Taking Back the House
by Chris Bowers, Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 09:34:06 AM EST
Considering our advances at the state level since 2000, the new congressional maps that will be drawn following the 2012 census will give Democrats a much better chance of retaking the House than we currently have in 2006, 2008 or 2010. Current Republican gerrymanders in Colorado, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Virginia would not be possible under the current structure of those state governments. Florida and Texas could still be changed, and we need to work hard to make sure that they are changed for the better.
However, winning back the House is not just about having better maps. Indeed, if we remain fifteen seats outside the majority, as we currently are, even new maps will not make taking back the House an easy task. Further, if we continue to leave 30-40 seats uncontested every two years, the party as a whole will suffer.
To win back the House, we need to attack everywhere. Here is my goal:
I complained about the DCCC not being aggressive enough, so I should make clear what level of aggression I would find satisfactory. I want 80 serious challenges to GOP House incumbents every two years and a Democratic name on the ballot in all 435 districts. That remains my goal. I have had enough of just targeting the twenty or so top races--let's engage in a full-frontal assault. It is a task that I hope you will partake in, and one that I believe we should begin to start now. The first step is to identify eighty Republicans against whom we could mount a serious challenge. Fortunately, identifying the first forty-seven is easy. From Adam Tondowsky, here are the forty-seven Republicans who won by the smallest margins (under 20%) in 2004:The order is by percentage of victory, from lowest to highest. Win% Outcome% 2002% 1. Indiana 9 Mike Sodrel 0.5% 49.5-49.0% 2. Pennsylvania 6 Jim Gerlach 2.0% 51.0-49.0% 51.4% 3. Washington 8 Dave Reichert 4.8% 51.5-46.7% 4. Connecticut 4 Chris Shays 4.8% 52.4-47.6% 64.4% 5. Colorado 4 Marilyn Musgrave 6.2% 51.0-44.8% 54.9% 6. Minnesota 6 Mark Kennedy 8.0% 54.0-46.0% 57.3% 7. Connecticut 2 Rob Simmons 8.4% 54.2-45.8% 54.1% 8. Indiana 8 John Hostettler 8.9% 53.4-44.5% 51.3% 9. New Mexico 1 Heather Wilson 8.9% 54.4-45.5% 55.3% 10. Indiana 2 Chris Chocola 9.7% 54.2-44.5% 50.5% 11. North Carolina 11 Charles Taylor 9.8% 54.9-45.1% 55.5% 12. New York 29 Randy Kuhl 9.9% 50.7-40.8% 13. Louisiana 7 Charles Boustany 10.0% 55.0-45.0% 14. Texas 32 Pete Sessions 10.3% 54.3-44.0% 15. Virginia 2 Thelma Drake 10.3% 55.1-44.8% 16. Kentucky 4 Geoff Davis 10.5% 54.4-43.9% 17. Florida 13 Katherine Harris 10.6% 55.3-44.7% 54.8% 18. California 26 David Drier 10.8% 53.6-42.8% 63.8% 19. North Carolina 8 Robin Hayes 11.0% 55.5-44.5% 53.6% 20. New York 26 Tom Reynolds 11.2% 55.6-44.4% 73.7% 21. Nebraska 1 Jeff Fortenberry 11.2% 54.2-43.0% 22. Illinois 6 Henry Hyde 11.6% 55.8-44.2% 65.1% 23. Colorado 7 Bob Beauprez 11.9% 54.7-42.8% 47.3% 24. Iowa 1 Jim Nussle 11.9% 55.2-43.3% 57.2% 25. Pennsylvania 8 Mike Fitzpatrick 12.0% 55.3-44.3% 26. Texas 2 Ted Poe 12.6% 55.5-42.9% 27. Wyoming Barbara Cubin 13.5% 55.3-41.8% 60.5% 28. Nevada 3 Jon Porter 14.0% 54.4-40.4% 56.1% 29. Texas 22 Tom Delay 14.1% 55.2-41.1% 63.2% 30. Georgia 11 Phil Gingrey 14.8% 57.4-42.6% 51.6% 31. Kansas 2 Jim Ryun 14.9% 56.1-41.2% 60.4% 32. New Jersey 7 Mike Ferguson 15.3% 57.0-41.7% 58.0% 33. Michigan 11 Thad McCotter 16.0% 57.0-41.0% 57.2% 34. Minnesota 2 John Kline 16.1% 56.4-40.3% 57.3% 35. WV 2 Shelley Capito 16.2% 57.5-41.3% 60.0% 36. New Jersey 5 Scott Garrett 16.5% 57.6-41.1% 59.5% 37. Ohio 4 Mike Oxley 16.8% 58.6-41.4% 67.5% 38. Illinois 11 Jerry Weller 17.4% 58.7-41.3% 64.3% 39. N. Carolina 5 Virginia Foxx 17.6% 58.8-41.2% 40. New York 13 Vito Fossella 18.0% 59.0-41.0% 69.5% 41. Texas 19 Randy Neugebauer 18.3% 58.4-40.1% 42. Pennsylvania 7 Curt Weldon 18.4% 58.8-40.4% 66.1% 43. Michigan 9 Joe Knollenberg 19.0% 58.5-39.5% 58.1% 44. Pennsylvania 15 Charlie Dent 19.2% 58.6-39.4% 45. Washington 5 Cathy McMorris 19.4% 59.7-40.3% 46. Ohio 1 Steve Chabot 19.7% 59.8-40.1% 64.8% 47. Iowa 2 Jim Leach 19.7% 58.9-39.2% 52.2%Forty-seven is a start, but we need to find at least thirty-three more. My first addition is the New York 25th, currently held by James Walsh, son of a Democratic congressmen from the same district. Despite nearly even voter registration in the district, despite the district voting for the Democratic candidate for President in four consecutive election cycles, despite it being the home of some prominent Democrats such as Terry McAullife and Michael Bragman (and it is where I grew up), and despite Walsh originally winning the seat by less than one hundred votes, the district did not have a Democratic challenger this time. This is a winnable seat, and we did not even try. This is unforgivable. I plan to not let it happen again.
Here are some more I would like to add:
- DE-AL. I know that former governor Mike Castle is popular, but he is also holds the least pro-Bush district held by any House Republican in the entire country. In 2000, Bush won only 42.4% in Delaware for cryin' out loud. Further, launching a serious challenge against Castle secures both Delaware Senate seats will remain in Democratic hands for a long time to come, as he is basically all that is left of the Delaware Republican Party. Sometimes, winning a serious challenge is not the only thing at stake.
- NJ-02, Frank LoBiondo. Another strong Democratic district. In 2000, Bush only received 42.9% of the vote here.
- AZ-01. Rick Renzi was not seriously challenged this time around, but in 2002 he won with under 50% of the vote. Anyone who receives less than 50% of the vote can be beaten.
- AZ-08. Jim Kolbe has cruised over the past two cycles, but his district is evenly split on Bush.
- KY-03. Ann Northrup only won by 4% in 2002. She can be beaten.
- NM-02. Steve Pearce lives in the most pro-Bush of New Mexico's three districts. However, it is still not that pro-Bush, and in 2002 his challenger received over 44% of the vote. Further, popular governor Richardson could have some big coattails in a state with favorable demographic changes.
- IA-04. Tom Latham won comfortably in 2004 with 61% of the vote, but in 2002 he only received 55%. His district is evenly split between Republicans and Democrats. Don't even tell me that we can't win here.
- MO-09 is another evenly split district, currently held by Kenny Hulshof, who in 2002 only received 55% of the vote.
- FL-22, held by Clay Shaw, was about to be seriously challenged by Jim Stork, until Stork encountered health problems that removed him from the race. We need to keep pushing here.
- CT-05, held by Nancy Johnson, only gave 43.4% of its Presidential vote to Bush in 2000.
- AL-03, held by Mike Rogers. Rogers escaped with only 50% of the vote in 2002. His district is not very strong Republican. He can be beaten.
- Here are some more anti-Bush seats where we did not come very close to Republican incumbents this time around: NJ-03 (Jim Saxton); NY 03 (Peter King); NJ-4 (Christopher Smith); IL-10 (Mark Kirk); FL-10 (C.W. Young); NY-24 (Sherwood Boehlert).
- Here are some more evenly split districts where we did not come very close to Republican incumbents this time around: NY-19 (Sue Kelly); NY-23 (John McHugh); MN-03 (Jim Ramstad).
Use the comments to list any Republican held seat that I did not list here that you believe Democrats could potentially win given a serious enough challenge. With every seat you list, provide an explanation for why you think a Democrat could win in that district. I will use the information to help my ongoing updates over at Our Congress. Our fight begins now.
Tags: House 2006 (all tags)
-----------
myDD - skin
-----------
32 Comments