Smart Politics - Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs

Education MN Election 2010 Minnesota

Will Minnesotans Elect Another Lawyer to the Governor's Mansion in 2010?

Pawlenty was first Gopher State Governor elected with a law degree since 1974; from 1910-1974, 90 percent of elected governors had a legal education

(This report is the ninth installment in Smart Politics' 'Pathway to the Governor's Mansion' Series. Past reports analyzed the political experience, geographic background, ethnic background, age (part 1), astrological signs, age (part 2), U.S. Senatorial experience, and names of successful gubernatorial candidates in Minnesota history).

Tom Emmer, Susan Gaertner, Paul Thissen, and Matt Entenza all hope Tim Pawlenty's election in 2002 and 2006 reestablished what once was a common trend in Minnesota gubernatorial politics.

Through the first three-quarters of the 20th Century, having a law degree, although not a prerequisite, was a common denominator for nearly every successful gubernatorial campaign.

A Smart Politics analysis of information provided by the biographical databases of the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library and National Governors Association finds that between 1910 and 1974, Gopher State residents elected candidates with a law degree into office in 90 percent of gubernatorial contests (27 of 30 races).

However, during the six subsequent elections from 1978 through 1998, none of gubernatorial victors held law degrees - Al Quie, Rudy Perpich, Arne Carlson, and Jesse Ventura.

Tim Pawlenty, who received his law degree from the University of Minnesota in 1986 and had a stint as a criminal prosecutor, is the 21st governor of the Gopher State to hold a law degree of the 38 men who have served in the office.

But law grads did not always so commonly bubble up the political ladder to become Governor of Minnesota. From a 51-year stretch from statehood in 1857 through 1908, those without a legal background won nearly two-thirds of gubernatorial elections - or 17 of 26 contests.

In fact, several governors of the Gopher State never ventured into halls of higher education at all.

Between, 1863 and 1908, Minnesotans elected candidates who never attended college 12 times: in 1863 (Stephen Miller), 1865 & 1867 (William Marshall), 1875, 1877, & 1879 (John Pillsbury, pictured), 1881 & 1883 (Lucius Hubbard), 1896 (David Clough), and 1904, 1906, & 1908 (John Johnson).

In total, seven Minnesota governors never attended college - the aforementioned six governors and Hjalmar Petersen (who was never elected into the office of governor). An additional four governors studied at higher education institutions, but did not graduate - Henry Sibley, Samuel Van Sant, C. Elmer Anderson, and Jesse Ventura.

The remaining 27 governors in Minnesota graduated from college, with 21 of these earning a law degree: Alexander Ramsey, Henry Swift (unelected to the office), Horace Austin, Cushman Davis, Andrew McGill, Knute Nelson, John Lind, Adolph Eberhart, Winfield Hammond, J.A.A. Burnquist, J.A.O. Preus, Theodore Christianson, Floyd Olson, Elmer Benson, Harold Stassen, Luther Youngdahl, Orville Freeman, Karl Rolvaag, Harold LeVander, Wendell Anderson, and Tim Pawlenty.

Overall, candidates with law degrees have been elected in 59.4 percent of gubernatorial contests since statehood (38 of 64 elections).

Of the current batch of leading Republican, DFL, and Independence Party candidates, all hold college degrees but only Republican Tom Emmer (William Mitchell), and DFLers Susan Gaertner (University of Minnesota), Paul Thissen (University of Chicago), and Matt Entenza (University of Minnesota) studied law.

Not all governors with law degrees practiced law for extensive periods of time. Some worked in private law practices, while others worked as attorneys for city or county government including Winfield Hammond, Floyd Olson, Luther Youngdahl, Harold LeVander, and Tim Pawlenty.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:25 AM ¤

2 comment(s)

Economy and jobs Minnesota

Minnesota Has Lowest Rate of Increase in Unemployment in Nation During Obama's First Year in Office

Gopher State shed the fewest jobs across the country with just a 1.4 percent net rise in its jobless rate from January 2009-January 2010; 50-state average is +25.5 percent

With seasonally adjusted unemployment numbers for January 2010 now released for all 50 states at the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Minnesota's jobs situation vis-à-vis the rest of the country is rosier than any other state through the first year of President Barack Obama's administration.

A Smart Politics analysis of BLS data from January 2009 through January 2010 finds the Gopher State to have absorbed only a 1.4 percent net increase in unemployment, from 7.2 to 7.3 percent, during Obama's first 12 months in office - the lowest rate of increase in the nation.

In fact, only four states in the country have seen jobless rate increases of less than double digits: Minnesota (1.4 percent increase), North Dakota (5.0 percent), Vermont (8.1 percent), and Oregon (8.1 percent).

The average rate of increase in unemployment during this 12-month span across the 50 states and District of Columbia is 25.5 percent.

The five states that have suffered through the most severe escalation in the rate of men and women filing jobless claims are Wyoming (+72.7 percent), West Virginia (+60.3 percent), New Mexico (+44.1 percent), Illinois (+39.5 percent), and Idaho (+38.8 percent). The District of Columbia has also undergone an increase in unemployment of +42.9 percent from January 2009-January 2010.

While Minnesota does not have the lowest unemployment rate in the country - that distinction belongs to neighboring North Dakota (at 4.2 percent) - the Gopher State has seen its unemployment rate improve from the 29th lowest in the nation to the 13th lowest since President Obama took office.

The 16-state jump up the employment ladder for Minnesota is also the best in the nation over the past year. Oregon (moving up 12 states from #49 to #37), Vermont (+11 from #17 to #6), and Maine (+11 from #30 to #19) also significantly improved their employment standing vis-à-vis the rest of the nation.

West Virginia's 16-state slide was the biggest (falling from the 13th lowest rate in unemployment to the 29th), followed by Wyoming's 13-state fall (from #4 to #17), and Illinois' 10-state drop (from #34 to #44).

The remarkable stability in the unemployment rate in Minnesota compared to the rest of the nation has not seemingly benefited Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty, however, whose constituents recently gave him his lowest marks of his 7+ years in office.

The country's economic recession and rise in unemployment started well before Obama took office, of course, but Minnesota still fares very well against the rest of the nation when comparing jobless trends even going back two years to January 2008.

Over the past 24 months, Minnesota has had the 4th lowest increase in unemployment across the country at a rate of 55.3 percent (from 4.7 to 7.3 percent).

Only Alaska (37.1 percent), North Dakota (44.8 percent), and Arkansas (55.1 percent) have had lower increases in the rate of unemployment during this two-year span.

Rate of Increase in Unemployment During Barack Obama Administration by State, January 2009-January 2010

State	Jan-09	Jan-10	Change	'09 rank	'10 rank
Minnesota	7.2	7.3	1.4	29	13
North Dakota	4.0	4.2	5.0	1	1
Vermont	6.2	6.7	8.1	17	6
Oregon	9.9	10.7	8.1	49	37
Indiana	8.8	9.7	10.2	42	34
Colorado	6.7	7.4	10.4	20	14
South Dakota	4.3	4.8	11.6	3	3
Nebraska	4.1	4.6	12.2	2	2
Maine	7.3	8.2	12.3	30	19
Kansas	5.6	6.4	14.3	8	4
Arizona	8.0	9.2	15.0	33	28
Hawaii	6.0	6.9	15.0	15	10
Arkansas	6.5	7.6	16.9	19	17
Missouri	8.1	9.5	17.3	34	32
Kentucky	9.1	10.7	17.6	43	37
Tennessee	9.1	10.7	17.6	43	37
Alaska	7.1	8.5	19.7	24	21
North Carolina	9.2	11.1	20.7	45	42
Virginia	5.7	6.9	21.1	11	10
Montana	5.6	6.8	21.4	8	8
Utah	5.6	6.8	21.4	8	8
Wisconsin	7.1	8.7	22.5	24	23
Maryland	6.1	7.5	23.0	16	16
Georgia	8.4	10.4	23.8	38	36
New York	7.1	8.8	23.9	24	24
Washington	7.5	9.3	24.0	31	29
Ohio	8.6	10.8	25.6	40	40
South Carolina	10.0	12.6	26.0	50	48
Michigan	11.3	14.3	26.5	51	51
Connecticut	7.1	9.0	26.8	24	26
Iowa	5.2	6.6	26.9	6	5
Texas	6.4	8.2	28.1	18	19
Delaware	7.0	9.0	28.6	23	26
California	9.7	12.5	28.9	48	47
Pennsylvania	6.8	8.8	29.4	22	24
Louisiana	5.7	7.4	29.8	11	14
New Jersey	7.5	9.9	32.0	31	35
Rhode Island	9.6	12.7	32.3	46	49
Mississippi	8.2	10.9	32.9	37	41
Massachusetts	7.1	9.5	33.8	24	32
Oklahoma	5.0	6.7	34.0	5	6
New Hampshire	5.2	7.0	34.6	6	12
Nevada	9.6	13.0	35.4	46	50
Florida	8.7	11.9	36.8	41	45
Alabama	8.1	11.1	37.0	34	42
Idaho	6.7	9.3	38.8	20	29
Illinois	8.1	11.3	39.5	34	44
DC	8.4	12.0	42.9	38	46
New Mexico	5.9	8.5	44.1	14	21
West Virginia	5.8	9.3	60.3	13	29
Wyoming	4.4	7.6	72.7	4	17

Bureau of Labor Statistics data compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:00 AM ¤

Leave a comment

Election 2010 National Politics U.S. House

Will Republicans Regain Eric Massa's NY-29 Seat?

GOP carried the region in U.S. House races from 1986-2006 by an average of 43.4 points

The sudden, embittered, and bizarre retirement of 1-term Democrat Eric Massa from the 29th Congressional District of New York opens up yet another opportunity for the GOP to carve into the Democratic Party's advantage in the U.S. House of Representatives this year.

The 29th Congressional District of former Representative Massa, who resigned on Monday, covers all of Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chemung, Schuyler, Steuben, and Yates counties and portions of Monroe and Ontario counties in the Southern Tier region of the Empire State.

In 2008, Massa edged out 2-term Republican Congressman Randy Kuhl in a rematch of their 2006 contest to end a more than two decade winning streak for the GOP in the region.

(Most residents of the current 29th Congressional District were represented in the U.S. House in the 31st CD from 1993-2003 and the 34th CD from 1983-1993 in previous redistricting cycles).

The 29th district in New York has a clear Republican tilt. Although Massa defeated Kuhl in 2008 by 1.8 percentage points, John McCain carried the district by 2 points over Barack Obama. George W. Bush won both the 29th CD in 2004 over John Kerry and the 31st CD in 2000 over Al Gore.

Charlie Cook's Partisan Voting Index measures the 29th CD as having a 5-point tilt for the GOP above the national average.

Prior to Massa's unseating of Kuhl, Republicans had won 11 consecutive U.S. House races in the region dating back to 1986 in the 34th, then 31st, then 29th Congressional Districts.

The last Democrat to win a U.S. House seat in the region was Stanley Lundine, who decided not to be a candidate for reelection in 1986 on his way to become Lieutenant Governor of New York.

In the 1986 open race, Republican millionaire Amo Houghton defeated his Democratic rival by 20 points, and then went on to eight more victories through the 2002 election.

From 1986 through 2002, Houghton won an average of 74.6 percent of the vote in his district, notching an average victory margin of 51.7 points. Democrats failed to field a challenger against him two times - in 1988 (then the 34th District) and in 1994 (then the 31st District).

Though Houghton was a moderate-to-liberal Republican, he received the endorsement of the Conservative Party of New York during each of his nine successful U.S. House campaigns. The Conservative Party received 6.4 percent of the vote in the open 2004 race for its candidate, Mark Assini.

However, Houghton was outspokenly pro-choice, and the Right to Life Party frequently fielded candidates against him - in the elections of 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998, and 2002.

After the popular Houghton's departure from the U.S. House, Democrats fared much closer to the partisan leanings of the district.

In 2004, Democrats lost the 29th CD race by 9.9 points, followed by a 3.0-point defeat during the Democratic tsunami of 2006, and the 1.8-point victory by Massa, a former Republican, during the tsunami of 2008.

Even with the recent competitiveness by the Democratic Party during the last three contests in the 29th, Democrats have averaged only 27.4 percent of the vote dating back to 1986 in the 29th, 31st, and 34th CD races.

From 1986 to 2006, en route to 11 straight victories, Republicans won the district by an average of 43.4 points.

Republican Margin of Victory in New York's 29th (Previously 31st and 34th) Congressional District, 1986-2008

Year	GOP	Democrat	3rd Party	GOP MoV
1986	60.1	39.9	0.0	20.3
1988	96.5	0.0	3.5	92.9
1990	69.6	29.0	1.4	40.6
1992	70.6	24.4	5.1	46.2
1994	84.8	0.0	15.2	69.6
1996	71.6	25.4	3.1	46.2
1998	68.0	25.3	6.7	42.7
2000	77.3	22.7	0.0	54.7
2002	73.1	21.3	5.6	51.8
2004	50.7	40.8	8.6	9.9
2006	51.5	48.5	0.0	3.0
2008	49.1	50.9	0.0	-1.8

Source: Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives. Data compiled by Smart Politics. Note: New York's 29th (2003-present), 31st (1993-2003), and 34th (1983-1993) Congressional District maps each included all of Allegany, Chemung, Schuyler, Steuben, and Yates counties. The 29th CD and 31st CD also included all of Cattaraugus and Chemung counties. The 31st CD and 34th CD also included all of Chautauqua county. The 29th CD encompasses parts of Monroe and Ontario counties, while the 31st CD contained parts of Cayuga, Seneca, and Tompkins counties and the 34th CD contained parts of Cattaraugus and Tompkins counties.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:01 AM ¤

Leave a comment

MN Election 2010 Minnesota

Will the DFL Cancel Minnesota's Membership to the 'Lonely Republican Governors Club' in 2010?

Minnesota could emerge from Election 2010 as one of just two states in the nation with a Republican governor and Democratic-led delegations to the U.S. Senate, U.S. House, State Senate, and State House

As reported a few months ago by Smart Politics, the DFL's failure to win gubernatorial elections over the past two decades has put the Gopher State in unusual company - Minnesota is third behind only the archly conservative states of South Dakota and Utah for the Democratic Party's longest gubernatorial droughts in the nation.

The DFL entered the 2010 election cycle with high hopes to take back the governor's mansion - first hoping to ride the remaining waves from the 2006 and 2008 Democratic tsunamis and then learning last June that Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty would not be seeking a third term.

With 15 GOP and DFL candidates still officially in the running for the chance to represent their party on the November general election ballot (not to mention the Independence Party), no reliable matchup polling exists as of yet to know which party, if any, enters the race on the inside track.

In fact, all major political analysts are currently handicapping the Minnesota gubernatorial race as a 'toss-up' (CQ, Charlie Cook, Stu Rothenberg, Larry Sabato), and the DFL therefore runs a real risk once again of extending their gubernatorial electoral drought for another four years, from 24 to 28 years.

The novelty of this drought occurring in a state as blue as Minnesota is quite striking. Here's why:

· Minnesota is currently 1 of 24 states in the nation with a Republican governor in office.

· Of these 24 states, Minnesota is 1 of 11 that voted for Barack Obama in 2008: California, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Indiana, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia.

· Of these 11 states, Minnesota is 1 of 8 that is represented in the U.S. Senate by two Democrats (or independents caucusing with the Democrats): California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Minnesota, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia. (One other state helmed by a Republican governor also has two Democratic U.S. Senators - North Dakota, which voted for John McCain in 2008).

· Of these 8 states, Minnesota is 1 of 7 that also has a Democratic-controlled state legislature as well as a Democratic majority in its respective delegation to the U.S. House of Representatives: California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Minnesota, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

· Of these 7 states, Democrats are poised to take back the governor's office in 5 of them in 2010, according to projections by several leading political analysts: California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

That means if the DFL fails to win the Gopher State's gubernatorial contest this November, Minnesota could very well be 1 of just 2 states in the nation with a Republican governor and Democratic-led delegations to the U.S. Senate, U.S. House, State Senate, and State House.

While Election Day is still more than seven months away (and the DFL still has to earn its majorities to the US House and state legislature), it is already apparent that there are not too many states that would likely end up joining New Jersey (and potentially Minnesota) in this unusual club.

· For example, even if the Republican Party should hold its gubernatorial seat in Florida, Democrats are not likely to win the open U.S. Senate seat, nor will they end up in control the GOP-dominated state legislature or the state delegation to the U.S. House.

· And even if the GOP should win the open gubernatorial seat in Iowa, Republican Charles Grassley will more than likely hold onto his U.S. Senate seat to take the Hawkeye State out of the running.

· And if Republicans pick up the open gubernatorial seat in Michigan, the GOP is unlikely to lose hold of its advantage in the Michigan Senate.

· Republicans could win Ted Strickland's seat in Ohio, but will almost assuredly not lose hold of their large advantage in the Ohio Senate.

· And while the GOP could pick up the open gubernatorial seats in Colorado and Pennsylvania, should they do so they are also equally likely to pick up U.S. Senate seats in those states this November.

· In Wisconsin, Republicans stand a strong chance to win the open governor's race. However, should they do so, their strong performance at the top of the ticket would likely mean they would also take back either the State Senate or Assembly, both of which currently have narrow Democratic majorities. (Not to mention what a potential Tommy Thompson candidacy might do to Russ Feingold's chances to win another term in the U.S. Senate).

· That leaves Illinois which finds Democrat Pat Quinn struggling to retain his gubernatorial seat, but also Republican Mark Kirk as a strong candidate to pick-up the open U.S. Senate seat for the GOP.

Should all these scenarios play out, which is possible but unknowable at this point in time, Minnesota's membership in the scarcely populated Lonely Republican Governors Club would add yet another chapter to the already very colorful political history the Gopher State has written over the past few decades.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:15 AM ¤

Leave a comment

Governorships Minnesota Partisanship

Tim Pawlenty Job Approval Rating Hits All-Time Low

Analysis of over 70 polls since 2003 finds Pawlenty's current job approval rating lowest in 7+ years in office

Despite presiding over one of the lowest statewide increases in unemployment in the nation over the past 12 months and hailing from a party that is poised to mount big gains in November, Minnesota Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty has just seen his job approval rating fall to its lowest all-time mark.

The latest numbers, courtesy of a new SurveyUSA poll of 500 Minnesotans, find Pawlenty's job approval rating at just 42 percent, with 52 percent disapproving.

This marks the lowest approval rating ever for Pawlenty, according to a Smart Politics analysis of more than 70 similarly-worded non-partisan public opinion polls dating back to the onset of his first term in office in 2003, including more than 50 polls conducted by SurveyUSA since Spring 2005.

One has to go back four and one-half years to find the previous low-water mark for Pawlenty - a 43 percent approval rating for the Governor in a July 2005 SurveyUSA poll of 600 Minnesotans.

In general, however, Pawlenty has sustained average to good approval ratings throughout his nearly two terms in office - an impressive feat for a Republican governor of a blue state that currently has two Democratic senators, has one of the largest Democratic-controlled state legislatures in the nation, and holds the longest streak in the country of a state voting for Democratic presidential nominees.

However, once the rumors of Pawlenty's national political ambitions really began to take hold in 2009, Pawlenty's approval numbers began to drop and never quite recovered. (Governor Pawlenty announced he would not seek a third term in early June 2009):

· In 2005, Pawlenty's average approval rating across 11 polls was 51.5 percent with a net approval rating of +9.8 points.
· In 2006, while running for reelection, the Governor's average approval rating was 52.5 percent across 22 polls with a net approval rating of +8.5 points.
· In 2007, Pawlenty had an average job approval mark of 55.7 percent across a dozen polls with a net approval rating of +15.7 points.
· In 2008, the Governor averaged an approval rating of 53.9 percent across 12 surveys with a net approval rating of +11.7 points.
· During the first five months of 2009, Pawlenty's average approval mark dropped to 49.4 percent across five polls, but still held a positive net approval rating of +3.9 points.

However, since his announcement that he would not seek a third term in June 2009, the Governor's average approval rating has fallen to 47.0 percent across five polls, with a net approval rating of -2.6 points.

Tim Pawlenty Gubernatorial Job Approval Rating, 2003-2010

Year	Approve	Disapprove	Difference	Polls
2003-2004	54.3	29.5	+24.8	4
2005	51.5	41.7	+9.8	11
2006	52.5	44.0	+8.5	22
2007	55.7	40.0	+15.7	12
2008	53.9	42.2	+11.7	12
2009 (Jan-May)*	49.4	45.8	+3.9	5
June 2009-2010	47.0	49.6	-2.6	5
Average	52.6	42.4	+10.2	71

* Governor Pawlenty announced he would not seek a third term in office in early June 2009. Approval ratings are aggregated from similarly worded public opinion polls by year. Data compiled by Smart Politics.

Pawenty has had difficulty getting good marks from Minnesotans despite presiding over a state which has endured one of the lowest increases in unemployment in the nation over the past year. Since his announcement in June 2009, Minnesota's seasonally adjusted unemployment rate has declined 13.1 percent, falling from 8.4 percent last June to 7.3 percent in January 2010.

Due to Pawlenty's probable national ambitions, the Governor has been under siege from the local media for months in light of his aggressive travel schedule and out-of-state appearances.

While a majority of Minnesotans believe Pawlenty's out of state travels have either had no impact on his ability to govern (40 percent) or has made him a more effective governor (16 percent), Gopher State residents have not yet warmed up to the idea of their Governor running for the presidency in 2012.

A vast majority of those polled by SurveyUSA last week stated they did not think Pawlenty should run for president - by a 63 percent to 28 percent margin.

Moreover, Pawlenty has been hammered by a DFL-dominated legislature that is frequently at odds with the Governor as to how to handle the state's budget crisis, as well as the large flock of DFL gubernatorial hopefuls who seek to succeed Pawlenty next year.

House Speaker and DFL gubernatorial candidate Margaret Anderson Kelliher took a shot at Pawlenty's tenure in office at a media availability just last Friday: "The Governor has not produced a balanced budget for a long time and his legacy, in fact, is going to be a legacy of the $6 to $8 billion deficit."

But with all the traction the GOP is gaining nationwide, and the majority of Gopher State residents seemingly having no problem with his travel schedule, why is Pawlenty struggling to get good marks from his constituents?

The answer to that might lie in a statistical curiosity in the new SurveyUSA poll that suggests there has been a reversal of fortune for the GOP in Minnesota.

Only 23 percent of those 500 Minnesotans polled by SurveyUSA in early March identified themselves as Republicans - the lowest mark in the more than 50 polls conducted by the organization in Minnesota since May 2005.

Meanwhile, 38 percent of respondents identified as independents - the highest mark since December 2005. Thirty-four percent identified as Democrats - tied for the lowest mark they have notched in the Gopher State across 10 polls since December 2008.

These Republican numbers seem a bit strange, considering both the national momentum towards the Republican Party, as well as the fact that the GOP had gained ground on the Democrats in Minnesota last year. Back in July, more Gopher State residents identified as Republicans than at any point in more than four years, at 34 percent.

Republicans approved of Pawlenty's job performance by an 80 to 14 percent margin in the new SurveyUSA poll, with independents approving by a narrower 48 to 46 percent margin.

However, with nearly 50 percent more Democrats than Republicans in the survey sample, and just 10 percent of those Democrats giving the Governor good marks, Pawlenty's overall approval numbers hit their lowest level to date.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 04:05 PM ¤

1 comment(s)

Ideology National Politics U.S. House

2009 Voting Record of Female Republicans in U.S. House Most Conservative in History

Analysis finds National Journal vote rankings of female GOP Representatives set record highs for conservatism in 2009

While the number of Republican female Representatives in the 111th Congress may be at its lowest level over the past decade, those that serve in the U.S. House are voting more conservatively vis-à-vis their peers than at any point in modern legislative history.

To be sure, several Republican women are ranked prominently among the Top 50 most conservative members of the U.S. House in National Journal's latest rankings, based on key votes cast in 2009. Marsha Blackburn (pictured, TN-07) ranks as the most conservative female Representative at #7, followed by Virginia Foxx (NC-05, #19), Michele Bachmann (MN-06, #28), Cynthia Lummis (WY-AL, #34), Sue Myrick (NC-09, #34), Kay Granger (TX-12, #41), and Mary Fallin (OK-05, #42).

The votes cast by these and the 10 remaining female GOPers in the House made history last year.

A Smart Politics analysis of 29 years of National Journal ideological vote rankings finds that the female Republican members of the U.S. House in 2009 notched both the highest composite conservative score on record and the highest conservative scores for key votes on economic and social policy legislation.

Moreover, the current group of Republican women in the U.S. House are continuing a half-decade long trend which finds them ranking more and more conservative as a group - GOP women are now voting more conservatively than 77 percent of the House as a whole.

In 2009, Republican women as a bloc voted more conservatively than 77.4 percent of the U.S. House as a whole on economic, social, and foreign policy issues. This number has risen steadily since 2004.

In that year, the 21 GOP Representatives voted more conservatively than 68.7 percent of the House as a whole, rising to 70.9 percent in 2005, 72.8 percent in 2006, 74.1 percent in 2007, and 74.9 percent in 2008.

By comparison, when National Journal began its annual ideological vote tracking in 1981, the 10 female Republican Representatives in office that year voted more conservatively than just 54.9 percent of the House as a whole.

Republican women notched their most conservative voting record relative to their peers to date in 2009 on both economic issues (voting more conservative than 77.8 percent of the House) and on social policy (76.0 percent).

Key votes cast by female GOPers on foreign policy issues were the fourth most conservative on record in 2009 (70.2), behind 2008 (75.0), 2006 (74.3), and 2003 (70.5).

This conservatism by Republican women in the U.S. House continues what has been a pattern over the past half decade: female GOPers ranking more and more conservative as a group relative to the House as a whole.

In 2004, female Republican Representatives had an average conservative ranking of 137. In other words, they collectively voted more conservatively than approximately 69 percent of the 435-member body. That number rose to an average conservatism ranking of 127 in 2005, 116 in 2006, 109 in 2007, and 108 in 2008.

By 2009, the 17 Republican women in office had an average conservative ranking of 97 - 40 slots higher than they did just five years prior. That means female GOP Representatives as a collective voted more conservatively than approximately 77 percent of the House as a whole last year.

Average Conservative Ranking for Female Republican U.S. Representatives, 2004-2009

Year	Average rank
2004	137
2005	127
2006	116
2007	109
2008	108
2009	97

National Journal data compiled by Smart Politics.

Several factors have contributed to the greater conservative 'purity' of the female Republicans in the U.S. House in recent years.

First, new Republicans have been elected to the body during the last few years who have clearly marked out very conservative territory in their voting record, such as Michele Bachmann (MN-06) and Mary Fallin (OK-05).

But more veteran Republican women of the House also began voting more conservatively relative to their peers. For example, former New Mexico Representative Heather Wilson was ranked the 222nd most conservative member of the House in 2005. Her conservative ranking rose to 214 in 2006, 148 in 2007, and 113 in her last year in office, 2008.

A third factor has been the departure from the U.S. House of more moderate (frequently Northeastern) Republican female Representatives during the last few years, such as former Representatives Nancy Johnson (CT-05), Sue Kelly (NY-19), and Deborah Pryce (OH-15). All three of these women frequently ranked at approximately the 200th most conservative member of the House.

Combined, these factors have helped transform the voting record of female GOPers such that in 2004, 10 of the 21 Republican women in the US House had an overall conservative ranking of #150+. In 2009, just 6 of the 17 GOP women were ranked at #150+, with 7 in the Top 50.

The rise in conservative voting by Republican women across the last three decades has been evident in all three of the general issue areas tracked by National Journal - particularly in social and foreign policy.

From 1981 to 1990, GOP women voted more conservatively than 55.6 percent of the House on social policy legislation. That number increased to 57.2 percent from 1991-2000 and then rose substantially to 67.3 percent from 2001-2009.

A more conservative foreign policy voting record has also been tracked across the decades. Republican women voted more conservatively than 56.1 percent of the House as a whole from 1981-1990, than 65.1 percent from 1991-2000, and 69.9 percent from 2001-2009.

Economic policy has seen the least dramatic shift. Republican women voted more conservatively than 67.4 percent of the House from 1981-1990, than 66.2 percent from 1991-2000, and 71.8 percent from 2001-2009.

Female Republican U.S. Representative Conservatism Ratings by Issue by Decade

Years	Economic	Social	Foreign	Composite
1981-1990	67.4	55.6	56.1	61.1
1991-2000	66.2	57.2	65.1	65.0
2001-2009	71.8	67.3	69.9	71.6

National Journal vote data compiled by Smart Politics. Data indicates the percentage of Representatives of which female GOPers are more conservative by issue.

Overall, the number of Republican women in the U.S. House is at a decade-long low. At just 17 members in 2009, the number of female GOPers has declined 32 percent from 2006, when 25 Republican women served in the House.

The number of female Republicans in the House had risen gradually from 16 in 1997, to 17 in 1998, to 18 in 2001, to 21 in 2003, to 23 in 2005, to 25 in 2006. That number dropped quickly to 21 in 2007 after the previous November's election.

Female Republican U.S. Representative Conservatism Ratings by Issue, 1981-2009

Year	Economic	Social	Foreign	Composite	#
1981	65.5	51.1	45.1	54.9	10
1982	58.3	49.7	48.6	53.4	10
1983	75.0	58.3	57.7	65.1	9
1984	67.6	59.1	58.4	63.5	9
1985	70.5	51.1	57.9	62.6	11
1986	73.5	59.8	61.0	66.8	11
1987	66.8	60.9	58.3	63.0	11
1988	64.0	54.2	57.3	59.2	11
1989	67.3	53.5	58.3	60.8	12
1990	65.2	57.8	59.3	61.8	13
1991	66.3	58.8	61.8	63.3	9
1992	70.7	57.2	60.9	65.1	9
1993	58.8	50.2	61.7	59.0	12
1994	66.5	62.3	67.6	67.0	12
1995	64.2	56.9	68.0	67.6	17
1996	66.2	53.2	66.6	65.2	17
1997	66.9	60.2	68.0	66.9	16
1998	64.2	61.7	68.2	66.0	17
1999	69.1	56.5	63.0	64.5	17
2000	69.4	54.9	65.3	65.3	17
2001	67.6	57.6	69.2	66.8	18
2002	68.9	57.1	66.4	66.9	18
2003	72.4	66.4	70.5	71.5	21
2004	68.5	66.3	68.4	68.7	21
2005	72.3	68.0	68.7	70.9	23
2006	69.1	71.1	74.3	72.8	25
2007	75.6	72.1	66.8	74.1	21
2008	74.4	71.5	75.0	74.9	20
2009	77.8	76.0	70.2	77.4	17

National Journal vote data compiled by Smart Politics. Data indicates the percentage of Representatives of which female GOPers are more conservative by issue.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 01:01 AM ¤

1 comment(s)

MN Election 2010 Minnesota

Kalin Announcement Opens Up Ripe Opportunity in HD 17B for GOP in 2010

Minnesota HD 17B has had a double-digit tilt for Republican candidates against their statewide average across several offices since 2002

When Republican State Representative Kurt Zellers made his debut as House Minority Leader in a press conference late last June, he made clear that one of his top goals, in addition to setting his caucus' agenda and fundraising for the GOP, would be to recruit strong Republican candidates for the 2010 election.

At that time, Zellers did not dismiss the idea of the GOP taking back control of the Minnesota House in 2010, despite facing a 38-seat deficit to the DFL.

The announcement today by 2-term DFLer Jeremy Kalin of North Branch (HD 17B) that he would not seek reelection this November likely just made Zellers' dream one seat closer to reality.

In his announcement, Kalin was self-assured that he could have won over his constituents for a third consecutive election this November ("I'm confident that I would have won their trust for another term"), but said that he is opting instead to focus on his family.

That confidence, however, may have been misguided, given the partisan leanings of Kalin's district, Kalin's own narrow victories during the Democratic tsunamis of 2006 and 2008, and the Republican resurgence being felt nationwide this year.

A Smart Politics analysis of statewide and district elections since redistricting in 2002 finds the voters in HD 17B to have demonstrated a significant GOP tilt vis-à-vis the performance of Republicans statewide.

In fact, Republican candidates for governor, US Senate, and president fared better in HD 17B by double-digit margins than they did statewide in every such contest since 2002.

· George W. Bush and John McCain each carried HD 17B, by 12.5 points in 2004 and 9.6 points in 2008 respectively. Those margins were 16.0 points and 19.8 points better than these GOP candidates did throughout the Gopher State.

· In US Senate contests, Norm Coleman carried 17B in both 2002 (by 18.5 points) and 2008 (by 13.8 points). And while Amy Klobuchar carried the district in 2006, she did so by 11.0 fewer points (9.2) than her statewide victory margin (20.2).

· Tim Pawlenty also dominated the district in both of his election bids - by 23.5 points in 2002 and 11.7 points in 2006. Both exceeded by double digits his statewide margin of victory.

· The GOP tilt in 17B was also demonstrated across elections for the other three constitutional offices in Minnesota, with a larger margin of victory (or narrower margin of loss) for all offices in both the 2002 and 2006 election cycles: for Secretary of State (+8.6 in 2002, +8.3 in 2006), Auditor (+9.3 in 2002, +4.5 in 2006), and Attorney General (+9.6 in 2002, +8.0 in 2006).

· In US House races, Jim Oberstar carried HD 17B by much narrower margins than his 37.4, 33.0, 29.2, and 35.5-point victories across the 8th Congressional District from 2002 through 2008. In 17B, Oberstar won by just 14.6 points in 2002, 14.3 points in 2004, 17.6 points in 2006, and 18.6 points in 2008 - a 17.5-point average tilt for the GOP in HD 17B against the 8th CD generally.

And as for State House races, even with Kalin's victories in 2006 and 2008, there has been a double digit average GOP tilt (+10.3 points) against the statewide average for all 134 house districts across the last four election cycles: +14.7 points in 2002, +12.6 points in 2004, +9.4 points in 2006, +4.5 points in 2008.

Votes cast for GOP candidates for State Senate contests in HD 17B were also 7.8 points (2002) and 7.7 points (2006) better than the statewide average for Republicans across Minnesota's 67 Senate districts.

GOP Tilt in Minnesota HD 17B in Statewide and District Elections by Office, 2002-2008

Office	2002	2004	2006	2008	Average
President		16.0		19.8	17.9
US Senate	16.8		11.0	13.8	13.9
US House*	22.8	18.7	11.6	16.9	17.5
Governor	15.6		10.7		13.2
Secretary of State	8.6		8.3		8.5
Auditor	9.3		4.5		6.9
Attorney General	9.6		8.0		8.8
State Senate**	7.8		7.7		7.8
State House**	14.7	12.6	9.4	4.5	10.3

Data reflects the difference between the margin of victory (or margin of loss) for Republican candidates in HD 17B and statewide totals. * For U.S. House contests, the difference is reflected against the district-wide 8th CD margin. ** For State House and State Senate races, the difference is tabulated against the total statewide margins for all 134 and 67 districts respectively. Election data compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:01 AM ¤

Leave a comment

Ideology Minnesota U.S. House

Bachmann's Narrow Victory in 2008 Did Not Curb Conservative Voting Record in 2009

Congresswoman followed up the narrowest victory for a GOP U.S. House incumbent in 2008 with the 28th most conservative voting record

Last year Smart Politics designated Michele Bachmann as having the 'boldest' political ideology of the entire Republican caucus in the U.S. House of Representatives. That designation was based on an analysis of the Congresswoman's conservative voting record (as measured by National Journal's annual rankings) and her narrow margin of victory in 2008.

National Journal's newly released 2009 vote ratings finds Bachmann upholding that reputation - a Representative who continues to boast one of the most conservative ratings in the House (#28), despite being reelected with the narrowest margin of victory of any Republican incumbent.

At 3.0 points, Bachmann had the 5th narrowest margin of victory of the 178 GOPers elected into office that November, with the other four more narrowly decided races all won by freshmen GOPers:

· John Fleming held the open LA-04 race for the Republicans by 0.4 points.
· Tom McClintock held the open CA-04 race for the GOP by 0.6 points.
· Blaine Luetkemeyer held the open MO-09 contest for the Republicans by 2.5 points.
· Joseph Cao won the LA-02 runoff in a pickup for the GOP by 2.7 points.

Overall, Representative Bachmann had the second narrowest victory of any Democratic or Republican incumbent. Only Democrat Michael Arcuri (NY-24) escaped with a closer victory in 2008, winning by 2.8 points to return to D.C. for his second term.

But what is unusual about Bachmann is not her conservative message and voting record per se, but rather how she stands apart from her fellow conservative peers who represent extremely safe congressional districts.

A Smart Politics analysis of National Journal's Top 50 most conservative members of the House finds Bachmann to be one of just four GOPers who was elected by less than 10 points in 2008, and one of just two elected by less than five points.

Representative Bachmann was joined by McClintock (0.6 points), Pete Olson (TX-07, 7.0 points), and Cynthia Lummis (WY-AL, 9.8 points) as the only Republicans ranked in the Top 50 who faced competitive races in 2008.

The average margin of victory in 2008 for the Top 50 most conservative members of the U.S. House was 32.2 points, with those members having served an average of 4.6 terms.

Bachmann's district has also been trending increasingly Democratic for the last few election cycles - with DFL state legislators quadrupling their number of House seats in the 6th CD since redistricting in 2002 and slicing the average GOP margin of victory in half from 13.4 to 6.5 points.

Bachmann was one of just nine Representatives among the Top 50 most conservative in the U.S. House who represent districts John McCain carried by less than 10 points.

In 2007, Bachmann's first year in office, National Journal scored her as the 26th most conservative member of the U.S. House. In 2008, she was ranked #31.

National Journal's Top 50 Most Conservative Members of the U.S. House, 2009

Rank	Name	District	Terms	2008 MoV	McCain MoV
1	Trent Franks	AZ-02	4	22.3	23
1	Doug Lamborn	CO-05	2	23.0	19
1	Randy Neugebauer	TX-19	4	47.5	45
1	Pete Olson	TX-22	1	7.0	17
1	John Shadegg	AZ-03	8	12.0	14
1	Mac Thornberry	TX-13	8	55.3	53
7	Marsha Blackburn	TN-07	4	37.2	31
8	Mike Pence	IN-06	5	30.6	6
9	Steve King	IA-05	4	22.4	11
9	Tom McClintock	CA-04	1	0.6	10
11	Todd Akin	MO-02	5	26.9	11
12	Jeff Miller	FL-01	5	40.4	35
12	Pete Sessions	TX-32	7	16.7	7
14	John Boehner	OH-08	10	35.8	23
15	John Linder	GA-07	9	24.1	21
16	George Radanovich	CA-19	8	97.2	6
17	Rob Bishop	UT-01	4	34.4	31
17	Patrick McHenry	NC-10	3	15.1	27
19	Virginia Foxx	NC-05	3	16.7	23
19	Jim Jordan	OH-04	2	30.3	22
21	Jason Chaffetz	UT-03	1	38.3	38
21	Mike Conaway	TX-11	3	76.7	51
21	Adrian Smith	NE-03	2	53.7	39
24	Louie Gohmert	TX-01	3	75.2	39
25	Lynn Westmoreland	GA-03	3	31.4	29
26	Kenny Marchant	TX-24	3	14.9	11
27	Bob Latta	OH-05	2	28.6	8
28	Michele Bachmann	MN-06	2	3.0	9
29	Kevin McCarthy	CA-22	2	100.0	21
30	Sam Johnson	TX-03	10	21.7	15
31	Wally Herger	CA-02	12	14.6	12
32	John Kline	MN-02	4	14.8	2
33	John Carter	TX-31	4	23.7	16
34	Jeb Hensarling	TX-05	4	67.2	27
34	Cynthia Lummis	WY-AL	1	9.8	32
34	Sue Myrick	NC-09	8	26.5	10
37	Eric Cantor	VA-07	5	25.6	7
38	Joe Pitts	PA-16	7	16.4	3
39	Devin Nunes	CA-21	4	36.4	14
40	Steve Scalise	LA-01	2	31.4	46
41	Kay Granger	TX-12	7	37.0	27
42	Mary Fallin	OK-05	2	31.8	18
43	John Culberson	TX-07	5	13.5	17
44	Tom Price	GA-06	3	37.0	28
45	Dan Burton	IN-05	14	31.1	19
45	Nathan Deal	GA-09	10	51.0	52
47	Phil Gingrey	GA-11	4	36.4	33
48	Gresham Barrett	SC-03	4	29.5	29
48	Paul Broun	GA-10	2	21.5	25
48	Duncan Hunter	CA-52	1	17.7	8
	Average		4.6	32.2	22.4

Note: Conservative ranking data from National Journal's 2009 analysis of key votes.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:11 AM ¤

3 comment(s)

Economy and jobs Terrorism

The Pessimistic Purple: Why Are Voters in Swing States the Most Discontented?

Analysis of Rasmussen polling finds purple state residents have the most dire outlook about their financial situation and the war on terrorism; red state residents are the most optimistic

Despite all the national attention brought to the issue of health care through the recent political skirmishes in Washington, D.C., the economy and jobs remain the biggest domestic concern for the American people today. And with wars continuing on two fronts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the war on terror continues to be a top-tier foreign policy concern.

As our country tackles these serious domestic and foreign policy problems, which Americans are most optimistic about issues related to the economy and the security of the United States? Which are the most pessimistic?

A Smart Politics analysis of more than two-dozen polls conducted by Rasmussen during a three-week span in February finds that likely voters in purple states are feeling the most bleak and discontented on issues related to both their finances and the security of their country, while residents of red states are the most optimistic.

Rasmussen conducted polls of 500 likely voters in 27 states between February 1st and February 23rd and asked voters in each state an array of questions dealing with their own personal finances as well as the war on terror.

The states that were polled include 11 blue states (California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington, Wisconsin), 9 purple states (Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Virginia), and 7 red states (Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas).

(While there is some gray area as to what constitutes the current partisan tilt of a state (Arkansas and Louisiana stand out here as perhaps more red than purple), red states are defined as having an average margin of victory over the past five presidential election cycles of more than five points for the Republicans, with blue states more than five points for the Democrats, and purple states as having less than a five point tilt in either direction).

To be sure, economic concerns are still high on the minds of Americans as the economy slowly tries to regain the millions of jobs shed during the last few years. An open-ended mid-February CBS/New York Times poll found four times as many Americans cited the economy and jobs as their top concern (52 percent) as health care (13 percent).

With the economy still far from recovery, and unemployment still flirting with 10 percent, many Americans have deep concerns about their personal finances, with residents of purple states the most pessimistic.

Residents of purple states were less likely to rate their own personal finances as 'excellent' or 'good' (39.7 percent) than those in the blue states (42.5 percent) or red states (44.4 percent) polled by Rasmussen.

Residents in purple states were also the most likely to rate their finances as just 'fair' or 'poor' (56.1 percent), followed by blue states (53.8 percent) and red states (51.1 percent).

Likely voters in the red state of Texas by far rated their own finances as the most positive, with 55 percent viewing them as excellent or good. The red states of Georgia (#2, 48 percent) and North Dakota (#4, 47 percent) were two of the other three states in which the percentage of likely voters viewing their finances as excellent or good was equal to or greater than those viewing it as fair or poor.

The three states least optimistic about their personal finances of the 27 surveyed were all purple: only 36 percent of likely voters in Florida, 34 percent in Missouri, and 33 percent in Arkansas viewed their personal finances in excellent or good shape.

Ramussen also asked likely voters in these 27 states how their personal finances are trending - whether they are getting better or worse.

Once again, residents of purple states were the most glum about where their finances are headed - with 47 percent stating their finances were getting worse - slightly more than likely voters in blue states (46 percent).

Red state voters were the least dour about how their finances were trending (with 42 percent stating 'worse').

Residents in purple states also shared the most gloomy collective outlook on the issues of terrorism and the safety of Americans.

When asked "Who is winning the war on terrorism, the United States and its allies or the terrorists," nearly 1 in 4 residents of purple states believed the terrorists were winning (24 percent). This was notably higher than the percentage of residents in both the more liberal blue states (20 percent) and the more conservative red states (16 percent).

Purple states comprised four of the top five slots of those states in which more than a quarter of its likely voters believed the terrorists were winning the war: Missouri (28 percent), Louisiana (28 percent), Nevada (26 percent), and Arkansas (26 percent). Thirty percent of Pennsylvanians also shared this view, which was highest among the 27 states surveyed.

Six red states, led by Georgia at 10 percent (plus North Carolina, Texas, North Dakota, Indiana, and South Dakota) and five blue states (Wisconsin, Delaware, Washington, Iowa, and Maryland), comprised the bottom 11 slots for those which believe the terrorists are winning the war.

By contrast, just 46 percent of likely voters in purple states believe the United States is winning the war on terrorism, compared to 48 percent of likely voters in blue states, and 52 percent of those in red states.

Of the 10 states in which more than 50 percent of its likely voters believe the United States and its allies are winning the war on terrorism, only one is purple (#6, Florida, at 52 percent).

The most optimistic states about the state of the war on terror were the red states of Georgia (59 percent), Texas (57 percent), North Carolina (57 percent), and South Dakota (52 percent), and the blue states of Delaware (55 percent), Iowa (53 percent), Michigan (51 percent), Maryland (51 percent), and Wisconsin (51 percent).

Rasmussen also asked likely voters in these 27 states whether the United States was safer today than it was before the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Once again, residents in purple states have the most pessimistic view of the security of their country, with 42 percent of likely voters in the nine states surveyed replying the U.S. is not safer today. Residents of blue states (37 percent) and red states (37 percent) are less negative, with pluralities of each believing the U.S. is safer today.

Residents of the purple states of Nevada (49 percent 'less safe'), Missouri (46 percent), and Arkansas (44 percent) had the most gloomy outlooks on this dimension of assessing the security of the nation's homeland.

As to why residents of purple states are more pessimistic these days than their fellow Americans in blue and red states is unclear.

Blue states, of course, tend to be more liberal (all 11 of which in this sample voted for Barack Obama in 2008), and are perhaps therefore more hopeful (and patient) that the direction of the country, President Obama's policies, and their own personal situation will change for the better soon.

Residents of red states, meanwhile, are perhaps less disappointed because they were less optimistic about the new administration and the changes that were promised in the first instance (as just 2 of the 7 red states under analysis voted for Obama).

As such, perhaps residents of many of these purple states feel particularly disappointed about the perceived lack of positive change brought about by the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress during the past year.

Unlike red states, most purple states voted for change in 2008 (six of the nine purple states in this analysis voted for Obama). However, because swing states are less consistently partisan as a collective, its residents are therefore perhaps less patient and more quick to harbor resentment and pessimism than those in blue states when change does not come about in the face of continued serious economic and foreign policy concerns.

And how might this discontent in purple states be expressed at the ballot box this November?

Three Democratic U.S. Senate incumbents from the purple states tracked in this analysis by Rasmussen are in serious jeopardy of losing their seats in 2010: Michael Bennet of Colorado, Harry Reid of Nevada, and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 01:46 AM ¤

Leave a comment

MN Election 2010 Minnesota Voting

Tom Emmer's Voter ID Amendment Lures 11 DFLers, Fails 73-58

Many of the 11 DFL defectors represent vulnerable House districts; Norm Coleman carried nine of these districts in 2008, including eight by double digits

Republican State Representative and gubernatorial hopeful Tom Emmer's latest attempt to require Minnesotans residents to present a valid photo identification in order to vote in the Gopher State fell eight votes short on Thursday, as a proposed amendment to a bill (HF 2552) that would move the the state's primary from the second Tuesday in September (the 14th this year) to the second Tuesday in August (the 10th this year).

While the bill had overwhelming support, passing on a 126-5 vote, Emmer's amendment failed 73-58.

Emmer has attempted to introduce similar legislation several times in his three terms in St. Paul.

Thursday's amendment offered several identification options for voters to present at the ballot box, so long as they included a photograph of the individual: a valid driver's license of ID card issued by the Department of Public Safety, a United States passport, a Minnesota voter identification card, a tribal ID card, or any other ID card with a photograph issued by the state of Minnesota or the federal government.

Public opinion surveys in recent years have established that voter ID legislation has overwhelming support in the Gopher State, by a 3:1 margin over its detractors.

On Thursday's House vote, All 47 Republican Representatives backed Emmer's photo ID amendment, which also attracted the support of 11 DFLers: Dave Olin (01A-Thief River Falls), Mary Ellen Otremba (11B-Long Prairie), Kory Kath (26A-Owatonna), Robin Brown (27A-Moscow Township), Phillip Sterner (37B-Rosemount), Mike Obermueller (38B-Eagan), Ann Lenczewski (40B-Bloomington), Denise Dittrich (47A-Champlin), Bev Scalze (54B-Little Canada), Julie Bunn (56A-Lake Elmo), and Marsha Swails (56B-Woodbury).

There are several interesting, perhaps revealing, aspects to those DFLers who chose to break with their caucus and support Emmer's amendment.

· Seven of the 11 DFLers are in their 1st (Obermueller, Sterner, Kath) or 2nd (Olin, Bunn, Swails, Brown) term in the House - voted into office during the Democratic tsumamis of 2006 or 2008.

· Six of these Representatives faced competitive races in 2008 - winning their election by 10 points or less: Bunn, Obermueller, Olin, Otremba, Sterner, and Swails.

· Most of these legislators also represent districts with a conservative tilt: Norm Coleman carried 9 of these 11 DFL House districts in the 2008 U.S. Senate contest - including 8 of them by double digit margins (Bunn, Dittrich, Kath, Obermueller, Olin, Otremba, Sterner, and Swails). John McCain also carried four of these districts (Dittrich, Kaith, Olin, and Otremba).

Overall, the margin of victory in 2008 for the 11 DFLers who joined the unified GOP caucus in supporting voter ID was just 12.3 points. The margin of victory for the other 76 dissenting (or non-voting) DFL members who opposed the amendment: 31.2 points.

Three DFLers did not vote Thursday: Thomas Huntley (07A-Duluth), Bobby Joe Champion (58B-Minneapolis), and Jim Davnie (62A-Minneapolis).

DFL Representatives Supporting Emmer Amendment for Voter ID

Representative	Terms	District	2008 MoV	Franken MoV	Obama MoV
Mike Obermueller	1	38b	2.5	-10.9	7.7
Mary Ellen Otremba	7	11b	4.9	-14.2	-11.9
Dave Olin	2	01a	5.0	-15.1	-4.0
Phillip Sterner	1	37b	5.2	-12.6	2.3
Julie Bunn	2	56a	5.6	-12.0	2.9
Marsha Swails	2	56b	10.1	-12.3	6.8
Kory Kath	1	26a	13.9	-11.0	-6.1
Robin Brown	2	27a	15.4	6.1	18.1
Denise Dittrich	3	47a	18.9	-11.4	-2.1
Bev Scalze	3	54b	22.5	-2.1	12.9
Ann Lenczewski	6	40b	31.4	0.0	12.2

Election data compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 09:54 PM ¤

2 comment(s)

MN Election 2010 Minnesota

Minnesota Republicans Look to End 10-Year Vote Skid in House Races in 2010

Votes for GOP House candidates statewide have gradually fallen each election cycle from 52 to 43 percent over the last ten years

A recent Politics in Minnesota article noted how Republicans are lining up to challenge DFLers in State House and Senate races across the state for this November's election. The article suggests that GOP candidates in Minnesota are set to ride the conservative wave that has crept, if not swept, through the nation over the past 12 months.

The fact that Republicans in Minnesota, the Upper Midwest generally, and nationwide are optimistic for expected gains in the 2010 election cycle is incontrovertible.

However, to what extent Republicans will make gains in the Minnesota legislature remains an open question, and, unfortunately for the GOP, its ability to field candidates in legislative races has not been an indicator of success for its party at the ballot box in recent years.

Looking at general election races, Republicans have fielded a candidate in 98.3 percent of Minnesota House contests since 2002, or 527 of 536 races.

Despite doing so, they have seen their 82-seat caucus in 2002 fall to a narrow majority of 68 seats in 2004 and to minority status in 2006 (49 seats) and 2008 (47 seats).

Republicans failed to field a candidate in just five districts in 2002 (03A, 05A, 59A, 59B, 60B), one district in 2004 (03A) and three districts in 2006 (03B, 06A, 07B).

And despite pitting an opponent against the DFL in every district in 2008, the GOP notched its lowest percentage of statewide votes cast for House candidates in the past two decades (43.8 percent statewide).

In fact, Republicans have faced a declining amount of popular vote support in State House races dating back to 1998:

· In the 1998 election, when the GOP regained control of the House with victories in 71 districts, Republican candidates netted 52.2 percent of the votes in such races statewide.
· In 2000, winning 69 seats, Republicans won 51.4 percent of the vote.
· In 2002, the GOP won a plurality 49.1 percent of the vote statewide in House races.
· In 2004, only 47.0 percent of Minnesota voters cast their ballots for Republicans in House contests.
· In 2006, Republicans notched just 44.4 percent of the vote as they lost their majority party status.
· In 2008, only 43.8 percent of the vote went to GOP candidates in House races.

The Republican Party has also faced an increasingly problematic ratio in recent years of votes received statewide per House seats won. In 2002, the GOP received 12,952 votes statewide on average for each House seat it carried in that year's general election. In 2004, that number increased to 18,563, rising to 19,329 in 2006, and 25,766 in 2008, with Republicans netting fewer seats each cycle. (Elevated statewide turnout in presidential election years accounted for some of this change).

But fielding candidates alone is not enough for the GOP, due in part to the fact that the DFL has become equally adept at placing candidates on the ballot across the state's 134 districts in their own right - turning many districts into battlegrounds this decade and thinning out Republican Party resources in the process.

In 2000, the DFL failed to field a candidate in 13 districts, compared to just 2 for the GOP.

During the next four election cycles after redistricting, from 2002-2008, the DFL fielded a candidate in all but five contests, or 99.1 percent of all general election races (531 of 536).

And that is perhaps why the Politics in Minnesota article's main focus was on the fact that multiple Republican challengers are popping up in some DFL-controlled districts across the state.

The implication, properly drawn, is that those candidates who emerge from the nomination and/or primary process for the GOP will be stronger for having first faced an intra-party opponent, and thus improve the Party's prospects in the general election.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:23 AM ¤

Leave a comment

National Politics U.S. House

Democrats Hold Edge Over GOP for Average Years of Service in U.S. House

Despite 30 percent of its caucus elected since 2006, Democrats have served almost 1 more year per member on average than Republicans; GOP also losing more experienced members to retirement on average than Democrats

While the Republican Party's eyes continue to bulge as it looks to pick off a few dozen or more Democratic U.S. House seats in this November's election, the GOP is nonetheless on the brink of losing more experienced members due to retirement and other political ambitions than a Democratic Party which already holds an advantage in terms of average years of service in the U.S. House.

A Smart Politics analysis of the 433 non-vacant districts in the U.S. House finds that despite the Democratic Party picking up more than 4-dozen seats in the last two election cycles and introducing more than 75 new members to the legislative body during that span, the average length of service by Democrats in the U.S. House is still greater by almost one full year compared to the Republicans.

The 255 Democrats in the U.S. House have served a combined 2,921.3 years in the lower chamber to date, or an average of 11.5 years per member.

The 178 Republicans, meanwhile, have served 1,910.1 years collectively, or 10.7 years per member.

Democrats hold this edge in experience despite the fact that there are currently 77 members (30 percent of its caucus) who were elected to the U.S. House from November 2006 onwards, compared to just 36 Republicans currently serving in the House who were elected during that span (20 percent of its caucus).

Almost three dozen members of the U.S. House have announced they will not be seeking reelection this year - due to either retirement from politics or the quest for higher public office.

The average length of service of the 18 Republicans stepping down from the U.S. House is nearly one full term longer than that of the 15 Democrats. The GOP is losing members who have served a combined 234.1 years to date - or 13.0 years on average.

This list includes five members who entered with the class of 1993 and who have all served 17.1 years to date: Michael Castle (DE-AL), Lincoln Diaz-Balart (FL-21), Nathan Deal (GA-09), Steve Buyer (IN-04), and Peter Hoekstra (MI-02).

While Democrats are losing three members of Congress with longer years of service - Bart Gordon (TN-06; 25.1 years), John Tanner (TN-08; 21.1 years), and Neil Abercrombie (HI-01; 19.4 years) - the average length of service of those Democrats not seeking reelection in 2010 is just 11.1 years to date, or two years less than the retiring GOPers.

One reason the Democrats have notched more average years of service than the Republicans, despite the fact that 30 percent of its caucus was elected since November 2006, is that almost all of the most seasoned members of the U.S. House are Democrats.

Thirteen of the top 15 members in the U.S. House with the longest length of service are Democrats - each with at least 33 years under their belts. This list is headed, of course, by Michigan's John Dingell (MI-15; 54.2 years) and John Conyers (MI-14; 45.1 years).

The only Republicans to crack the Top 15 list are the Youngs - Bill of Florida (District 10, 39.1 years) and Don of Alaska (AL, 36.9 years).

In total, 18 current U.S. Representatives have served at least 30 years in the chamber.

Top 15 Longest Serving Current Members of the U.S. House

Rank	District	Incumbent	Party	Years
1	MI-15	John Dingell	Democrat	54.2
2	MI-14	John Conyers	Democrat	45.1
3	WI-07	David Obey	Democrat	40.8
4	NY-15	Charlie Rangel	Democrat	39.1
4	FL-10	Bill Young	GOP	39.1
6	CA-13	Pete Stark	Democrat	37.1
7	AK-01	Don Young	GOP	36.9
8	CA-07	George Miller	Democrat	35.1
8	CA-30	Henry Waxman	Democrat	35.1
8	MN-08	Jim Oberstar	Democrat	35.1
11	MA-07	Ed Markey	Democrat	33.3
12	MI-05	Dale Kildee	Democrat	33.1
12	MO-04	Ike Skelton	Democrat	33.1
12	WA-06	Norman Dicks	Democrat	33.1
12	WV-03	Nick Rahall	Democrat	33.1

Data compiled by Smart Politics from the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.

And which states have the most experienced U.S. House delegations?

Excluding states with at-large members, which hold three of the top six slots (Alaska at #1, Delaware and North Dakota at #5), West Virginians have remained the most loyal to their U.S. Representatives, with Nick Rahall, Alan Mollohan, and Shelley Moore Capito averaging 23.1 years of service.

A recent Smart Politics analysis of seniority in the U.S. Senate also found West Virginia at the top of that list for years of service in the upper chamber.

West Virginia is followed by Michigan (#3, 19.4 years on average), Wisconsin (#4, 18.3 years), and Massachusetts (#7, 16.3 years).

The greenest state delegations with at least two members are New Mexico (1.1 years on average) and New Hampshire (3.1 years).

Whether or not this extra experience in the U.S. House will be an asset to the Democrats as they attempt to stave off large losses in 2010 could depend in part on the extent to which there is a 'throw-all-the-bums-out' mentality this November.

However, several dozen Democrats represent very safe districts and many have withstood previous GOP surges.

For example, 75 current members of the Democratic caucus were elected into office before the Republican Revolution of 1994 - withstanding the GOP in that election and every other one since. (An additional six members of the Democratic caucus were first elected to the body during that November 1994 election).

Average Length of Service of U.S. House Delegation by State

Rank	State	Years	Districts	Average
1	Alaska	36.9	1	36.9
2	West Virginia	69.3	3	23.1
3	Michigan	290.7	15	19.4
4	Wisconsin	146.2	8	18.3
5	Delaware	17.1	1	17.1
5	North Dakota	17.1	1	17.1
7	Massachusetts	163.2	10	16.3
8	Washington	125.9	9	14.0
9	California	710.8	53	13.4
10	Tennessee	120.1	9	13.3
10	South Carolina	79.7	6	13.3
12	New Jersey	170.9	13	13.1
13	Texas	403.5	32	12.6
14	Indiana	110.7	9	12.3
15	Rhode Island	24.2	2	12.1
15	Virginia	132.8	11	12.1
17	Oregon	60.2	5	12.0
17	New York	348.6	29	12.0
19	Hawaii	22.5	2	11.3
20	Arkansas	43.6	4	10.9
20	Missouri	98.1	9	10.9
22	North Carolina	138.8	13	10.7
23	Georgia	133.8	13	10.3
24	Kansas	40.4	4	10.1
24	Minnesota	80.8	8	10.1
26	Mississippi	40.0	4	10.0
27	Kentucky	59.5	6	9.9
27	Florida	237.8	24*	9.9
29	Illinois	174.9	19	9.2
30	Montana	9.1	1	9.1
31	Maryland	69.8	8	8.7
32	Pennsylvania	154.2	18*	8.6
33	Iowa	41.5	5	8.3
34	Arizona	64.1	8	8.0
35	Oklahoma	39.1	5	7.8
36	Alabama	53.7	7	7.7
37	Connecticut	37.5	5	7.5
38	Ohio	122.5	18	6.8
39	Nebraska	19.3	3	6.4
40	Idaho	12.2	2	6.1
41	Utah	17.3	3	5.8
42	South Dakota	5.7	1	5.7
43	Nevada	15.3	3	5.1
44	Maine	8.2	2	4.1
45	Colorado	27.7	7	4.0
46	Louisiana	22.4	7	3.2
47	New Hampshire	6.2	2	3.1
47	Vermont	3.1	1	3.1
49	Wyoming	1.1	1	1.1
49	New Mexico	3.3	3	1.1

* Excludes vacant districts in Florida (FL-19) and Pennsylvania (PA-12). Data compiled by Smart Politics from the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 01:34 AM ¤

Leave a comment

Health

Health Care Reform Advocate Praises New Obama Proposal at HHH Event

In an event at the Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs Monday afternoon, a leading advocate of health care reform addressed the latest proposal unveiled by President Barack Obama and stressed the need to move ahead and avoid the traps of passing incremental reform at this juncture in the legislative process.

Judy Feder, Professor of Public Policy at Georgetown University and principal deputy assistant secretary for planning and evaluation in the Department of Health and Human Services during Bill Clinton's first term, said Obama is "determined" to achieve health care reform and "This legislation has too much going for it to let it go down now."

Feder, an admitted "enthusiastic supporter and advocate" for Obama's plan, says the current political situation is such that either Congress should pass the main tenets of the president's plan now or do nothing. Feder stated that working on a "scaled down" version of health care reform would be just as challenging as crossing the finish line with the current proposal.

Professor Feder acknowledged the dissension that exists among Democrats - with moderates who are concerned the current proposal will lead to too much government and progressives in the House who are "skeptical" of the shortcomings of the current bill.

Still, despite its nearly $1 trillion price tag and its far-reaching effects of covering more than 31 million Americans, Feder characterizes Obama's new proposals as a "compromise" bill - "a compromise you can't walk away from...the bill is too good to let go."

Feder stated that if Congress does not act now, it will be "another couple decades" before politicians will try to pass substantial health reform again.

Regarding Feder's assertion that the bill was endorsed as "financially sound" by the Congressional Budget Office, panelist Stephen Parente, Academic Director of the Medical Industry Leadership Intitute at the University of Minnesota's Carlson School of Management, expressed concern that the cost projection of the President's proposal was correct - noting that the Medicare cost projections were widely underestimated from 1966 on.

Feder had harsh criticisms for several of the reforms advocated by Republicans in Congress (e.g. "Tort reform does not improve the quality of care") and characterized increased premiums by insurance companies whose profits are rising as "unacceptable."

When asked why public opinion is against the President's plan, Feder stated the opposition among the public was the result of both "overpromising" by progressive advocates of health care reform and "downright dishonest treachery" by its opponents.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 08:18 PM ¤

1 comment(s)

Minnesota U.S. Senate

Klobuchar and Franken to Get Boost in Senate Seniority After 2010 Election

Gopher State delegation currently has second lowest collective seniority in the U.S. Senate

Minnesota's fresh-faced U.S. Senators Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken are on the verge of a much-needed boost in seniority in 2011, given the rash of retirements that have been announced in the 2010 election cycle, and the potential ousting of even more sitting Senators at the ballot box this November.

The Gopher State U.S. Senate delegation currently is ranked second to the bottom for collective years of service in the Senate, at just 3.7 years to date, and for its cumulative seniority ranking of 178.

Senator Klobuchar has a seniority ranking of #80 while Franken comes in at #98.

Only Colorado's tandem of Democratic Senators Mark Udall and 2009 appointee Michael Bennet rank lower in both categories (2.2 years and 191 respectively).

Eight U.S. Senators who have a higher seniority ranking than both Klobuchar and Franken are not seeking reelection in 2010: Chris Dodd (#9, CT), Kit Bond (#21, MO), Byron Dorgan (#27, ND), Judd Gregg (#29, NH), Sam Brownback (#38, KS), Jim Bunning (#48, KY), George Voinovich (#51, OH), and Evan Bayh (#52, IN).

An additional two Democratic Senators (both appointees) who have a higher ranking than Franken will also retire: Roland Burris (#94, IL) and Ted Kaufman (#95, DE).

Excluding any potential unseating of incumbents that may occur at the ballot box in November, Klobuchar will move up to at least #72 in the Senate seniority rankings, with Franken moving up to at least #88.

When these 11 retirements take hold in January 2011, the collective years of service of the Minnesota Senate delegation will eclipse the delegations of Missouri, Ohio, and New Hampshire to move the Gopher State up from #49 nationwide to #46.

Minnesota's new faces on the Hill stand in stark contrast to several Upper Midwestern U.S. Senate delegations that currently rank among the Top 10 longest-serving in the nation: Iowa comes in at #3 (54.2 years collectively for Chuck Grassley and Tom Harkin), with North Dakota at #7 (40.3 years for Dorgan and Kent Conrad), and Wisconsin at #9 (38.2 years for Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold).

Aside from the office perks associated with increased seniority within the Senate, the most tangible benefit Minnesota residents would receive from its delegation's rise in the seniority rankings is the increased power its Senators will have to choose committee assignments, as well the rise in rank in some of the committees on which Klobuchar and Franken already serve.

Klobuchar currently serves on the Judiciary Committee, Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, Environment and Public Works Committee, and Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee. She also serves on the Joint Economic Committee.

Franken serves with Klobuchar on the Judiciary Committee, plus the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, the Committee on Indian Affairs, and the Special Committee on Aging.

In addition to the nearly one dozen retirees exiting the Senate, the Democratic seats held by Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada are in particular jeopardy of flipping to the GOP this November.

In the Democratic caucus, Senators Lincoln (Chairwoman, Agriculture Committee) and Dorgan (Commerce) hold rank over Klobuchar in her major committee assignments, while Dodd (Health, Education, Labor & Pensions), Dorgan (Indian Affairs), Lincoln (Aging), and Bayh (Aging) do so over Franken in his committees.

Of course, if there are too many Democratic seats that end up switching to the Republican column in November, then any power gained through increased seniority by Klobuchar and Franken could be offset if the Democrats fall into minority party status in the chamber (should the GOP cobble together enough victories to reach 51 seats).

Years of U.S. Senate Service by State Delegation

Rank	State	Senior	Junior	Total
1	West Virginia	51.1	25.1	76.2
2	Hawaii	47.1	19.7	66.8
3	Iowa	29.1	25.1	54.2
4	Connecticut	29.1	21.1	50.2
4	Utah	33.1	17.1	50.2
6	Indiana	33.1	11.1	44.2
7	North Dakota	23.1	17.2	40.3
8	Michigan	31.1	9.1	40.2
9	Arizona	23.1	15.1	38.2
9	Vermont	35.1	3.1	38.2
9	Wisconsin	21.1	17.1	38.2
12	Alabama	23.1	13.1	36.2
12	Kentucky	25.1	11.1	36.2
14	California	17.3	17.1	34.4
15	Montana	31.2	3.1	34.3
16	Mississippi	31.2	2.2	33.4
17	Nevada	23.1	9.1	32.2
17	Pennsylvania	29.1	3.1	32.2
19	New Jersey	25.1*	4.1	29.2
20	Maine	15.1	13.1	28.2
20	New Mexico	27.1	1.1	28.2
22	Kansas	13.3	13.1	26.4
23	Maryland	23.1	3.1	26.2
23	Missouri	23.1	3.1	26.2
23	Washington	17.1	9.1	26.2
26	Massachusetts	25.1	0.1	25.2
27	Texas	16.6	7.1	23.7
28	Oklahoma	15.3	5.1	20.4
29	Arkansas	11.1	7.1	18.2
29	Louisiana	13.1	5.1	18.2
29	New Hampshire	17.1	1.1	18.2
29	South Dakota	13.1	5.1	18.2
33	Rhode Island	13.1	3.1	16.2
34	Wyoming	13.1	2.6	15.7
35	Oregon	13.9	1.1	15.0
36	Illinois	13.1	1.1	14.2
36	Ohio	11.1	3.1	14.2
38	Georgia	7.1	5.1	12.2
38	Idaho	11.1	1.1	12.2
38	New York	11.1	1.1	12.2
38	South Carolina	7.1	5.1	12.2
42	Delaware	9.1	1.1	10.2
42	Nebraska	9.1	1.1	10.2
42	Tennessee	7.1	3.1	10.2
45	Florida	9.1	1.0	10.1
46	Alaska	7.2	1.1	8.3
47	North Carolina	5.1	1.1	6.2
48	Virginia	3.1	1.1	4.2
49	Minnesota	3.1	0.6	3.7
50	Colorado	1.1	1.1	2.2

* Not all of New Jersey senior U.S. Senator Frank Lautenberg's service has been consecutive. Lautenberg served 18+ years (from December 1982-January 2001) prior to his current run of 7+ years (January 2003-present).

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 11:23 PM ¤

Leave a comment

Health Minnesota

Pawlenty Prepares Veto #101 for Health Care Bill

Governor begins 8th year in office with 100 vetoes under his belt and a policy agenda undaunted by large DFL legislative majorities

After the Minnesota legislature overwhelmingly passed a $284 million bill Thursday to restore General Assistance Medical Care (GAMC) to approximately 85,000 Minnesotans for 16 months, Governor Tim Pawlenty indicated he would once again unholster his veto pen, which he has already drawn 100 times during his first seven years in office.

Pawlenty made his intentions clear regarding GAMC funding last year, when he issued a line item veto of a $381 million appropriation for GAMC in the omnibus health and human services finance bill on May 14th.

The DFL attempted to override that veto, but the measure failed three days later on May 17th by three votes, 87-47.

While the House of Representatives passed the funding measure Thursday on a bipartisan 125-9 vote, Republican Minority Leader Kurt Zellers released a statement later in the evening that his caucus will uphold Governor Pawlenty's forthcoming veto.

According to data culled by Smart Politics from the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library, only 9 percent of gubernatorial vetoes in the Gopher State have seen an override attempt by the legislature since 1939 - or 46 attempts out of 511 vetoes.

Of these 46 attempts, 32 have failed, with 14 (2.7 percent of all vetoes) successfully overturning the governor's veto. Twenty-six of these 32 failed attempts stalled in the House of Representatives.

Only 1 of Pawlenty's 100 vetoes has been overridden, with just four attempts by the DFL-controlled legislature to date.

Pawlenty currently ranks 2nd out of the 14 governors who have served the Gopher State since 1939 for both total number of vetoes (100), and the average number of vetoes per year in office (14.3).

Former Republican Governor Arne Carlson (179 vetoes, 22.4 per year) ranks first in both categories.

A higher percentage of Pawlenty's vetoes were full bill vetoes (78 percent, 78 of 100), compared to those issued by Governor Carlson (71 percent, 127 of 179).

Vetoes by Minnesota Governors, 1939-2010

Governor	Party	#	Per year	Override attempts	Overrides
Arne Carlson	GOP	179	22.4	12	0
Tim Pawlenty	GOP	100	14.3	4	1
Jesse Ventura	Reform	54	13.5	14	9
Al Quie	GOP	31	7.8	6	2
Luther Youngdahl	GOP	27	4.5	4	1
Harold Stassen	GOP	25	4.2	0	0
Karl Rolvaag	DFL	22	5.5	0	0
Rudy Perpich	DFL	20	2.0	1	0
Wendell Anderson	DFL	19	3.2	0	0
Orville Freeman	DFL	11	1.8	1	0
Harold LeVander	GOP	9	2.3	2	1
C. Elmer Anderson	GOP	7	3.5	0	0
Elmer Andersen	GOP	4	2.0	1	0
Edward Thye	GOP	3	1.5	1	0
Total		511	7.2	46	14

Data compiled from Minnesota Legislative Reference Library.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:22 AM ¤

Leave a comment

Media Minnesota U.S. House

Minnesota's GOP U.S. Representatives Launching Aggressive Media Campaign in 2010; DFLers Shying Away

Bachmann, Kline, and Paulsen issuing nearly twice as many press releases in 2010 as Gopher State's DFL Representatives

While critics continue to charge Republicans on Capitol Hill as simply the 'Party of No,' the Minnesota Republican U.S. House delegation is leading the charge with a much more aggressive media strategy, laden with both negative and positive messages, than their DFL counterparts.

Putting GOP star Michele Bachmann's television appearances aside, Minnesota's three Republican U.S. House members of Bachmann, John Kline, and Erik Paulsen have started this election year by issuing more press releases on their official U.S. House websites through February 17th (43) than the five DFL U.S. Representatives from the Gopher State (39).

A Smart Politics analysis finds that through the first one and a half months of 2010, Minnesota's GOP U.S. House members are averaging 9.6 press releases per month per Representative compared to just 5.2 per DFLer.

John Kline leads the way with 15 press releases issued this year, with Erik Paulsen (14) and Michele Bachmann (14) close behind.

DFL Transportation Committee Chair Jim Oberstar has issued the most statements for the DFL with 14 - three concerning the earthquake and relief efforts in Haiti (where the Congressman was employed for more than three years in the late 1950s and early 1960s).

Keith Ellison (8), Betty McCollum (7), Tim Walz (5), and Collin Peterson (5) have issued only 25 statements collectively.

Bachmann and Kline also led the Minnesota delegation by issuing the most press releases in 2009 with 143 and 110 respectively. Collin Peterson issued the least with just 19.

And have Minnesota's Republican Representatives, through their press releases, earned the label as members in good standing of the 'Party of No?'

Not entirely.

Of Bachmann's 14 press releases, 10 were critical of the policies of Democrats on the Hill and/or Barack Obama, while three advanced positive messages and one neutral.

The most high-profile press release unveiled by Representative Bachmann this year was her "Declaration of Health Care Independence" on January 27th. Bachmann also issued statements critical of the federal stimulus (February 17th), runaway spending in Washington (February 1st), and the President's approach to terrorism (January 7th).

The Congresswoman did issue three statements striking a positive tone - two on the "Valentines for Veterans" program and one supporting Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano's announcement of a humanitarian parole policy for Haitian orphans.

John Kline's statements, meanwhile, were more balanced, with the 4-term Congressman issuing six statements that were very critical of the Democratic policies in Washington and six messages that were positive in tone or offering solutions through new legislation.

On the critical side, for example, Kline issued a statement earlier this month opposing a House measure to raise the debt limit to $14.3 trillion (February 4th), opposing the President's "reckless" budget (February 1st), and criticizing several of Obama's policies on the anniversary of his first year in office (January 20th).

On the positive side, Kline released two statements advocating bonus pay to the Minnesota Red Bulls (February 3rd, 16th), plus statements encouraging his constituents to participate in the 2010 census (January 14th), and nominating residents from his 2nd CD to U.S. service academies (February 2nd).

Kline's statement on the President's State of the Union Address included both critical and supportive messages, and another two messages released by the Congressman were neutral - relaying administrative information to his constituents.

Erik Paulsen, who represents the most politically moderate district of the three GOPers, struck the most positive tone on balance, issuing six positive statements, just two that were explicitly critical, and two that struck a mixed tone, with the rest providing factual information to constituents.

Paulsen issued press releases with positive messages, for example, advocating for the Minnesota Red Bulls (February 16th), for bi-partisan support advocating nuclear energy as a solution towards energy independence (February 2nd), for funding of an I-94 interchange in his district, and for support for the U.S.-led recovery effort in Haiti (January 14th).

Paulsen issued statements critical of TARP funding (February 2nd) and his disapproval of the process and substance of Democratic-led health care legislation (January 14th).

In sum, as the march towards Election Day moves on, Minnesota Republicans have aggressively taken their case to the media - with both critical and positive messages - while the Gopher State's DFLers have remained, comparatively, silent.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:07 AM ¤

2 comment(s)

All other states Election 2010 National Politics U.S. Senate

Evan Bayh's Exit from the U.S. Senate Unprecedented in the History of Indiana Politics

Bayh is only elected Democrat from Indiana since popular vote elections to exit the U.S. Senate for reasons other than defeat at the ballot box or death

Being a Democratic member of Congress these days may not be easy. In fact, being a Democratic Senator from the State of Indiana has been a tricky business for most of the past 100 years.

And while Evan Bayh's decision to retire after two terms in the U.S. Senate, is, by at least Bayh's own account, a departure on his own terms, many Democrats are fuming at the junior Senator from Indiana for the vulnerable position his decision has left the Party in the 2010 election cycle.

If Democratic leaders were surprised at Bayh's decision, that is because the move was unprecedented in Indiana politics. Here's why:

Senator Bayh's pronouncement to step aside and not seek reelection gives him the luxury to leave the U.S. Senate on terms not enjoyed by any of his Democratic predecessors in the traditionally Republican Hoosier State.

Prior to Bayh, since popular vote elections were introduced nearly 100 years ago, every other elected Democratic Senator from Indiana exited the Senate 'going down fighting' - by either losing at the ballot box, or by dying in office.

Here is the fate of Bayh's Democratic predecessors:

· The most recent Democratic Senator from Indiana to leave the Senate on terms not of his own making was Bayh's father, Birch (1963-1981). The elder Bayh was defeated by Dan Quayle in his quest for a 4th term during the Reagan revolution election of 1980, when a 58-41 Democratic advantage turned into a 53-46 deficit.

· Prior to Bayh, Vance Hartke (1959-1977) was similarly defeated in his attempt at a 4th term in office - by current Republican Senator Richard Lugar in 1976.

· Future Supreme Court Justice Sherman Minton (1935-1941) lost his attempt at a second term by less than 24,000 votes when GOPer Raymond Willis defeated him in 1940.

· Frederick Van Nuys (1933-1944) died in office near the end of his second term.

· Samuel Ralston (1923-1925) died in office less than three years into his first term.

· John Kern (1911-1917) lost his reelection bid for a second term in 1916.

· Benjamin Shively (1909-1916) died in office in his second term. (Democrat Thomas Taggart was appointed in March 1916 to fill the vacancy caused by the death of Senator Shively, but lost the special election to fill his seat that November).

The only Democratic Senator from Indiana to retire, like Bayh, was Samuel D. Jackson, although Jackson was never elected by popular vote in the first place. Jackson only served 10 months in 1944 when he was appointed after the death of Senator Van Nuys. After the November 1944 election, Republican William Jenner took his seat.

Republican Senators from Indiana have enjoyed much more volitional exits as a whole since popular vote elections were introduced in 1914.

While three Senators were eventually defeated in reelection bids (Arthur Robinson, James Watson, and Homer Capehat) and one lost his party's nomination (Harry New), four Senators retired from office (Raymond Willis, William Jenner (twice), and Dan Coats) and a fifth resigned (Dan Quayle, to become Vice President of the United States).

No Republican Senator has died in office in over 130 years.

Bayh, however, cited the death of bipartisan comity on Capitol Hill as a motivating factor in his decision to not seek reelection.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:01 AM ¤

Leave a comment

Campaign finances MN Election 2010 Minnesota National Politics U.S. House

Minnesota Ranks 10th in Nation in Campaign Contributions Per Congressional District in 2009

South Carolina tops list at $1.6 million per district with Minnesota 10th at $983,029; candidates in Northeastern congressional districts receiving the most money overall

Buoyed in part by the aggressive fundraising of Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann and the competitive intra-party battle between DFL hopefuls Tarryl Clark and Maureen Reed, the State of Minnesota cracked the Top 10 states with the highest average funds raised per congressional district for 2009.

A Smart Politics analysis of Federal Election Commission data from January 1-December 31 finds that, at nearly $2.8 million, candidates in the Gopher State's 6th Congressional District race received the sixth most funds in the nation last year, although this was still more than $2.5 million shy of the money raised in the 2010 rematch between Republican Joe Wilson and Democrat Rob Miller in South Carolina's 2nd CD (leading the nation at ($5.4 million).

(This data excludes from analysis the five congressional districts which held special elections in 2009: candidates in districts CA-10, CA-32, IL-05, NY-20, NY-23 raised more than $18.5 million collectively last year).

The Wilson-Miller fundraising battle helped to lead South Carolina, which also has two open seat races on the ballot this November, to an average of $1.63 million raised across its six U.S. House districts in 2009 - highest in the nation. Representative Wilson raised nearly $2.7 million in the 3rd Quarter of 2009 alone - the quarter in which his "You lie!" outburst during President Barack Obama's address to a Joint Session of Congress brought him to the forefront of Washington politics.

Far behind the 6th CD in the Gopher State was the 3rd Congressional District, which came in at #66 nationwide. While freshman Congressman Erik Paulsen raised in excess of $1.1 million last year, the campaigns of his DFL challengers Maureen Hackett and James Meffert got off to later, and comparatively slower, starts than their DFL allies in the 6th CD, netting them less than $200,000 collectively, compared to the nearly $1.2 million raised by Clark and Reed in the 6th.

Candidates in Minnesota's 8th CD ranked #128 in the country in funds raised, followed by the 1st CD at #172, the 2nd CD at #183, the 7th CD at #238, the 5th CD at #254, and the 4th CD at #330.

Overall, the most attractive contests for those contributing to U.S. House races were in the nation's Northeastern states - candidates in the 81 Congressional Districts (excluding NY-20 and NY-23) across the states of Connecticut, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Maine, and Vermont raised an average of $880,879 per district.

U.S. House candidates in the nation's 12 Midwestern states followed with an average of $854,775 per congressional district, followed by the South at $780,874, and the West at $761,162.

In the Upper Midwest, North Dakota (whose at-large Democratic incumbent Earl Pomeroy is expected to face one of his most difficult races in years) came in at #7 in the nation ($1.15 million), with Wisconsin at #27 ($759,520 per district), South Dakota at #29 ($756,220), and Iowa at #42 ($606,563).

A Smart Politics analysis also found there to be little correlation between the amount of money raised per district in a state and the average margin of victory in U.S. House contests in the 2008 elections.

In fact, four states whose average margin of victory for U.S. House races in 2008 ranked in the Top 10 most competitive in the country, currently rank in the Bottom 10 in terms of 2009 fundraising.

For example, Alaska had the lowest average statewide margin of victory in 2008 (with its at-large U.S. House race decided by 5.1 points), but currently ranks #44 in average statewide fundraising per district.

Wyoming had the second lowest average statewide margin of victory for U.S. House races in 2008 (with its at-large race decided by 9.8 points), but currently ranks #50 in fundraising. Iowa (7th in 2008 MoV) and Maine (8th) also found themselves in the bottom 10 in average funds contributed to U.S. House candidates in 2009 per district.

There are a few states, however, who ranked among the leaders in both the lowest average margins of victory in 2008 and the highest average campaign contributions per House district in 2009.

South Carolina (#1), for example, had the 6th lowest average margin of victory in 2008, at 20.6 points per district. New Mexico (#3 in average funds raised) came in 4th in 2008 with an average margin of victory of 16.5 points. Nevada (#5 in average funds raised) had the 5th lowest average margin of victory in 2008 (18.2 points).

Overall, nearly $350 million was raised across the nation' 430 U.S. House districts that did not hold special elections in 2009. Adding in the five districts that did hold special elections last year brings the total to just shy of $370 million.

Average Funds Raised Per U.S. House District by State, 2009

Rank	State	Average	2008 ave. MoV	MoV rank
1	South Carolina	$1,635,780	20.6	6
2	Connecticut	$1,352,485	32.0	25
3	New Mexico	$1,320,651	16.5	4
4	Kansas	$1,298,943	30.4	21
5	Nevada	$1,218,066	18.2	5
6	Virginia	$1,208,261	32.2	26
7	North Dakota	$1,153,666	24.0	12
8	Pennsylvania	$1,101,242	28.1	16
9	Idaho	$1,032,063	21.8	8
10	Minnesota	$983,029	27.6	15
11	Illinois*	$964,611	41.6	36
12	New Hampshire	$937,588	10.5	3
13	Maryland	$907,011	42.9	40
14	New York*	$895,231	46.0	42
15	Rhode Island	$866,575	42.3	37
16	Montana	$857,397	29.8	20
17	Alabama	$837,516	51.5	45
18	Arizona	$837,339	22.6	10
19	Ohio	$832,024	25.9	13
20	Florida	$823,792	31.1	23
21	Indiana	$812,825	28.6	17
22	Louisiana	$794,316	38.6	35
23	Michigan	$792,386	32.4	27
24	Missouri	$788,143	34.1	31
25	Tennessee	$785,213	52.3	47
26	Oregon	$768,693	47.4	43
27	Wisconsin	$759,520	36.3	33
28	Colorado	$757,529	26.0	14
29	South Dakota	$756,220	35.2	32
30	California*	$746,316	44.6	41
31	Delaware	$720,039	23.1	11
32	Mississippi	$707,508	30.9	22
33	Kentucky	$691,646	29.4	19
34	Massachusetts	$662,226	78.2	49
35	Washington	$660,561	31.3	24
36	Oklahoma	$658,390	37.6	34
37	Georgia	$645,586	42.8	39
38	Texas	$643,288	42.7	38
39	Nebraska	$636,629	33.1	28
40	Hawaii	$626,294	52.1	46
41	New Jersey	$619,258	34.0	30
42	Iowa	$606,563	20.9	7
43	Arkansas	$582,223	70.7	48
44	Alaska	$523,295	5.1	1
45	North Carolina	$494,696	29.0	18
46	West Virginia	$488,757	49.4	44
47	Maine	$421,868	21.8	8
48	Vermont	$369,254	78.4	50
49	Utah	$364,021	33.8	29
50	Wyoming	$327,721	9.8	2

* Data excludes money raised by candidates in the following congressional districts which held special elections in 2009: CA-10, CA-32, IL-05, NY-20, NY-23. Data includes money raised by incumbents in 2009 who later opted to not seek reelection in 2010, except for those U.S. Representatives who are seeking U.S. Senate seats. FEC data and election data compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:02 AM ¤

Leave a comment

National Politics Presidency

Presidents Day Special: The Astrological Signs of the Presidents

Elected presidents most frequently born under the sign of Aquarius (1 in 5); Sarah Palin only leading contender of 2012 GOP rumored candidates to be born under this sign

(This report is the third installment in Smart Politics' 'Pathway to the White House' Series. Past reports analyzed from what state presidents come and how frequently presidents have been elected without carrying their home states).

The celebration of George Washington's Birthday, or Presidents Day, appropriately falls this year on February 15th, under the sign of Aquarius.

Appropriately, that is, as a Smart Politics analysis finds that of the 56 presidential elections in U.S. history, 20 percent (11) have been won by those born under the sign of Aquarius (although not Washington) - more common than any other astrological sign.

There have been five Aquarius presidents, and presidential scholars frequently rank three of them among the Top 10 Presidents of all time: Abraham Lincoln (February 12), Franklin D. Roosevelt (January 30), and (the critically surging) Ronald Reagan (February 6). William McKinley (January 29), and William Henry Harrison (February 9) round out the list.

One bleak spot for the Aquarius club - four of the five died in office with the fifth, Reagan, nearly assassinated in 1981. Nonetheless, these presidents proved to be quite popular, with all but Harrison elected to more than one term in office.

There have also been five Scorpios elected president - although none since 1920. Two Scorpios died in office and none were elected to more than one term: John Adams (October 30), James Polk (November 2), James Garfield (November 19), Teddy Roosevelt (October 22), and Warren Harding (November 2).

Thirty-three percent of presidential elections have been won by candidates born under the signs of Aquarius (11) or Pisces (8), which follows Aquarius on the astrological calendar. Four presidents - each elected to two terms - were Pisces: George Washington (February 22), James Madison (March 16), Andrew Jackson (March 15), and Grover Cleveland (March 18).

The longest astrological drought - at 206 years and counting - is currently being endured by Aries. Thomas Jefferson (April 13) is the last and only elected president born under the sign of The Ram, when he was reelected in 1804.

Leos have made a strong showing in recent years, winning three of the last five presidential races, with Bill Clinton (August 19) and Barack Obama (August 4) as members. There have been four Leos elected president, as well as four Tauruses.

Most Common Astrological Signs of Elected Presidents

Sign	Elections won	# Presidents	Last
Aquarius	11	5	1984
Pisces	8	4	1892
Taurus	6	4	1948
Scorpio	5	5	1920
Leo	5	4	2008
Cancer	4	3	2004
Libra	4	3	1976
Capricorn	4	2	1972
Sagittarius	3	3	1852
Gemini	2	2	1988
Virgo	2	2	1964
Aries	2	1	1804

Data compiled by Smart Politics.

And which rumored 2012 Republican presidential candidate has the astrological goods to take on the surging Leos?

As it turns out - none other than Sarah Palin. Born on February 11th, Palin is the only Aquarius of the leading batch of rumored GOP contenders.

Pisces Mitt Romney (March 12) has the next best astrological history on his side with Virgo Mike Huckabee (August 24), Sagittarius Tim Pawlenty (November 27), Geminis Bobby Jindal (June 10) and Newt Gingrich (June 17), Capricorn John Thune (January 7), and Libra Haley Barbour (October 22) on less sound astrological footing.

The Astrological Signs of Elected Presidents

President	Birthday	Sign
Washington	February 22, 1732	Pisces
J. Adams	October 30, 1735	Scorpio
Jefferson	April 13, 1743	Aries
Madison	March 16, 1751	Pisces
Monroe	April 28, 1758	Taurus
J.Q. Adams	July 11, 1767	Cancer
Jackson	March 15, 1767	Pisces
Van Buren	December 5, 1782	Sagittarius
W.H. Harrison	February 9, 1773	Aquarius
Polk	November 2, 1795	Scorpio
Taylor	November 24, 1784	Sagittarius
Pierce	November 23, 1804	Sagittarius
Buchanan	April 23, 1791	Taurus
Lincoln	February 12, 1809	Aquarius
Grant	April 27, 1822	Taurus
Hayes	October 4, 1822	Libra
Garfield	November 19, 1831	Scorpio
Cleveland	March 18, 1837	Pisces
B. Harrison	August 20, 1833	Leo
McKinley	January 29, 1843	Aquarius
T. Roosevelt	October 27, 1858	Scorpio
Taft	September 15, 1857	Virgo
Wilson	December 28, 1856	Capricorn
Harding	November 2, 1865	Scorpio
Coolidge	July 4, 1872	Cancer
Hoover	August 10, 1874	Leo
F. Roosevelt	January 30, 1882	Aquarius
Truman	May 8, 1884	Taurus
Eisenhower	October 14, 1890	Libra
Kennedy	May 29, 1917	Gemini
L. Johnson	August 27, 1908	Virgo
Nixon	January 9, 1913	Capricorn
Carter	October 1, 1924	Libra
Reagan	February 6, 1911	Aquarius
G.H.W. Bush	June 12, 1924	Gemini
Clinton	August 19, 1946	Leo
G.W. Bush	July 6, 1946	Cancer
Obama	August 4, 1961	Leo

Note: Presidents not elected into office include Capricorns Millard Fillmore (January 7) and Andrew Johnson (December 29), Aries John Tyler (March 29), Cancer Gerald Ford (July 14), and Libra Chester Arthur (October 5). Data compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:23 AM ¤

Leave a comment

Budget and taxes Economy and jobs Minnesota

A Content Analysis of Governor Pawlenty's 2010 State of the State Address

Governor's focus on jobs in speech up more than threefold from 2009 Address despite yearly drop in unemployment

Even though the Gopher State's unemployment rate is slightly lower than the last time Tim Pawlenty delivered his State of the State Address in mid-January 2009, the Governor honed in on jobs as the top issue in his 2010 Address on Thursday morning.

A Smart Politics content analysis of Pawlenty's 2008, 2009, and 2010 Addresses finds that Pawlenty has increasingly focused on jobs in his most high profile speech over the last three years - from speaking on the subject for just 6 sentences in 2008 (2.8 percent of his speech), to 15 lines in 2009 (6.1 percent), to 48 sentences in 2010 (21.3 percent).

When Pawlenty delivered his Address in February 2008, the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate in Minnesota was 5.0 percent - marginally higher than the 4.8 percent rate nationwide. Even though the jobless rate was up 19 percent that year from when he was reelected in November 2006, Pawlenty was more focused in his 2008 speech on several other policy issues, including K-12 education (51 lines), taxes (19 lines), health care (17 lines), energy (13 lines), veterans (12 lines), and agriculture (11 lines).

For his next Address, in January of 2009, the jobless rate had soared to 7.5 percent in Minnesota and 7.6 percent nationwide, and Pawlenty devoted more than twice as much time to jobs. Still, at just 15 lines, employment was only the seventh most discussed policy issue in his speech that year behind K-12 education (50 lines), taxes (26 lines), veterans (25 lines), higher education (19 lines), intergovernmental relations (17 lines), and the budget and spending (16 lines).

On Thursday, jobs were the #1 policy issue discussed by the Governor - even though the unemployment rate has actually dropped slightly from a year ago (to 7.4 percent in the most recent numbers from December; with January's national numbers falling to 9.7 percent, Gopher State residents are hopeful Minnesota's unemployment rate has fallen even further).

While no political opponent in St. Paul could begrudge the Governor for aiming to lower the unemployment rate in Minnesota back to pre-recession levels (Pawlenty did lay out specific tenets of his Jobs Creation Bill in his speech), speculation has run rampant among his detractors for the better part of a year that his words and policy decisions are carefully geared towards a national audience, not simply to his constituents in the Gopher State.

As a result, one wonders why Pawlenty devoted 33 more lines to jobs this year as compared to last year's speech, when unemployment has dropped statewide. Jobless claims nationwide, however, are up 2.1 points at a hefty 9.7 percent with economic concerns very palpable among an anxious American public.

Pawlenty also focused a good portion of his Address Thursday on state spending and the budget crisis that faces Minnesota this legislative session (43 lines, 19.1 percent). Pawlenty not only took pride in how his administration has "dramatically slowed down state government spending," but he criticized both Democrats and Republicans who have adopted the big government, big spending posture now and in the past.

The Governor devoted only 16 lines to spending and budget issues in last year's speech and just 4 lines back in 2008.

Pawlenty, a life-long Minnesotan, is also known for peppering his Addresses with several passages, often humorous, about the uniqueness and grandeur of the Gopher State, and this year was no exception. The Governor spent 31 lines discussing Minnesota culture and history (13.8 percent), from quips about the heartbreaking Minnesota Vikings, to the "goodness" of its people, to the "natural splendor" of the state. Pawlenty similarly devoted 30 lines to "Minnesota life" in his 2009 Address and 34 lines in 2008.

Other top issues raised by the Governor Thursday were veterans (20 lines, 8.9 percent), health care (19 lines, 8.4 percent), and K-12 education (17 lines, 7.6 percent).

Interestingly, Pawlenty only delivered 14 lines (6.2 percent) explicitly on his pet issue of keeping taxes low - down from 26 lines in 2009 and 19 lines in 2008.

Governor Tim Pawlenty's State of the State Addresses by Issue, 2008-2010

Issue	2008	%	2009	%	2010	%
Jobs	6	2.8	15	6.1	48	21.3
Budget / deficit / spending	4	1.9	16	6.6	43	19.1
Minnesota life / history	34	16.0	30	12.3	31	13.8
Military / veterans	12	5.7	25	10.2	20	8.9
Health	17	8.0	6	2.5	19	8.4
K-12 Education	51	24.1	50	20.5	17	7.6
Taxes	19	9.0	26	10.7	14	6.2
Economy (general)	4	1.9	12	4.9	6	2.7
Business / regulations	1	0.5	5	2.0	3	1.3
Challenges (general)	7	3.3	13	5.3	3	1.3
Crime	0	0.0	1	0.4	3	1.3
Religion	1	0.5	3	1.2	3	1.3
Unallotment	0	0.0	0	0.0	3	1.3
Environment	9	4.2	0	0.0	1	0.4
Voting	1	0.5	0	0.0	1	0.4
Agriculture	11	5.2	0	0.0	0	0.0
Disasters	6	2.8	0	0.0	0	0.0
Energy	13	6.1	6	2.5	0	0.0
Higher Education	0	0.0	19	7.8	0	0.0
Intergovernmental relations	0	0.0	17	7.0	0	0.0
Mining	8	3.8	0	0.0	0	0.0
Technology	1	0.5	0	0.0	0	0.0
Transportation	7	3.3	0	0.0	0	0.0
Other	0	0.0	0	0.0	10	4.4
Total	204	100.0	244	100.0	225	100.0

Note: Measured by number of sentences devoted to each topic / policy issue. Data compiled by Smart Politics.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 10:33 PM ¤

Leave a comment

Campaign finances MN Election 2010 Minnesota

Bachmann's Election 2010 Out of State Fundraising Fueled by Democratic States

Conservative Congresswoman's large donor out of state individual fundraising for 2009 was 33 percent higher per capita in blue states than in red states

As Smart Politics reported earlier this week, Minnesota U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann has relied increasingly on contributions from individuals and less from PACs while tallying more than $1.5 million to her campaign coffers through the end of 2009.

Bachmann's fundraising numbers reveal substantial support in particular from small donors, with 47.3 percent of her total funds raised in 2009 coming in contributions of less than $200 ($726,154). Small donor money to Bachmann's campaign also increased in each quarter - from $80,138 in Q1, to $101, 245 in Q2, to $193,838 in Q3, to $350,931 in Q4.

(The large uptick in Q4 receipts can be attributed, in part, to Bachmann's high profile "Send a Message to the Left" campaign in mid-October).

With just 12.3 percent of Bachmann's funds coming from PACs ($188,785), the balance of her 2009 receipts, large donor individual contributions, still comprise a significant portion of her fundraising portfolio, at 40.4 percent ($620,129).

In fact, over a quarter of a million dollars of Congresswoman Bachmann's 2009 fundraising haul came in the form of large donor contributions from outside of the Gopher State ($253,238) or 40.8 percent of her total large donor contributions.

And which states were the most supportive of one of the U.S. House's most conservative members?

In what the Bachmann camp must find to be a delicious twist, a Smart Politics analysis finds that not only is the vast majority of such out of state money coming from the most Democratic states in the country, but that, even on a per capita basis, the nation's bluest states are giving 33 percent more money to Bachmann's campaign than the nation's reddest states.

The deep blue state of Maryland has set the pace for Bachmann's per capita out of state large donor fundraising this year, coming in at $406.05 per 100,000 residents. The Old Line State gave consistently to Bachmann's reelection campaign in each quarter of 2009 - $7,750 in Q1, $5,750 in Q2, $4,050 in Q3, and $5,325 in Q4 for nearly $23,000 for the year.

Other heavily Democratic states giving in large amounts per capita to Representative Bachmann are Maine (#3, $239.28 per 100,000 residents), Michigan (#6, $114.46), Wisconsin (#8, 112.64), California (#9, $109.82), and Illinois (#11, $98.44).

Overall, residents from the nation's 19 bluest states (excluding Minnesota) contributed $138,013 in large donor funds to the controversial Congresswoman, at a rate of $96.78 per 100,000 residents.

That amounts to a 33 percent higher rate of return for Bachmann than what she has received from residents of the nation's 19 reddest states, who gave just $64,131 to Bachmann in 2009, at a rate of only $72.63 per 100,000 residents.

The nation's 11 'purple' states contributed to the Congresswoman at a nearly identical rate - $69.70 per 100,000 residents - for $47,345 in total.

Only five 'red states' appear among the Top 30 from which Congresswoman Bachmann received her highest per capita large donor funds in 2009: Nebraska (#2), Texas (#4), Wyoming (#7), and Kentucky (#24).

And while Bachmann raised large donor funds from 41 states plus the District of Columbia last year, some of the deepest red states in the country did not deliver any large donor money to Bachmann in 2009 - such as the heavily Republican states of Utah, Mississippi, Alaska, and the Congresswoman's neighboring states of North and South Dakota.

Of course, it is true that, in general, there is a per capita income disparity between blue states and red states across America, with the more Democratic states in the country generally having a higher per capita income than the more Republican states. (Hence, they have more wealth to give to the campaigns of elected officials).

Even still, based on the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis's 2007 per capita personal income rankings, the states with the highest personal incomes (Connecticut, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and New York) were not driving Bachmann's numbers - none of these states even cracked Bachmann's Top 10 list (ranking #13, #20, #29, and #21 respectively).

In fact, only two states among the Top 10 highest incomes per capita cracked Bachmann's Top 10 states for large donor per capita contributions: Maryland (which has the #5 per capita income rank) and Wyoming (which is #6 and a red state).

Unfortunately, small donor contributions are not itemized by state - so it is not knowable whether or not this pattern of the nation's most Democratic states fueling Bachmann's 2010 reelection campaign still holds when factoring in the more than $725,000 in contributions of less than $200 that the 2-term Republican raised over the last 12 months.

Out of State Individual Large Donor Contributions to Michele Bachmann Per Capita, 2009

Rank	State	Partisan tilt	Total	per 100,000 residents
1	Maryland	Blue	$22,875	$406.05
2	Nebraska	Red	$6,825	$382.69
3	Maine	Blue	$3,150	$239.28
4	Texas	Red	$43,176	$177.48
5	D.C.	Blue	$1,000	$168.97
6	Michigan	Blue	$11,450	$114.46
7	Wyoming	Red	$600	$112.64
8	Wisconsin	Blue	$6,300	$111.94
9	California	Blue	$40,365	$109.82
10	Louisiana	Purple	$4,600	$104.29
11	Illinois	Blue	$12,700	$98.44
12	Nevada	Purple	$2,550	$98.07
13	Connecticut	Blue	$3,400	$97.11
14	Rhode Island	Blue	$1,000	$95.17
15	Virginia	Purple	$7,044	$90.67
16	Florida	Purple	$14,300	$78.02
17	Ohio	Purple	$8,750	$76.18
18	Colorado	Purple	$3,700	$74.91
19	Washington	Blue	$4,575	$69.86
20	New Jersey	Blue	$5,633	$64.88
21	New York	Blue	$12,215	$62.67
22	Missouri	Purple	$3,550	$60.05
23	Pennsylvania	Blue	$6,875	$55.23
24	Kentucky	Red	$2,250	$52.70
25	Iowa	Blue	$1,450	$48.29
26	Hawaii	Blue	$550	$42.70
27	Oklahoma	Red	$1,500	$41.18
28	Oregon	Blue	$1,500	$39.58
29	Massachusetts	Blue	$2,525	$38.86
30	Arizona	Purple	$2,401	$36.94
31	Idaho	Red	$500	$32.81
32	Kansas	Red	$755	$26.94
33	North Carolina	Red	$2,450	$26.57
34	Tennessee	Red	$1,625	$26.15
35	New Mexico	Blue	$450	$22.68
36	Alabama	Red	$1,000	$21.45
37	New Hampshire	Purple	$250	$19.00
38	Georgia	Red	$1,700	$17.55
39	South Carolina	Red	$750	$16.74
40	Indiana	Red	$1,000	$15.68
41	Arkansas	Purple	$200	$7.00
42	Delaware	Blue	$0	$0.00
42	Vermont	Blue	$0	$0.00
42	West Virginia	Purple	$0	$0.00
42	Alaska	Red	$0	$0.00
42	Mississippi	Red	$0	$0.00
42	Montana	Red	$0	$0.00
42	North Dakota	Red	$0	$0.00
42	South Dakota	Red	$0	$0.00
42	Utah	Red	$0	$0.00
	Other (territories)		$3,750
	Total		$253,239

FEC data compiled by Smart Politics. This table reflects the definition of a 'red state' as having an average margin of victory over the past five presidential election cycles of more than five points for the Republicans, a 'blue state' as having more than five points for the Democrats, and a 'purple state' as having less than a five point tilt in either direction.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:22 AM ¤

2 comment(s)

Crime and punishment Minnesota

Pawlenty Proposal to Get Tough on Sex Offenders Likely to Have Huge Public Support

Previous polling suggests Minnesota residents back various tougher penalties on sex offenders by greater than 3:1 margins

Governor Tim Pawlenty's proposal on Tuesday that the State should increase the presumptive sentence for most first-degree criminal sexual conduct from 12 to 25 years is the kind of tough-on-crime policy that is likely to receive overwhelming public support among Minnesota residents.

A little more than five years ago, during Pawlenty's first term in office (when the Governor enjoyed a Republican majority in the House of Representatives), a series of public opinion polls on the punishment of sex offenders was conducted in Minnesota by multiple polling organizations while the Legislature in St. Paul debated whether or not to increase penalties on sex offenders whose crimes included other 'heinous elements.'

When 625 Minnesotans were asked in January of 2004 whether or not the state's current provisions for the punishment of convicted sex offenders were too tough, too lenient, or adequate, 73 percent replied "too lenient" with only 18 percent replying "adequate," and 1 percent "too tough" (MPR / Pioneer Press poll).

When the Legislature did not pass tougher sentences for sex offenders by the end of its 2004 session that May, 72 percent of 625 registered voters surveyed supported passing a bill creating tougher sentences for sex offenders while just 22 percent opposed it (MPR / Pioneer Press poll).

In the Governor's press release on Tuesday, Pawlenty argued that his proposal will not only protect Minnesotans but also save the state money:

"(T)he proposal would also save the state some money over the long-term as offenders who would've been civilly committed in the more expensive Minnesota Sex Offender Program would be kept in prison longer than under current law. Prison costs are currently $63 per day while civil commitment costs are $325 per day."

Back in January 2004, a Star Tribune poll of 821 residents found that 67 percent believed Minnesota was committing too few sex offenders to treatment facilities after completing their prison sentence, with only 5 percent believing too many were being committed and 9 percent 'about right.'

But Pawlenty's new proposal, if enacted, would more than double the time sex offenders serve before such prison sentences were completed in the first instance.

Towards that end, the same Star Tribune poll also found that 76 percent of Minnesotans believed individuals convicted of serious sex crimes should be sent to prison "indefinitely" whereupon it would be up to a parole board to determine if and when they would be released. Only 15 percent supported the current system of finite sentencing for sex offenders.

Governor Pawlenty added that the State needs to "(D)o even more to protect our citizens from dangerous sexual predators. We need to change the law so we can keep these predators off our streets."

Past polling shows Minnesotans agree - back in January 2004, only 33 percent of registered voters believed the Minnesota corrections system was doing an 'excellent' or 'good' job in protecting the public from sex offenders, while 59 percent believed its performance was 'fair' or 'poor.' (MPR / Pioneer Press).

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 10:02 PM ¤

2 comment(s)

Campaign finances MN Election 2010 Minnesota

Bachmann 2010 Election Fundraising Effort Outpacing '08 by 32 Percent

Small donor contributions to Bachmann soar by 355 percent compared to two years ago while special interest PAC money declines 51 percent

In helping to solidify her efforts to defend a seat highly targeted by Democrats in Washington and statewide, two-term Congresswoman Michele Bachmann begins 2010 with significantly more fundraising support than she received two years ago at this point in the election cycle - and from radically different donor sources.

A Smart Politics analysis of FEC data finds Representative Bachmann's 2009 fundraising efforts, completing her third year in D.C., are up 32.0 percent from the money she had raised at the end of her first year in Congress during the last election cycle in 2007.

For the 2009 calendar year, Bachmann raised $1,535,543 through individual contributions, PACs, and political party committees, compared to $1,163,314 for 2007, an increase of nearly one-third.

Representative Michele Bachmann's Yearly Fundraising Tally: Year 1 (2007) vs. Year 3 (2009)

Type	2007	2009	Change
PACs	$384,357	$188,785	-50.9
Individuals	$778,966	$1,346,283	+72.8
Itemized	$619,438	$620,129	+0.1
Small donors	$159,527	$726,154	+355.2
Total	$1,163,314	$1,535,543	+32.0

FEC data compiled by Smart Politics.

But while Bachmann raised over $300,000 more in 2009 than the second highest fundraiser in the Gopher State's U.S. House delegation (Erik Paulsen), the story behind the story is not the extent of Bachmann's contributions, but its form.

While individual contributions to Bachmann's campaign are up 72.8 percent from 2007 ($778,966) to 2009 ($1,346,283) her receipts from large money donors are flat: $619,438 in 2007 versus $620,129 in 2009.

One thing that has changed, however, and has been reported by Smart Politics throughout the past year, is the unprecedented scope of small donations from individuals contributed to Bachmann's campaign (Donations tallying less than $200 for the election cycle).

In 2009, Bachmann received $726,154 in small donor funds - up 355.2 percent from 2007 ($159,527).

In 2007, just 13.7 percent of Bachmann's total receipts were from small donors, compared to a whopping 47.3 percent in 2009, buoyed in part by the Congresswoman's successful media blitz that began more than one year ago.

Small donor funding has comprised a larger and larger percentage of Bachmann's total quarterly fundraising receipts throughout this election cycle: 25.5 percent in Q1 2009, followed by 35.5 percent in Q2, 56.6 percent in Q3, and 59.3 percent in Q4.

The second major trend that continues to develop in Bachmann's fundraising numbers is the sharp decrease in PAC money that is being donated to the Congresswoman's campaign - to the tune of a 50.9 percent decrease from the respective period in 2007. Bachmann raised $384,357 from PACs in 2007, but just $188,785 from such committees in 2009.

While donations from individuals comprised 92.7 percent of Bachmann's Q4 2009 nearly $600,000 haul, PAC money has declined to just 7.3 percent - the lowest percentage of quarterly funds the Representative has received from PACs since landing the Republican Party endorsement for the 6th Congressional District back in May 2006.

Representative Bachmann relies less on PAC money as a component of her fundraising profile than any other member of the Gopher State U.S. House delegation. By contrast, 90.7 percent of Rep. Collin Peterson's (comparatively meager) Q4 2009 fundraising receipts came from PACs.

Percentage of PAC vs. Individual Donations to Michele Bachmann by Quarter, 2009

Type	Q1 2009	Q2 2009	Q3 2009	Q4 2009
Individuals	80.4	81.4	90.9	92.7
PACs	19.6	18.6	9.1	7.3

FEC data compiled by Smart Politics.

Overall, the $591,599 raised by Bachmann in Q4 2009 is the fourth highest in her career - with the other three occurring much later in their respective election cycles: $1,073,462 in Q4 2008, $856,456 in Q3 2006, and $816,687 in Q2 2006.

Fundraising by the DFL candidates challenging Bachmann are also far ahead of the pace of their candidate in 2007, El Tinklenberg (who announced his candidacy much later in the year). Tinklenberg had raised just $133,152 by the end of 2007, compared to $602,095 raised by Tarryl Clark and $574,625 by Maureen Reed in 2009.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:23 AM ¤

Leave a comment

National Politics U.S. House U.S. Senate Voting

Red States Hold Primaries More than Five Weeks Earlier on Average than Blue States: Which Party Benefits?

Study finds average 'red state' primary date is June 15th, while average 'blue state' date is July 23rd. 'Purple state' average date is July 11th.

As Illinois voters went to the polls last Tuesday to launch the 2010 primary season, other states, such as Minnesota and Vermont, are contemplating moving their primary dates to earlier in the calendar year.

But even if the Minnesota legislature, for example, is successful in moving the Gopher State's primary date from September 14th to August 10th as proposed in new State Senate legislation, blue states will still dominate the back end of the primary schedule.

A Smart Politics analysis finds that the average primary date for red states is June 15th - more than five weeks earlier than the average primary date for blue states (July 23rd). Purple states rest in between with an average primary date of July 11th.

(Note: the 'average primary date' is calculated by assigning a numerical value for each day of the year and dividing the sum total of primary date values by the number of red, blue, and purple states respectively. For a note on the definition of red, blue, and purple states, and the admitted quibbling that may result at the margins, see the footnote at the bottom of the table, below).

Almost half of the nation's 20 blue states will hold primary elections in the middle of September.

Under the current primary calendar, blue states comprise nine of the last ten spots on the list: Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin all hold their elections on September 14th with Hawaii four days later on September 18th.

One purple state - New Hampshire - also holds its primary on September 14th.

The latest primary date for a red state is August 24th (Alaska) with 15 of the nation's 19 red states holding primaries before August 1st.

The momentum pushing some states on the back end of the calendar to move their primary elections forward is coming from the pressure on election officials to allow enough time in the event of a recount (a particularly sensitive issue in Minnesota) to be able to mail general election ballots in time to its overseas residents (i.e. armed services members).

But will these earlier primaries in red and some purple states, and later primaries in blue states, benefit Republicans or Democrats in 2010?

In general, political parties looking to steal a seat against a potentially vulnerable incumbent want their nominee selected as soon as possible - solidifying (financial) support around a candidate and having enough time to build name recognition in the electorate to compete with well-known incumbents.

With that in mind, Arkansas' early primary date (tied for the eighth earliest in the nation on May 18th, with a potential runoff on June 8th) would seem to favor the Republicans, who are hoping to pick up Democrat Blanche Lincoln's U.S. Senate seat.

Likewise, Nevada's early primary date of June 8th (tied for 16th earliest in the nation) will winnow the field of Republican candidates to one nearly five months before the general election as the GOP seeks to dethrone Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid.

In U.S. House races, the GOP will get an early look at its nominees in red states against incumbents in districts they hope to capture such as Walt Minnick's 1st CD seat in Idaho (May 25th), Bobby Bright's 2nd CD seat in Alabama (June 1, pending a potential runoff), and Travis Childers 1st CD seat in Mississippi (June 1, pending a potential runoff).

In purple states, the Republican Party will settle on its U.S. House nominees late in the spring against vulnerable Democratic incumbents such as Mary Jo Kilroy in Ohio's 15th district (May 4) and Tom Perriello in Virginia's 5th CD (June 8).

On the other hand, late primary dates in some purple and blue states may help a few rookie Democratic incumbents who seek to stave off challengers.

For example, lightning rod Alan Grayson in Florida's 8th CD won't officially have an opponent until August 24th and the GOP challenger of Frank Kravotil in Maryland's 1st CD won't be settled until September 14th.

However, most Democratic-held U.S. Senate and U.S. House seats in blue states with late primaries in September, are either not expected to be vulnerable to GOP pick-ups, or are open seat races, which means both parties are facing the same compressed timeline to rally behind a candidate.

2010 Primary Dates in Chronological Order

Rank	State	Date	Partisan tilt
1	Illinois	February 2	Blue
2	Texas	March 2	Red
3	Indiana	May 4	Red
3	North Carolina	May 4	Red
3	Ohio	May 4	Purple
6	Nebraska	May 11	Red
6	West Virginia	May 11	Purple
8	Arkansas	May 18	Purple
8	Kentucky	May 18	Red
8	Oregon	May 18	Blue
8	Pennsylvania	May 18	Blue
12	Idaho	May 25	Red
13	Alabama	June 1	Red
13	Mississippi	June 1	Red
13	New Mexico	June 1	Blue
16	California	June 8	Blue
16	Iowa	June 8	Blue
16	Maine	June 8	Blue
16	Montana	June 8	Red
16	Nevada	June 8	Purple
16	New Jersey	June 8	Blue
16	North Dakota	June 8	Red
16	South Carolina	June 8	Red
16	South Dakota	June 8	Red
16	Virginia	June 8	Purple
26	Utah	June 22	Red
27	Georgia	July 20	Red
28	Oklahoma	July 27	Red
29	Kansas	August 3	Red
29	Michigan	August 3	Blue
29	Missouri	August 3	Purple
32	Tennessee	August 5	Red
33	Colorado	August 10	Purple
33	Connecticut	August 10	Blue
35	Washington	August 17	Blue
35	Wyoming	August 17	Red
37	Alaska	August 24	Red
37	Arizona	August 24	Purple
37	Florida	August 24	Purple
40	Louisiana	August 28	Purple
41	Delaware	September 14	Blue
41	Maryland	September 14	Blue
41	Massachusetts	September 14	Blue
41	Minnesota	September 14	Blue
41	New Hampshire	September 14	Purple
41	New York	September 14	Blue
41	Rhode Island	September 14	Blue
41	Vermont	September 14	Blue
41	Wisconsin	September 14	Blue
50	Hawaii	September 18	Blue

Note: Ten states also have potential runoff elections. Deciding on a red-blue-purple state definition, of course, is subject to some quibbling. One quick-and-dirty method is to simply look at the most recent presidential race (e.g. Obama states vs. McCain states), although that method unfairly paints some states as 'blue' when they have been historically red in recent years (e.g. Indiana, North Carolina). As such, this table reflects the definition of a red state as having an average margin of victory over the past five presidential election cycles of more than five points for the Republicans, a blue state of more than five points for the Democrats, and a purple state as having less than a five point tilt in either direction. This results in 20 blue states, 19 red states, and 11 purple states. This yields a workable, but admittedly flawed definition (e.g. Arkansas, Louisiana, and West Virginia stand out as questionable 'purple' states at this point in political history).

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:01 AM ¤

Leave a comment

MN Election 2010 Minnesota

Why Minnesota Democrats Should Be Thankful Tim Pawlenty Is Not Running for Reelection

Republican gubernatorial incumbents in Minnesota have won 93 percent of reelection defenses since statehood (25 of 27), while losing 70 percent of open seat contests over the past century

While most renowned political prognosticators currently list the 2010 Minnesota gubernatorial matchup in the 'toss-up' category (e.g. Charlie Cook, Stu Rothenberg, Larry Sabato), the DFL will be fighting more than the changing national political environment in its attempt to recapture the governorship this November - it will also be fighting history.

In recent weeks, Smart Politics has documented that Minnesota currently has the third longest Democratic gubernatorial drought in the nation (23+ years), behind only South Dakota and Utah, and that Democrats have had historical difficulties in winning gubernatorial elections in Minnesota with a Democrat in the White House - losing 22 of 25 such races since statehood.

However, there is one historical trend that can buoy the DFL's spirits in the run up to the 2010 election - and it all starts with Tim Pawlenty's decision to not seek reelection last June.

A Smart Politics analysis of Minnesota elections finds that the GOP has not held an open gubernatorial seat since 1946 and has lost four of the last five such contests since 1930 and seven of the last ten dating back to 1898.

Republicans most recently lost their hold on the Minnesota governor's mansion in the following open seat races:

· In 1998, after Arne Carlson's exit (with Reform Party nominee Jesse Ventura beating Norm Coleman by 2.7 points).
· In 1982, after Al Quie's 1-term reign in St. Paul (with DFLer Rudy Perpich defeating Wheelock Whitney).
· And in 1970, after Harold LeVander opted not to seek reelection (with DFLer Wendell Anderson subsequently beating Douglas Head by 8.5 points).

After nine consecutive successful defenses of open gubernatorial seats from the 1860s to the 1890s (in 1863, 1865, 1869, 1873, 1875, 1881, 1886, 1888, and 1892), the GOP lost control of the Governor's mansion to the Democrats in its next three such open seat races, in 1898, 1904, and 1914. Republicans also lost their hold on the governorship in an open seat race in 1930 to the Farmer-Labor Party (Floyd Olson).

The last time the Republican Party held an open gubernatorial seat in Minnesota was back in 1946 when Luther Youngdahl won the first of his three terms after GOP Governor Edward Thye decided to seek (and won) the U.S. Senate seat that year.

In a statistical oddity, while the GOP has 12 victories and 7 defeats overall in defending open gubernatorial seats, the Democratic Party (and DFL) has only had only one opportunity to do so - in 1859, after the state's first Governor, Democrat Henry Sibley, did not seek reelection.

Every other Democratic or DFL governor has been on the ballot in the subsequent election cycle - with the Party winning six contests (1906, 1908, 1956, 1958, 1974, 1986) and losing five (1900, 1960, 1966, 1978, 1990).

Defending open seats, of course, is nearly always more difficult for a political party than seeing an incumbent candidate reelected. Overall, political parties in Minnesota have successfully defended open gubernatorial seats in just 59.1 percent of elections (13 of 22), while winning 80.5 percent of such contests with incumbents running on the ballot (33 of 41).

And here is why Democrats should be especially relieved Governor Tim Pawlenty is not seeking a third term.

Republican incumbents in Minnesota gubernatorial elections have a nearly unblemished record - with GOP governors winning reelection in 25 of 27 such contests since statehood (92.6 percent), culminating in Pawlenty's 1.0 point victory during the Democratic tsunami of 2006.

By contrast, DFL (and formerly Democratic Party) governors have won only 6 of 11 reelection bids in Gopher State history (54.5 percent). Third party incumbents are 2 for 3.

Additionally, Republicans have also enjoyed much larger margins of victory, and much smaller margins of defeat, with gubernatorial incumbents on the ballot. In their 25 victories with incumbents, the average margin of victory for the GOP has been 16.0 points. In defending open seats, their average margin of victory has been 26.3 percent smaller - at 11.8 points.

In the seven cases in which Democrats have taken back the governor's mansion from Republicans in open seat races, the GOP's average margin of defeat has been 9.6 points. In the two cases in which GOP incumbents were defeated (in 1954 and 1962) the average margin of defeat was just 3.0 points.

Republican Party Defense of Gubernatorial Seats in Minnesota with Incumbents vs. Non-Incumbents

Status	Win	Loss	MoV	MoD
Incumbents	25	2	16.0	-3.0
Open seats	12	7	11.8	-9.6

Note: some incumbents came into office as Lieutenant Governor after resignation or death of the Governor. Data compiled by Smart Politics.

So while national politics is currently boosting the standing of many Republican candidates across the country, Democrats in Minnesota should be thankful they will be running against Candidate X in November, and not a two-term Governor whose approval rating was 53 percent in a mid-January Rasmussen poll.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Posted by Eric Ostermeier at 12:01 AM ¤

Leave a comment

Political News

Iowa

Des Moines Register

Minnesota

Minnesota Public Radio

Star Tribune

South Dakota

Keloland Television

Wisconsin

Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

Links

National

Non-partisan

Left

Right

Friday, March 12, 2010

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Sunday, March 7, 2010

Thursday, March 4, 2010

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Monday, March 1, 2010

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Monday, February 22, 2010

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Friday, February 19, 2010

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Monday, February 15, 2010

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Monday, February 8, 2010

Monday, February 8, 2010

Friday, February 5, 2010

Search

Feedback

Newsfeed (RSS)

Categories

Archives

University Links

Humphrey blogs

Powered by