defend Boswell in 2004 and 2006 but hasn't seen the need for that this year.
So I was more than a little annoyed to receive a fundraising solicitation from Dody Boswell this week:
Dear Friends,
First, thank you all for your support with Leonard's campaign. I know we've all been working hard for the last few months and now we only have 50 days to go! It's great to know so many of you have already gone online to donate.
It is truly with urgency, that I need to ask you again to help out my husband. The election is closing in and we need to raise enough money to buy some media for the last few weeks of the campaign. We also have the reporting deadline in two weeks on September 30 and need to show the press that we have the funds to compete.
Our goal is within reach and I know if everyone donated at least forty-two more dollars we will make that goal!!! You can donate at www.boswellforcongress.com or click on the link below.
PLEASE CONTRIBUTE $42.00 BEFORE THE SEPTEMBER 30 DEADLINE!!!
I can personally tell you how hard Leonard works for us. And that he appreciates everything that you do to allow him to continue his efforts on our behalf in Washington.
I thank you so very much,
Dody
PS - Your small contribution of $42 really will make all the difference!
Boswell for Congress
P.O. Box 6220
Des Moines, IA 50309
Excuse me, Boswell needs "to show the press that we have the funds to compete"?
As of June 30, Boswell had $393,852 on hand, while little-known Republican challenger Kim Schmett had $28,768. Boswell has held several fundraisers since then.
He should not be asking constituents for more money. He should be handing over a large chunk of his campaign account to the DCCC so they can use it to play for more Republican-held seats and to defend truly vulnerable incumbents (the way the DCCC helped Boswell in past years).
You can reach Boswell's Congressional office at (202)225-3806.
You can reach his campaign headquarters at (515)883-2254 or Campaign@BoswellForCongress.com.
Tell his staff that you want him to give at least 10 percent of his campaign's cash on hand to the DCCC.
For more on this year's Use It or Lose It campaign, read this post by Lucas O'Connor. If every safe House incumbent handed over 10 percent of his or her campaign account, the DCCC would have an additional $8.3 million to use in competitive races.
On a different subject, I called Boswell's Congressional office yesterday and was told he did not have any statement yet on the bailout proposal. What do you want to bet he was among the Blue Dogs who urged Nancy Pelosi today to move toward the position of the Bush administration and corporate lobbyists?
I'll fill in that oval next to Boswell's name on the ballot, but he won't get a dime from me.
I'm giving as much as I can afford to Rob Hubler and Becky Greenwald.
|
|
Discuss
:: (6
Comments)
|
|
Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 16:26:59 PM CDT
|
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee had big news today for Becky Greenwald:
For Immediate Release
September 12, 2008
DCCC Places Greenwald for Congress on the Emerging Races List
Waukee, IA - Today, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) announced they put Becky Greenwald's race for Congress on its final Emerging Races list. Emerging Races are candidates that have generated excitement in their districts in their campaigns for change. This is the first time since 2002 the DCCC has become involved in the 4th District.
"We are thrilled the DCCC has chosen our race for their Emerging Races list," said Becky Greenwald. "The DCCC is seeing what we have been seeing for months: voters in the 4th District want an independent thinker who will work to make a real difference for Iowans."
"For too long, Tom Latham has been a wingman for George Bush and blames Congress, the same place he has been for 14 years, for getting nothing done for Iowans," Greenwald continued. "Enough is enough. I will go to Washington, roll up my sleeves, and work across the aisle to get things done for the people of the 4th District."
Greenwald is on her "Enough is Enough Tour" exposing Tom Latham's lack of action on education, national security, energy, healthcare and the economy. Last week, the campaign launched www.replacetomlatham.com and the Latham-Bush caption contest.
I suspect that this means Greenwald's fundraising has been quite strong since June 30.
The Emerging Races list includes candidates the DCCC is considering for its Red to Blue list. The Red to Blue candidates receive significant funding and/or television advertising help from the DCCC.
Greenwald can beat Tom Latham.
The big gains in Democratic voter registration, combined with the Democratic advantage in the generic Congressional ballot, Barack Obama's big lead over John McCain in Iowa and the Obama campaign's enormous ground game all will be working in her favor.
She doesn't need to match Latham's spending dollar for dollar, but she does need to raise enough cash to go up on television and persuade groups like the DCCC and EMILY's list to get involved.
The next reporting period ends September 30. Please go here and give what you can to Becky's campaign.
If you live in or near the fourth Congressional district and would like to volunteer, please call the main campaign office at (515) 987-2800 and ask to speak to John.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 10:45:40 AM CDT
|
|
Mike Glover of the Associated Press wrote a piece this week on the huge money advantage that Senator Tom Harkin and Iowa's five U.S. House incumbents have over their opponents.
I'll have more to say on this topic in future posts, but for now I want to note one thing: although nearly all incumbents are able to outspend their opponents, that advantage is not always enough to overcome a national tidal wave toward the other party.
Bruce Braley, Dave Loebsack and Leonard Boswell all represent districts with a Democratic tilt (of varying degrees) in what is likely to be a very big Democratic year.
The odds-makers might favor Tom Latham and Steve King now, but in a big year for the challenger's party, money and the other advantages of incumbency are not always enough to win.
Just ask Neal Smith, who was an 18-term incumbent and had more clout than any Iowan currently serving in the U.S. House. I can't find campaign finance statistics going back that far, but I would bet that he spent more trying to keep his seat in 1994 than Republican Greg Ganske spent in taking him down.
Democratic House Speaker Tom Foley spent "what aides say may total $1.5 million to $2 million, a staggering amount for a House race" in 1994, but he still lost to George Nethercutt in Washington's fifth district.
Chris Bowers had the most accurate final House forecast in 2006. But what did he write in his first forecast following several states' primaries in September of that year?
NH-01 drops off the board since upset winner Shea-Porter has only 3% of her opponent's cash
And in his final House update, published on November 6, 2006, Bowers still had Shea-Porter's race in the "likely Republican" category, commenting, "If she wins, Carol Shea-Porter will become a legend."
Her shocking victory in New Hampshire's first district over an entrenched Republican incumbent was indeed legendary.
Obviously, it's better for a challenger to have as much money to spend as possible, which is why you should donate to Rob Hubler and Becky Greenwald, and why I would like to see our ultra-safe Democratic incumbents giving more to the DCCC and DSCC.
But I strongly disagree with the contention that a money advantage makes Tom Latham and Steve King as safe as Iowa's Democratic incumbents this year.
UPDATE: In the comments, riverdog9 asked why I would encourage people to give to the DCCC instead of directly to the candidates. That was not my intention, and I apologize for any misunderstanding.
To clarify, individual Democratic voters should give directly to the Congressional candidates, unless you're one of those people who can afford to give more than the maximum donation of $2,300 to a candidate for federal office. In that case, you should give $2,300 directly to the candidate and any extra money to interests groups that are supporting that candidate.
Safe Democratic incumbents should give more to the DCCC and DSCC, because campaign finance law allows unlimited transfers of funds from members of Congress to those committees, and unlimited expenditures by those committees on behalf of candidates in individual districts.
|
|
Discuss
:: (1
Comments)
|
|
Mon Aug 04, 2008 at 10:02:29 AM CDT
|
|
cross-posted around the blogosphere
On Saturday a fundraising solicitation arrived in the mail from Iowa Senator Tom Harkin. It asked me to confirm delivery of the enclosed "supporter card" within ten days, and also to "help keep my 2008 re-election campaign on the road to victory" with a special contribution.
Funny, I wasn't aware that Harkin needed any extra help. Everyone in the election forecasting business has labeled this seat safe for him. The available polling shows Harkin with a comfortable lead.
According to Open Secrets, Harkin had $4.1 million cash on hand at the end of the second quarter. His little-known Republican opponent, Christopher Reed, has raised a total of $11,765 for his Senate campaign and had $292 (two hundred and ninety-two dollars) on hand as of June 30.
Harkin's letter got me thinking that we need a "Use It Or Lose It" campaign for 2008.
Join me after the jump for more.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 1203 words in story)
|
|
|
|
|
|