"That blog isn't called Smart Politics for nothing."
- POLITICO


"Fantastic. Truly high-end to feed political addiction."
- Chuck Todd, NBC News Political Director

Smart Politics is the blog of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota’s Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs. Smart Politics provides thoughtful, data-driven, non-partisan analysis of public policy and statewide and district elections for Upper Midwestern and national politics. Smart Politics is an on-line extension of the wide array of public events and programs convened by the Center to promote an informed and engaged citizenry. The Center also curates the largest on-line collection of Upper Midwestern public opinion and historical election results.

Thursday, September 2, 2010

History Says Barrett Win in Wisconsin Governor's Race Hinges on Feingold Victory

Democrats have never won a gubernatorial election in Wisconsin when they have lost their U.S. Senate race

A general rule of thumb when anticipating results on Election Day is that the race at the top of the ticket in a state will frequently dictate what happens in contests further down the ballot.

But when it comes to gubernatorial elections in Wisconsin, there has been a different calculus at work.

A Smart Politics analysis of historical election returns in Wisconsin finds that Democratic gubernatorial candidates have lost every election since 1914 in which the Democratic U.S. Senate candidate did not prevail - 15 out of 15 races.

This does not bode well for Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett (pictured above), who is seeking to extend the Democratic winning streak for the governorship of the Badger State to three consecutive elections - for the first time since 1958, 1960, and 1962 - as well as set the record for years of continuous Democratic control of the governorship in the state.

The eight consecutive years of Democratic control in Wisconsin through outgoing governor Jim Doyle's term in January 2011 will tie the longest such stretch in the Party's history, along with Patrick Lucey's eight-year reign from 1971-1979.

Barrett has trailed his likely November opponent, Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker, in each of the dozen non-partisan polls conducted so far this year. Walker faces former U.S. Representative Mark Neumann in the state's September 14th GOP primary.

The historical data suggests Barrett will want to doubly cross his fingers that fellow Democrat Russ Feingold wins a fourth term in his U.S. Senate matchup against Republican Ron Johnson.

(Johnson has enjoyed a slim single-digit advantage, within the poll's margin of error, in each of the last four Rasmussen surveys dating back to mid-July).

Since popular vote U.S. Senate elections began in 1914, Democrats have lost gubernatorial elections in every cycle in which the Democratic U.S. Senate candidate also lost: in 1916, 1918, 1920, 1922, 1926, 1928, 1934, 1938, 1940, 1944, 1946, 1950, 1952, 1956, and 1986.

However, that does not mean that a Democratic U.S. Senate victory is a guarantee for success in the gubernatorial race, although the odds have been more favorable.

Democrats have won both offices in seven election cycles: 1932, 1958, 1962, 1970, 1974, 1982, and 2006.

But on five occasions, Democrats have won their U.S. Senate race and still lost the governorship: 1914, 1964, 1968, 1994, and 1998.

Democrats have not fared much better in the race for governor during Class II U.S. Senate election cycles when Wisconsin does not have a Senate contest on the ballot.

In these cycles, Democratic gubernatorial candidates have won just two races and lost nine, notching their only victories in 1960 with Gaylord Nelson and 2002 with Jim Doyle.

Fate of Wisconsin Democratic Gubernatorial Candidates vis-à-vis Performance of Democratic U.S. Senate Candidates, 1914-2006

U.S. Senate
Gov. Won
Gov. Loss
Total
Won
7
5
12
Loss
0
15
15
Not on ballot
2
9
11
Data compiled by Smart Politics.

The good news for Feingold, however, is that if Barrett's campaign gains traction, he might be on his way to a much easier path to victory.

And that is because on no occasion has the Democratic Party won a governor's race in Wisconsin and lost the U.S. Senate race that same cycle.

Democratic gubernatorial victories in 1932, 1958, 1962, 1970, 1974, 1982, and 2006 were all met with victories for the party in the U.S. Senate race as well.

Looking deeper into the numbers over the last several decades, it becomes apparent that Democratic U.S. Senate candidates have consistently performed better than their Democratic colleagues at the top of the ticket - either presidential or gubernatorial candidates.

Since 1950, Democratic Senate candidates in Wisconsin have both won a higher percentage of the popular vote as well as a higher margin of victory (or lower margin of loss) than Democratic nominees in top of the ticket races in 19 of 20 election cycles.

Overall, such Senate candidates have won an average of 56.0 percent of the vote, compared to just 47.3 percent for Democratic presidential or gubernatorial candidates that same cycle - or an 8.7-point better performance than the top of the ticket.

The only election cycle since 1950 in which a Democratic U.S. Senate nominee fared worse than the top of the ticket was in 1964, when William Proxmire won his third term with 53.3 percent of the vote.

Lyndon Johnson carried the Badger State that November with 62.1 percent against Barry Goldwater.

Democratic candidates have also averaged a +15.0-point higher margin of victory (or lower margin of loss) across these twenty election cycles vis-à-vis their top of the ticket Democratic brethren.

Performance of Wisconsin Democratic U.S. Senators vis-à-vis Top of the Ticket Democratic Candidates, 1950-2006

Year
US Senate
Top of ticket
Vote diff.
MoV diff.
2006
67.3
52.7 (G)
14.6
30.4
2004
55.4
49.7 (P)
5.7
10.9
2000
61.5
47.8 (P)
13.7
24.3
1998
50.5
38.7 (G)
11.8
23.1
1994
58.3
30.9 (G)
27.4
53.9
1992
52.6
41.2 (P)
11.4
2.2
1988
52.1
51.4 (P)
0.7
1.0
1986
47.4
46.2 (G)
1.2
3.0
1982
63.6
56.8 (G)
6.8
14.6
1980
48.3
43.2 (P)
5.1
2.8
1976
72.2
49.4 (P)
22.8
43.6
1974
61.8
53.2 (G)
8.6
14.9
1970
70.8
54.2 (G)
16.6
33.0
1968
61.7
44.3 (P)
17.4
27.0
1964
53.3
62.1 (P)
-8.8
-19.7
1962
52.6
50.4 (G)
2.2
4.4
1958
57.1
51.6 (G)
5.5
11.2
1956
41.2
37.8 (P)
3.4
6.4
1952
45.6
38.7 (P)
6.9
13.7
1950
46.19
46.15 (G)
0.04
-0.1
Average
56.0
47.3
8.7
15.0
Last column denotes the difference between the margin of victory or margin of loss for Democrats in the race for U.S. Senate and governor. Data compiled by Smart Politics from State of Wisconsin Blue Book.

And there's even more data to suggest Barrett will need Feingold to win a healthy majority on Election Day if he is to keep the governorship in the Democratic column.

During the last 14 election cycles since 1950 in which U.S. Senate and gubernatorial elections in Wisconsin have been held in the same year, Democratic Senate candidates have outperformed gubernatorial candidates in 13 of them - winning an average of 8.2 points more of the popular vote.

The exception was in 1956, when Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Henry Maier won just 41.2 percent of the vote in his loss to three-term GOP incumbent Alexander Wiley.

In the open seat gubernatorial race, William Proxmire won 48.1 percent of the vote in defeat to Vernon Thomson. This marked the third consecutive gubernatorial election loss for Proxmire before he would shift his political ambitions to the U.S. Senate - later winning a 1957 special election after the death of GOPer Joe McCarthy.

Performance of Wisconsin Democratic U.S. Senators vis-à-vis Democratic Gubernatorial Candidates, 1950-2006

Year
US Senate
Governor
Vote diff.
MoV diff
2006
67.3
52.7
14.6
30.4
1998
50.5
38.7
11.8
23.1
1994
58.3
30.9
27.4
53.9
1986
47.4
46.2
1.2
3.0
1982
63.6
56.8
6.8
14.6
1974
61.8
53.2
8.6
14.9
1970
70.8
54.2
16.6
33.0
1968
61.7
46.8
14.9
29.5
1964
53.3
49.4
3.9
5.9
1962
52.6
50.4
2.2
4.4
1958
57.1
51.6
5.5
11.2
1956
41.2
48.1
-6.9
-13.6
1952
45.6
37.3
8.3
16.6
1950
46.19
46.15
0.04
-0.1
Average
55.5
43.6
8.2
16.2
Last column denotes the difference between the margin of victory or margin of loss for Democrats in the race for U.S. Senate and governor. Data compiled by Smart Politics from State of Wisconsin Blue Book.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

What are the Most Partisan Cities in Minnesota for U.S. House Campaign Contributions?

Champlin and Lakeland have the largest Republican tilts for U.S. House campaign contributions; Anoka, Elk River, and Minneapolis have the largest Democratic tilts

This is the sixth in a series of reports on campaign fundraising in Minnesota's U.S. House races. Previous reports examined which 6th CD candidate was raising more in-state money, which 6th CD candidate was receiving more contributions from Minnesota political elites, to which candidates Minneapolis residents have made campaign contributions, Michele Bachmann's fundraising in her home town of Stillwater, and the large contributions coming from Wayzata.

While yesterday's Smart Politics report revealed that the tiny city of Wazayta has left the biggest footprint in campaign fundraising to Minnesota U.S. House candidates - particularly for Republicans - the west metro suburb is not the city with the largest GOP tilt when it comes to which political party Minnesotans direct their campaign dollars.

Wayzata is a staple for GOP fundraising, to be sure. Republican congressional candidates have raised more money from Wayzatans ($289,020) than any other city in the state - including Minneapolis, which has approximately 100 times the number of residents ($288,893).

But Wayzata is also the fourth largest donor to DFL congressional candidates this election cycle, at $126,100 through mid-July, behind only Minneapolis ($758,457), St. Paul ($279,055), and Edina ($155,775).

Thus, while the GOP fundraising from Wayzatans is notable, the 70/30 percent split it enjoys over Democrats does not come close to the partisan tilt in campaign contributions seen in other cities around the Gopher State.

Smart Politics examined the partisan giving to Minnesota U.S. House candidates from the 44 cities in Minnesota that have contributed at least $20,000 in itemized individual contributions for the election cycle to date.

The donations from residents in these 44 cities tally $4.3 million, or 81 percent of the $5.3 million that has been donated to all Minnesota U.S. House candidates from some 599 cities and towns across the state.

The overall distribution of funds from these 44 cities is basically even between Republican candidates ($2,208,768) and DFLers ($2,111,660).

And what cities have the biggest partisan tilt when it comes to campaign contributions by its residents in Minnesota U.S. House races?

Twenty-nine of these 44 cities had a fundraising advantage in the favor of the Republican Party, but none more so than the City of Champlin in the 3rd Congressional District.

Champlin residents have given 100 percent of their $35,855 in large donor contributions to Republican U.S. House candidates this election cycle, without a single large donor sending money to a DFLer.

Although the city is represented by Republican Erik Paulsen in the U.S. House, the plurality of funds was directed to 6th CD GOPer Michele Bachmann ($9,755). Another $9,600 went to 2nd CD Representative John Kline, with $8,500 to Paulsen and $8,000 to 1st CD challenger Randy Demmer.

Champlin's $35K + in large donor contributions ranks 24th in the Gopher State overall this election cycle.

But the curious thing about the severe partisan tilt for Champlin's campaign contributions is that the City is not heavily Republican.

In the 2008 Presidential election, John McCain carried Champlin by just 4.7 points, 51.5 percent to 46.8 percent for Barack Obama.

And while Erik Paulsen carried each of the city's four precincts by between 9 and 19 points in his U.S. House race against Ashwin Madia, DFL State Representative Denise Dittrich carried each precinct by between 12 and 23 points.

The city with the second largest partisan advantage toward the GOP in campaign contributions to Minnesota's U.S. House candidates is the small town of Lakeland in the 6th CD.

With a 2000 Census population of just shy of 2,000 residents, Lakeland has donated $32,475 thus far to Minnesota's congressional candidates, which is good for 28th highest in the state. The city's $16.94 contribution-per-resident rate is 10th highest in the state.

Lakeland residents have donated a whopping 98.5 percent of their large donor funds to Republican candidates ($31,975) thus far in the election cycle, compared to just 1.5 percent to DFLers ($500).

Lakeland's Congresswoman Michele Bachmann has received over half of this money, at $16,575, with Kline next at $9,600 and then Paulsen at $5,800.

These lopsided donations from Lakeland residents to Republican U.S. House officeholders is odd, particularly those to Bachmann, considering DFLer Elwyn Tinklenberg carried the city by 7.1 points in the 2008 congressional race (47.9 to 40.8 percent over Bachmann).

Moreover, Lakeland residents also voted for Obama in the 2008 presidential election - defeating McCain 49.2 to 48.0 percent in the city.

Five other cities with substantial large donor contributions this election cycle have also given more than 90 percent of their funds to Republican candidates: Granite Falls (95.1 percent), Waconia (93.5 percent), Prior Lake (93.1 percent), Willmar (93.0 percent), and Medina (92.0 percent).

Minnesota Cities with Republican Tilt in Itemized Individual Contributions to Gopher State U.S. House Candidates

Rank
City
DFL
GOP
% DFL
% GOP
Total
1
Champlin
$0
$35,855
0.0
100.0
$35,855
2
Lakeland
$500
$31,975
1.5
98.5
$32,475
3
Granite Falls
$1,000
$19,450
4.9
95.1
$20,450
4
Waconia
$2,100
$30,255
6.5
93.5
$32,355
5
Prior Lake
$3,875
$52,485
6.9
93.1
$56,360
6
Willmar
$2,250
$30,012
7.0
93.0
$32,262
7
Medina
$3,150
$36,084
8.0
92.0
$39,234
8
Long Lake
$5,950
$43,700
12.0
88.0
$49,650
9
Sartell
$3,400
$19,075
15.1
84.9
$22,475
10
Lake Elmo
$3,650
$17,570
17.2
82.8
$21,220
11
Eden Prairie
$34,680
$161,332
17.7
82.3
$196,012
12
Orono
$4,750
$21,425
18.1
81.9
$26,175
13
Burnsville
$17,400
$63,366
21.5
78.5
$80,766
14
Excelsior
$26,700
$92,952
22.3
77.7
$119,652
15
Plymouth
$17,150
$43,194
28.4
71.6
$60,344
16
Lakeville
$6,430
$15,649
29.1
70.9
$22,079
17
Winona
$13,610
$32,535
29.5
70.5
$46,145
18
Wayzata
$126,100
$289,020
30.4
69.6
$415,120
19
Bloomington
$17,125
$39,066
30.5
69.5
$56,191
20
St. Peter
$8,300
$17,625
32.0
68.0
$25,925
21
Andover
$9,625
$19,510
33.0
67.0
$29,135
22
Maple Grove
$8,060
$15,110
34.8
65.2
$23,170
23
Woodbury
$24,400
$45,230
35.0
65.0
$69,630
24
Mound
$10,750
$15,224
41.4
58.6
$25,974
25
Hopkins
$13,147
$17,500
42.9
57.1
$30,647
26
Mahtomedi
$9,450
$11,628
44.8
55.2
$21,078
27
Edina
$153,775
$181,382
45.9
54.1
$335,157
28
White Bear Lake
$24,975
$26,620
48.4
51.6
$51,595
29
Duluth
$17,025
$17,917
48.7
51.3
$34,942
Note: Campaign contributions from January 1, 2009 through July 21, 2010. Source: Federal Election Commission. Table compiled by Smart Politics.

But some big donor cities in the Gopher State have also witnessed a clear Democratic advantage in their congressional campaign contributions this election cycle - and no more so than the north metro City of Anoka.

Anoka residents have given $41,677 to Minnesota's U.S. House candidates through mid-July, which ranks 21st highest in the state.

Of that total, 92.6 percent has been directed to DFL candidates ($38,600) with just 7.4 percent to Republicans ($3,077).

The majority of this money has gone to support the city's 6th CD DFL challengers: $9,900 to Tarryl Clark, $9,600 to Elwyn Tinklenberg, and $500 to Maureen Reed. Tim Walz also received a sizable $9,850 from Anoka residents.

Despite this imbalance in fundraising, the city did not break toward Democratic candidates in 2008 in large numbers. Barack Obama carried the city by just 3.9 points, 50.7 to 46.8 percent, with John McCain carrying the 3rd and 8th Precincts.

Moreover, Republican Norm Coleman carried five of the eight precincts in his U.S. Senate race against Al Franken, winning Anoka by a 2.4-point margin (42.3 to 39.9 percent).

Additionally, Republican State Representative Jim Abeler won all eight precincts, including seven of them by more than 20 points.

Despite the competitiveness of Republican candidates in the city, Anoka residents are not opening up their checkbooks to GOP U.S. House candidates.

But while Republicans are enjoying a more than 2:1 fundraising advantage in 21 cities among those that have contributed at least $20,000 in the election cycle to date, only three such cities have 2:1 Democratic tilts: Anoka, Elk River (84.7 percent) and Minneapolis (72.4 percent).

In fact, it is only because the DFL advantage is as strong as it is in Minneapolis, that the party remains competitive in the large-donor arena overall.

DFLers outgained Republicans by more than $469,000 in Minneapolis ($758,457 to $288,893), but only by $306,747 in the other 14 major cities combined in which they had a large donor contribution advantage for U.S. House races ($783,876 to $477,129).

In short, large donor support runs narrow but deep for the DFL and wider and more shallow for the Republicans.

Minnesota Cities with Democratic Tilt in Itemized Individual Contributions to Gopher State U.S. House Candidates

Rank
City
DFL
GOP
% DFL
% GOP
Total
1
Anoka
$38,600
$3,077
92.6
7.4
$41,677
2
Elk River
$23,800
$4,305
84.7
15.3
$28,105
3
Minneapolis
$758,457
$288,893
72.4
27.6
$1,047,405
4
Stillwater
$54,300
$27,845
66.1
33.9
$82,145
5
North Mankato
$18,550
$9,680
65.7
34.3
$28,230
6
Golden Valley
$36,950
$20,290
64.6
35.4
$57,240
7
Mankato
$34,395
$19,800
63.5
36.5
$54,195
8
St. Cloud
$66,649
$39,213
63.0
37.0
$105,862
9
St. Paul
$279,055
$165,740
62.7
37.3
$444,795
10
Eagan
$20,000
$13,421
59.8
40.2
$33,421
11
North Oaks
$15,350
$10,355
59.7
40.3
$25,705
12
Roseville
$21,760
$15,625
58.2
41.8
$37,385
13
Rochester
$75,917
$60,266
55.7
44.3
$136,183
14
Mendota Heights
$18,975
$16,820
53.0
47.0
$35,795
14
Minnetonka
$79,575
$70,692
53.0
47.0
$150,267
Note: Campaign contributions from January 1, 2009 through July 21, 2010. Source: Federal Election Commission. Table compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Wayzata: The Hamptons of Minnesota?

Small western suburban city of less than 5,000 residents has given $415,000+ to Minnesota U.S. House candidates - third highest in the state and less than $30,000 behind St. Paul

This is the fifth in a series of reports on campaign fundraising in Minnesota's U.S. House races. Previous reports examined which 6th CD candidate was raising more in-state money, which 6th CD candidate was receiving more contributions from Minnesota political elites, to which candidates Minneapolis residents have made campaign contributions, and Michele Bachmann's fundraising in her home town of Stillwater.

As candidates head into the final two months before Election Day, there is one small Minnesota city to which congressional candidates will continue to turn as they seek to refill their campaign coffers.

Despite a population of a little more than 4,000 residents, the wealthy western suburb of Wayzata remains a big player in funding congressional hopefuls in the Gopher State.

A Smart Politics analysis of itemized individual contributions for the 2010 election cycle through July 21st finds that residents of Wayzata have donated over $100 per resident to Minnesota's U.S. House candidates, a tally that is nearly twice the rate of the next closest city.

Even more impressive, at $415,120 in contributions, Wayzata ranks as the third largest absolute donor of funds to House candidates in the state, behind only the behemoth cities of Minneapolis ($1,047,405) and St. Paul ($444,795).

Through mid-July of this year, residents from 599 cities and townships across the Gopher State have contributed more than $5.3 million in itemized funds to the state's eight U.S. Representatives and their various challengers.

Donations have exceeded $5,000 in 113 of these cities, totaling over 93 percent of all contributions ($4.98 million).

Naturally, several of the state's largest cities lead the way in total contributions made to congressional campaigns.

However, Wayzata and its fellow 3rd Congressional District city Excelsior stand out in terms of per resident contributions. In total, five 3rd CD cities crack the Top 10.

Top 10 Cities Contributing Itemized Individual Donations to Minnesota U.S. House Candidates in 2010 Election Cycle

Rank
City
Total
Per Resident
1
Minneapolis
$1,047,405
$1.55
2
St. Paul
$444,795
$2.75
3
Wayzata
$415,120
$100.93
4
Edina
$335,157
$7.07
5
Eden Prairie
$196,012
$3.57
6
Minnetonka
$150,267
$2.93
7
Rochester
$136,183
$1.59
8
Excelsior
$119,652
$50.00
9
St. Cloud
$105,862
$1.79
10
Stillwater
$82,145
$5.42
Through July 21, 2010. Population based on 2000 U.S. Census. Source: Federal Election Commission. Table compiled by Smart Politics.

While Wayzata's population is less than one-tenth of one percent of the state's population, the more than $415,000 it has donated to congressional campaigns represents 7.8 percent of large donor contributions from across the state.

In other words, Wayzata gives more than 97 times its proportional share of itemized contributions to Minnesota's congressional candidates.

When adjusting for population, the City of Wayzata has given an average of $100.93 per resident to Minnesota's U.S. House candidates this election cycle, which is nearly two times the rate of the next closest city, Woodstock ($52.42) - a small city in Pipestone County in the southwestern part of the Gopher State.

With the exception of Wayzata and Excelsior, the Top 10 list looks quite different when calculating contributions on a per resident basis.

Top 10 Cities Contributing Itemized Individual Donations to Minnesota U.S. House Candidates in 2010 Election Cycle (Per Resident)

Rank
City
Amount
Population
Per Resident
1
Wayzata
$415,120
4,113
$100.93
2
Woodstock
$6,920
132
$52.42
3
Excelsior
$119,652
2,393
$50.00
4
Long Lake
$49,650
1,842
$26.95
5
Sunfish Lake
$13,220
504
$26.23
6
Lilydale
$12,528
552
$22.70
7
Herman
$9,610
452
$21.26
8
Crystal Bay
$12,250
607
$20.18
9
Dellwood
$17,700
1,033
$17.13
10
Lakeland
$32,475
1,917
$16.94
Through July 21, 2010. Population based on 2000 U.S. Census. Source: Federal Election Commission. Table compiled by Smart Politics.

And what candidates are the recipients of all this money coming out of Wayzata?

Overall, Republican candidates received $289,020, or 69.6 percent of its large donor contributions. DFLers received $126,100, or 30.4 percent.

Erik Paulsen, who represents the city in the 3rd Congressional District, received $168,140 from residents of Wayzata, or 40.5 percent of such funds.

Meanwhile, only $18,200 (4.3 percent) has been targeted to 3rd CD DFL nominee Jim Meffert and former 3rd CD DFL candidate Maureen Hackett.

Michele Bachmann has received the second largest amount of money from Wayzata residents, at $63,830 (15.4 percent), followed by former 6th CD DFL candidate Maureen Reed at $43,550 (10.5 percent).

Itemized Individual Contributions from Wayzata Residents to Minnesota U.S. House Candidates in 2010 Election Cycle

Candidate
District
Amount
Percent
Erik Paulsen
3
$168,140
40.5
Michele Bachmann
6
$63,830
15.4
Maureen Reed
6
$43,550
10.5
John Kline
2
$28,800
6.9
Randy Demmer
1
$28,000
6.7
Tim Walz
1
$27,450
6.6
Tarryl Clark
6
$20,450
4.9
Jim Meffert
3
$17,200
4.1
Elwyn Tinklenberg
6
$4,800
1.2
Betty McCollum
4
$4,500
1.1
Keith Ellison
5
$4,150
1.0
Through July 21, 2010. Table lists only those candidates who received more than $1,000 from Wayzatans. Source: Federal Election Commission. Table compiled by Smart Politics.

But Wayzata doesn't have the largest partisan tilt for political donations in the Gopher State.

The next report in this series will reveal the Minnesota cities with the biggest imbalance in giving to Democratic and Republican congressional candidates.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Monday, August 30, 2010

No Recipe for Success for Murkowski Write-In Campaign in Alaska

No Alaskan candidate for statewide office has won more than 27 percent in a write-in campaign; Senator Ernest Gruening's model for potential Murkowski write-in candidacy netted just 17 percent in 1968

Republican Lisa Murkowski's odds to retain her U.S. Senate seat from Alaska past January 2011 just got a little more grim on Monday, as the state's Libertarian Party voted unanimously not to allow the two-term Senator to run on its ballot line should she lose the GOP primary to upstart candidate Joe Miller.

Miller is currently leading Murkowski by less than 1,700 votes with several thousand absentee ballots yet to be counted.

But although a Republican primary loss ended the long political career of her father Frank Murkowski in his 2006 bid for a second term as governor, there is chatter Senator Murkowski might consider a write-in candidacy this November to win a third term in D.C.

The problem for Murkowski is not simply that only one U.S. Senator in history has been elected via a write-in campaign (Strom Thurmond won 63.1 percent of the vote in South Carolina's 1954 Senate race).

The problem is that Alaska politicians have already attempted this feat for statewide offices several times over the past 50 years without success.

A Smart Politics analysis of data from the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives and State of Alaska Division of Elections finds there have been eight general election write-in campaigns for statewide office in Alaska over the past 26 election cycles dating back to 1958.

Two of these campaigns were for U.S. Senate seats.

The first occurred in 1958, when the Last Frontier State elected its inaugural pair of U.S. Senators. During the election for its Class II seat, Keith Capper received 599 write-in votes (1.2 percent) to place third out of three candidates in a race won by Democrat Bob Bartlett.

The other case involves Alaska's other inaugural Senator, Democrat Ernest Gruening, who was formerly a Territorial Governor of Alaska from 1939 to 1953.

Gruening, a longtime opponent of the Vietnam War who was one of two Senators to vote against the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution in 1964, was reelected in 1962 with 58 percent of the vote, but failed to receive his party's nomination in 1968.

Gruening won 47.1 percent of the Democratic primary vote held that August, losing to Alaska's Speaker of the House Mike Gravel by 5.8 points.

Senator Gruening did not exit quietly, however, and launched a write-in campaign that netted him 14,118 votes on Election Day, winning 17.4 percent of the vote for third place out of three candidates, with Gravel prevailing.

It has now been 42 years since Gruening's failed write-in candidacy - the last such attempt for a U.S. Senate seat in Alaska.

Senator Murkowski is the current holder of Gruening's old Class III Senate seat.

But in the meantime there have also been six gubernatorial write-in candidacies in Alaska, beginning with that of a former Governor, Wally Hickel, in 1978.

Nearly 10 years after he resigned as Alaska's second governor to become Richard Nixon's Secretary of the Interior, Hickel launched a write-in campaign for his old job in 1978.

Hickel had lost the GOP primary that August by a mere 98 votes to his political rival, Jay Hammond. (Hickel had also previously lost the 1974 Republican primary to Hammond, but by a much wider margin of 7,874 votes).

In the 1978 general election, Hickel was able to notch a state record that still stands today, winning 26.4 percent of the vote as a write-in candidate (33,555 votes). Hickel placed second out of five candidates, 12.6 points behind Hammond.

Eight years later, in 1986, Hickel lost his third GOP gubernatorial primary, this time to Arliss Sturgulewski by 2,007 votes.

Hickel went on to receive 4,958 write-in votes (2.8 percent) in that November's general election won by Democrat Steve Cowper. Hickel's tally was good for fourth place out of six candidates, including Ed Hoch, another write-in candidate who received just 107 votes for sixth place (0.1 percent).

The last election cycle with write-in candidacies for a statewide office in Alaska took place during the 1998 gubernatorial race.

Republican State Senator Robin Taylor lost that year's GOP primary by 7,391 votes to nominee John Lindauer.

However, the Alaska Republican Party withdrew support from Lindauer just a few weeks before the general election after a dust-up involving the source of Lindauer's campaign funding. The GOP then backed Taylor as a write-in candidate.

Taylor did win 40,209 write-in votes - the most in state history - but his 18.3 percent showing was far behind that of one-term Democratic incumbent, Tony Knowles, who won with 51.3 percent of the vote.

Taylor came in second place among eight candidates, including write-in candidates Wayne Ross (801 votes, 0.4 percent, 7th place), who had come in a close third in the GOP primary, and Nick Begich, Jr. (579 votes, 0.3 percent, 8th place).

Of course, Senator Murkowski will not need to be in a position to make history if she can make up enough ground during the counting of absentee ballots in the coming days.

Write-In Candidacies in Alaskan Statewide General Elections, 1958-2008

Year
Candidate
Office
Votes
Percent
Place
1958
Keith Capper
US Senate
599
1.2
3 of 3
1968
Ernest Gruening
US Senate
14,118
17.4
3 of 3
1978
Wally Hickel
Governor
33,555
26.4
2 of 5
1986
Wally Hickel
Governor
4,958
2.8
4 of 6
1986
Ed Hoch
Governor
107
0.1
6 of 6
1998
Robin Taylor
Governor
40,209
18.3
2 of 8
1998
Wayne Ross
Governor
801
0.4
7 of 8
1998
Nick Begich, Jr.
Governor
579
0.3
8 of 8
Sources: Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives; State of Alaksa Division of Elections. Table compiled by Smart Politics.


Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Sunday, August 29, 2010

Which States Host the Most Competitive Gubernatorial Elections?

New Mexico, Alaska, and Indiana have provided the tightest gubernatorial races in the nation since 1900; over the last three decades: Mississippi, Illinois, and Virginia

This is the eighth in a series of historical reports leading up to the gubernatorial elections of 2010. Past reports have examined the historic Class of 2002 and its large number of first-term governors, the success rate of ex-governors trying to reclaim their office, plurality winning gubernatorial campaigns, states with the most living ex-governors, what states give birth to the most governors, the number of potential GOP victories this election cycle, and the large number of prominent third party candidates making waves in 2010.

If history has its say, the gubernatorial contest in New Mexico between Democratic Lieutenant Governor Diane Denish and Republican Dona Ana County District Attorney Susana Martinez will go down to the wire as the most competitive race in the country in 2010.

The New Mexico race, along with several others among the more than three dozen states with gubernatorial elections on the ballot this November, has been categorized as a 'toss-up' by most political analysts as the campaign soon heads into the final 60 days.

And while term-limited Governor Bill Richardson won the office by an average of 27 points in 2002 and 2006, those contests are aberrations in the annals of gubernatorial electoral history in the Land of Enchantment.

A Smart Politics analysis of nearly 1,800 gubernatorial elections since 1900 finds that while the average margin of victory in such contests nationwide has been 21.0 points, New Mexico has averaged a highly competitive 7.5-point victory margin across its 38 contests held since statehood.

In fact, an astounding 79 percent of New Mexico's races for governor have been decided by less than 10 points (30 of 38) - best in the nation - with 47 percent by less than 5 points (18).

However, despite this history of highly competitive races for the state's chief executive office, including 20 of 22 races decided by single digits from 1942 through 1998, New Mexico Democrats have consistently edged out Republicans in these tight contests - winning nearly twice as many elections as the GOP (25 to 13).

But the 16.4 and 37.6-point victories by Richardson in 2002 and 2008 respectively do not reflect the competitiveness of New Mexico gubernatorial races across the decades.

Richardson's 2008 win marked the largest margin of victory in state history while his 2002 triumph was the third largest, behind Democrat Jack Campbell's 20.4-point victory in 1964.

But New Mexico isn't the only state that has provided election watchers with interesting gubernatorial contests cycle after cycle.

The 9.0-point average margin of victory across Alaska's 13 gubernatorial elections since statehood rank the Last Frontier State as the second most competitive in the nation, with 10 of these races decided by single digits (77 percent).

Adding to the drama and tight races in Alaska have been the prominence of strong third party candidates (e.g. Wally Hickel winning in 1990) as well as write-in campaigns that have defeated endorsed major party candidates, landing write-in candidacies in second place twice (Wally Hickel in 1978 and Robin Taylor in 1998).

Rounding out the Top 10 most competitive states for gubernatorial elections since 1900 are Indiana (#3, 9.5 point average margin of victory), Ohio (#4, 10.0 points), Missouri (#5, 10.1 points), Connecticut (#6, 10.5 points), New Jersey (#6, 10.5 points), Hawaii (#6, 10.5 points), Illinois (#9, 10.7 points), and New York (#10, 11.1 points).

And what state has served up the least competitive gubernatorial elections over the last 110 years?

Although four of its last five races have been decided by single digits, the State of Georgia has hosted the most lopsided contests in the nation overall, with an average victory margin of 75.1 points across its 39 gubernatorial elections since 1900.

Of course, due to the dominance of the Democratic Party for decades upon decades in the South, the winner of the Democratic primary often went uncontested in the general election in many southern states - driving up this gaudy margin of victory tally.

As a result, despite a gradual rise in competitiveness and then power for the GOP in the region beginning in the mid-1960s, 11 of the 12 states with the largest average margin of victories in gubernatorial races since 1900 are southern states.

Georgia, at #50, is followed by South Carolina (#49, 72.3 points), Louisiana (#48, 63.7 points), Mississippi (#47, 62.0 points), Texas (#46, 50.0 points), Alabama (#45, 49.2 points), Arkansas (#44, 45.5 points), Florida (#43, 37.0 points), Virginia (#41, 26.6 points), Tennessee (#40, 24.4 points), and North Carolina (#39, 21.8 points).

Margin of Victory in Gubernatorial Races Since 1900 by State

Rank
State
#
MoV
# < 10 pts
% < 10 pts
1
New Mexico
38
7.5
30
78.9
2
Alaska
13
9.0
10
76.9
3
Indiana
28
9.5
14
50.0
4
Ohio
41
10.0
23
56.1
5
Missouri
28
10.1
14
50.0
6
Connecticut
40
10.5
24
60.0
6
New Jersey
32
10.5
16
50.0
6
Hawaii
13
10.5
7
53.8
9
Illinois
28
10.7
14
50.0
10
New York
37
11.1
19
51.4
11
West Virginia
28
11.3
19
67.9
11
Massachusetts
54
11.3
33
61.1
13
Washington
28
11.5
15
53.6
14
Pennsylvania
27
12.0
16
59.3
14
Idaho
39
12.0
22
56.4
16
Kentucky
28
12.1
15
53.6
17
Montana
28
12.2
15
53.6
18
Wyoming
30
12.4
14
46.7
19
Kansas
46
12.6
26
56.5
20
Michigan
44
13.2
22
50.0
21
Delaware
28
13.4
18
64.3
22
Arizona
39
13.5
22
56.4
23
Minnesota
43
13.6
20
46.5
24
Colorado
42
13.7
16
38.1
25
Nebraska
44
13.9
23
52.3
25
Iowa
45
13.9
17
37.8
27
Rhode Island
57
14.0
27
47.4
27
New Hampshire
55
14.0
26
47.3
29
Maine
43
14.1
22
51.2
30
Maryland
27
14.2
13
48.1
30
Oregon
29
14.2
12
41.4
32
Wisconsin
45
14.4
19
42.2
33
Oklahoma
26
15.0
10
38.5
34
Utah
28
15.5
12
42.9
35
Nevada
27
17.4
11
40.7
36
California
28
17.9
10
35.7
37
South Dakota
46
18.0
13
28.3
38
North Dakota
45
20.5
17
37.8
39
North Carolina
28
21.8
7
25.0
40
Tennessee
40
24.4
10
25.0
41
Virginia
28
26.6
6
21.4
42
Vermont
55
26.8
9
16.4
43
Florida
29
37.0
3
10.3
44
Arkansas
50
45.5
5
10.0
45
Alabama
27
49.2
3
11.1
46
Texas
46
50.7
9
19.6
47
Mississippi
27
62.0
5
18.5
48
Louisiana
27
63.7
2
7.4
49
South Carolina
34
72.3
6
17.6
50
Georgia
39
75.1
5
12.8
 
Total
1,777
20.9
746
42.0
Note: Table compiled by Smart Politics.

The only non-southern state with a history of blow-out gubernatorial races over the last century is Vermont, coming in at #42.

The Green Mountain State, which has held 55 elections since 1900, has had an average victory margin of 26.8 points, with just nine of these decided by single digits (16 percent).

Those perplexed by how what is now one of the most liberal states in the nation could have recently elected a Republican to four consecutive terms (outgoing Governor Jim Douglas, pictured), as well as staked 2010 GOP nominee Lieutenant Governor Brian Dubie to a double-digit lead in general election matchup polling, should take note of the state's electoral history: Vermont has elected Republicans into the governor's mansion in 42 of the state's 55 races since 1900.

But because the partisan voting behavior in a state's electorate can change drastically over time (e.g. in the South), taking only the long view of history is not necessarily a good predictor of what gubernatorial races are likely to be competitive in 2010.

As such, the table below lists the Top 10 most competitive states in gubernatorial races since both 1965 (the year after the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act) and 1980 (the beginning of the Reagan Revolution).

States with the Top 10 Narrowest Average Margins of Victory in Gubernatorial Elections Since 1965 and 1980

Rank
1965-2009
MoV
1980-2009
MoV
1
Alaska
8.4
Mississippi
8.7
2
New Mexico
8.8
Illinois
9.4
3
Virginia
9.0
Virginia
9.6
4
Illinois
9.7
Alabama
9.8
5
Maine
10.3
Iowa
10.1
6
Washington
10.6
Minnesota
10.9
7
Hawaii
10.7
Alaska
11.1
8
Arizona
11.3
Washington
11.2
9
Iowa
11.3
North Carolina
11.3
10
North Carolina
11.7
Hawaii
11.5
Note: Table compiled by Smart Politics.

As the table above demonstrates, over the past three decades some of the most competitive races for governor have taken place in the South.

From 1980 to 2009, the State of Mississippi has provided the narrowest average margin of victory at 8.7 points per election.

Fellow southern states Virginia (#3, 9.6 points), Alabama (#4, 9.8 points), and North Carolina (#9, 11.3 points) also rank in the Top 10 during this 30-year span.

Overall, the average margin of victory in the 16-state southern region (as designated by the U.S. Census Bureau), has been 38.9 points in the South since 1900, but just 18.7 points since 1965 and 16.7 points since 1980.

By contrast, every other region in the United States has seen its average margin of victory in gubernatorial contests increase during this span, with the nine-state eastern region of the country home to the largest average victory margin since 1980 at 18.7 points.

Average Margin of Victory in Gubernatorial Elections by Region and Time Period

Region
1900-2009
1965-2009
1980-2009
East
14.4
16.8
18.7
Midwest
13.7
14.2
16.2
South
38.9
18.7
16.7
West
13.0
14.4
16.0
Note: State are grouped into regions as designated by the U.S. Census Bureau. Table compiled by Smart Politics.

However, one southern state continues to rank as the least competitive in the nation - Louisiana.

The Pelican State has had the largest victory margins since both 1965 (36.5 points) and 1980 (35.5 points), as depicted in the table below.

States with Top 10 Largest Average Margins of Victory in Gubernatorial Elections Since 1965 and 1980

Rank
1965-2009
MoV
1980-2009
MoV
41
Georgia
20.8
New York
21.3
42
Rhode Island
21.4
South Dakota
21.4
43
Maryland
21.8
Utah
21.6
44
Nevada
21.8
Nebraska
21.9
45
Delaware
22.1
Rhode Island
22.8
46
Tennessee
22.1
New Hampshire
22.8
47
Arkansas
22.6
Nevada
23.5
48
Utah
23.2
North Dakota
24.0
49
Alabama
25.0
Delaware
28.1
50
Louisiana
36.5
Louisiana
35.5
Note: Table compiled by Smart Politics.

The preceding table reflects the geographic shift to the northeast for where many of the nation's least competitive gubernatorial races can be found (e.g. New York (#41, 21.3 points), Rhode Island (#45, 22.8 points), and New Hampshire (#46, 22.8 points)).

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Thursday, August 26, 2010

No Hometown Advantage for Michele Bachmann in Stillwater

Clark even with Bachmann in per-day fundraising from Stillwater; Congresswoman has shed top of the ticket GOP vote in the City in both 2006 and 2008

This is the fourth in a series of reports on campaign fundraising in Minnesota's U.S. House races. Previous reports examined which 6th CD candidate was raising more in-state money, which 6th CD candidate was receiving more contributions from Minnesota political elites, and to which candidates Minneapolis residents have made campaign contributions.

While Michele Bachmann's fundraising within the state of Minnesota has been equal to that of her DFL rival Tarryl Clark, she has not yet enjoyed much success in finding contributors in Stillwater, where she launched her political career as a state senator.

Although only boasting a population of a little more than 15,000 residents, Stillwater has been a key fundraising city for U.S. House candidates in the 2010 election cycle.

A Smart Politics analysis of FEC itemized individual contributions from January 1, 2009 through the July 21, 2010 primary reporting period finds Stillwater residents to have donated the 10th most money to Minnesota U.S. House candidates of any city in the Gopher State, with $82,145 across 255 contributions.

At $5.42 per resident, the only other city across the state besides Stillwater with a 2000 U.S. Census population of more than 5,000 residents that has a higher rate of giving to congressional campaigns this election cycle is Edina, at $7.07 per resident ($335,157).

However, of the $82,145 in itemized individual contributions from Stillwater that have been given to Minnesota congressional candidates through mid-July, only $18,495 has been directed to Representative Bachmann, or 22.5 percent of such funds.

By contrast, even though she didn't launch her campaign until late July 2009, Clark has received $61,249 of the $105,862 raised in her home city of St. Cloud, or 57.9 percent of all funds. (St. Cloud ranks 9th on the statewide funding list - just ahead of Stillwater).

Which raises the question: to what candidates are Stillwater residents opening their checkbooks?

The plurality of funds has actually gone to another Stillwater resident, former 6th CD DFL candidate Maureen Reed.

Reed notched $33,150 in itemized individual contributions from Stillwater (40.4 percent of all U.S. House contributions) before dropping out of the race in early June of this year.

Reed, in fact, was dominating the hometown battle against Bachmann - raising an average of $83.70 per day from the 'Birthplace of Minnesota' while she was in the race, compared to just $32.61 per day for Congresswoman Bachmann.

The hometown support for Reed has helped propel donations from Stillwater to all DFL U.S. House candidates across the Gopher State to nearly double the amount ($54,300) that has been given to Republican candidates ($27,845).

Another $11,350 in donations from Stillwater was targeted to Tarryl Clark, or $31.70 per day for the 358 days she has been in the race through the July 21st reporting period.

In other words, Stillwater is giving virtually the same amount of funds to Clark ($31.70 per day) as they are to their hometown U.S. Representative Bachmann ($32.61 per day).

Money Raised Per Day from Stillwater Residents by 6th CD Candidates

Candidate
Money
Days
Per Day
Michele Bachmann
$18,495
567
$32.61
Tarryl Clark
$11,350
357
$31.70
Maureen Reed
$33,150
396
$83.70
Note: Denotes itemized individual contributions raised from January 1, 2009 through July 21, 2010, adjusted for number of days each candidate has been in the race. FEC data compiled by Smart Politics.

So why isn't Stillwater getting behind Representative Bachmann?

An analysis of the voting behavior of the City over the past four election cycles demonstrates Stillwater residents to have frequently backed Republican candidates in high profile races:

· In the 2002 U.S. Senate race, Republican Norm Coleman won 51.3 percent of the vote in Stillwater, defeating Walter Mondale by 5.5 points.

· In his 2008 reelection bid, Coleman carried Stillwater by a 43.2 to 41.4 percent margin over Al Franken.

· In the 2002 gubernatorial race, Republican Tim Pawlenty cruised to a 10.5-point win over Roger Moe in Stillwater, winning 46.7 percent of the vote.

· In his 2006 gubernatorial reelection bid, Pawlenty maintained his support in Stillwater, winning 47.0 percent of the vote compared to 42.8 percent for DFLer Mike Hatch.

In short, Stillwater is not St. Paul on the St. Croix.

However, it would also be wrong to characterize the City as having a definite right tilt.

In the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections, John Kerry and Barack Obama both carried Stillwater, winning 51.6 and 56.0 percent of the vote respectively.

Amy Klobuchar also won the district with 60.0 percent of the vote during her 2006 rout of former 6th CD Representative Mark Kennedy.

But the success several Republicans have enjoyed in Stillwater over the past decade has yet remained elusive for its hometown Congresswoman.

For example, former GOP Congressman Mark Kennedy (who lived two counties over in Watertown) averaged 48.5 percent of the Stillwater vote during his successful 2002 (52.7 percent) and 2004 (44.2 percent) U.S. House bids.

Bachmann, however, has averaged only 35.5 percent of the Stillwater vote during her 2006 (35.3 percent) and 2008 (35.6 percent) campaigns.

Kennedy also ran 6.0 points better in the City during his 2002 U.S. House run than did Tim Pawlenty in that year's gubernatorial contest (52.7 vs. 46.7 percent). Meanwhile, Bachmann ran 11.7 points worse in Stillwater than the Governor in 2006 (35.3 vs. 47.0 percent).

And while Kennedy ran 1.4 points ahead of Norm Coleman in the City in 2002 (52.7 vs. 51.3 percent), Bachmann ran 1.1 points worse than Kennedy in 2006 in his Senate bid (35.3 vs. 36.4 percent) and 7.6 points worse than Coleman in his 2008 contest (35.6 vs. 43.2 percent).

Bachmann's tendency to shed top-of-the-ticket GOP support in her hometown was also apparent in the 2008 presidential race: the Congresswoman received 6.8 points less than fellow Republican John McCain (35.6 vs. 42.4 percent), whereas Mark Kennedy received just 3.1 points less in the City than George W. Bush in 2004 (44.2 vs. 47.3 percent).

Overall, Representative Bachmann has yet to carry even one of the eight precincts that comprise her hometown of Stillwater in either of her U.S. House victories.

Bachmann came closest in 2006 with Ward 3, Precinct 6 - losing to Patty Wetterling by a 458 to 445 vote margin.

By contrast, Pawlenty won five of the eight precincts in 2006, including Ward 4, Precinct 9 by 282 votes. Bachmann lost that precinct by 70 votes.

Norm Coleman won three precincts and tied in another in 2008, carrying Ward 4, Precinct 9 by 279 votes. Bachmann lost the 9th by 186 votes.

Perhaps tellingly, Congresswoman Bachmann launched her two-day bus tour this week not from Stillwater, but from Woodbury.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Murkowski Primary Struggles Just Another Day in Alaska Politics

Murkowski defeat would mean half of Alaskan U.S. Senators eventually failed to win their party's primary

Observers of Alaskan politics over the decades have learned that the unusual is commonplace, particularly when it comes to the comings and goings of the state's congressional delegation.

With challenger Joe Miller leading by nearly 2,000 votes with 98 percent of precincts reporting, two-term Republican U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski is poised to join a growing list of Alaskan congressional incumbents who have made unexpected exits from Washington, D.C.

Alaska's congressional delegation has been riddled with unpredictability over its 50+ years since statehood, including two deaths, a posthumous victory, nepotism, calls of corruption, and several incumbent Senators who have failed to win their own party's primary.

If Miller's lead stands, Murkowski would be the third U.S. Senator in Alaskan history to fail to win her party's nomination - out of just seven men and women who have served that office from The Last Frontier State. (With one of these, Democratic Senator Mark Begich elected in 2008, yet to face a primary challenge as Senator).

Murkowski would join Democrats Ernest Gruening and Mike Gravel as multi-term incumbents who eventually fell so out of favor that they failed to win their own party's primary in their reelection bids.

Gruening, one of Alaska's inaugural Senators, had been elected in 1958 and 1962 before losing to Mike Gravel in the Democratic primary in 1968.

Gruening, however, did not leave Washington quietly, but his independent challenge of Gravel and Republican Elmer Rasmuson that November fell short, winning 17.4 percent of the vote for a third place finish.

Gravel himself - after winning the general elections of 1968 and 1974 - would eventually go on to lose the 1980 Democratic primary to Gruening's grandson, Clark.

But while Lisa Murkowski's defeat would be the first time a Republican member of Congress from Alaska had been thwarted in the primary by his or her own party, leaving D.C. for reasons not of the delegation's choosing has been quite commonplace.

Of the eight former U.S. Senators and Representatives from Alaska, only two departed Washington on their own terms.

In addition to the aforementioned Senatorial incumbents who lost their primary bids, another two members of Congress died in office.

Democratic U.S. Senator Bob Bartlett, one of the state's inaugural members of its D.C. delegation, died during his third term in 1968.

A few years later, in October 1972, Democratic at-large Representative Nick Begich disappeared while on a flight to a campaign event from Anchorage to Juneau. The plane was never located.

And while Begich's presumptive death certificate was not issued until two months later, he still won his seat posthumously, by more than 12 points over the man who would later fill his vacancy in a special election the next year, Republican Don Young. Young, who still holds the seat today, cruised to a 70 percent primary victory Tuesday evening.

Two other members of Congress, Democratic Representative Ralph Rivers and GOP Senator Ted Stevens, were defeated during the general elections of 1966 and 2008 respectively.

Only Senator Frank Murkowski, who resigned in 2002, and Representative Howard Pollock, who did not run for his U.S. House seat in 1970, exited D.C. of their own free will - both for gubernatorial bids.

Should Lisa Murkowski get ousted in the primary by Miller, it would not be the first Alaskan congressional race to befuddle outsiders in the Lower 48.

Attempts in recent years to conduct polling of likely Alaskan voters has proven to be difficult for survey organizations.

For example, in 2008, Democratic challenger Mark Begich polled 22 points ahead of 7-term GOP Senator Ted Stevens just one week before the election (Research 2000), only to see Begich win by 1.3 points and less than 4,000 votes in a nail-biter on Election Day.

Less than a month before the 2010 primary, Moore Research had Murkowski doubling-up Miller by a 62-30 percent margin, seemingly leaving the Kansas-born challenger out of the running, despite being endorsed by Sarah Palin nearly two months prior on June 2nd.

However, after spending more than $2 million in her primary run, Murkowski is now poised to exit the Senate in as stunning a manner as she entered it.

In 2002, the Senator's father, four-term U.S. Senator Frank Murkowski, retired from his seat to become the Governor of Alaska - only to appoint his own daughter to his former seat.

This controversial move caused an uproar in both Democratic and Republican circles in The Last Frontier State - and in part led to Murkowski's unpopularity and primary defeat in his gubernatorial reelection bid in 2006 to Sarah Palin.

It also contributed to Lisa Murkowski's rather tepid 58 percent primary victory in 2004 as she sought a second term.

And while the stain left by the nepotism charges did not ultimately derail her 2004 reelection bid, the 48.6 percent she received in that November's general election was the lowest ever notched by an Alaskan U.S. Senate incumbent in state history at that point in time.

That record would be eclipsed by Ted Stevens' 46.5 percent showing in his 2008 defeat, so Murkowski's 2004 victory is now the second worst performance out of 16 general elections for Alaskan U.S. Senate incumbents.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Minnesota Unemployment Numbers and Trends at a Glance

Gopher State job data trend lines generally favorable compared to the nation and the Upper Midwest region

The new seasonally adjusted unemployment numbers released last week by the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development may have been flat - remaining at 6.8 percent for the second consecutive month - but the trend in the Gopher State's jobs situation continues to have a comparatively rosier outlook than the nation as a whole.

Here are some Minnesota employment facts at a glance:

Fact #1. The jobless rate has not increased in Minnesota for 14 consecutive months - the seventh longest streak over the past 34 1/2 years dating back to 1976.

The unemployment rate has fallen from 8.4 percent in June 2009 to 6.8 percent in July 2010, or a 19.0 percent decline.

Previous streaks include:

· A 22-month streak from October 1976 through July 1978 (falling from 5.9 to 3.9 percent)
· A 29-month streak from January 1983 through May 1985 (falling from 9.0 to 5.8 percent)
· A 30-month streak from January 1986 through June 1988 (falling from 6.1 to 4.3 percent)
· A 32-month streak from April 1993 through November 1996 (falling from 5.1 to 3.7 percent)
· A 25-month streak from May 1996 through May 1998 (falling from 4.0 to 2.6 percent)
· A 26-month streak from July 2003 through August 2005 (falling from 5.0 to 4.0 percent)

Of course, in order for rates to fall or stagnate for such a long period of time, they usually have to begin at a high level. And while seasonally adjusted jobs data does not account for those individuals who have stopped looking for work, falling or stagnating jobless numbers are obviously still better than rising numbers.

Fact #2. The 6.8 percent unemployment rate in Minnesota is just 71.6 percent that of the national average of 9.5 percent for the second straight month. This marks the lowest relative rate of unemployment in the Gopher State compared to the nation as a whole in more than 10 years.

In February 2000, Minnesota's 2.8 percent rate was 68.3 percent of the national rate of 4.1 percent.

By comparison, in March 2007, Minnesota's unemployment rate (4.5 percent) was 102.3 percent the national rate (4.4 percent) .

Overall, Minnesota's unemployment rate is tied with Iowa for the 9th lowest in the nation and 5th lowest in the 12-state Midwest region (behind North Dakota (3.6 percent), South Dakota (4.4 percent), Nebraska (4.7 percent), and Kansas (6.5 percent)).

Fact #3. The 6.8 percent unemployment rate in Minnesota is now equal to that of its neighbor to the south, Iowa, for the first time since November 2005.

The jobless rate in Minnesota has only been equal to or lower than that of the Hawkeye State for 19 of the last 135 months dating back to May 1999.

Overall, Minneosta's rate has been lower than that of Iowa for 131 of the last 415 months dating back to January 1976 (31.6 percent), higher for 265 months (63.9 percent), and the same for 19 months (4.6 percent).

Fact #4. After a string of 18 months in which Minnesota's jobless rate was equal to or higher than that of its neighbor to the east (September 2007-February 2009), the Gopher State's rate has now been lower than that of Wisconsin for 17 consecutive months.

Wisconsin's July 2010 unemployment numbers came in at 7.8 percent.

Overall, Minnesota's unemployment rate has been lower than that of Wisconsin for 292 of the last 415 months (70.4 percent), higher for 105 months (25.3 percent), and the same for 18 months (4.3 percent).

Fact #5. Of course, the employment news is less rosy for Minnesota compared to its neighbors to the west, where North Dakota (3.6 percent) and South Dakota (4.4 percent) continue to have the two lowest jobless rates in the nation.

Minnesota's unemployment rate has not been equal to or lower than that of South Dakota since June 1999 and North Dakota since April 2000.

Overall, Minnesota's jobless rate has been lower than that of South Dakota for just 18 of the past 415 months (4.3 percent), higher for 332 months (94.7 percent), and the same for four months (1.0 percent).

The Gopher State's rate has been lower than that of North Dakota for 73 of the last 415 months (17.6 percent), higher for 332 months (80.0 percent), and the same for 10 months (2.4 percent).

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Monday, August 23, 2010

What Does Wisconsin History Say About Russ Feingold's Chances in 2010?

Five of six U.S. Senators from Wisconsin have won bids for a fourth term

With three-term Wisconsin U.S. Senator Russ Feingold running next-and-neck with likely Republican nominee Rob Johnson for this November's election, and momentum continuing to swing towards the GOP nationwide, there is one bit of Badger State election history that is in the Democratic Senator's favor.

A Smart Politics analysis of the 35 popular vote U.S. Senate elections that have been held in the Badger State since 1914 finds that Wisconsin Senators running for a fourth term have prevailed in five out of six instances.

The margin between Feingold and Johnson, a businessman who is a newcomer to the political scene, has been within two points in each of the last five polls conducted by Rasmussen dating back three months to late May of this year. (Johnson will first need to win his Republican primary held on September 14th).

But Wisconsinites have tended to reward three-term Senatorial incumbents with a fourth term over the decades:

· The legendary Robert La Follette (Sr.) was elected to his fourth term (his second by popular vote) in 1922 by a margin of 64.0 points, winning 80.6 percent of the vote.

· Former Republican Robert La Follette Jr. won his fourth term in 1940 as a Progressive by 3.9 points over GOPer Fred Clausen.

· Republican Alexander Wiley also won his bid for a fourth term, in 1956, by a comfortable 17.4-point margin over Democrat Henry Maier.

· Democrat William Proxmire won over 70 percent of the vote for his fourth term in 1970, defeating Republican John Erickson by 42.3 points.

· Current senior Senator from the Badger State, Democrat Herb Kohl, cruised to an easy 37.8-point victory to win his fourth term in 2006 over Republican Robert Lorge, notching over two-thirds of the vote that November.

The only U.S. Senator from Wisconsin to fail in his bid for a fourth term was Democrat Gaylord Nelson, who narrowly lost by 1.9 points to former GOP Congressman Robert Kasten in 1980.

Nelson had the misfortune to be up for reelection in a year in which Republicans netted 12 Senate seats across the country - their biggest haul since 1946 when they gained 13 seats, and the fourth largest shift in the Senate by any party since the beginning of the Great Depression.

It is Johnson's hope 2010 proves to be another wave election year for the GOP.

But one difference between Feingold and the elections that propelled the La Follettes, Wiley, Proxmire, and Kohl to fourth terms is that those candidates had averaged double-digit victory margins when winning their preceding three contests.

Robert La Follette Jr. won his first three terms by an average of 46.6 points, with Alexander Wiley at 12.0 points, William Proxmire at 12.3 points, and Herb Kohl at 15.6 points. (La Follette Sr. had won his third term, his first by popular vote, by 27.3 points).

Feingold, meanwhile, has not exactly coasted to victory over the last two decades - winning his first three terms by an average of just 6.7 points. (By 6.6 points to upend incumbent Robert Kasten in 1992, by 2.1 points over Congressman Mark Neumann in 1998, and by 11.3 points over Tim Michels in 2004).

And there is another piece of Badger State history that also does not play in Feingold's favor. Of the 11 former U.S. Senators from Wisconsin elected by popular vote, only one left on his own terms - William Proxmire.

After winning a special election in 1957, and subsequent victories in 1958, 1964, 1970, 1976, and 1982, Proxmire opted not to be a candidate for reelection in 1988, at the age of 72.

All other 10 former U.S. Senators either lost at the ballot box, failed to secure their party's nomination, or died in office:

· Democrat Paul Husting died in his first term in 1917, Republican Robert La Follette Sr. died during his fourth term in 1925, and Republican Joseph McCarthy passed away near the end of his second term in 1957.

· Failing to receive their party's nomination for U.S. Senate were Republicans Irvine Lenroot (in 1926), John Blaine (in 1932), and Robert La Follette Jr. (in 1946, after switching back to the GOP).

· Incumbents losing their general election contests were Democrat F. Ryan Duffy (in 1938), Republican Alexander Wiley (in 1962), Democrat Gaylord Nelson (in 1980), and Republican Robert Kasten (in 1992, to Feingold).

This suggests that while Feingold's time in the U.S. Senate may not be up in 2011, the time to exit the body is not normally a decision a Senator from Wisconsin gets to make.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Thursday, August 19, 2010

And the Leader in Minneapolis Campaign Fundraising Is...Maureen Reed?

Former 6th CD DFLer who suspended her campaign more than two months ago has still raised the most money from Minneapolis residents of any U.S. House candidate this election cycle

This is the third in a series of reports on campaign fundraising in Minnesota U.S. House races. Previous reports examined which 6th CD candidate was raising more in-state money and which 6th CD candidate was receiving more contributions from Minnesota political elites.

Although its population of just shy of 400,000 is approximately 7.3 percent that of the entire state, the City of Minneapolis does wield a much bigger punch when it comes to fundraising for political candidates.

While the City of Lakes is not the per capita leader in money contributed to candidates (see a future installment in this series on this topic), Minneapolis does contribute a disproportionate share.

A Smart Politics analysis of more than 14,500 itemized contributions to U.S. House candidates statewide, finds that with $1,047,405 in such donations through July 21, 2010, Minneapolis residents account for 19.6 percent of all such donations raised throughout the Gopher State ($5,344,913), or a 2.7 times higher rate than its population.

Given the prevalence of large corporations headquartered in Minneapolis and the Greater Metro region generally, it is natural that the individuals who run these corporations will make big donations to political campaigns disproportionately from this area.

However, a Smart Politics analysis of funds raised through the first 567 days of the current election cycle finds that the candidate who has received the most itemized individual contributions from Minneapolis is...Maureen Reed?

Despite dropping out of her 6th CD race against Tarryl Clark in early June for the right to challenge Michele Bachmann in November, Reed has received nearly 1 in 5 dollars Minneapolis residents have given to all DFL and GOP U.S. House candidates in this election cycle through July 21st.

But first, let's take a step back.

It should not come as a surprise that a DFLer leads the way for contributions gathered from Minneapolis residents. The 5th CD - which is mostly comprised of the City of Minneapolis - voted 74.1 percent for Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential election, as well as 70.9 percent for DFLer Keith Ellison in the U.S. House race.

Overall, of the nearly $1.05 million in funds donated to U.S. House candidates from Minneapolis this election cycle, $758,457 have been given to DFLers (72.4 percent), with $288,893 to Republicans (27.6 percent).

In short, partisan giving from Minneapolis is virtually dead even with partisan voting.

The vast majority of this money, however, is not going to candidates in the 5th Congressional District race. And for good reason.

Keith Ellison won the 5th CD by 48.9 points in 2008 - which was the largest margin of victory posted by a one-term U.S. House incumbent in the history of the Gopher State and the second largest victory margin of all-time in the district.

Without a competitive race in the 5th to get behind, Minneapolis residents have therefore turned their pocketbooks out to candidates in other districts - particularly the 6th CD.

Through late July, over $469,000 of the $1.05 million in itemized individual contributions from Minneapolis has been directed to candidates in Michele Bachmann's 6th CD, or 44.8 percent.

This is more than twice the amount of the next closest districts, the 1st CD ($200,071; 19.1 percent) and 3rd CD ($175,443; 16.8 percent), and is more than six times the amount spent on candidates in the 5th ($74,130; 5.7 percent).

Overall, candidates in the 6th CD race have received more money from Minneapolis residents than all candidates in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th, and 8th districts combined.

Delivering over 61 percent of funds to the 6th and 3rd CDs makes particular sense for DFLers, as those were the two most competitive races in the state in 2008, with Republicans Bachmann and Erik Paulsen winning by 3.0 and 7.6 percent respectively.

Donating nearly 20 percent of contributions to 1st CD candidates also makes sense both for Democrats and Republicans - as Tim Walz is considered the most vulnerable DFLer in the Gopher State of the delegation's five safe seats.

Itemized Individual Contributions by Minneapolis Residents to U.S. House Candidates by Congressional District

District
Funds
Percent
2008 MoV
6
$469,066
44.8
3.0
1
$200,071
19.1
29.6
3
$175,443
16.8
7.6
5
$74,130
7.1
48.9
2
$59,240
5.7
14.7
4
$53,900
5.1
37.1
8
$13,950
1.3
35.5
7
$1,550
0.1
44.5
Total
$1,047,405
100.0
Contributions through July 21, 2010. FEC Data compiled by Smart Politics.

But what is perhaps most curious about all the money that has been thrown into the 6th CD race from Minneapolis to date is that the candidate who has received the most is no longer even in the race.

DFLer Maureen Reed, who suspended her campaign in early June a couple months after losing her party's endorsement to State Senator Tarryl Clark, has received $202,666 from Minneapolis residents - more than candidates from both parties combined for any of the other seven congressional districts in the Gopher State.

Reed has received 19.3 percent of all itemized contributions from Minneapolis residents this election cycle - just edging out Clark, who has received $200,006 during this period, or 19.1 percent.

Although Reed did have a one quarter head start against Clark early in the campaign, her success in receiving financial support in Minneapolis comes even as Clark had outraised her by more than a 2:1 margin through June 2010 for all individual contributions, with $1.79 million to Reed's $882,480.

Although the extremely well-funded Michele Bachmann is outraising Clark within the State of Minnesota as a whole - receiving $1.02 for every $1.00 for Clark - she comes in at a distant 6th in funds received from the deep blue City of Lakes with $66,144, or 6.3 percent of total funds donated.

Ellison, who represents the 5th CD, comes in fifth on the list with $72,140, or 6.9 percent.

Itemized Individual Contributions by Minneapolis Residents to U.S. House Candidates by Candidate

Rank
Candidate
District
Funds
Percent
1
Maureen Reed
6
$202,666
19.3
2
Tarryl Clark
6
$200,006
19.1
3
Tim Walz
1
$168,876
16.1
4
Erik Paulsen
3
$141,234
13.5
5
Keith Ellison
5
$72,140
6.9
6
Michele Bachmann
6
$66,144
6.3
7
Betty McCollum
4
$52,600
5.0
8
John Kline
2
$47,340
4.5
9
Randy Demmer
1
$31,195
3.0
10
Jim Meffert
3
$26,450
2.5
11
Jim Oberstar
8
$13,950
1.3
12
Maureen Hackett
3
$7,759
0.7
13
Dan Powers
2
$6,900
0.7
14
Shelly Madore
2
$5,000
0.5
15
Joel Demos
5
$1,680
0.2
16
Collin Peterson
7
$1,550
0.1
17
Teresa Collett
4
$1,300
0.1
18
Barb Davis White
5
$310
0.0
19
Elwyn Tinklenberg
6
$250
0.0
Total
$1,047,405
100.0
Contributions through July 21, 2010. FEC Data compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Brett Favre Returns: How Many Games Will the Vikings Win?

Favre has 85-50 career mark against this year's Vikings opponents, including a 68-31 record against them vis-à-vis the team's 2010 home/away schedule

The trip to Hattiesburg, Mississippi this week by Minnesota Vikings Jared Allen, Ryan Longwell, and Steve Hutchinson to win over quarterback Brett Favre was perhaps not unlike the walk to the White House many Democratic members of Congress have made over the past year, as they sought to plead and persuade President Barack Obama to join forces as they prepare for battle against Republicans on Capitol Hill.

And while Favre is not president of the Vikings (that title belongs to Mark Wilf, younger brother of owner Zygi), the power and respect the quarterback has accumulated during his mere 12 months on the job in Minneapolis is perhaps without precedent in the National Football League and truly a case study in executive power.

Since the Vikings deem Favre to be the lynchpin to realize their lofty hopes for a successful 2010 season, they are obviously banking on Favre to be able to translate his successes of the past into many victories again this year with the Vikings, his 20th season in the National Football League.

And just how successful has Favre been against the 13 teams he will be playing in the 2010 regular season?

Very.

If (Favre's) past is prologue, the Vikings are going to have another banner year - winners of at least 13 games.

Favre, of course, has played only about five percent of his illustrious career with the Minnesota Vikings, and the #4 of 2010 is naturally not the same as the 1996 edition, nor are the players on the team rosters against which he will be playing.

Nonetheless, certain patterns have emerged for the future Hall of Fame quarterback as he enters the third decade of his career.

For example, Green Bay Packer fans will painfully remember that Favre is a combined 0-11 on the road in his career against the Philadelphia Eagles and Dallas Cowboys in the regular season (not to mention several more losses in the playoffs).

On the flip side, Favre has proven to be virtually unbeatable at home against the Detroit Lions, winning 16 and losing only once in his 17 career starts, including a 27-10 win in Week 10 last season.

Overall, a Smart Politics analysis of Favre's 285 career regular season starts finds that he has 85 wins and 50 losses in the 135 games he has played against the 13 teams he will face in the 2010 season.

The Vikings quarterback has a winning record against nine of these 13 teams, including all three of his divisional opponents, winning 25 of 34 games against the Lions, 23 of 34 games against the Bears, and tallying a 2-0 record against the Packers last year.

Favre also has a winning record against the majority of the remaining conference opponents the Vikings will face this year: the Washington Redskins (4-0), New York Giants (5-2), Arizona Cardinals (4-2), and New Orleans Saints (3-2).

Favre has a losing record against his other two 2010 NFC opponents, the aforementioned Dallas Cowboys (2-6) and Philadelphia Eagles (5-7).

The Vikings will play their remaining four games against AFC East squads this year, where Favre has compiled a 12-11 career mark, with winning records against the Buffalo Bills (4-3) and Miami Dolphins (4-2), drawing even against the New England Patriots (3-3), and a losing record against his other former team, the New York Jets (1-3).

Of course, a key factor in determining Favre's success or failure over the years against many of these teams is whether or not he has played them at home or on the road.

A Smart Politics analysis of Favre's performances against his 2010 opponents that takes into account his respective career home and away records against them, finds the trend lines looking even more favorable for the Vkings this year.

Whereas Favre has compiled a .630 winning percentage against these 13 teams overall (85-50), he has a .687 career record against them in respective home and away games vis-à-vis the Vikings' 2010 schedule (68-31).

A game-by-game simulation of the Vikings' season based solely on Favre's career mark in home and away games against the team's 2010 opponents, finds the Vikings winning at least 13 games, including their highly-anticipated season opener in New Orleans, where Favre has a 3-1 record in regular season matchups.

The Vikings' only losses would come at the New York Jets in their fourth game on October 11th after the bye week (where Favre is 0-1 in his career, losing 42-17 in 2002) and in their 15th game at Philadelphia on December 26th (where Favre is 0-5 in his regular season career).

Favre has a 2-2 career record at home against the Miami Dolphins, which Minnesota will host in their second game on September 19th.

Overall, Favre has a gaudy 38-11 career home record against the eight teams the Vikings will host in Minneapolis this year.

Favre also has a solid 30-20 mark for his career on the road against the eight teams the Vikings will face away from the Metrodome in 2010.

Now all #4 has to do is suit up and play the games...

Brett Favre's Career (Home/Road) Record Against Minnesota Vikings' 2010 Opponents

Date
Team
Won
Loss
Projection
Sept. 9
New Orleans (A)
3
1
Win
Sept. 19
Miami (H)
2
2
???
Sept. 26
Detroit (H)
16
1
Win
Oct. 11
New York Jets (A)
0
1
Loss
Oct. 17
Dallas (H)
2
0
Win
Oct. 24
Green Bay (A)
1
0
Win
Oct. 31
New England (A)
3
1
Win
Nov. 7
Arizona (H)
3
0
Win
Nov. 14
Chicago (A)
13
4
Win
Nov. 21
Green Bay (H)
1
0
Win
Nov. 28
Washington (A)
1
0
Win
Dec. 5
Buffalo (H)
2
0
Win
Dec. 12
New York Giants (H)
2
1
Win
Dec. 20
Chicago (H)
10
7
Win
Dec. 26
Philadelphia (A)
0
5
Loss
Jan. 2
Detroit (A)
9
8
Win
Table compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Monday, August 16, 2010

Loss by Herseth Sandlin in 2010 South Dakota US House Race Would Be Historic

Defeat of four-term Democratic Congresswoman would mark biggest fall since statehood for a South Dakota U.S. House incumbent in back-to-back contested elections

Although U.S. Representative Stephanie Herseth Sandlin is not the only Democrat on the hot seat in 2010, the four-term at-large incumbent from South Dakota is in serious jeopardy of ending up on the wrong side of history this election cycle.

For the last three months of Rasmussen polling, Herseth Sandlin has seen the double-digit advantage she held in March over her GOP challenger, Kristi Noem, erode into a near double-digit deficit.

Noem, who is in her second term in the South Dakota House of Representatives and currently serves as the Assistant Majority Leader, leads the Congresswoman by a 51 to 42 percent margin, according to the Rasmussen poll of 500 likely voters conducted on August 3rd.

If Noem prevails on Election Day, Herseth Sandlin's plunge from a 35.1-point defeat of her GOP rival in 2008 to a loss in 2010 would mark the biggest fall by a U.S. House incumbent in Mount Rushmore State history.

Herseth Sandlin's struggles come as Democrats are already flailing in South Dakota, with the party's failure earlier this year to field a candidate against one-term GOP U.S. Senator John Thune.

That debacle marked the first time in 34 contests since popular vote U.S. Senate elections were introduced in 1914 that a Democratic candidate had failed to appear on the ballot in South Dakota.

A Smart Politics analysis also found that the Democratic Party's plunge from earning 49.4 percent of the U.S. Senate vote in 2004 (with nominee Tom Daschle) to being left completely off the ballot six years later was the largest fall across the more than 1,050 general election U.S. Senate races conducted since WWII.

And now one of the few Democratic stars in South Dakota - and a conservative Blue Dog Democrat at that - appears to be caught in the same net as her less conservative brethren during a national tidal wave favoring the GOP, despite casting key votes against her party and President this session, such as her 'nay' vote against the controversial health care bill earlier this year.

What a difference two years make.

Herseth Sandlin defeated her previous Republican opponent, Chris Lien, by over 35 points in 2008, winning more than two-thirds of the statewide vote.

If Representative Herseth Sandlin falls in November, she would be just the 11th South Dakota U.S. Representative to lose a general election race in 121 years since statehood, and just the fourth since the mid-1930s.

The majority of Representatives in Mount Rushmore State history yielded their seat only because they did not seek reelection.

Of Herseth Sandlin's 37 predecessors since 1889, 20 did not seek reelection to their U.S. House seat, two died in office, two resigned, and three failed to receive their party's nomination.

That leaves just 10 South Dakota Representatives who were knocked out of office at the ballot box, with seven of these occurring between 1896 and 1936.

If Herseth Sandlin were to lose her quest for a fifth term in November, she would set two state records in doing so - notching the worst performance by a South Dakota U.S. Representative in back-to-back elections contested by major parties:

· A loss would drop Heresth Sandlin from her 67.6 percent showing in 2008 to at least 49.9 percent - or a fall of at least 17.7 points. The biggest previous such decline was suffered by Democrat Frank Denholm at 15.8 points, from 60.5 percent in 1972 to 44.7 percent in 1974.

· A loss would also mean that the Congresswoman would have endured a 35.2+ point net deficit from her 35.1-point margin of victory in 2008 to at least a 0.1-point margin of loss in 2010. Denholm's 31.6-point fall in 1974 was the previous such high.

The only larger fall by either of these measures for an ousted U.S. Representative from South Dakota came in 1932, when Republican Charles Christopherson (pictured) was defeated by Democrat Fred Hildebrandt by 8.7 points - 53.1 to 44.4 percent.

However, Christopherson was coming off an 84.7 percent performance in 1930 in which he won by 69.4 points in a race without a Democratic candidate on the ballot (Christopherson defeated independent candidate Henry Bormann).

But what is particularly curious about the trendline for Herseth Sandlin - and what speaks volumes about the dire straits Democrats are facing nationwide in November - is that she is facing this historic collapse despite enjoying well above average favorability ratings from the South Dakota electorate.

The same August Rasmussen poll that found her trailing Noem by nine points also found 57 percent of South Dakotans with a very favorable or somewhat favorable view of her, with just 40 percent somewhat or very unfavorable, or a +17 net favorability rating.

The Congresswoman's favorability numbers are as strong or are stronger now than they were in March (52 percent favorable, +9 net favorability), April (55 percent, +12 net), June (57 percent, +16 net), and July (56 percent, +15 net).

The same August poll also found South Dakotans to view Herseth Sandlin as more 'mainstream' than her opponent (59 to 54 percent) as well as less of an ideologue: just as many likely voters viewed the Congresswoman as 'very liberal' as 'very conservative' (10 percent each), while Noem was viewed as 'very conservative' by 35 percent and 'very liberal' by just 1 percent.

This suggests the "D" after Herseth Sandlin's name might be more important than both her views and her votes.

For unlike the last two election cycles, in 2010, the scarlet letter is a shade of blue.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Sunday, August 15, 2010

Minnesota Political Elites Backing Clark, Not Bachmann

Clark has received 400+ times more money from current and former Minnesota politicians than Congresswoman Bachmann

Although Michele Bachmann is having no trouble raising funds for her reelection campaign, and is slightly outperforming her DFL rival Tarryl Clark with contributions from Minnesotans overall, Clark is besting the Republican incumbent by a huge margin in one regard: financial support from the state's political leaders.

A Smart Politics analysis of FEC data compiled through July 21st finds that Clark has received nearly $17,000 in itemized individual contributions from more than 20 current and former Minnesota officeholders and candidates, while Bachmann has received just $35 from only two.

State Senator Clark's financial backers include some very prominent names in Gopher State politics.

Former U.S. Senator and current DFL gubernatorial nominee Mark Dayton has contributed $2,400 to Clark thus far in her campaign.

Former DFL U.S. Senate candidates David Lillehaug (in 2000), Rebecca Yanisch (2000), and Priscilla Lord Faris (2008) also have given $3,300 collectively to the State Senator.

But Dayton is just one of several current and former gubernatorial candidates to give money to Clark in her bid to upset Bachmann this November.

Matt Entenza, whose 2010 bid ended on primary night last Tuesday, donated $2,400 to Clark at the end of June. Former Attorney General and 2006 DFL gubernatorial nominee Mike Hatch gave $250 to the Clark campaign, as did former Senate Majority Leader and 2002 gubernatorial nominee Roger Moe ($700).

Two former DFL Congressmen have also provided financial support to Clark - including one of Bachmann's 6th CD seat predecessors.

Bill Luther (pictured), who represented the 6th District from 1995-2003, contributed $500 to Clark, as did former longtime 5th CD Representative Martin Sabo.

Patty Wetterling, who vied for the 6th CD seat against Mark Kennedy in 2004 and Bachmann in 2006, has put up $1,500 of her own money in 2010 to help Clark defeat the two-term GOP Congresswoman.

Maureen Hackett, who campaigned for the 3rd CD DFL endorsement to take on Republican Erik Paulsen in 2010, donated $1,200 to Clark in late 2009.

In addition to Entenza and Moe mentioned above, several other current and former state legislators have donated to the Clark campaign, to the tune of more than $4,400 collectively.

From the Senate, Clark has received money from Linda Higgins (SD 58-Minneapolis), Terri Bonoff (SD 43-Minnetonka), and Tony Lourey (SD 08-Kerrick). Former State Senator and Representative Steve Kelley has also contributed to Clark.

From the House, contributions have come in from Phyllis Kahn (HD 59B-Minneapolis), Frank Hornstein (HD 60B-Minneapolis), and Paul Thissen (HD 63A-Minneapolis).

Former longtime Republican lawmaker (and 2008 Moderate Independent candidate) Ron Erhardt also made two contributions to Clark during the last few months.

And at the local level, Clark has received money from officeholders such as Edina Mayor James Hovland and Wright County Commissioner Rosemary Thelen.

But while the total amount of money raised by Clark from these notable political figures is but a small fraction of the more than $775,000 she has received in itemized contributions thus far in the election cycle, it still towers over the amount of money political elites have given to Congresswoman Bachmann.

Although Representative Bachmann has amassed nearly $1,000,000 in itemized funds from Minnesotans through mid-July, only $25 has come from a prominent current political officeholder.

That distinction is held by first term GOP Representative Peggy Scott (HD 49A-Andover, pictured), who donated $25 to Bachmann in the 4th Quarter of 2009.

Bachmann also received a small contribution from former six-term GOP Representative Sondra Erickson from District 16A, who was defeated at the ballot box in 2008. According to the FEC report, Erickson gave $10 to Bachmann's campaign in December of 2009.

Of course, this striking imbalance in contributions from Gopher State political elites may be a badge of honor for Bachmann, who has prided herself in not being an 'establishment candidate' through her nearly four years in Congress.

In fact, though she is an incumbent and well-funded, there is telling evidence of Bachmann's "outsider" status: the only area of the country in which Clark holds a decisive fundraising advantage over Bachmann is none other than the Congresswoman's workplace, Washington D.C.

This imbalance in financial support from political elites raises a key political question.

Are political elites from the GOP not donating money to Bachmann because they know the well-funded incumbent does not need their donation, because they do not support her candidacy, or because they believe there is too great of a political risk in supporting such a controversial candidate?

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Will the Defeat of Handel and Anderson Kelliher Dash 'Year of the Woman' Prospects?

Female gubernatorial candidates still on track to break records for total number of nominees on the ballot and elections won in 2010, despite set-backs in Minnesota and Georgia

This is the eighth in a series of historical reports leading up to the gubernatorial elections of 2010. Past reports have examined the historic Class of 2002 and its large number of first-term governors, the success rate of ex-governors trying to reclaim their office, plurality winning gubernatorial campaigns, states with the most living ex-governors, what states give birth to the most governors, the number of potential GOP victories this election cycle, and the surge in third party candidacies.

With the defeat Tuesday evening of DFL-endorsed candidate Margaret Anderson Kelliher in Minnesota and Republican Karen Handel in a runoff election in Georgia, women in politics suffered a definite set back in an attempt to make history in 2010.

However, female gubernatorial candidates are still on track to break two records this November: the largest number of female major party gubernatorial candidates on the general election ballot and the largest number of women winning governorships.

In 2006, six states across the country cast their ballots to elect female governors - the most in U.S. history.

The election of three Republicans (Sarah Palin of Alaska, Jodi Rell of Connecticut, and Linda Lingle of Hawaii) and three Democrats (Janet Napolitano of Arizona, Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas, and Jennifer Granholm of Michigan) bested the previous high water mark of four back in 2002, when Lingle, Napolitano, Granholm, and Sebelius were elected to their first terms.

The key to eclipsing this record in 2010 is, of course, to maximize the number of major party female nominees.

During the last four mid-term elections (1994, 1998, 2002, 2006) the number of Republican and Democratic women on the gubernatorial general election ballot has peaked at 10 each cycle.

But this record may yet fall in 2010, despite the losses by Anderson Kelliher and Handel on Tuesday, although the math became just a little bit trickier.

Thus far in the 2010 election cycle, seven Democratic and Republican women have already secured their place on November's ballot by winning their respective state's primary:

· Republican Meg Whitman in California
· Democrat Libby Mitchell in Maine
· Democrat Diane Denish and Republican Susana Martinez in New Mexico
· Democrat Jari Askins and Republican Mary Falin in Oklahoma
· Republican Nikki Haley in South Carolina

Another two women are virtually assured to win their party's nominations being held later this month, which brings the number of female gubernatorial nominees to nine:

· Democrat Alex Sink in Florida
· Republican Governor Jan Brewer in Arizona

Needing one more woman from a major party on the general election ballot to tie the all-time record and two more to break it, additional female Democratic nominees may very well emerge from Vermont (with Secretary of State Deb Markowitz and Sue Bartlett) as well as Wyoming, where Democrat Leslie Peterson and Republican Rita Meyer are front runners in that open seat race.

Interestingly, although women in the electorate tend to self-identify more as Democrats than Republicans, the 2010 election cycle has produced more female Republican gubernatorial candidates (14) than Democrats (11).

Overall, seven female GOP gubernatorial hopefuls have already been defeated in the primaries, compared to just three on the Democratic side.

In Texas, GOP U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (pictured) failed to upend three-term incumbent Rick Perry, winning just 30.3 percent of the vote.

In that same race, tea party favorite Debra Medina also lost with 18.6 percent of the vote, while Alma Ludivina Aguado came in a distant fourth out of seven candidates on the Democratic side (2.9 percent).

Two Republican women also challenged a sitting governor for the GOP nomination in Idaho. Governor Butch Otter notched 54.6 percent of the primary vote while Ada County Commissioner Sharon Ullman won 8.4 percent for third place and Tamara Wells received 2.8 percent for sixth.

In Kansas, although U.S. Senator Sam Brownback was a lock to win that state's Republican nomination for its open gubernatorial seat, businesswoman Joan Heffington threw her hat into the ring, but won only 17.8 percent of the primary vote.

Finally, although the winners of their party's primaries were women, two other major party female gubernatorial candidates have been defeated so far this year. In Maine, Democratic businesswoman Rosa Scarcelli placed third with 21.5 percent of the vote behind Libby Mitchell, while in New Mexico Republican State Representative Janice Arnold-Jones placed fifth with 3.1 percent behind Susana Martinez.

Of course, it is one thing to get nominated and yet another to win the election.

Can women get to seven victories in gubernatorial races in 2010?

Here is how the math looks today:

#1 & #2. Women are guaranteed at least two victories, as both the Republican and Democratic parties in New Mexico and Oklahoma nominated women in 2010.

#3. Additionally, Republican Nikki Haley from South Carolina is currently polling with a double-digit advantage over her Democratic opponent, Vincent Sheheen (Rasmussen, July 29).

#4. Should Jan Brewer win the Arizona Republican primary as expected, she will be heavily favored to defeat Democratic nominee Terry Goddard in November. Brewer held a 19-point lead over Goddard in a late July Rasmussen survey.

#5. Florida Democrat Alex Sink, meanwhile, has frequently polled ahead (by narrow margins) in general election matchup surveys against her two prime GOP contenders (Bill McCollum and Rick Scott) and independent Bud Chiles.

#6. A sixth victory for women could come from California Republican Meg Whitman. Although the Golden State leans Democratic, Whitman has eked out narrow leads over Democratic nominee Jerry Brown in three of the last six public opinion polls released over the past month and a half.

#7. A seventh and record-setting victory could come from either Maine (Libby Mitchell) or Wyoming, if Republican and/or Democratic primary voters nominate the front running women in that race. (Despite its conservative electorate, Wyoming has elected a Democratic governor during seven of the last nine election cycles).

And then there is the state of Vermont. Even though the Green Mountain State is one of the most liberal in the nation, Republicans have won the governorship there in 9 of the last 18 elections since 1974, in 19 of 32 contests since 1946, and in 42 of 55 elections since 1900.

Presuming either Secretary of State Deb Markowitz (pictured) or Sue Bartlett wins the August 24th Democratic primary, they will face a tough campaign against GOP Lieutenant Governor Brian Dubie, who led both women in Rasmussen polls conducted earlier this summer.

But even though the number of women elected to the office of governor across the country has increased substantially over the past generation, they are being elected by historically much narrower margins than their male counterparts - suggesting there is still an uphill battle even successful female candidates are facing at the ballot box, at least when it comes to positions of executive power.

Smart Politics analyzed nearly 1,800 gubernatorial elections that have been conducted since 1900 across all fifty states. In the 1,739 elections won by men, the average margin of victory was 21.2 points. In the 38 elections won by women, the average victory margin was nearly half that, at 11.8 points.

Here are some telling illustrations from the early, middle, and later periods of the 20th Century.

From 1900 through 1960, the Democratic Party swept all 31 gubernatorial elections in Texas. The 29 elections won by men were decided by an average of 70.4 points during this span, while the two elections won by women (Democrat "Ma" Wallace Ferguson in 1924 and 1932) were decided by just 21.0 points.

And when Democrat Lurleen Wallace - wife of term-limited George Wallace - won the Alabama governorship in 1966, her Republican opponent received 31.0 percent of the vote, which was the high water mark for the GOP across the 20 election cycles from 1902 through 1978. In the other 19 elections during this 75+-year span, the average vote received by the GOP when running against male Democratic candidates was only 13.4 percent.

As a result, Wallace's 32.4-point victory in 1966 was half that enjoyed by male Democratic candidates during this span (64.6 points).

Meanwhile, in New Jersey, the eight gubernatorial races won by men since 1973 have been decided by an average of 17.7 points, while the two elections won by women (GOPer Christine Todd Whitman in 1993 and 1997) were decided by an average of just 1.0 points.

Despite these historical hurdles, and the key losses by Anderson Kelliher and Handel, female candidates still have a very good chance to make 2010 the 'Year of the Woman' in gubernatorial elections.

Elected Female Gubernatorial Candidates, 1924-2008

Year
#
Governor
2008
2
Beverly Perdue (NC), Christine Gregoire (WA)
2006
6
Sarah Palin (AK), Janet Napolitano (AZ), Jodi Rell (CT), Linda Lingle (HI), Kathleen Sebelius (KS), Jennifer Granholm (MI)
2004
2
Ruth Ann Miner (DE), Christine Gregoire (WA)
2003
1
Kathleen Blanco (LA)
2002
4
Janet Napolitano (AZ), Linda Lingle (HI), Kathleen Sebelius (KS), Jennifer Granholm (MI)
2000
3
Ruth Ann Miner (DE), Judy Martz (MT), Jeanne Shaheen (NH)
1998
2
Jane Dee Hull (AZ), Jeanne Shaheen (NH)
1997
1
Christine Todd Whitman (NJ)
1996
1
Jeanne Shaheen (NH)
1993
1
Christine Todd Whitman (NJ)
1990
3
Joan Finney (KS), Barbara Roberts (OR), Ann Richards (TX)
1988
1
Madeline Kunin (VT)
1986
2
Kay Orr (NE), Madeline Kunin (VT)
1984
1
Madeline Kunin (VT)
1983
1
Martha Layne Collins (KY)
1978
1
Ella Grasso (CT)
1976
1
Dixy Lee Ray (WA)
1974
1
Ella Grasso (CT)
1966
1
Lurleen Wallace (AL)
1932
1
Ma Wallace Ferguson (TX)
1924
2
Ma Wallace Ferguson (TX), Nellie Tayloe Ross (WY, special election)
Table compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Dayton Eyes Minnesota History as Gubernatorial Campaign Moves Forward

Election of Dayton to a third statewide office this November would set multiple Minnesota electoral records

While the final numbers may look tighter than many analysts and pollsters had anticipated, Mark Dayton's victory in Minnesota's DFL gubernatorial primary on Tuesday brings the general election matchup most Minnesotans had expected for several weeks.

The close race presents an unusual example in which a winner was declared several hours ago (by the Associated Press, early Wednesday morning) but has not yet officially been acknowledged by the victorious candidate himself. Dayton says he will not declare victory until Margaret Anderson Kelliher concedes. Kelliher, the DFL-endorsed candidate who trails Dayton by over 5,000 votes with 98 percent of the vote in, vowed late Tuesday evening to make sure "every vote" was counted.

Dayton will face Republican Tom Emmer and Independence Party candidate Tom Horner in November's election in what is expected to be one of many toss-up gubernatorial races across the country this year.

Dayton led Emmer and Horner by double-digit margins in the two most recent matchup polls conducted in late July (Star Tribune) and early August (SurveyUSA).

Should Dayton sustain this advantage through Election Day to break the nearly quarter-century gubernatorial drought for the DFL, a Smart Politics analysis of Minnesota electoral history finds he would set or tie several records.

Dayton would be the first Minnesotan ever elected to the U.S. Senate to then be subsequently elected Governor of the Gopher State.

Only two other Minnesotans have ever received their party's nomination for governor after being elected to serve in the U.S. Senate - and both lost their respective gubernatorial general election contest.

Democrat Henry Rice, who served in the United States Senate for nearly five years from 1858 to 1863, ran for Governor of Minnesota in 1865 - losing by 11.2 points to Republican William Marshall in the midst of 19 consecutive gubernatorial victories by the GOP from 1859-1896.

Approximately 60 years later, Farmer-Laborite Magnus Johnson won a special election to the U.S. Senate in 1923 to fill the vacancy caused by the death of Republican Knute Nelson. Johnson served a little more than 1.5 years in D.C., but lost his reelection bid in 1924. Johnson then ran for Governor in 1926 on the Farmer-Labor ticket, but lost by 18.4 points to GOP incumbent Theodore Christianson. (Johnson had also previously lost the gubernatorial election of 1922 - by 2.1 points to Republican J.A.O. Preus).

No other former U.S. Senator from the Gopher State has subsequently received their party's nomination for governor. (Note: Farmer-Laborite Elmer Benson was appointed to his U.S. Senate seat after Republican Thomas Schall died in December 1935. Benson served just 10 months in the Senate and was then elected Governor in 1936).

If elected, Dayton would also be the first Minnesotan to win two different statewide offices before being elected Governor.

After a failed U.S. Senate bid against Republican David Durenberger in 1982, Dayton went on to successful statewide campaigns for the open race for State Auditor in 1990 and the race against one-term GOP incumbent Rod Grams for his U.S Senate seat in 2000.

Several governors of the Gopher State were previously elected to statewide office once before being elected governor, and almost all took the route of Lieutenant Governor: David Clough, Adolph Eberhart, J.A.A. Burnquist, Edward Thye, C. Elmer Anderson, Karl Rolvaag, and Rudy Perpich (running on a joint ticket with Wendell Anderson).

(The state's 3rd Governor Henry Swift and 23rd Governor Hjalmar Petersen were also previously lieutenant governors, but ascended into the office of governor through their predecessor's resignation and death respectively and were never elected to that office).

Republicans J.A.O. Preus and Arne Carlson were elected to the office of State Auditor before being elected Governor of Minnesota.

If elected, Dayton would also become only the third Minnesotan to win three different statewide offices over the course of his political career.

Nearly 200 Minnesotans have been elected to statewide office over the past 150+ years, and Dayton would join two former Republican governors, J.A.A. Burnquist (pictured) and Edward Thye, as the only ones who were each elected to three different statewide offices.

Burnquist was elected Lieutenant Governor in 1912 and, after assuming office after the death of Governor Winfield Hammond, was elected governor by wide margins in 1916 and 1918. Later in life, Burnquist had a 16-year tenure as Minnesota's Attorney General (From 1939-1955).

Fellow Republican Edward Thye was also first elected as Lieutenant Governor (in 1942) and ascended into the governor's office when Harold Stassen resigned to join the U.S. Navy shortly into his third term. Thye was then elected governor in his own right by a landslide margin in 1944 as well as to the U.S. Senate thereafter in 1946.

Another 20 Gopher State politicians have been elected to two different statewide offices.

But, for the moment, the history books will have to wait and see if Dayton can actually defeat Emmer and Horner, in what could prove to be another thrilling race in Minnesota electoral politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Monday, August 9, 2010

Bachmann vs Clark: Who's Receiving More Money from Minnesotans?

Bachmann raising $1.02 for every $1.00 Clark raises in Minnesota; Congresswoman outraising Clark in 48 of 50 states overall

Despite facing nearly a 2:1 disadvantage in campaign fundraising from her rival Michele Bachmann over the course of the election cycle to date, and more than $700,000 last quarter alone, DFL 6th CD candidate Tarryl Clark is virtually tied with the two-term Republican Congresswoman on one metric: money raised in their home state of Minnesota.

A Smart Politics analysis of itemized individual contributions from January 1, 2009 through July 21, 2010 finds that Bachmann has raised $1,689.04 per day in such contributions from Minnesotans compared to $1,658.49 per day for Clark since she launched her campaign in July 2009.

To be sure, the Bachmann-Clark matchup is not simply of interest to 6th CD constituents, but also to residents across the Gopher State and the nation, where many Republicans see the Congresswoman as a champion of true conservative principles on Capitol Hill, while many liberals see her as tone deaf to her district and a top target to defeat at the ballot box this November.

But while Bachmann and Clark may be miles apart on policy, their fundraising campaigns are following similar tracks by some measures.

For example, through the second quarter of 2010, Clark had raised 88.7 percent of her total funds from individuals with just 11.2 percent from PACs. Bachmann, meanwhile, had raised 91.9 percent of her funds from individuals and only 8.1 percent from PACs.

Secondly, of the funds Clark has raised from individuals, 61.3 percent are small donors, or unitemized contributions, compared to a very similar 55.8 percent for Bachmann.

In Minnesota, Congresswoman Bachmann has raised $957,687 in itemized funds through July 21st, compared to $593,380 for Clark. But this statistic is misleading.

Although Bachmann has received $364,307 more from in-state contributors than Clark for the campaign cycle to date, the DFL State Senator did not enter the race until late July of 2009 and has thus had 209 fewer days to raise money during the past one and a half years.

When adjusting for the number of days on the campaign trail, the numbers are almost even, with just a slight in-state edge to Bachmann: $1,689.04 raised per day for the Congresswoman and $1,658.49 per day for Clark.

This $31.55 daily advantage for Bachmann is not significant considering the total amount of money being raised by the two candidates in-state: Bachmann is raising $1.02 for every $1.00 raised by Clark in itemized contributions from Minnesotans.

Per Day Itemized Individual Contributions to Bachmann and Clark from Minnesotans

Candidate
Funds
Days
Per Day
Bachmann
$957,687
567
$1,689.04
Clark
$593,380
368
$1,657.49
Total
$1,551,067
935
$1,658.90
Data from FEC through July 21, 2010. Table compiled by Smart Politics.

But while Clark is virtually even with Bachmann for in-state large donor fundraising, a tie probably isn't good enough for the State Senator.

Because Congresswoman Bachmann has become such a national phenomenon during the last two years, a significant amount of her fundraising comes from out of state.

The $957,687 raised by Bachmann in-state amounts to just 39.7 percent of her itemized contributions raised nationwide. For Clark, the $593,380 she has raised in Minnesota totals 76.4 percent of such contributions she has received.

Overall, Representative Bachmann is outraising Clark in 48 of 50 states, including $365 per day in California, $296 per day in Florida, and $289 per day in Texas.

After also including New York and Illinois, Bachmann is raising $1,344 per day from these five states for the election cycle to date, compared to $220 per day for Clark since she launched her candidacy one year ago.

For every $1.00 Clark raises in these heavily populated states, Bachmann is raising $6.11.

The Congresswoman is raising more than 10 times that of the Clark campaign per day in 11 states across the country: Indiana (160x), Florida (25x), North Dakota (19x), South Carolina (15x), Ohio (15x), Texas (15x), Alabama (15x), Wisconsin (14x), Hawaii (12x), Oklahoma (11x), and Idaho (11x).

This does not include another seven states in which Clark has yet to raise money from an itemized individual donor: Nevada, Wyoming, Rhode Island, Utah, Mississippi, Delaware, and West Virginia. (Bachmann has raised large donor money from all 50 states).

And what are the two states in which Clark has a fundraising advantage over Bachmann?

Conservatives will nod knowingly to learn that Clark is outraising Bachmann in two of the nation's most liberal states: Massachusetts and Vermont.

Clark is raising $24.36 per day in Massachusetts compared to $23.87 for Bachmann, or for every $1.00 raised by Clark, the Congresswoman is raising $0.98.

In Vermont neither candidate is bringing in a haul, but Clark holds a $2.86 per day to $2.37 advantage.

However, the place where Clark has the biggest advantage is actually where Bachmann works, Washington, D.C.

Clark is raising $5.51 more per day ($21.73) than Bachmann ($16.22) at the nation's capital, or, for every $1.00 raised by Clark in D.C., the Congresswoman is raising just $0.75.

Itemized Individual Contributions to Bachmann and Clark Campaigns by State Per Day

State
Bachmann
Clark
Difference
x Diff
D.C.
$16.22
$21.73
-$5.50
0.75
Vermont
$2.37
$2.86
-$0.50
0.83
Massachusetts
$23.87
$24.36
-$0.49
0.98
Minnesota
$1,689.04
$1,657.49
$31.56
1.02
Pennsylvania
$84.44
$52.01
$32.43
1.62
Kentucky
$16.11
$8.38
$7.73
1.92
Connecticut
$18.02
$8.38
$9.64
2.15
South Dakota
$3.11
$1.40
$1.71
2.23
Oregon
$27.23
$10.75
$16.48
2.53
New York
$128.40
$50.55
$77.84
2.54
New Mexico
$17.16
$6.28
$10.88
2.73
New Hampshire
$5.86
$2.06
$3.80
2.85
Washington
$57.77
$18.19
$39.58
3.18
New Jersey
$60.75
$18.74
$42.00
3.24
Maryland
$81.57
$25.04
$56.53
3.26
Iowa
$14.98
$4.47
$10.51
3.35
Alaska
$4.90
$1.40
$3.51
3.51
California
$480.58
$115.05
$365.53
4.18
Montana
$13.34
$2.79
$10.55
4.78
Virginia
$67.32
$13.20
$54.12
5.10
Georgia
$36.18
$6.98
$29.19
5.18
Illinois
$117.35
$22.57
$94.78
5.20
Michigan
$65.87
$12.15
$53.72
5.42
Arkansas
$6.30
$0.98
$5.32
6.44
North Carolina
$32.29
$4.75
$27.54
6.80
Arizona
$40.69
$5.73
$34.96
7.11
Louisiana
$24.27
$3.21
$21.06
7.56
Maine
$8.46
$1.12
$7.34
7.57
Tennessee
$33.75
$4.33
$29.42
7.79
Colorado
$72.56
$8.17
$64.39
8.88
Nebraska
$18.32
$1.96
$16.37
9.37
Missouri
$33.85
$3.49
$30.36
9.70
Kansas
$11.86
$1.19
$10.68
9.99
Idaho
$7.95
$0.70
$7.26
11.39
Oklahoma
$16.42
$1.40
$15.02
11.76
Hawaii
$8.82
$0.70
$8.12
12.63
Wisconsin
$53.44
$3.58
$49.87
14.95
Alabama
$21.44
$1.42
$20.02
15.05
Texas
$309.36
$20.25
$289.11
15.28
Ohio
$75.63
$4.89
$70.74
15.47
South Carolina
$11.03
$0.70
$10.33
15.79
North Dakota
$34.71
$1.82
$32.90
19.12
Florida
$309.09
$12.22
$296.87
25.29
Indiana
$22.43
$0.14
$22.29
160.63
West Virginia
$3.97
$0.00
$3.97
---
Delaware
$4.61
$0.00
$4.61
---
Mississippi
$6.10
$0.00
$6.10
---
Utah
$7.49
$0.00
$7.49
---
Rhode Island
$9.33
$0.00
$9.33
---
Wyoming
$11.50
$0.00
$11.50
---
Nevada
$19.20
$0.00
$19.20
---
Data from FEC through July 21, 2010. Table compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Sunday, August 8, 2010

Is Winning a Contested Primary in Minnesota a Path to General Election Success?

Many DFLers since 2000 who won less than 2/3 of the primary vote in statewide elections went on to win in November

On the eve of Minnesota's primary, all eyes are on the DFL gubernatorial race to see which candidate emerges to secure the right to try to take back the governor's mansion for the Democrats for the first time in nearly a quarter century.

It is expected that the winner of the DFL primary will only escape with a plurality of the vote.

The latest SurveyUSA poll gives former U.S. Senator Mark Dayton a 43 to 27 percent lead over Margaret Anderson Kelliher, with Matt Entenza at 23 percent, and just 7 percent undecided.

But what, if anything, can be read into the DFL primary results when its winning candidate will likely have more than half of its base voting for another candidate?

Will the DFL victor emerge stronger for having survived a seriously contested primary, or weaker for having had to fight this intra-party battle in the first instance?

All the while, Republicans have had more than three months to rally behind their endorsed candidate, Tom Emmer.

A Smart Politics analysis of Minnesota statewide elections since 2000 finds that DFL candidates who have had to endure more than a token primary challenger - those candidates winning with less than two-thirds of the primary vote - frequently went on to win their respective general election contest that fall.

In 2000, Mark Dayton won a hard-fought primary battle in his U.S. Senate run to defeat Republican Rod Grams that November.

Dayton won only a 41.3 percent plurality in the primary against his three chief DFL opponents - Mike Ciresi (22.4 percent), Jerry Janezich (20.8 percent), and Rebecca Yanisch (14.6 percent).

Dayton was polling at just 21 percent in early July of 2000 (Pioneer Press / MPR) and at 27 percent in late August (Pioneer Press / MPR) before eventually eclipsing the 40 percent mark for his primary win in mid-September.

Another plurality winner for the DFL in a statewide primary election was Lori Swanson in the 2006 race for Attorney General to replace outgoing DFLer Mike Hatch.

Swanson won just 41.8 percent of the vote that September, defeating party-endorsed State Senator Steve Kelley (37.3 percent) and former U.S. Congressman Bill Luther (20.9 percent).

Swanson then went on to beat Republican Jeff Johnson two months later by nearly 13 points in the general election.

Finally, in 2008, extremely well-financed DFL endorsee Al Franken did not have a direct path to the nomination when Priscilla Lord Faris entered the race against him that summer.

Franken won just 65.3 percent of the primary vote against Faris' 29.7 percent, before defeating Norm Coleman in the hotly contested general election vote.

Only Carol Johnson, who garnered just 51.5 percent of the 2002 primary vote for Auditor against two DFLers, went on to lose in the general election (by 0.7 points to Republican Pat Anderson).

However, it would not be quite accurate to call the 2010 DFL gubernatorial race up to this point a "brutally" fought battle for the nomination.

Of the 19 television ads run by Dayton (8), Entenza (8), and Anderson Kelliher (3), only one ad makes any mention to a rival DFL candidate.

In Entenza's most recent "No Child Left Behind" ad, there is a single, fleeting reference that Kelliher was "attacking" Entenza on the education issue.

These three seconds are the only instance of an intra-party negative message or attack during the 10 minutes of ads run by the trio of DFL candidates.

It is almost as if the DFLers - tired of their 24-year drought at the ballot box in Gopher State gubernatorial races - have agreed from the onset not to bloody up one another, so that whoever wins the election would be 'well-rested' to go into battle against Republican Tom Emmer this fall.

In fact, the DFL ads have been riddled with specific attacks on the GOP, in the midst of their own primary battle.

Of these 19 DFL television ads, 11 launch direct attacks on a variety of GOP figures, including Emmer (2 ads), Sarah Palin (1 ad), former President George W. Bush (4 ads) and, particularly, outgoing Governor Tim Pawlenty (9 ads).

But while seriously-contested statewide DFL primary races have generally not had a debilitating impact on their performance in November, interestingly, when Republican nominees have had to endure bona fide primary challengers since 2000, they have gone on to lose each general election race.

In 2002, Tom Kelly won 68.8 person of the vote over 1994 GOP nominee Sharon Anderson to become the Republican nominee for Attorney General, before losing to Mike Hatch by nearly 14 points in November.

In 2006, Jeff Johnson won 58.0 percent of the vote in the Republican primary contest for Attorney General before losing to Lori Swanson in the general election.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Thursday, August 5, 2010

Increased Partisan Opposition in Kagan Confirmation Vote Continues Historical Trend

Six of the last seven presidents have faced increased opposition to get their second SCOTUS justice seated; Kagan receives third most 'nay' votes among successful nominees in history

Elena Kagan's confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court by the U.S. Senate Thursday by a 63-37 vote may not have come as a surprise to anyone in Washington, D.C., but the (historically) high level of opposition against her confirmation was predicted here at Smart Politics after her nomination in mid-May.

Three months ago, Smart Politics observed that since Woodrow Wilson, U.S. presidents have faced increased opposition from the Senate to get their second Supreme Court Justice seated - with only one such nominee receiving greater support from the chamber during this nearly 100-year span (FDR's Hugo Black).

In light of the fact that nominees of five of the last six presidents since Lyndon Johnson prior to Obama had received more 'nay' votes than their successful predecessor, Smart Politics predicted that Kagan would receive greater opposition from the Senate than Obama's first seated Justice, Sonia Sotomayor - a prediction made even though Sotomayor had received the third most 'nay' votes for a successful seated nominee in U.S. history at that time (with 31).

With 37 votes cast against her confirmation, Kagan now holds the mark for the third largest number of 'nay' votes received by a successful nominee, behind only Clarence Thomas in October 1991 (48) and Samuel Alito in January 2006 (42).

When taking into account the changing number of seats in the U.S. Senate across history as well as variations in the number of Senators voting on confirmation, the 37.0 percent opposition to Kagan marks the sixth largest opposition against a successful nominee in U.S. history, behind James Garfield's Stanley Matthews (48.9 percent), Thomas (48.0 percent), James Buchanan's Nathan Clifford (46.9 percent), Grover Cleveland's Lucias Lamar (46.7 percent), and Alito (42.0 percent).

Largest Opposition to Confirmed U.S. Supreme Court Nominees (Percent)*

Justice
President
Year
Vote
% Oppose
Stanley Matthews
Garfield
1881
24-23
48.9
Clarence Thomas
Bush 41
1991
52-48
48.0
Nathan Clifford
Buchanan
1858
26-23
46.9
Lucius Lamar
Cleveland
1888
32-28
46.7
Samuel Alito
Bush 43
2006
58-42
42.0
Elena Kagan
Obama
2010
63-37
37.0
John Catron
Van Buren
1837
28-15
34.9
Mahlon Pitney
Taft
1912
50-26
34.2
Roger Taney
Jackson
1836
29-15
34.1
Charles Hughes
Hoover
1930
52-26
33.3
Melville Fuller
Cleveland
1888
41-20
32.8
Louis Brandeis
Wilson
1916
47-22
31.9
Sonia Sotomayor
Obama
2009
68-31
31.3
William Rehnquist
Nixon
1971
68-26
27.7
Philip Barbour
Jackson
1836
30-11
26.7
* Excludes confirmed justices who never served on the bench (e.g. William Smith in 1837, 38.3 percent). Data compiled by Smart Politics.

The increase of opposition of six votes and 5.1 percentage points from Sotomayor to Kagan means that opposition to presidential attempts to seat their second nominee has now increased for six of the last seven such presidents:

· Lyndon Johnson's first seated Justice on the Court, his friend Abe Fortas, was confirmed easily by a voice vote. His next pick, Thurgood Marshall, would become the first black Justice on the Court, but not before many of the Southern Senators from the President's own party (along with newly converted Republican Strom Thurmond) opposed Marshall's confirmation. Marshall was confirmed with 86 percent of the vote (69-11), although 20 Senators in the chamber did not cast a vote.

· Richard Nixon's first nominee, the conservative-leaning Warren Burger, received the confirmation of 96 percent of voting Senators (74-3) - the largest support received by a nominee via a roll call vote since Ulysses S. Grant nominee Morrison Waite in 1874 (63-0). Nixon was not so lucky on his next choice, Clement Haynsworth. Haynsworth was rejected by the Senate, receiving the support of 45 percent of the body (45-55), due largely to his anti-labor leanings, possible conflict of interest in votes cast while on the 4th Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals, and for his lack of support on civil rights issues.

· George H.W. Bush saw his first nominee, David Souter, pass through the Senate with 91 percent of the vote (90-9). Bush's next pick, Clarence Thomas, escaped with just 52 percent of the vote (52-48) - the narrowest successful confirmation since John Garfield's nominee, Stanley Matthews, was confirmed with 51 percent of the vote in 1881 (24-23). It took 107 days from Thomas' nomination on July 1, 1991 until his confirmation vote on October 15th that autumn. Thomas' confirmation was nearly blocked by critics for his very brief experience as a judge, his suspected conservative leanings on abortion and affirmative action, and, of course, attorney Anita Hill's allegations of sexual harassment.

· Bill Clinton's first nominee, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, was confirmed with 97 percent of the vote (96-3). Only Republicans Jesse Helms (NC), Don Nickles (OK), and Bob Smith (NH) opposed her. Clinton's next nominee, Stephen Breyer, had three times as many votes cast against him, but was still confirmed with 91 percent of the vote (87-9). A group of nine Republicans, including Helms, Nickles, and Smith, cast the 'nay' votes. The period from Ginsburg's nomination to confirmation took just 58 days compared to 83 days for Breyer.

· George W. Bush's first seated Justice, John Roberts, was confirmed by 78 percent of the Senate (78-22). Bush's next nominee, Harriet Miers, turned out to be an unqualified disaster for the President - receiving strong criticisms from both Democrats and Republicans alike for her perceived lack of knowledge on constitutional law, her lack of experience as a judge, and her personal ties to the president. Opposition was so strong that her nominations was withdrawn before the confirmation hearings began.

Only Ronald Reagan bucked this trend with his first (Sandra Day O'Connor, 99-0) and second (Antonin Scalia, 98-0) seated justices both emerging without a single 'nay' vote cast against them.

Fate of Recent Presidential Attempts to Get Second Justice Seated on the Supreme Court

President
1st Confirmed
Result
Next nominee
Result
Obama
Sotomayor
68-31
Kagan
63-37
Bush 43
Roberts
78-22
Miers
Withdrew
Clinton
Ginsburg
96-3
Breyer
87-9
Bush 41
Souter
90-9
Thomas
52-48
Reagan
O’Connor
99-0
Scalia
98-0
Nixon
Burger
74-3
Haynsworth
45-55
LBJ
Fortas
Voice vote
Marshall
69-11
Table compiled by Smart Politics.

With important midterm elections just around the corner and Obama's own approval rating down 11 points from a year ago in Gallup's daily tracking poll (45 approve to 48 disapprove today versus 56 approve to 37 disapprove a year ago), it was also perhaps a bit easier for Republicans (and one Democrat) to vote against Obama's second Supreme Court justice today.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Thursday, August 5, 2010

Humphrey Institute Event to Feature Minnesota Journalist Political Fact-Checkers

On Friday afternoon, the University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs will host a panel of journalists to discuss political fact checking as the 2010 campaigns heat up in the Gopher State.

The panel includes Pat Kessler from WCCO-TV, Eric Black from MinnPost, and Tom Scheck and Catherine Richert from Minnesota Public Radio, and is moderated by the Star Tribune's Lori Sturdevant.

The event will be held from 12:00 to 1:30 pm at Cowles Auditorium at the Humphrey Institute on August 6th.

Here is the event summary from the Institute's Center for the Study of Politics and Governance:

"Voters rely on campaigns to learn where candidates stand and how they will tackle today's most pressing challenges. But too often campaigns are fast and loose with facts. This forum brings together four of the most accomplished fact-hounds who are sniffing out the lies, distortions, or half-truths in Minnesota politics. The group will discuss the importance of political fact-checking and preview key issues in the upcoming election - and how they may be distorted."

Panel Presenters:

Eric Black pens the Black Ink column for MinnPost. He is a former reporter for the Star Tribune and Twin Cities blogger. He writes about politics and government of Minnesota and the United States, the historical background of topics and other issues.

Pat Kessler is a reporter for WCCO-TV and has covered state government, politics, campaigns and conventions since 1984. Kessler is also known for his 'Reality Check' segments that separate fact from fiction in the political world. Before joining WCCO-TV, Kessler was a reporter for Minnesota Public Radio, and a technical assistant for 'A Prairie Home Companion' with Garrison Keillor. Kessler studied English and journalism at Macalester College.

Catharine Richert is the lead reporter for PoliGraph, a fact-checking project of The Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs and Minnesota Public Radio. Before moving to Minnesota, she lived in Washington, D.C. where she worked for Congressional Quarterly and PolitiFact.com. She is earning her Master of Public Policy at the Humphrey Institute and completed her undergraduate education at Oberlin College.

Tom Scheck covers politics and state government for Minnesota Public Radio News. He moved to Minnesota in 2000. Scheck went to Syracuse University and grew up in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

Moderator: Lori Sturdevant, Editorial Writer/Columnist for the Star Tribune

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

You Say You Want a Revolution? Third Party Gubernatorial Candidates Thriving in 2010

Third party gubernatorial candidates rivaling 1994 for their best showing since the Great Depression

This is the seventh in a series of historical reports leading up to the gubernatorial elections of 2010. Past reports have examined the historic Class of 2002 and its large number of first-term governors, the success rate of ex-governors trying to reclaim their office, plurality winning gubernatorial campaigns, states with the most living ex-governors, what states give birth to the most governors, and the number of potential GOP victories this election cycle.

The entry of former Congressman and Presidential candidate Tom Tancredo into the Colorado gubernatorial race this past week on the Constitution Party ticket has been a political landmine for the Republican party in the Centennial State.

Tancredo now joins a growing list of third party candidates that look to have a dynamic effect on several contests this fall, and his candidacy is further evidence of the growing public discontent with both political parties in the U.S. as the nation continues to face serious economic and foreign policy challenges.

And just how much of an impact will third parties have in 2010?

A Smart Politics analysis of nearly 1,800 gubernatorial elections since 1900 finds that third party candidates in 2010 will rival those of 1994 for the strongest showing over the past 75 years since the Great Depression.

Tancredo is simply one of many third party candidates currently polling in double digits in gubernatorial races across the country:

· The former Colorado Congressman hit the ground running at 24 percent in new SurveyUSA and Rasmussen polls in three-way matchups against Democrat John Hickenlooper and GOP hopefuls Scott McInnis and Dan Maes.

· In Rhode Island, former Republican U.S. Senator and current independent candidate Lincoln Chaffee has enjoyed narrow leads against his GOP and Democratic rivals throughout most of the summer. The July 21st Rasmussen survey measures Chaffee's support at 37 percent.

· In Minnesota, Independence Party endorsee (and former Republican) Tom Horner polled between 13 and 15 percent in the latest Star Tribune poll against GOP endorsee Tom Emmer and the three DFL hopefuls. The Gopher State has elected five third party candidates to the office of governor since 1900 - the most in the nation.

· Two former Democrats-turned-independents are looking to have an impact in the northeast. Maine's Eliot Cutler polled at 15 percent in a mid-July Rasmussen survey while Massachusetts Treasurer Tim Cahill came in at 17 percent in a July 22nd Rasmussen survey.

· Meanwhile, in Florida, a late July Quinnipiac survey finds independent Bud Chiles, son of former Democratic governor Lawton Chiles, receiving 14 percent of the vote in matchups against Democrat Alex Sink and the two leading GOPers (Rick Scott and Bill McCollum).

If these third party candidates sustain their support through the November 2010 election, it will mark only the second time since the Great Depression that six gubernatorial candidates will have won at least 10 percent of the vote in an election cycle (the other being 1994).

While the 1994 election is best known for the "Republican Revolution" and the GOP takeover of the U.S. House, it was also fertile ground for third parties, with eight candidates across seven states receiving at least 10 percent of the vote in gubernatorial contests, including independent Angus King (pictured) of Maine who won the Pine Tree State with a 35.4 percent plurality.

That election cycle also saw notable campaigns from Frank Fasi running on the "Best Party" ticket in Hawaii (30.7 percent, 2nd place), independent Wes Watkins of Oklahoma (23.5 percent), Alaskan Independence party candidate Jack Coghill (19.8 percent), Eunice Groark on the "A Connecticut Party" ticket (18.8 percent), Independence party candidate Tom Scott (11.4 percent, also in Connecticut), Constitution Party candidate Peg Luksik in Pennsylvania (12.8 percent), and Green Party candidate Roberto Mondragon in New Mexico (10.3 percent).

After 1994, the next largest number of states with candidates notching at least 10 percent of the vote in an election cycle since the Great Depression was four - with most of these during the last 25 years: 2006 (Alaska, Illinois, Maine, Texas (x2)), 2002 (Minnesota, New York, Oklahoma, Wisconsin), 1998 (Alaska, Maine, Minnesota, Pennsylvania), 1990 (Alaska, Connecticut, New York, Oregon), 1986 (Arizona, Illinois, Maine (x2), Vermont), and 1938 (Connecticut, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin).

The 1990s in particular brought a resurgence to third parties in gubernatorial campaigns that had not been seen since before World War II. From 1990 to 1999, five third party candidates won gubernatorial contests - the second largest number per decade since the beginning of the 20th century.

In addition to independent Angus King's 1994 and 1998 victories in Maine, victorious third party candidates include Lowell Weicker on the A Connecticut Party ticket (1990), Alaskan Independence Party candidate Wally Hickel (1990), and Reform Party candidate Jesse Ventura in Minnesota (1998).

In total, 17 states across 144 elections in the 1990s had third party candidates reach double digits in gubernatorial races, or 11.8 percent - the third highest percentage by decade since the 1900s.

Number of States with Third Party Gubernatorial Candidates Winning 10+ Percent by Decade Since 1900

Decade
States
Candidates
Elections
% States
Won
1900-1909*
8
8
181
4.4
0
1910-1919
45
48
188
23.9
2
1920-1929
22
22
184
12.0
0
1930-1939
20
20
182
11.0
8
1940-1949
4
4
176
2.3
1**
1950-1959
4
4
175
2.3
0
1960-1969
3
3
155
1.9
0
1970-1979
8
9
152
5.3
1
1980-1989
7
8
122
5.7
0
1990-1999
17
18
144
11.8
5
2000-2009
9
10
117
7.7
0
Total
147
154
1,776
8.3
17
* Excludes Fusion (Democratic-Populist) candidacies in South Dakota, North Dakota, and Colorado in 1900. ** Orland Loomis died before taking office in Wisconsin. Data compiled by Smart Politics.

In the 1930s, third party candidates won eight gubernatorial contests, including four by Farmer-Laborites in Minnesota (Floyd Olson in 1930, 1932, and 1934, Elmer Benson in 1936), two by Progressives in Wisconsin (Philip Fox La Fallotte in 1934 and 1936), as well as independents in Oregon (Julius Meier in 1930) and North Dakota (William Langer in 1936).

From the 1940s through the 1980s, third party candidates won the governor's mansion only two times: Progressive Orland Loomis in Wisconsin in 1942 (who died before taking office) and independent James Longley in Maine in 1974.

But the heyday for third parties since the end of the 19th Century was decidedly the 1910s.

From 1910 to 1919, nearly one quarter of gubernatorial elections had at least one third party candidate garner 10 percent or more of the vote.

Two of these were victorious: former Republican-turned-Progressive Hiram Johnson of California (1914) and Sidney Catts of Florida (1916, pictured), who attained the highest elected office in history for any candidate from the Prohibition Party.

In total, 45 of 188 gubernatorial elections had third party candidates reach the 10 percent mark or beyond during this 10-year span (23.9 percent), with 48 candidates overall.

The vast majority of these candidacies were Progressives, with the 1912 presidential run by Teddy Roosevelt buoying the total number of third party candidates earning 10+ percent in that year alone to 23 across 20 states: Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho (x2), Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana (x2), New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, and Washington (x2).

Another 11 third party candidates reached the 10 percent mark two years later in 1914.

Largest Number of States with Third Party Gubernatorial Candidates Winning 10+ Percent Per Election Cycle, 1900-2009

Year
States
Candidates
Elections
% States
1912
20
23
33
60.6
1914
11
11
31
35.5
1920
8
8
35
22.9
1994
7
8
36
19.4
1934
6
6
34
17.6
1918
5
5
32
15.6
1922
5
5
33
15.2
1924
5
5
36
13.9
Data compiled by Smart Politics.

While the conventional wisdom is that third party candidacies begin to falter as Election Day draws nearer due to the electorate's fear of the 'wasted vote,' sometimes a political environment is so tumultuous that the allure of a candidate outside the box, combined with a desire to stick it to the two major parties, will override that fear.

With Democrats on the hot-seat now and the distaste the electorate felt for the GOP just two years old, all signs point toward a big day for third parties in 2010.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Monday, August 2, 2010

Can the DFL Win Minnesota's Governorship in the Face of a GOP Sweep of its Upper Midwestern Neighbors?

Democrats have won gubernatorial elections in Minnesota only four times since statehood without also holding one of its neighboring four states; last time was 1954

Buoyed by a recent poll that shows any of its trio of gubernatorial candidates ahead of GOP endorsee Tom Emmer, the DFL continues to be optimistic about its odds of winning Minnesota's gubernatorial election this November.

However, if Democrats are to be successful in taking back the governor's mansion in the Gopher State, they may have to accomplish that task by doing something they haven't done in more than half a century.

A Smart Politics analysis of historical election results finds that the DFL (or Democratic) Party has only won four gubernatorial elections in Minnesota history - and none since 1954 - unless also holding one of its neighboring four states at the same time.

In short, when Republicans are poised to sweep the highest office across the Upper Midwest, the Gopher State usually follows suit.

The last time Minnesota Democrats bucked the partisan trend of neighboring Iowa, Wisconsin, North Dakota, and South Dakota in gubernatorial elections was 1954, when DFLer Orville Freeman knocked out 1-term Republican incumbent C. Elmer Anderson by 5.9 points.

That November, Wisconsinites and North Dakotans elected Republicans Walter Kohler and C. Norman Brunsdale back into office for third terms respectively while Iowans and South Dakotans elected GOPers Leo Hoegh and Joe Foss for the first time.

Prior to 1954, it had been 40 years since the last time Minnesotans were able to eke out a Democratic victory while the rest of the region voted Republican for their chief executive.

In 1914, former Democratic Congressman Winfield Hammond (pictured) narrowly won his first and only term by 3.4 points in the Gopher State (he would die in office in 1915).

Republicans swept through the rest of the Upper Midwest that November with George Clarke in Iowa, Emanuel Philipp in Wisconsin, Frank Byrne in South Dakota, and Louis Hanna in North Dakota.

The third such instance happened 10 years prior, in 1904, when Democrat John Johnson was elected to his first of three terms in Minnesota, winning by 2.6 points. Republicans swept the region that year with Robert La Follette in Wisconsin, Samuel Elrod in South Dakota, Elmore Sarles in North Dakota, and Albert Cummins in Iowa (elected in 1903).

These three election cycles are the only times during the last 152 years in which there has been this sort of 'Minnesota exceptionalism' with Democrats winning gubernatorial elections in the Gopher State in the face of Republican dominance across the neighboring four states.

The only other instance of a Democrat winning Minnesota whilst surrounded by Republican neighbors took place in 1857, more than 30 years before the Dakotas achieved statehood.

In Minnesota's first gubernatorial election, Democrat Henry Sibley narrowly defeated Alexander Ramsey by 0.6 points, while Republicans were elected into office in Iowa (Ralph Lowe) and Wisconsin (Alexander Randall).

A look at the current Upper Midwestern political landscape suggests it might take one of these 'Minnesota miracles' in 2010 for a Democrat to win a governorship across these five states:

· Republicans currently hold the governor's seat in North Dakota, which will not have a gubernatorial election until 2012. If Governor John Hoeven wins his U.S. Senate race as expected, then (Minneapolis-born) Lieutenant Governor Jack Dalrymple will serve as governor of the Peace Garden State for the next two years.

· In South Dakota's open race, Republican Lieutenant Governor Dennis Daugaard has held a 15 to 20 point advantage over Democrat Scott Heidepriem in each of the last five public opinion polls, including a 17-point lead in the most recent Rasmussen poll conducted in early July.

· In Iowa, former four-term GOP Governor Terry Branstad has polled ahead of 1-term Democratic incumbent Chet Culver in each of the more than half-dozen surveys conducted this year, including a 26-point lead in a mid-June Rasmussen survey.

· In Wisconsin's open-seat race, front-running GOP hopeful Scott Walker has held a lead over Milwaukee's Democratic Mayor Tom Barrett in each of the ten non-partisan public opinion polls conducted this year, though most by single-digit margins. The latest poll (Rasmussen, July 27) has Walker up by seven points.

Meanwhile, the last seven times Minnesotans elected a Democrat into the governor's office, one or more of these neighboring states did likewise:

· When DFLer Rudy Perpich won his first term in 1982, Wisconsin elected Democrat Anthony Earl. North Dakota's last Democratic Governor, George Sinner, was two years into serving his first term in office when Perpich won his second term in 1986.

· When DFLer Wendell Anderson (pictured) won his first term in 1970, Democrats also won gubernatorial elections in South Dakota (Richard Kneip) and Wisconsin (Patrick Lucey) while North Dakota Democrat William Guy was two years into his fourth and final term. Kneip and Lucey were also elected alongside Anderson in 1974, and North Dakota Democrat Arthur Link was two years into his first term.

· When DFLer Karl Rolvaag won his infamous 91-vote victory over Elmer Anderson in 1962, Democrats were also elected in Iowa (Harold Hughes), Wisconsin (John Reynolds), and North Dakota (William Guy).

· When DFLer Orville Freeman won his second term in 1956, Democrats took home the governorship in Iowa (Herschel Loveless). When Freeman won his third term in 1958, Loveless was also reelected as were Democratic governors in Wisconsin (Gaylord Nelson) and South Dakota (Ralph Herseth).

With Republicans poised to win their most gubernatorial seats in an election cycle in 90 years, a DFL pick-up in Minnesota would not only defy the historical odds of the Upper Midwest region, but the national political environment as well.

Election of Democratic Gubernatorial Candidates in Minnesota Vis-à-Vis the Upper Midwest, 1857-Present

Year
Minnesota
Region
1986
Rudy Perpich
North Dakota (George Sinner, 1984)
1982
Rudy Perpich
Wisconsin (Anthony Earl)
1974
Wendell Anderson
South Dakota (Richard Kneip), Wisconsin (Patrick Lucey), North Dakota (Arthur Link, 1972)
1970
Wendell Anderson
South Dakota (Richard Kneip), Wisconsin (Patrick Lucey), North Dakota (William Guy, 1968)
1962
Karl Rolvaag
Iowa (Harold Hughes), Wisconsin (John Reynolds), North Dakota (William Guy)
1958
Orville Freeman
Iowa (Herschel Loveless), Wisconsin (Gaylord Nelson), South Dakota (Ralph Herseth)
1956
Orville Freeman
Iowa (Herschel Loveless)
1954
Orville Freeman
None
1914
Winfield Hammond
None
1908
John Johnson
North Dakota (John Burke)
1906
John Johnson
North Dakota (John Burke)
1904
John Johnson
None
1898
John Lind
South Dakota (Andrew Lee, Fusion)
1857
Henry Sibley
None
Data compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Monday, August 2, 2010

Emmer's Statewide Support Still Ahead of Pawlenty's 2002 Pace

Pawlenty did not poll at 30 percent until mid-October 2002 before winning first term

With the three main DFL gubernatorial candidates understandably garnering the spotlight in the days leading up to the highly anticipated August 10th primary, momentum appears to be on the side of the Democrats in Minnesota's top-of-the-ticket race: frontrunning DFL candidate Mark Dayton has now led Republican Tom Emmer (sometimes within the margin of error) in each of the the last three public opinion polls conducted since June.

In the most recent survey conducted by the Star Tribune from July 26-29 of 831 registered voters, Emmer trailed Dayton by a 40 to 30 percent margin, trailed 38 to 29 percent to DFLer endorsee Margaret Anderson Kelliher, and 36 to 31 percent to Matt Entenza.

Independence Party endorsee Tom Horner received between 13 percent and 15 percent in each matchup.

Given the fact that the Gopher State has the 3rd longest Deomcratic gubernatorial drought in the nation and that the national political winds continue to favor the GOP this election cycle, Emmer's deficit three months out gives the appearance that the Republican endorsee is in trouble.

But is that the case?

Perhaps Emmer's biggest problem is one of perception, a perception that his campaign is faltering a bit after shooting out of the gate rather fast - notching a 42 to 34 percent lead over Dayton, 41 to 33 percent advantage over Anderson Kelliher, and 42 to 31 percent over Entenza in May in the first poll conducted after the DFL and GOP conventions this spring (SurveyUSA).

Emmer's support, in a variety of polls sampling likely voters, registered voters, and adults, has not eclipsed 40 percent since, ranging between a high of 37 percent to a low of 30 percent in the new Star Tribune survey.

Emmer, however, is nonetheless polling ahead of Governor Tim Pawlenty's campaign at this stage back in 2002, when Pawlenty went on to win his first term in that year's GOP-leaning midterm election cycle.

Pawlenty, who was more well-known at the time to Minnesotans than Emmer is today due to his status as Majority Leader of the House of Representatives for two sessions, did not poll at 30 percent until a MSNBC / Zogby survey in October 2002:

· Pawlenty polled at 22 percent in a June 2002 Pioneer Press / MPR survey and 24 percent in a June 2002 Star Tribune poll.
· After the primaries in mid-September, Pawlenty polled at 25 percent, 28 percent, and 28 percent in Pioneer Pres / MPR, Star Tribune, and MSNBC / Zogby polls respectively.

It was not until a second MSNBC / Zogby poll conducted October 9-11 that Pawlenty reached the 30 percent mark, and it would be two more polls before the Star Tribune measured Pawlenty's support in the 30s (just one week before Election Day on October 28th).

Emmer's numbers have remained at or above 30 percent in each of the more than half-dozen non-partisan polls conducted this year.

Pawlenty, like Emmer, was also facing a well-known DFL Minnesota politician back in 2002. Roger Moe had run as the DFL candidate for Lieutenant Governor in 1998 and was Majority Leader of the Senate for 22 years.

Emmer's chief prospective DFL challenger, Mark Dayton, has wide name recognition from his family's business and due to the fact that he has already been elected to statewide office both as State Auditor (in 1990) and U.S. Senator (in 2000).

Where the Emmer-Pawlenty tapestry begins to fray, however, is with the differences between the 2002 and 2010 Independence Party candidates.

Back in 2002, Pawlenty was joined on the ballot by a former Democrat running as the Independence Party nominee in Tim Penny.

Penny ran a strong campaign winning several counties in the 1st Congressional District he used to represent, and likely pried more votes from the left than the right that November on his road to a 16 percent showing.

In fact, it was Penny's strong numbers through the summer and early Autumn that helped to depress Pawlenty's poll numbers down in the 20s for several months.

In 2010, however, the leading 2010 IP candidate Tom Horner is a former Republican, a fact which is of no small concern to the Emmer campaign as it tries to build a base of support among GOPers and conservative to moderate independents. Rob Hahn is challenging Horner for the IP slot on the ballot.

The real test for Team Emmer is whether he can maintain his numbers in the 30s if and when statewide support for the IP candidate reaches 20 percent in the coming weeks.

Still, while the Emmer camp would no doubt like to be the candidate flirting with the low 40s instead of the low 30s at the moment, recent Gopher State political history has shown it is much too early to suggest the Star Tribune polling results signify big trouble for the Republican Party in Minnesota this November.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Friday, July 30, 2010

Southern U.S. Representatives Leading the Campaign Against Illegal Immigration

Nearly half of Southern U.S. House incumbents address illegal immigration on campaign websites, compared to 30 percent from the West, 23 percent in the Midwest, and 14 percent out East

This is the second in a series of reports on U.S. House incumbents campaigning on illegal immigration. The first report analyzed the differences in how Democratic and Republican incumbents highlighted illegal immigration on their campaign websites.

Although support for a crackdown on illegal immigration - as well as the Arizona law SB 1070 - is enjoying large support in states across the country, it is not drawing uniform attention from Representatives in the U.S. House.

A Smart Politics content analysis of campaign websites for U.S. House incumbents running for reelection in 2010 finds that 49 percent of Representatives from Southern states are highlighting the immigration issue, compared to just 30 percent from Western states, 23 percent from the Midwest, and 14 percent from the East.

Smart Politics content analyzed the policy issues highlighted on the campaign websites of 373 members of the U.S. House (all 435 seats minus vacancies, minus the more than three dozen Representatives not running for reelection, minus those incumbents already defeated in primaries, minus 18 Representatives who do not maintain campaign websites).

Of the 124 Representatives running for reelection to the House from the 16 Southern states, 61 are putting immigration issues in the spotlight on their websites (49.2 percent) while 63 are not (50.8 percent).

Southern members of Congress are by far the most immigration-focused of the four regions of the United States, in part because delegation-heavy Texas is a border state with Mexico. Twenty of the Lone Star State's 29 Representatives with campaign websites highlight immigration as a top issue, with 17 of them advocating get-tough reforms, such as Republican Michael Burgess (TX-26):

"Over the past decade, immigration has become a crisis for our nation. With over one million immigrants streaming into our country every year, our education, terrorism, healthcare, and prison systems are being heavily burdened by this growing population."

Meanwhile, just 30.3 percent of Representatives from the nation's 13 Western states feature immigration as one of the top issues on their campaign websites (27 of 89), including of five of the seven incumbents running for reelection from Arizona and five of seven from Colorado.

However, none of the three (all Democratic) incumbents from the border state of New Mexico are putting immigration in the spotlight, nor are 32 of the 46 incumbents with campaign websites from California. Several of those who are focused on immigration from California are opposed to the enforcement-first policy backed by the GOP and the majority of Americans (e.g. Linda Sanchez, CA-39; Joe Baca, CA-43; Bob Filner, CA-51).

Representing districts further away from the U.S.-Mexican border are those from the nation's 12 Midwestern states.

Of the 88 incumbents running for reelection maintaining a campaign website, just 20 are emphasizing the immigration issue (22.7 percent).

Of the four northern rim states in this region - North Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan - just 3 of 27 incumbents address illegal immigration on their websites (11.1 percent): Paul Ryan (WI-01; advocating a get-tough approach), Keith Ellison (MN-05, soft), and Thad McCotter (MI-11; get-tough).

Moving still further from the southern border are Representatives from the nine states in the Eastern region of the country. Only 13.9 percent of incumbents from these states (10 of 72) are highlighting immigration on their campaign websites.

Geographic Distribution of U.S. House Incumbents Highlighting Immigration on Campaign Websites

Region
Yes
No
Total
% Yes
% No
South
61
63
124
49.2
50.8
West
27
62
89
30.3
69.7
Midwest
20
68
88
22.7
77.3
East
10
62
72
13.9
86.1
Total
118
255
373
31.6
68.4
Data based on the percentage of all U.S. House incumbents running for reelection with campaign websites by regions as demarcated by the U.S. Census. Data compiled by Smart Politics.

Of course, part of the reason why Southern members of the U.S. House are inordinately highlighting immigration on their campaign websites is that this region is dominated by Republicans.

The first part of this series of reports demonstrated GOP incumbents to be focusing on immigration 2.7 times more than their Democratic counterparts.

In total, 69.1 percent of Southern Republican incumbents featured immigration as a top issue on their websites, compared to 44.1 percent out West, 32.5 percent in the Midwest, and 21.4 percent out East.

The GOP has 68 incumbents running in the South (plus one without a website), compared to 40 in the Midwest, 34 in the West, and 14 in the East.

The geographic distribution of Democratic U.S. House members running for reelection is much more even: 58 in the East (plus six without websites), 56 in the South (plus four without websites), 55 in the West (plus four without websites), and 48 in the Midwest (plus three without websites).

Overall, 25 percent of Democratic Representatives from the South highlight immigration, compared to 21.8 percent out West, 14.6 percent in the Midwest, and 12.1 percent out East.

U.S. House Incumbents Addressing Immigration on Campaign Websites by Region and Party

Republican
Yes
No
Total
% Yes
% No
South
47
21
68
69.1
30.9
West
15
19
34
44.1
55.9
Midwest
13
27
40
32.5
67.5
East
3
11
14
21.4
78.6
Total
78
78
156
50.0
50.0
Democrat
Yes
No
Total
% Yes
% No
South
14
42
56
25.0
75.0
West
12
43
55
21.8
78.2
Midwest
7
41
48
14.6
85.4
East
7
51
58
12.1
87.9
Total
40
177
217
18.4
81.6
Data based on the percentage of all U.S. House incumbents running for reelection with campaign websites by party and region, as demarcated by the U.S. Census. Data compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

GOP U.S. House Incumbents Six Times More Likely to Run Get-Tough on Illegal Immigration Campaigns than Democrats

Half of Republican incumbents are highlighting get-tough anti-illegal immigration policy solutions on campaign websites compared to just 8 percent of Democrats

While several components of Arizona's new immigration law are (temporarily) blocked from going into effect by a federal judge ruling on Wednesday, dozens of U.S. Representatives are running on a get-tough on illegal immigration platform as a key component of their reelection campaigns - the vast majority of whom are Republicans.

A Smart Politics content analysis of campaign websites for U.S. House members running for reelection in 2010 finds that 50 percent of Republican incumbents feature get-tough policy solutions to the nation's immigration problems on their websites, compared to just 8 percent of Democrats.

Smart Politics content analyzed the policy issues highlighted on the campaign websites of 373 members of the U.S. House (all 435 seats minus vacancies, minus the more than three dozen Representatives not running for reelection, minus those incumbents defeated in the primary, minus 18 Representatives who do not maintain campaign websites).

In total, 217 Democratic and 156 Republican incumbent websites were studied, with 31.6 percent of these 373 sites addressing the immigration issue in some form (118).

Republican incumbents were 2.7 times more likely to address immigration on their campaign websites overall, with 50 percent spotlighting the issue (78 of 156 representatives).

Meanwhile, only 40 Democrats focused on immigration issues on their websites (18.4 percent), with 177 ignoring the policy area altogether (81.6 percent).

U.S. Representative Campaign Websites Addressing Immigration by Party

Party
Yes
No
Total
% Yes
% No
Democrat
40
177
217
18.4
81.6
GOP
78
78
156
50.0
50.5
Total
118
255
373
31.6
68.4
Data compiled by Smart Politics.

While only a handful of GOPers mention the Arizona immigration law specifically on their sites, there is little doubt SB 1070 has influenced the national debate and thus the agenda of dozens of Republicans (Americans support stricter border enforcement measures as well as the Arizona law by wide margins in most polls).

Some Republicans did address the Arizona law head-on:

John Mica (FL-07): "Just as the State of Arizona recently did with its immigration enforcement act, any state should be able to enforce federal law and protect its borders and citizens."

Phil Roe (TN-01): "Phil believes that states like Arizona would not have to enforce their own border security if the federal government was willing to do its part and secure our borders and stop illegal immigration."

Of course, the Arizona law - and immigration policy generally - has sparked impassioned debate on both sides of the aisle. Several Democratic members of Congress have condemned the law on their campaign websites:

Linda Sanchez (CA-39): "This is the most oppressive piece of legislation since the Jim Crow laws."

Jane Harman (CA-36): "The immigration law signed last week in Arizona is deeply troubling and should be condemned. I believe the new statute will not pass constitutional muster... the approach adopted in Arizona risks racial profiling and creating an atmosphere of intolerance."

Joe Baca (CA-43): "Joe Baca's campaign against Arizona's new anti-immigration law appears to be picking up steam. As part of his general boycott of Arizona -- which includes his refusal to fly through Phoenix on his weekly trips to and from Washington -- Baca, D-Rialto, is distributing wristbands inspired by the Lance Armstrong LiveSTRONG craze."

And this raises the second main difference between Democratic and Republican U.S. House incumbents as to how immigration is playing a role in their reelection campaigns.

Not only are Republicans nearly three times more likely to feature the issue on their campaign websites, but they are also six times more likely to advance get-tough policy solutions to fix the problem.

Of the 78 Republicans who are campaigning on the issue, all but one propose unequivocally get-tough solutions to illegal immigration, such as beefing up enforcement through more border patrol agents, completing the fence, opposing amnesty, deportation, and ending birthright citizenship.

The only Republican of the 78 highlighting immigration to stake out more neutral ground in his approach to immigration policy is Arizona's Jeff Flake from the state's 6th CD:

"I think we all wish that we could wave a magic wand, or build a sturdy fence, to solve our immigration problems. But of course, a problem this complex requires a comprehensive solution - one that involves better border security, a realistic mechanism to deal with some 12 million illegal aliens who are currently in the United States, and a meaningful temporary worker program (with serious employment verification and enforcement) to ensure that we don't end up in the same situation years from now. Amnesty is not the answer, but neither is pretending that we can solve the problem simply by enforcing current law. We have to find common ground that respects both reality and the rule of law."

The remaining 77 Republicans, however, had more direct approaches in mind to solving the nation's border and immigration problems, focusing on border enforcement first, with many tying the issue to national security:

Ander Crenshaw (FL-04): "Illegal immigration continues to put us all at risk. Gaining control over our borders means protecting the American dream for all our citizens and legal immigrants. There is a very real threat - not just posed by illegal aliens and drug smugglers, but by terrorists who target our very freedom. Safe communities begin with secure borders."

Don Young (AK-AL): "The practice of illegal immigration threatens the security of our Nation and the safety of our citizens. Most of us would never allow a complete stranger into our home and risk the safety of our loved ones. But, by failing to secure our borders, we are allowing individuals without any documentation as to their identity or history, to freely live among us, drive on our streets, and patronize our stores."

Pete Olson (TX-22): "If we don't know who is coming into our country, how will we know they don't want to harm us?... We shouldn't have gun battles in our neighborhoods between these gangs and police officers being shot by criminal illegal immigrants."

Tom Graves (GA-09): "Since September 11, 2001, the United States has enacted many reforms, at home and abroad, to secure our homeland, but unfortunately we've failed to meet the challenge in dealing with the illegal immigration crisis. There are estimated more than ten million illegal immigrants currently in the United States, many with criminal convictions that have received final deportation orders and we are unable to find them."

Roscoe Bartlett (MD-06): "Strengthening our border, port security and law enforcement capabilities including reducing illegal immigration will make it harder for terrorists to attack the United States."

Scott Garrett (NJ-05): "We must ensure that those who seek to cross our borders do so legally. The validity of our laws as well as the strength of our national security depends on this. Scott Garrett supported the Secure Fence Act. He firmly believes that providing stronger border security will help us better protect our nation."

Lynn Jenkins (KS-02): "At the same time we must secure our borders and refuse to grant amnesty to those who violate our laws. We also cannot ignore the gaping holes that exist along our border. It is a matter of national security and it will continue to be my priority to make sure Kansans and all Americans remain safe and secure."

John Sullivan (OK-01): "I am working to strengthen the security of our nation's borders because I truly believe that border security is national security. By fully constructing a double layer border fence, hiring and training additional border patrol agents and utilizing technology along the border, our nation can achieve operational control of our southern border."

Paul Ryan (WI-01): "Porous borders leave us susceptible to the illegal crossing of terrorists, drug lords, and gang members, placing our homeland security in serious jeopardy."

Bill Posey (FL-15): "We must secure our borders as a matter of national security, and once we accomplish that we must get to the business of deporting any illegal immigrants who have been convicted of felonies in our courts, so we can make a real impact in the fight to make our nation safer and more secure."

John Culberson (TX-07): "We will never win the war on terror until we secure our borders. Lawlessness breeds lawlessness, and this lack of enforcement is allowing illegal aliens and potential terrorists to enter our country."

Others Republican incumbents focused on the various economic problems brought about by unchecked illegal immigration, both on the macro and micro level:

Tim Murphy (PA-18): "Illegal immigration cost U.S. taxpayers over $100 billion each year. Securing our nation's borders is essential not just to our national security, but also to our economic security."

Tom Latham (IA-04): "Small businesses lose money and lay people off. Local governments struggle to maintain basic services. Our rural towns can't afford large economic hits. People who knowingly present falsified information, and employers who look the other way, are doing an incredible disservice to their communities, to the State of Iowa, and to our great nation."

John Fleming (LA-04): "What we are confronted with today is an invasion by illegal aliens. Besides the illegality and the criminality of the situation, there is a new motive for coming to America. The motive is not freedom in the classic sense of the word, nor is it a desire to be fully American. The underlying motive of illegal aliens is economic. It is about money, making it and also sending it out the country."

Steve King (IA-05): "The overwhelming consensus of experts is that the wages of less-educated, low-skill workers have been most negatively impacted by illegal immigration. The wage rates of these workers have declined while their unemployment rates have increased."

Peter Roskam (IL-06): "According to a recent study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, the State of Illinois' provision of education, healthcare and employment benefits to illegal immigrants comes at a cost to taxpayers of $3 to 3.5 billion every year."

Dan Burton (IN-05): "Illegal immigration imposes great burdens on our local, state and federal governments, which are already stretched to the limits of their budgets. Illegal aliens drive up their education, health care, and welfare costs."

Thad McCotter (MI-11): "Big government, big business, the Left, and this trio's elitist accomplices have all combined to cheat us of our sovereignty and tax money by enticing and exploiting illegal immigrants into America. We now witness the perverse spectacle of people illegally in America receiving legal benefits."

Tom Price (GA-06): "Citizens across the United States are fed up with widespread illegal immigration, and it is no longer an isolated problem for border states. Overcrowded schools, over-extended social services, and strained hospitals are bearing the brunt, and lawful taxpayers are left picking up the tab."

Gary Miller (CA-42): "Illegal immigrants cost the average California family $1,185 a year in additional taxes to pay for their education, healthcare and other social services."

Cynthia Lummis (WY-AL): "To protect America's integrity we must secure our borders and prevent illegal immigrants from eroding America's economic strength...Cynthia will work to insure that illegal aliens do not receive social security benefits, medicaid benefits, food stamps, drivers licenses, or other benefits."

Still other Republican incumbents are campaigning that illegal immigration is a threat to the American way of life - its sovereignty and national unity:

John Boehner (OH-08): "Above all else, John believes the success of our country depends on newcomers obeying the law, assimilating into American society by learning English, and embracing our common identity as Americans."

Sam Johnson (TX-03): "We must protect our sovereignty once and for all by gaining control of our porous borders."

Ron Paul (TX-14): "The talk must stop. We must secure our borders now. A nation without secure borders is no nation at all."

Meanwhile, on the Democratic side of the aisle, the 40 incumbents focusing on immigration on their campaign websites were split in their policy views.

A total of 18 Democrats espoused get-tough solutions (8.3 percent of incumbents with campaign websites), while 11 proposed more middle-of-the-road 'comprehensive' plans (5.1 percent), and 11 encouraged soft approaches, such as open-borders or giving governmental benefits to illegal immigrants (5.1 percent).

The vast majority of Democratic incumbents, however, do not address immigration on their campaign websites at all (177, 81.6 percent).

Policy Approach to Illegal Immigration on U.S. Representative Campaign Websites by Party

Party
Tough
Mixed
Soft
% Tough
% Mixed
% Soft
Democrat
18
11
11
8.3
5.1
5.1
GOP
77
1
0
49.4
0.6
0.0
Total
95
12
11
25.5
3.2
2.9
Percentages based on the percentage of all U.S. House incumbents running for reelection with campaign websites by party. Data compiled by Smart Politics.

Of the 18 Democrats carving out similar get-tough immigration policy positions to their GOP colleagues, several represent very competitive districts and are in the midst of fierce challenges from Republican hopefuls:

Joe Donnelly (IN-02): "It is imperative that we begin our efforts to stop illegal immigration by securing our nation's borders. As it currently stands more than 8 years from the horrendous attacks of 9/11 we are still short on resources to stop the flow of intruders into our country."

Chet Edwards (TX-17): "Far more must be done to protect our borders from potential terrorists and to end the flood of illegal immigration, which puts a financial strain on our local schools, hospitals and communities."

Bobby Bright (AL-02): "Bobby recognizes that illegal immigrants are never entitled to federal benefits and will always support measures to ensure this never happens."

Debbie Halvorson (IL-11): "While people enter our borders illegally every day, Debbie is fighting to provide additional resources to secure our borders and keep our country safe."

Baron Hill (IN-09): "I do not support amnesty and do not believe it has a place in the overall discussion."

John Spratt (SC-05): "Whatever we do about immigration, we first have to secure our borders and control who enters our country. John Spratt has voted to double the Border Patrol, to deploy troops on the border, to build an electronic fence and walls, and to increase the number of immigration officials."

Frank Kratovil (MD-01): "Frank believes that immigration reform should focus on enforcement, not amnesty...Frank Kratovil strongly believes that our government's first immigration priority must be enforcing the laws currently on the books and taking steps to ensure that illegal behavior is not rewarded."

John Adler (NJ-03): "It is critical to our country's safety and security that we seal the borders and ensure all immigration is done so legally. John does not support amnesty nor does he support giving benefits that hardworking American citizens receive to illegal immigrants."

Paul Kanjorski (PA-11): "Paul believes that we need secure borders and strong enforcement of laws already on the books to prevent illegal immigration. He opposes amnesty for illegal immigrants."

Some Democrats, such as the aforementioned Kratovil and Mike McIntyre (NC-07) are also campaigning to make English the official language of the United States (e.g. the English Language Unity Act) along with several Republican colleagues, such as John Shimkus (IL-17), Thad McCotter (MI-11), Clifford Stearns (FL-06), Vern Buchanan (FL-13), Geoff Davis (KY-04), Pete Olson (TX-22), Randy Forbes (VA-04), and Cynthia Lummis (WY-AL).

But there are other Democrats in the House, most in extremely safe districts, who are campaigning on a much softer platform regarding illegal immigration:

Yvette Clark (NY-11): "Rep. Clarke's 2009 Immigration Goals: Reform immigration policy in the spirit of the American dream, uphold the American tradition of an open border, stop deporting the parents of citizens, leaving them orphaned."

Mike Quigley (IL-05): "Mike Quigley is proud to stand up for the men and women who have come to Chicago from across the globe, and who work everyday to build and improve their adopted country...Mike has been a strong and tireless advocate for the rights of immigrants in Cook County - and will take that same fight to Congress. He'll stand-up to the extremists in Congress who try to use immigrants as scapegoats and whose harsh policies would divide spouses, parents and children. Mike will fight for the rights of families to stay united here in America."

Carolyn Maloney (NY-14): "Carolyn recognizes that this country was built on the backs of immigrants, and has always believed that legal avenues to citizenship should be made available to hardworking members of our society."

Linda Sanchez (CA-39): "Linda is committed to improving the lives of immigrant families. America is a country built and sustained by immigrants. She is working hard in Congress to make sure that hard-working immigrants are able to reunite with their loved ones, have access to safe and secure jobs, have the opportunity to become full citizens of the United States."

Keith Ellison (MN-05): "Keith also supports the Dream Act, which would increase access to higher education for the children of foreign-born workers."

It will be interesting to see what effect the federal court injunction against the Arizona law has on public opinion, and what effect changing public opinion will have on the remaining 250+ incumbents in the U.S. House who are not yet highlighting the immigration issue in their reelection campaigns.

Note: Part two of Smart Politics' immigration report - examining the geographic breakdown of incumbents campaigning on immigration - will be released later this week.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Monday, July 26, 2010

Minnesota U.S. Representatives Silent on Illegal Immigration on Campaign Websites

Delegation campaign websites largely silent on issue as support to adopt Arizona's anti-illegal immigration law eclipses 60 percent in Minnesota

With Arizona's new immigration law SB 1070 set to go into effect later this week, politicians and activists from around the country - on both sides - have mobilized around the hot-button issue.

But 1,000 miles northeast of the Grand Canyon State, Minnesota's U.S. Representatives are largely steering clear of illegal immigration, at least on their campaign websites, despite strong support for the Arizona law in the Gopher State.

A Smart Politics analysis finds that no one from the state's eight-member U.S. House delegation addresses the Arizona law on their campaign websites, and just one representative, DFLer Keith Ellison, even mentions immigration as one of his campaign issues.

Smart Politics recently profiled Minnesota's support for Arizona's immigration law and the general principles behind it - support which has now increased over the past two months.

In late May, Rasmussen found 53 percent of Minnesotans favored passage of Arizona's law here in the Gopher State, with 34 percent opposed.

In a new Rasmussen poll conducted a week ago of 500 likely voters in Minnesota, 62 percent are now in support of such a measure, with just 27 percent opposed.

But while several of Minnesota's U.S. Representatives have taken strong public stands on the Arizona issue, they are not doing so on their campaign websites.

For example, both Republicans Michele Bachmann and John Kline recently signed an amicus brief - along with more than six dozen other members of the House - in support of the State of Arizona in the lawsuit it faces from the Obama administration.

But neither Bachmann, Kline, or fellow GOPer Erik Paulsen even mention immigration, let alone the Arizona law, on their campaign sites.

The only Representative who addresses immigration is two-term DFLer Keith Ellison, who lists immigration reform as one of 11 topics under "Civil and Human Rights" on his site. Ellison lays out his views thusly:

"Keith supports comprehensive immigration reform such as the STRIVE Act that includes four components: a clear path to citizenship to those who are already in the U.S. working and paying taxes; expedited process for family reunification; workable employment verification system with strict penalties for employers who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants. Keith also supports the Dream Act, which would increase access to higher education for the children of foreign-born workers."

Curiously, despite only one of Minnesota's U.S. House members focusing on immigration on his or her campaign website, four Representatives hit on the issue - to varying degrees - on their official Congressional sites.

For example, under "Defending Our Homeland" (one of eight main issues on his U.S. House site), Congressman Paulsen hints at the immigration issue in the context of his support for a strong national defense:

"A strong defense includes strong law enforcement, secure borders, a strong military and vigorous intelligence services." (emphasis added)

Michele Bachmann, meanwhile, highlights immigration as one of 10 issues on her official U.S. House site, and carves out her clear opposition to amnesty, her desire to secure America's borders, and her view that the federal government should enforce the laws already on the books.

This placement suggests Congresswoman Bachmann, one of the most prominent Republican figures in Congress, believes it is important for her to emphasize her opposition to illegal immigration on the national stage through her U.S. House site, but not in her 6th CD reelection campaign per se (perhaps given her district's 1,000+ mile distance from the Mexican border).

On the DFL side, Ellison reiterates on his official U.S. House website the same views delineated on his campaign site, while senior delegation member Jim Oberstar highlights immigration as one of nine general issue categories on his House site under "Homeland Security, Immigration & Defense".

The 18-term Congressman takes the following position:

"The current immigration system needs reform. There are an estimated 12 million undocumented, illegal aliens inside the United States. These include people who overstay their visas, sneak across the border, and enter the U.S. based on fraudulent documents. I believe it is possible to create much-needed meaningful reform of our nation's immigration policies that would enhance of domestic security, meet the demonstrated needs of industries and agriculture that depend upon immigrant labor, and not punish those immigrants who have followed existing immigration rules and laws."

Representatives Tim Walz, Betty McCollum, Collin Peterson, and John Kline do not highlight the issue of illegal immigration on their official U.S. House sites.

While the economy is still of paramount concern to most Minnesotans, it will be interesting to see if the attention paid to immigration on the campaign trail by the state's U.S. Representatives eventually begins to rise, as support for the Arizona law mounts across the Gopher State.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs